The Militant Libertarian

I'm pissed off and I'm a libertarian. What else you wanna know?

Saturday, August 08, 2009

Top five political conspiracy theories

by Tracey D. Samuelson
The 'birther' allegation that President Obama wasn't born in the US is nothing new. America has a long tradition of political accusations gaining traction.

The recent chatter over the Birther’s Movement and President Obama’s birthplace has a long way to go before it can be considered one of the top political conspiracy theories out there. Here are several that endure year after year, often despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

1. JFK’s assassination: Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone

Many people still question the death of the 35th president on a sunny afternoon in Dallas on November 22, 1963. Was it really Lee Harvey Oswald? If so, did he act alone? Under whose direction? Were the FBI or CIA involved? There are endless questions posed about that day, and as many different theories about how to answer them.

2. The American government was behind 9/11

According to 911Truth.org, the collapse of the Twin Towers wasn’t caused by Al Qaeda or foreign terrorists, but rather “elements within the US government and covert policy apparatus must have orchestrated or participated in the execution of the attacks for these to have happened in the way that they did.”

3. The government hushed up what really crashed in Roswell, N.M.

Something crashed in the desert outside Roswell, New Mexico in July of 1947. But what? Some conspiracy theorists maintain it was an alien space ship and that the US military covered up the discovery of the crash site and alien bodies. The enduring theory has turned the small town of Roswell into a circus of alien paraphernalia shops and a tourist destination for seekers of the paranormal.

4. The CIA created AIDS

Most people and scientists believe that the AIDS virus was transferred from monkeys to humans in the 1930s. But a small group maintains that the virus was man-made, manufactured by the US government or the CIA and specifically used to target African-Americans and homosexuals. Others believe the US created AIDS as a bioweapon, but that it spiraled out of control.

5. The moon landing was a hoax

We’ve all seen the grainy video of Neil Armstrong taking his historic steps on the moon, planting the American flag, and declaring, “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” But some say it was all staged so that the US could beat Cold-War-Rival Russia in the Space Race.

Ye Olde Conspiracy Theories

For conspiracy theories that date back to the founding of the Republic, including His Royal Highness King John Adams and Confederate turncoat Mary Todd Lincoln, check out this essay on The Daily Beast.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Washington is Selling Servitude

by Brian Roberts, Tenth Amendment Center

*Washington is selling servitude.

*We watched as they destroyed the financial sector by forcing banks to give loans to people that could not afford them… then they stepped in to “save the day” by gaining direct control of our financial sector.

*We watched as they destroyed a once powerful automotive industry through excessive regulation and labor union control… then they stepped in to “save the day” by gaining direct control of our automotive industry.

*We listened as they verbally assaulted capitalism when government regulations were to blame.

*We watched as they asked the American people to fund a $1 trillion dollar stimulus bill, they yelled emergency as they slipped cash from our children’s pockets to their political allies.

*We watched, as they worked to destroy the rule of law by arbitrarily dictating revised terms to legal contracts and installing a Supreme Court justice that promotes social justice over rule-of-law.

*We know, they intend to control our children, it’s written in the GIVE Act.

*We know, they intend to control our resources, it’s written in the Cap and Trade Bill.

*We know, they intend control of our very lives, it’s written in the Health Care Bill.

*We know, they intend to control our votes, the 2010 census is now controlled by the white house and the ones registering voters are corrupt

*We watch and wait as they install unaccountable czars for dictating not representing

*We watch and wait as they increase “organizer” funding from millions to billions of our tax dollars. And we wonder how these groups will be used to steal our life, liberty and property from us.

The fifth sentence of the Declaration of Independence states, “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

Our product of freedom is competing with an illegal product. The federal government does not have the constitutional authority to sell servitude. It’s that simple. The 10th amendment positions our competitor as an outlaw and recent actions in Washington reaffirm this claim. This brings us to our first point of strategic significance:

A movement based on the 10th amendment is undeniably lawful and moral.
Washington is selling servitude. On fundamental issues, we the people are no longer represented by our national politicians. Our political leaders do not respect the people. They do not bother to read bills that steal away our money and freedom, but then they support these bills aggressively. They set up final votes at midnight in hopes that we do not notice the theft. They pit us against one another by highlighting trivial, but polarizing issues. When the people scream for a solution that doesn’t fit their personal quest for power they shelve the debate instead of making changes that would benefit the people. Despite this disrespect, many national leaders stay in office forever and when real opportunities arise to fill seats with true freedom oriented candidates, the establishment candidates step up, promote and install new big government-types that are mirror images of themselves. It is about personal power not representation. Washington is selling servitude.

Click here to read the full article.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Friday, August 07, 2009

The Folly of Hate-Crime Laws

by Richard Cohen, Washington Post

James von Brunn, who is alleged to have opened fire and killed a guard at the Holocaust Memorial Museum, is apparently a consummate bigot. His former wife said that his hatred of blacks and Jews "ate him alive like a cancer," so it might seem appropriate that in addition to having been indicted last week for murder and gun-law violations, he was also charged with hate crimes. At age 89, he proves that you are never too old to hate.

He also proves the stupidity of hate-crime laws. A prime justification for such laws is that some crimes really affect a class of people. The hate-crimes bill recently passed by the Senate puts it this way: "A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim . . . but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected." No doubt. But how is this crime different from most other crimes?

First, let us consider the question of which "community" von Brunn was allegedly attempting to devastate. He rushed the Holocaust museum, which memorializes the 6 million Jews killed by the Nazis and their enablers. There could be no more poignant symbol for the Jewish community. Yet von Brunn killed not a Jew but an African American -- security guard Stephen Tyrone Johns.

So which community was affected by this weird, virtually suicidal act? Was it the Jewish community or the black community? Since von Brunn hated both, you could argue that it does not matter. But since I would guess that neither community now gives the incident much thought, the answer might well be "neither one." So what is the point of piling on hate crimes to what von Brunn has allegedly done? Beats me. He already faces -- at age 89, remember -- a life sentence and, possibly, the death penalty.

The real purpose of hate-crime laws is to reassure politically significant groups -- blacks, Hispanics, Jews, gays, etc. -- that someone cares about them and takes their fears seriously. That's nice. It does not change the fact, though, that what's being punished is thought or speech. Johns is dead no matter what von Brunn believes. The penalty for murder is severe, so it's not as if the crime is not being punished. The added "late hit" of a hate crime is without any real consequence, except as a precedent for the punishment of belief or speech. Slippery slopes are supposedly all around us, I know, but this one is the real McCoy.

Let us assume that the "community" is really affected by what we call a hate crime. I am Jewish. But even with von Brunn's attack, I am more affected by a mugging in my neighborhood that might keep me from taking a walk at night than I am by a shooting at the Holocaust museum. If there's a murder in a park, I'll stay out of it for months. If there's a rape, women will stay out of the park. If there's another and another, women will know that a real hater is loose. Rape, though, is not a hate crime. Why not?

I doubt that any group of drunken toughs is going to hesitate in their pummeling of a gay individual or an African American or a Jew on account of it being a hate crime. If they are not already deterred by the conventional penalties -- prison, etc. -- then why would additional penalties deter them? And if, in fact, they kept their mouths shut, refrained from the N-word or the F-word or the K-word, and simply made the beating or the killing seem one triggered by dissing or some other reason, then they would not be accused of hate -- merely of murder or some such trifle. If, though, they gave vent to their thoughts, they would be in for real trouble.

For the most part, hate-crime legislation is just a sop for politically influential interest groups -- yet another area in which liberals, traditionally sensitive to civil liberties issues, have chosen to mollify an entire population at the expense of the individual and endorse discredited reasoning about deterrence.

In von Brunn's case, the hate-crime counts are an obscenity. To suggest that the effects of this attack were felt only by the Jewish or the black communities -- and not, for instance, by your average Washington tourist -- ghettoizes both its real and purported victims. It's a consequence that von Brunn himself might applaud.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

State Mandates & Health Insurance: Find out what you're paying for (and don't need)

by Shelly Roche, Bytestyle.tv



State mandates on health insurance are a major factor in the high cost of coverage. I did some research to find out what I'm paying for (and don't want or need):

State: Maryland
Cost of Coverage: about $500/month

Here are just a few of the dozens of things I'm paying for:

In-Vitro Fertilization - accounts for 3-5% of my premium
Morbid Obesity Treatment - accounts for 1-3% of my premium
Smoking Cessation - accounts for 1-3% of my premium
Well Child Care - accounts for 1-3% of my premium
Alcoholism/Substance Abuse - accounts for 1-3% of my premium
Hair Prosthesis - accounts for 1% of my premium

I'm not morbidly obese, I don't smoke, I don't have kids (nor am I looking to get pregnant any time soon, sorry mom!), and I'm pretty sure I don't need rehab.

Go to Shelly's website for more!

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

U.S.S. of A. (video)


-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Thursday, August 06, 2009

End the Fed? A not-so-crazy idea.

by George Selgin
Congressman Ron Paul's bill may never pass, but history suggests the US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve.

Since it was introduced in February, Representative Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" bill (H.R. 1207) has gained 282 congressional cosponsors. If adopted, the bill would allow the Government Accountability Office to review, not only the Federal Reserve's balance sheet, but its recent monetary policy deliberations and transactions.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke opposes the plan, saying it would undermine the Fed's hallowed independence.

But Mr. Paul, a noted libertarian who ran for president last year, also wants to keep the Fed out of Congress's clutches – by scrapping it altogether. That's the goal of his follow-up Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (H.R. 833). Although that measure has yet to gain a single cosponsor, it has plenty of grass-roots support, and Paul hopes that members of Congress will jump on the bandwagon once their eyes are opened by a no-holds-barred audit.

Wacky stuff? Well, if not having a ghost of a chance is enough to make a bill bonkers, Paul's measure probably qualifies. But that doesn't mean you've got to be crazy to believe that the US economy would be better off without the Fed.

The Fed's apologists suggest otherwise, of course. They note that the US spent nearly half the years between 1854 to 1913 in recession, as opposed to just 21 percent of the time since the Fed's establishment in 1913. Who would want to go back to those bad old days?

But consider: the US economy has actually grown less rapidly since 1914 than it did before. And inflation has been much worse, despite both the Civil War, which featured the nation's worst inflation, and the Great Depression, which featured its severest deflation!

What's more, the frequent downturns before 1914 were due, not to the lack of a central bank, but to foolish government regulations. Topping the list were bans on branch banking, initiated by state governments and then incorporated into federal banking law. The bans propped up thousands of undercapitalized and under-diversified banks – banks unfit to survive major local shocks, let alone macroeconomics ones. They also caused bank notes – competitively supplied counterparts of today's Federal Reserve notes – to trade at discounts whenever they traveled far from the solitary offices of banks that issued them.

During the Civil War, state bank notes were taxed out of existence to make way for those of new national banks. Because national banks had to accept one another's notes at full value, their currency was uniform. But national bank notes had to be backed by government bonds.

That requirement, designed to bolster the Union's finances while the war raged on, proved disastrous afterward, when government surpluses led to a halving of the federal debt, and to a corresponding shortage of bonds for securing bank notes. The resulting currency panics – in 1873, 1884, 1893, and 1907 – prompted the Fed's establishment.

But they didn't have to. Until 1907, prominent reformers favored simply abolishing Civil War-era restrictions on banks' freedom to issue notes and allowing all banks to branch nationwide to ease the mopping-up of unwanted paper money.

They drew inspiration from Canada, where a similar "asset currency" arrangement had been working smoothly for decades. Between the panic of 1893 and that of 1907, Congress considered more than a dozen "asset currency" measures But none got anywhere, thanks to local bankers' determination to block any proposal for branch banking that would threaten their cozy monopolies.

It was only once these deregulatory efforts failed that reformers fell back on the plan of establishing a "central reserve bank." The resulting Federal Reserve Act was, in essence, merely a plan to allow 12 new banks to do what other banks were prevented from doing themselves, namely, establish branch networks and issue currency backed by commercial assets.

But the Federal Reserve plan proved to be a poor substitute for deregulation. By granting monopoly privileges to the Federal Reserve banks, it allowed them to inflate recklessly: By 1919, the US inflation rate, which had cleaved close to zero ever since the Civil War, was close to 20 percent! Yet the Fed was also capable of failing to supply enough money to avert crises. The first downturn over which it presided – that of 1921 – was among the sharpest in US history. Still it was nothing compared to the unprecedented monetary contraction of 1929-1933.

Would asset currency have been any better? Canada's was: Between 1929 and 1933, for instance, 6,000 US banks failed, and a third of the US money stock was wiped out. In contrast, and despite a fixed Canadian-US dollar exchange rate, Canada's money stock shrank by just 13 percent, and no Canadian bank failed.

Notwithstanding this superior outcome, the Canadian government itself abandoned asset currency in favor of central banking in 1935, to placate a growing Canadian movement for easy money.

So a call to end the Fed would have been anything but crazy in 1934. Three-quarters of a century and a dozen crises later, there are plenty of grounds for insisting that it hasn't gotten any crazier.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

by Jeremy Scahill

A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of explosive allegations in sworn statements filed on August 3 in federal court in Virginia. The two men claim that the company's owner, Erik Prince, may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with federal authorities investigating the company. The former employee also alleges that Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," and that Prince's companies "encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life."

In their testimony, both men also allege that Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq. One of the men alleges that Prince turned a profit by transporting "illegal" or "unlawful" weapons into the country on Prince's private planes. They also charge that Prince and other Blackwater executives destroyed incriminating videos, emails and other documents and have intentionally deceived the US State Department and other federal agencies. The identities of the two individuals were sealed out of concerns for their safety.

These allegations, and a series of other charges, are contained in sworn affidavits, given under penalty of perjury, filed late at night on August 3 in the Eastern District of Virginia as part of a seventy-page motion by lawyers for Iraqi civilians suing Blackwater for alleged war crimes and other misconduct. Susan Burke, a private attorney working in conjunction with the Center for Constitutional Rights, is suing Blackwater in five separate civil cases filed in the Washington, DC, area. They were recently consolidated before Judge T.S. Ellis III of the Eastern District of Virginia for pretrial motions. Burke filed the August 3 motion in response to Blackwater's motion to dismiss the case. Blackwater asserts that Prince and the company are innocent of any wrongdoing and that they were professionally performing their duties on behalf of their employer, the US State Department.

The former employee, identified in the court documents as "John Doe #2," is a former member of Blackwater's management team, according to a source close to the case. Doe #2 alleges in a sworn declaration that, based on information provided to him by former colleagues, "it appears that Mr. Prince and his employees murdered, or had murdered, one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information, to the federal authorities about the ongoing criminal conduct."
John Doe #2 says he worked at Blackwater for four years; his identity is concealed in the sworn declaration because he "fear[s] violence against me in retaliation for submitting this Declaration." He also alleges, "On several occasions after my departure from Mr. Prince's employ, Mr. Prince's management has personally threatened me with death and violence."

In a separate sworn statement, the former US marine who worked for Blackwater in Iraq alleges that he has "learned from my Blackwater colleagues and ormer colleagues that one or more persons who have provided information, or who were planning to provide information about Erik Prince and Blackwater have been killed in suspicious circumstances." Identified as "John Doe #1," he says he "joined Blackwater and deployed to Iraq to guard State Department and other American government personnel." It is not clear if Doe #1 is still working with the company as he states he is "scheduled to deploy in the immediate future to Iraq." Like Doe #2, he states that he fears "violence" against him for "submitting this Declaration." No further details on the alleged murder(s) are provided.

"Mr. Prince feared, and continues to fear, that the federal authorities will detect and prosecute his various criminal deeds," states Doe #2. "On more than one occasion, Mr. Prince and his top managers gave orders to destroy emails and other documents. Many incriminating videotapes, documents and emails have been shredded and destroyed."

The Nation cannot independently verify the identities of the two individuals, their roles at Blackwater or what motivated them to provide sworn testimony in these civil cases. Both individuals state that they have previously cooperated with federal prosecutors conducting a criminal inquiry into Blackwater.

"It's a pending investigation, so we cannot comment on any matters in front of a Grand Jury or if a Grand Jury even exists on these matters," John Roth, the spokesperson for the US Attorney's office in the District of Columbia, told The Nation. "It would be a crime if we did that." Asked specifically about whether there is a criminal investigation into Prince regarding the murder allegations and other charges, Roth said: "We would not be able to comment on what we are or are not doing in regards to any possible investigation involving an uncharged individual."

The Nation repeatedly attempted to contact spokespeople for Prince or his companies at numerous email addresses and telephone numbers. When a company representative was reached by phone and asked to comment, she said, "Unfortunately no one can help you in that area." The representative then said that she would pass along The Nation's request. As this article goes to press, no company representative has responded further to The Nation.

Doe #2 states in the declaration that he has also provided the information contained in his statement "in grand jury proceedings convened by the United States Department of Justice." Federal prosecutors convened a grand jury in the aftermath of the September 16, 2007, Nisour Square shootings in Baghdad, which left seventeen Iraqis dead. Five Blackwater employees are awaiting trial on several manslaughter charges and a sixth, Jeremy Ridgeway, has already pleaded guilty to manslaughter and attempting to commit manslaughter and is cooperating with prosecutors. It is not clear whether Doe #2 testified in front of the Nisour Square grand jury or in front of a separate grand jury.

The two declarations are each five pages long and contain a series of devastating allegations concerning Erik Prince and his network of companies, which now operate under the banner of Xe Services LLC. Among those leveled by Doe #2 is that Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe":

To that end, Mr. Prince intentionally deployed to Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis. Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, the warriors who fought the Crusades.

Mr. Prince operated his companies in a manner that encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life. For example, Mr. Prince's executives would openly speak about going over to Iraq to "lay Hajiis out on cardboard." Going to Iraq to shoot and kill Iraqis was viewed as a sport or game. Mr. Prince's employees openly and consistently used racist and derogatory terms for Iraqis and other Arabs, such as "ragheads" or "hajiis."

Among the additional allegations made by Doe #1 is that "Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq." He states that he personally witnessed weapons being "pulled out" from dog food bags. Doe #2 alleges that "Prince and his employees arranged for the weapons to be polywrapped and smuggled into Iraq on Mr. Prince's private planes, which operated under the name Presidential Airlines," adding that Prince "generated substantial revenues from participating in the illegal arms trade."

Doe #2 states: "Using his various companies, [Prince] procured and distributed various weapons, including unlawful weapons such as sawed off semi-automatic machine guns with silencers, through unlawful channels of distribution." Blackwater "was not abiding by the terms of the contract with the State Department and was deceiving the State Department," according to Doe #1.

This is not the first time an allegation has surfaced that Blackwater used dog food bags to smuggle weapons into Iraq. ABC News's Brian Ross reported in November 2008 that a "federal grand jury in North Carolina is investigating allegations the controversial private security firm Blackwater illegally shipped assault weapons and silencers to Iraq, hidden in large sacks of dog food." Another former Blackwater employee has also confirmed this information to The Nation.

Both individuals allege that Prince and Blackwater deployed individuals to Iraq who, in the words of Doe #1, "were not properly vetted and cleared by the State Department." Doe #2 adds that "Prince ignored the advice and pleas from certain employees, who sought to stop the unnecessary killing of innocent Iraqis." Doe #2 further states that some Blackwater officials overseas refused to deploy "unfit men" and sent them back to the US. Among the reasons cited by Doe #2 were "the men making statements about wanting to deploy to Iraq to 'kill ragheads' or achieve 'kills' or 'body counts,'" as well as "excessive drinking" and "steroid use." However, when the men returned to the US, according to Doe #2, "Prince and his executives would send them back to be deployed in Iraq with an express instruction to the concerned employees located overseas that they needed to 'stop costing the company money.'"
Doe #2 also says Prince "repeatedly ignored the assessments done by mental health professionals, and instead terminated those mental health professionals who were not willing to endorse deployments of unfit men." He says Prince and then-company president Gary Jackson "hid from Department of State the fact that they were deploying men to Iraq over the objections of mental health professionals and security professionals in the field," saying they "knew the men being deployed were not suitable candidates for carrying lethal weaponry, but did not care because deployments meant more money."

Doe #1 states that "Blackwater knew that certain of its personnel intentionally used excessive and unjustified deadly force, and in some instances used unauthorized weapons, to kill or seriously injure innocent Iraqi civilians." He concludes, "Blackwater did nothing to stop this misconduct." Doe #1 states that he "personally observed multiple incidents of Blackwater personnel intentionally using unnecessary, excessive and unjustified deadly force." He then cites several specific examples of Blackwater personnel firing at civilians, killing or "seriously" wounding them, and then failing to report the incidents to the State Department.

Doe #1 also alleges that "all of these incidents of excessive force were initially videotaped and voice recorded," but that "Immediately after the day concluded, we would watch the video in a session called a 'hot wash.' Immediately after the hotwashing, the video was erased to prevent anyone other than Blackwater personnel seeing what had actually occurred." Blackwater, he says, "did not provide the video to the State Department."

Doe #2 expands on the issue of unconventional weapons, alleging Prince "made available to his employees in Iraq various weapons not authorized by the United States contracting authorities, such as hand grenades and hand grenade launchers. Mr. Prince's employees repeatedly used this illegal weaponry in Iraq, unnecessarily killing scores of innocent Iraqis." Specifically, he alleges that Prince "obtained illegal ammunition from an American company called LeMas. This company sold ammunition designed to explode after penetrating within the human body. Mr. Prince's employees repeatedly used this illegal ammunition in Iraq to inflict maximum damage on Iraqis."

Blackwater has gone through an intricate rebranding process in the twelve years it has been in business, changing its name and logo several times. Prince also has created more than a dozen affiliate companies, some of which are registered offshore and whose operations are shrouded in secrecy. According to Doe #2, "Prince created and operated this web of companies in order to obscure wrongdoing, fraud and other crimes."

"For example, Mr. Prince transferred funds from one company (Blackwater) to another (Greystone) whenever necessary to avoid detection of his money laundering and tax evasion schemes." He added: "Mr. Prince contributed his personal wealth to fund the operations of the Prince companies whenever he deemed such funding necessary. Likewise, Mr. Prince took funds out of the Prince companies and placed the funds in his personal accounts at will."

Briefed on the substance of these allegations by The Nation, Congressman Dennis Kucinich replied, "If these allegations are true, Blackwater has been a criminal enterprise defrauding taxpayers and murdering innocent civilians." Kucinich is on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and has been investigating Prince and Blackwater since 2004.

"Blackwater is a law unto itself, both internationally and domestically. The question is why they operated with impunity. In addition to Blackwater, we should be questioning their patrons in the previous administration who funded and employed this organization. Blackwater wouldn't exist without federal patronage; these allegations should be thoroughly investigated," Kucinich said.

A hearing before Judge Ellis in the civil cases against Blackwater is scheduled for August 7.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Diseased African Monkeys Used to Make Swine Flu Vaccines; Private Military Contractor Holds Key Patents

NaturalNews.com

To most people, vaccines sound medically harmless. "They're good for you!" say the doctors and drug companies, but they never really talk about what's in those vaccines. There's a good reason for that: If people knew what was really in those vaccines, they would never allow themselves to be injected with them.

Aside from the dangerous ingredients many people already know about (like squalene or thimerosal), one of the key ingredients used in flu vaccines (including the vaccines being prepared for the swine flu pandemic) is the diseased flesh of African Green Monkeys. This is revealed in U.S. patent No. 5911998 - Method of producing a virus vaccine from an African green monkey kidney cell line. (http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5...)

As this patent readily explains, ingredients used in the vaccine are derived from the kidneys of African Green Monkeys who are first infected with the virus, then allowed to fester the disease, and then are killed so that their diseased organs can be used make vaccine ingredients. This is done in a cruel, inhumane "flesh factory" environment where the monkeys are subjected to a process that includes "incubating said inoculated cell line to permit proliferation of said virus." Then: "harvesting the virus resulting from step (c); and... (ii) preparing a vaccine from the harvested virus."

Aside from the outrageous cruelty taking place with all this ("incubating" the virus in the kidneys of living monkeys, for example), there's another disturbing fact that has surfaced in all this: The patent for this process is held not just by the National Institutes of Health, but by another private corporation known as DynCorp.

This, of course, brings up the obvious question: Who is Dyncorp? And why do they hold a patent on live attenuated vaccine production using African Green Monkeys?


What you probably didn't want to know about Dyncorp

DynCorp, it turns out, is a one of the top private military contractors working for the U.S. government. In addition to allegedly trafficking in under-age sex slaves in Bosnia (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.ph...) and poisoning rural farmers in Ecuador with its aerial spraying of Colombian coca crops (http://www.corpwatch.org/article.ph...), Dyncorp just happens to be paid big dollars by the U.S. government to patrol the U.S. / Mexico border, near where the H1N1 first swine flu virus was originally detected.

DynCorp also happens to be in a position to receive tremendous financial rewards from its patents covering attenuated live viral vaccine harvesting methods, as described in four key patents jointly held by DynCorp and the National Institutes of Health:

(6025182) Method for producing a virus from an African green monkey kidney cell line

(6117667) Method for producing an adapted virus population from an African green monkey kidney cell line (http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6...)

(5911998) Method of producing a virus vaccine from an African green monkey kidney cell line

(5646033) African green monkey kidney cell lines useful for maintaining viruses and for preparation of viral vaccines

Government collusion?

One of the key inventors in these patents now held by DynCorp was Dr. Robert H. Purcell. Who is Dr. Robert Purcell? He's one of the co-chiefs of the Laboratory of Infectious Diseases of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases operating under the National Institutes of Health of the U.S. government.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Wednesday, August 05, 2009

flag@whitehouse.gov

I've been reporting YouTube vids of Obama talking about healthcare to flag@whitehouse.gov as "fishy"

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

First Lady requires more than twenty attendants

by Dr. Paul L. Williams, Canada Free Press

By the staff of thelastcrusade.org

“The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it”
--Albert Einstein

“In my own life, in my own small way, I have tried to give back to this country that has given me so much,” she said. “See, that’s why I left a job at a big law firm for a career in public service, “ Michelle Obama

No, Michele Obama does not get paid to serve as the First Lady and she doesn’t perform any official duties. But this hasn’t deterred her from hiring an unprecedented number of staffers to cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession. Just think Mary Lincoln was taken to task for purchasing china for the White House during the Civil War. And Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary.

How things have changed! If you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of Miz Michele are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by John Q. Public:

$172,2000 - Sher, Susan (CHIEF OF STAFF)
$140,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$113,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE SOCIAL SECRETARY)
$102,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Winter, Melissa E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)
$90,000 - Medina, David S. (DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)
$84,000 - Lelyveld, Catherine M. (DIRECTOR AND PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)
$75,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND ADVANCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$70,000 - Sanders, Trooper (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$65,000 - Burnough, Erinn J. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)
Reinstein, Joseph B. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)
$62,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND EVENTS COORDINATOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)
$60,000 - Fitts, Alan O. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADVANCE AND TRIP DIRECTOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Lewis, Dana M. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT AND PERSONAL AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)
$52,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)
$50,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR SCHEDULING AND TRAVELING AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)
$45,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)
Tubman, Samantha (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,SOCIAL OFFICE)
$40,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)
$36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (STAFF ASSISTANT TO THE SOCIAL SECRETARY)
Bookey, Natalie (STAFF ASSISTANT)
Jackson, Deilia A. (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Vaccine Created Illnesses



-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Deployed in the USA?

by Gene Healy

It's not hard to understand why President Barack Obama appalls supporters of traditional American liberties.

In the first six months of his presidency, he's fought for radically expanded federal power, while asserting a quasi-royal prerogative to control the auto industry and pushing for a government takeover of the health care sector, as well as a cap-and-trade scheme that would regulate virtually every human activity that emits carbon dioxide.

But if you're inclined to thank God for small favors, there's this at least: Obama hasn't yet proposed turning the U.S. military against American citizens. Last week, the New York Times revealed that the Bush administration seriously considered doing just that.

According to former administration officials, at a top-level meeting in 2002, Vice President Dick Cheney and his allies lobbied hard for sending U.S. troops onto the streets of a Buffalo, NY suburb to kick down doors and kill or capture a group of terrorist suspects, the so-called Lackawanna Six.

In that debate, Cheney relied on a legal memo by DOJ official John Yoo, who, because of his belief that the president could do no constitutional wrong, was sardonically dubbed "Dr. Yes" by Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Yoo's memo insisted that neither the Fourth Amendment nor the Posse Comitatus Act, the longstanding federal statute that restricts the use of standing armies to keep the peace at home, could check the commander-in-chief's power to use the military domestically.

To his credit, President Bush ultimately rejected Cheney's scheme for a gratuitous show of force. The Lackawanna Six were arrested without incident by the FBI, and Americans were spared the kind of spectacle usually associated with militarized banana republics.

As Lackawanna's police chief put it, "If we had tanks rolling down the streets of our city, we would have had pandemonium down here."

There's good reason to resist turning the machinery of war inward. From the violent suppression of strikers in the 19th century to the 1997 Marine Corps killing of an American high school student at the Mexican border, deviation from our tradition of civilian law enforcement has had grave consequences.

Even when it doesn't lead to collateral damage, the use of standing armies at home can, as Jefferson put it, "overawe the public sentiment," and acclimate Americans to a militarized home front inconsistent with democratic life.

The Times' revelation is just the latest piece of evidence demonstrating the previous administration's dangerous flirtation with domestic militarism. The Bush team repeatedly insisted that the Posse Comitatus Act was a dead letter when it came to using the Army for homeland security.

And in Katrina's aftermath, Bush pushed through new exceptions to the act that, until they were repealed in 2008, gave him the power to fight a militarized federal war on hurricanes, declaring himself supreme military commander in any state where he thought emergency conditions warranted it.

Obama seems less inclined than his predecessor to reach reflexively for the military option at home. But unless it's actively resisted, "mission creep" can lead to domestic militarism all the same.

The 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team was the first to fight their way into Baghdad, and last fall they became the first unit assigned to the U.S. Army's domestic Northern Command to serve as "an on call federal response force" for natural disasters or terrorist attacks.

Initial statements--later retracted by the Defense Department--suggested that they'd have a hands-on law enforcement role, Posse Comitatus notwithstanding.

And the Pentagon recently announced plans for military task forces to work with FEMA in the event of a Swine Flu outbreak. How much we should worry about that depends on what tasks the soldiers will be assigned, and few details are available thus far. But it's worth remembering that during 2005's Avian Flu scare, Bush officials explored the idea of military-enforced quarantines, a disturbing prospect.

Perhaps, instead of relentlessly extending federal power over the economy and the environment, Congress could exercise its legitimate oversight functions, investigate whether these domestic military missions are needed, and ensure that they remain firmly within the law. Or would that be too much to ask?

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

TELL THEM LOUDLY AND PROUDLY THAT YOU HATE THEIR GUTS AND THE STOMACH THEY PACK THEM IN

I got yet another one of those "look at the lunatic liberals and what they're doing to us" emails today. This one about the audience that shouted down their Senator during a "town hall" meeting. The Senator requested a police escort to leave the place, fearing a mob riot.

Good. That Senator can go screw. I almost wish the crowd had gone mob. Almost. That might have made things worse for us and better for them. Us being The People and them being The Elected SOBs.

Here was my response to the mailing list that sent that email around talking about how "golly gee, the liberals are getting mad and calling angry audience members 'terrorists' and stuff."
----------

The greatest fear of elected types is that We the People will stop being civilized to them. They can have 24 hour armed guards and wear all the body armor they want. In order to appear as our "representatives," they have to talk to the People directly at town hall meetings and events. That means that they have to expose themselves to the wrath of the public, at least in part.

In the old days, politicians who did what ours have been doing to us for years now were physically dragged from home or office, tarred and feathered and left on display to find their own humiliated way home.

Now? We write "letters of protest" and publish letters to the editor in our newspapers and get angry in private, carefully-said words at small gatherings. Anything more than that is "uncivilized" and "wrong."

I say that we should all be going to these town hall public meetings and doing exactly what those people these statists are denigrating did. SHOUT! YELL! TELL YOUR ELECTED MORON THAT HE OR SHE IS NOT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE. CALL THEM A DIRTY SOB, A POS, A WORTHLESS SUCKER, WHATEVER. TELL THEM LOUDLY AND PROUDLY THAT YOU HATE THEIR GUTS AND THE STOMACH THEY PACK THEM IN.

Take off the kid gloves, people. Be real men. Act like true women. Give the politicians what for. Let them know that if they keep doing what they're doing, they're going to get a lot more than they used to get from us.

ABOVE ALL, SHOW THE PRESS AND THE PEOPLE THAT THE ELECTED A-HOLES ARE NOT OUR REPRESENTATIVES. THEY'RE SHILLS, CON MEN, AND LYING SELLOUTS. If they don't represent us, they no longer have any power. All of their power lies in the fact that We the People are their "constituents." Show them that we aren't and they are powerless. Their entire structure depends on that illusion. Pull out the mirror and show the world the fakery!

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Should You Get The Flu Shot?

Get the REAL Flu Facts before you decide.
by Dr. Joseph Mercola

"Look, first of all you have 2/3rds of the population on aspartame which interacts with all vaccines. Secondly, the CDC has admitted this is not the same strain as the flu that is here. Of course it couldn't be, its made from last year's flu vaccine. So even if someone wasn't using aspartame, all it can do is give you the flu. On an Ohio radio show Nov. 25,2003, a doctor stated 'If you have taken the flu shot more than 8 times in the last 10 years you have an 80% chance of getting Alzheimers'. Since aspartame is escalating Alzheimers anyway, and memory loss is so prevalent with aspartame its like #9 on the FDA list of 92 symptoms, people won't have a chance.
Ingri Cassel, President Vaccination Liberation

Stop Worrying About the Flu
By Dr. Joseph Mercola

Like diehard fans camping out overnight to be the first in line for concert tickets to their favorite performer, people are waiting in long lines hoping to get the flu vaccine. Yes, it's that time of year -- flu season and the media and the government have stirred the public into complete panic mode. Headlines flood newspapers reading, "Vaccine shortage leads public crisis" and on the hour radio broadcasts are bombarding the public with reports that the flu epidemic is coming and there aren't enough vaccines to fight it.

Before You Run Out to Get the Flu Shot ... Do Your Homework

It's becoming increasingly difficult to separate facts from the hype created by the media and government officials. In order to make an informed decision of whether or not to get the flu shot, it is of utmost importance to do your homework. This involves doing thorough research of the safety issues surrounding the flu vaccination and then learning the preventative measures against getting the flu in the first place.

The Target Markets for the Flu Vaccine: Elderly and Children

Generally, the flu vaccine is recommended for people ages 65 and older and to those with serious medical conditions that could quickly worsen as a result of serious complications from the flu. Reports from medical journals widely vary in the effectiveness for the elderly, ranging from 0 to 85 percent.

The CDC reports that 90 percent of deaths from influenza occur among the elderly. These kinds of statistics make it nearly impossible to credit the flu vaccine for prolonging lives in this age group, as 65 percent of all deaths (regardless of the cause) happen among the elderly.

Further, there are potential dangers to the flu vaccine, particularly to the already vulnerable elderly population. Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, one of the world's leading immunogeneticists, states the chances of getting Alzheimer's disease is 10 times higher if an individual has five consecutive shots than if they have one, two or no shots. This is likely due to the thimerosol (a mercury-derived preservative) and aluminum content of the vaccine.

Recommendations to give flu vaccinations to children were adopted on March 1, 2003. These recommendations include vaccinating children between 2 and 18 years who live in households containing children younger than 2 years of age. The most common type of flu vaccine given to children is called Fluzone, with each dose containing 25 ug of mercury. CDC recommendations include administering the flu vaccine to children beginning at six months of age and then on an annual basis, for the rest of their lives.

Does the Flu Vaccine Really Work?

The flu vaccine can actually weaken the immune system and make you more predisposed to the illness.

The flu vaccine, whether in the shot or nasal form, is worthless at best and should be avoided. Not only are they loaded with toxic chemicals including mercury and aluminum, but many people come down with the flu shortly after receiving the shot. This is because it actually weakens the immune system, making the person more predisposed to the illness.

The Dangers You Need to Know About FluMist

First, it is important to familiarize yourself with the side effects of FluMist, which include cough, runny nose/nasal congestion, irritability, headaches, chills, muscle aches and fever. Ironically, all of these symptoms bear striking similarities to the symptoms of the flu.

In addition, research has shown an increased risk of Bell palsy following intranasal flu vaccination, according to the Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS). The makers of the nasal flu vaccine in the study decided not to market it the following season due to the risk. According to GACVS, the greater risk of Bell palsy following immunization with this vaccine may have been due to specific vaccine components, or simply to use of the intranasal administration route. It is therefore possible that such complications of vaccine administration may also apply to other nasal vaccines.

The new live-virus vaccine (FLUMIST), which is squirted up the nose, was licensed by the FDA in June 2003 for use in healthy individuals between the ages of five and 50. It is not recommended for pregnant women or those with asthma, chronic lung or heart disease; chronic underlying medical conditions such as diabetes or kidney disorders; immune suppression or immune system problems; children or adolescents receiving aspirin therapy, anyone allergic to eggs; or those with a history of Guillain Barre syndrome. It should not be given simultaneously with other vaccines.

FLUMIST's vaccine live virus is shed after vaccination so the vaccinated are advised to avoid close contact with immune-compromised individuals for at least 21 days. Some hospital personnel are asking those recently vaccinated with FLUMIST to avoid visiting patients in hospitals to prevent the risk of transmitting the vaccine strain virus to sick patients.

Source: http://www.mercola.com/2004/oct/27/flu_options.htm

By Dr Sherri Tenpenny
www.nmaseminars.com

News reports have been flooding us with articles warning that the impending flu season may be the worst in years. Even though it is difficult to separate the facts from the hype, a close evaluation of the flu vaccine will reveal that serious questions must be raised about the recommendations that are routinely touted, namely high efficacy with little risk. Anyone considering a flu shot should become informed about the substances coming through that needle, and should be determined to investigate the safety and efficacy issues that are still unresolved.

The vaccine virus
Each year, a new vaccine is developed that contains three different viruses (one influenza B and two influenza A strains). CDC officials select the new viruses based on which viruses were prevalent during the flu season in China and Australia the previous year. The CDC admits that the viruses selected for the new vaccine are chosen on the basis of an “educated guess.” [i]

What’s in a flu shot?
The influenza virus is grown in “specific pathogen-free” (SPF) eggs. Eggs are tested for a variety of agents—usually between 23 and 31—to confirm the absence of those specific pathogens. Laboratories limit the number of agents that are screened due to the shear abundance of potential viruses and/or bacteria to choose from. In addition, screening for every potential agent would be cost prohibitive.[ii] If none of the tested agents are detected, the vaccine is reported as “pathogen free.”

However, it should be understood that there is a distinct difference between “pathogen free” and “specific pathogen-free.” In its July 1996 report, the Institute of Medicine acknowledged that “although it is not possible to produce a completely uncontaminated animal, it is possible to produce an animal [or egg] certified to be free of specific pathogens.”[iii] Viruses that are harmless to their animal host, however, may be potentially harmful to humans.

During the manufacturing process, antibiotics (neomycin, polymyxin B and gentamicin) are added to eliminate stray bacteria found in the mixture. The final solution can contain the following additives in any combination: Triton X-100 (a detergent); polysorbate 80 (a potential carcinogen); gelatin; formaldehyde; and residual egg proteins. In addition, many of the influenza vaccines still contain thimerosal as a preservative. Thimerosal (mercury) is being investigated for its link to brain injury and autoimmune disease.

Does the flu shot protect?
There are no guarantees that the influenza viruses selected for the vaccine will be the identical strains circulating during a given flu season. In fact, it has recently been announced that this year's flu vaccine does not include the strain that is being reported by doctors in the community called the “A Fujian” strain. Outbreaks have been reported in Texas, Colorado and elsewhere[iv] that involve strains that do not match the current flu vaccine. CDC tests have confirmed that more than 80 per cent of the 55 strains of influenza virus isolated thus far are the A Fujian strain. Even so, the CDC still maintains that the current vaccine could provide cross-protection against the new variant, but the fact is, no one knows for sure.

Moreover, the majority of illnesses characterized by fever, fatigue, cough and aching muscles are not caused by the influenza virus. Non-influenza viruses (e.g., rhinoviruses respiratory syncytial virus [RSV], adenoviruses, and parainfluenza viruses) can cause symptoms referred to influenza-like illnesses (ILI). Certain bacteria, such as Legionella spp., Chlamydia pneumoniae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Streptococcus pneumoniae, have been documented as the causes of ILI.[v]

Notably, these microbes are not part of the flu vaccine. Unless an organism’s antigen is contained within the vaccine, there is no protection conferred by the vaccine. It is estimated that most adults will average 1-3 episodes of ILI, and most children will average 3-6 episodes. The CDC also admits that “many persons who have been vaccinated against influenza can still get the flu”[vi]

A serious concern: Alzheimer’s Disesase
Hugh Fudenberg, MD, an immunogeneticist and biologist with nearly 850 papers published in peer review journals, has reported that if an individual had five consecutive flu shots between 1970 and 1980 (the years studied), his/her chances of getting Alzheimer's Disease is ten times higher than if they had zero, one, or two shots.[vii]

Dr. Boyd Haley, Professor and Chair of the Department of Chemistry at the University of Kentucky, Lexington has done extensive research in the area of mercury toxicity and the brain. Haley’s research has established a likely connection between mercury toxicity and Alzheimer’s disease. [viii] In a paper published in collaboration with researchers at University of Calgary, Haley stated that “seven of the characteristic markers that we look for to distinguish Alzheimer's disease can be produced in normal brain tissues, or cultures of neurons, by the addition of extremely low levels of mercury.”[ix]

Does this prove that the mercury contained in the influenza shot can be directly linked to Alzheimer’s? No, absolutely not. But further research in this area is critically needed because the absence of proof is not the “proof of absence.”[x]

Flu vaccine now for children
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) adopted a resolution effective March 1, 2003 that expanded the use of the influenza vaccine to include children aged 6-23 months. The recommendations also included vaccinating those aged 2 to 18 years who live in households containing children younger than 2 years of age.[xi]

The flu vaccine most commonly given to children is Fluzone>, a trivalent vaccine grown in chicken eggs. Harvested with formaldehyde and containing the recommended ratio of 15 ug of each of the three prototype viral strains, each dose of Fluzone> also contains 25 ug of mercury.[xii] The new CDC recommendations include giving the influenza vaccine to children beginning at six months of age and then annually, for the rest of their lives. Children less than age 9 receiving their first flu shot, two doses of vaccine are recommended, with a minimum interval of one month between the two doses. However, the CDC does not provide a direct reference to substantiate this recommendation.[xiii]

On June 17, 2003, the FDA approved an intranasal influenza vaccine for use in healthy persons aged 5–49 years. Flumist> is a live-virus vaccine that can cause a litany of problems. (for further information on Dangers of FluMist)

Alternatives?
If you choose not to receive the flu shot, have a discussion with your doctor regarding other options. However, some simple and possibly quite effective things you can do for yourself to prevent the flu include: 1) avoid white sugar;[xiv] 2) exercise regularly; 3) get adequate sleep; 4) eat a healthy diet, omitting trans-fats; 5) drink plenty of purified water daily and 6) wash your hands. A common way people contract viral illnesses is by rubbing their nose or their eyes after their hands have been contaminated with a virus. The CDC states, “the most important thing you can do to keep from getting sick is to wash your hands.”[xv]

We are so used to taking medications—for prevention and treatment—that it is difficult to comprehend that these modest recommendations are really the most powerful ways to minimize the likelihood of getting the flu.

Making the decision
You may decide to consult a physician who is schooled in alternative medicine to assess a variety of options for you and your family. What is most important, in the end, is to become as informed as possible regarding your options for keeping healthy and avoiding the flu.

REFERENCES
[i] Sabin, Russel and Reynolds. Breakdowns Mar Flu Shot Program Production, distribution delays raise fears of nation vulnerable to epidemic. San Francisco Chronicle. Feb. 25, 2001
[ii] Charles River Laboratories, A Laboratory Animal Health Monitoring Program: Rationale and Development,' (Winter 1990); Source: Internet
[iii] Institute of Medicine Press Release: Federal Guidelines Needed to Ensure Safety in Animal-to-Human Organ Transplants. July 17, 1996.
[iv]CBS: The Associated Press. CDC Says Flu Season Is Going Strong in Parts of U.S., Vaccine Doesn't Match Strain Doctors See.
[v] MMWR. November 9, 2001 / 50(44);984-6
[vi] MMWR Nov. 9, 2001/50(44); 984-6
[vii] Hugh Fudenberg, MD, is Founder and Director of Research, Neurolmmuno Therapeutic Research Foundation. Information from Dr. Hugh Fudenberg came from transcribed notes of Dr. Fudenberg's speech at the NVIC International Vaccine Conference, Arlington, VA September, 1997. Quoted with permission.
[viii] The Relationship of Toxic Effects of Mercury to Exacerbation of the Medical Condition Classified as Alzheimer’s Disease by Boyd E. Haley, PhD.
[ix] NeuroReport, 12(4):733-737, 2001
[x] This information was stated at: http://www.testfoundation.org/ however their site has been removed.
[xi] MMWR. 2002;51[RR-3]:1-31
[xii] Package insert. Influenza Virus VaccineFluzone® 2003 – 2004 Formula
[xiii] MMWR. 2002: 51 [RR-3], pg. 19
[xiv] All forms of refined sugar depress white blood cells' ability to destroy bacteria. See Sanchez A, et al. Role of sugars in human neutrophilic phagocytosis. Am J Clin Nutr 1973;26:1180.
[xv]CDC—Handwashing: An ounce of prevention keeps the germs away.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Vaccination Myths and Truths

by Stephen Lendman, Global Research

Alan G. Philips is an attorney with the following credentials:

-- he's one of the few American lawyers whose practice includes vaccine exemption and waiver issues;

-- he advises other attorneys seeking help for their own clients on vaccine exemptions;

-- he co-founded Citizens for Healthcare Freedom (CHF) as "a grassroots, nonprofit organization supporting an exciting new Consumer Health Freedom Act in North Carolina" where he lives and practices law;

-- he "may be the only attorney in the US with a website dedicated to vaccine exemptions" - vaccinerights.com;

-- he authored "The Authoritative Guide to Vaccine Legal Exemptions;" and

-- he's written numerous articles and publications on vaccinations and immunizations, including "Dispelling Vaccination Myths: An Introduction to the Contradictions Between Medical Science and Immunization Policy," published in 1996 and most recently updated in 2007.

Given the possibility of universally mandated untested, experimental, toxic, and extremely dangerous Swine Flu vaccinations this fall, Philips' work is especially relevant and vital.

In its entirety, it can be accessed at www.vaccinerights.com/. A brief account follows below, focusing on 10 myths and truths, which he explains plus some additional information. More than ever, information is vital for protection against vaccines that can cause annoying to life-threatening autoimmune diseases, even the illnesses they're designed to prevent.

Of special concern is their effect on children. In America and elsewhere, they're over-immunized enough to destroy their immune systems, leaving them vulnerable to a lifetime of serious health disorders.

No one should voluntarily or otherwise take any vaccine, let alone one as untested and dangerous as for H1N1. But make no mistake. The dominant global media are readying a high intensity fear-mongering campaign to convince the unwary to jeopardize their health and well-being by doing it. Just say NO!!

In America, laws in place empower the Health and Human Services and/or Defense secretaries to declare a national emergency and order mass vaccinations. Legally, individual states can resist, but not likely when enough pressure is applied.

Under the proposed, but not enacted, October 2001 Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA), states are advised on how to exercise extraordinary emergency powers without regard to civil liberties issues. Individual ones have adopted some of its provisions and may add more later given the power of Washington and the media to force them.

The WHO is also empowered under the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) to address but not mandate global vaccinations. But it has enough influence to compel nations to go along in case of a "declared" pandemic threat, even without evidence to prove one.

Suspicious H1N1's Origins

On April 24, AP reported that

"Health officials are investigating a never-before-seen form of the flu that combines pig, bird and human viruses.... (It's) a growing medical mystery because it's unclear how (affected people) caught the virus. None (of seven cited had) contact with pigs." Nor had others reportedly affected in other US cities.

The "intercontinental" mixture included North American Swine Flu, North American Avian Flu, human H1N1 flu, and a fourth H3N2 strain found in Asia and Europe.

Suspicions about a synthetic laboratory-made virus have surfaced. Writing in NewsMax.com, Dr. Russell Blaylock quoted an unnamed viroligist saying: "Where the hell it got all these genes we don't know." According to Blalock: "Debate continues over the possibility that swine flu is a genetically engineered virus."

Dallas County Medical Director Dr. John Carlo voiced concern about the possibility that:

"This strain of swine influenza (may have been) cultured in a laboratory....something that's not been seen anywhere actually in the United States and the world...."

Recently interviewed on Russia Today TV, investigative journalist Wayne Madsen cited a University of Wisconsin lab conducting joint influenza vaccine research with drug company FluGen. On March 24, Reuters reported that:

"FluGen, Inc., an emerging leader in the development, production and delivery of influenza vaccines and related products, today announced it has secured exclusive rights to a novel, patent-protected vaccine-delivery technology (that) painlessly delivers seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines."

Madsen believes "the Swine Flu virus began in a lab," the objective being profits for vaccine makers with products "that may not actually be safe." Many noted experts share that view about all vaccines.

NutriMedical founder Dr. William Deagle reported that 6-8% of Swine Flu DNA matches no virus on record. He believes more lethal strains may appear in the fall.

Project Camelot "provide(s) a vehicle for researchers and whistleblowers to get their stories out." Interviewed on its Whistleblower Radio show, Burk Elder Hale claimed that a senior drug company biochemist (unnamed to protect him) told him:

"....an aerosoled precursor has been put into the air and almost everyone has breathed it into their lungs. (When Swine Flu) vaccines (are) administered in the fall, (they'll) be activated when (their) constituents come into contact with the aerosoled precursor in the body and will cause a rapid spread of the H1N1 influenza A virus. The biochemist is very upset about the matter....and is a very reliable source that needs our utmost protection."

Catherine Austin Fitts is a former high-level US government official and Wall Street insider. She's now the editor of Solari.com and runs Solari, Inc. as an "online media company focusing on ethical investment and preserving family wealth."

Admitting she's no expert, she wrote this about Swine Flu on July 22:

"I believe one of the goals of the swine flu vaccine is depopulation. Perhaps it is the goal of a swine flu epidemic as well, whether bio-warfare or hype around a flu season....Lowering immune systems and increasing toxicity levels combined with poor food, water and terrorizing stress will help do the trick....a plague can so frighten and help control people that they will accept the end of their current benefits....without objection. And a plague with proper planning can be highly profitable. Whatever the truth (about) swine flu and related vaccines....it can be used (to) control (a) situation that is quickly shifting out of control."

"In short, an epidemic can be used to offset the inflation of capital with increasing deflation of the value and income of labor and continual demand destruction. (What's coming next is the) meaner face of 'the establishment against the rest of society.' "

The possibility of a diabolical depopulation scheme can't be dismissed. The idea's been around for decades, including from the 1974 Henry Kissinger project - National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200). It was backed by powerful economic interests to cull the world population of useless feeders so corporate giants could exploit world resources unimpeded.

Kissinger's scheme was to make birth control a prerequisite for US aid. He wanted the annual death rate doubled and for a population decline in the hundreds of millions by 2000. Poor third world women in countries like Brazil were involuntarily sterilized. Millions were harmed then. Perhaps today's toll from mandatory global Swine Flu vaccinations will be billions.

Yet US laws were passed to prevent it. In 1986, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) required:

-- giving parents written information on vaccine benefits and risks so they could decide on what was safe for their children;

-- maintaining a permanent record of all vaccines given children, including producer names and lot numbers;

-- keeping up to date medical records of all vaccinations given children; and

-- recording all serious health problems after vaccinations were administered and notifying the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) immediately.

At issue is whether federal laws and constitutional and Nuremberg protections will help. Nuremberg requires voluntary consent with full disclosure of known risks and avoidance of experimental treatments if there's any reason to believe harm may result. The Fifth Amendment protects against abusive government authority in stating that "No person shall....be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law...." The Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments." Harming human health is cruel and abusive. Mandating suspect drugs violates Nuremberg, the US Constitution, and other protective laws. Whether they'll be enforced is another matter.

Dispelling Vaccination Myths with Truths

Myth No. 1: Vaccines are safe

Under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Reporting System) was established. Annually, it reports about 11,000 serious vaccine reactions, including up to 200 deaths and many more permanent disabilities.

Far more alarming is the following;

-- the FDA estimates that only 1% of serious adverse reactions are reported;

-- CDC says it's 10%;

-- medical school students testified before Congress that they're told not to report these incidents;

-- according to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), only one in 40 New York doctors reported adverse vaccine reactions or deaths;

-- international studies show vaccines cause up to 10,000 US SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths annually, and at least half of them are from vaccines;

-- another study determined that 3000 US children die annually from vaccines;

-- poor reporting in America suggests that annual adverse vaccine reactions, in fact, number from 100,000 - one million;

-- since 1988, the government's National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) paid families of affected children $1.2 billion in damages;

-- as authorized by the 2006 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, HHS Secretary Sebelius, granted drug companies legal immunity (except for impossible to prove willful misconduct) to proliferate dangerous, untested Swine Flu vaccines globally;

-- vaccines are legally mandated in all 50 US states, though legally avoidable in most (under normal circumstances) as explained below;

-- in settling vaccine damage suits, drug companies impose gag orders to keep vital information from the public; and

-- insurers refuse to cover adverse vaccine reactions because of the high potential liability they'd face.

Truth No. 1

Vaccinations cause high numbers of severe reactions, permanent disabilities, and deaths as well as an enormous personal and public cost. Virtually none of this gets reported.

Myth No. 2: Vaccines are very effective

Medical literature documents significant numbers of vaccine failures for measles, mumps, small pox, pertussis, polio and Hib-causing bacterial meningitis and pneumonia. In 1989, Oman experienced a widespread polio outbreak six months after completing a population-wide immunization program. In Kansas (in 1986), 90% of 1300 reported pertussis cases were "adequately vaccinated," and 72% of Chicago pertussis incidents in 1993 had been as well.

Truth No. 2

Evidence shows that vaccinations are an unreliable and dangerous way to prevent illness and disease.

Myth No. 3: Low US disease rates are attributable to vaccines

From 1850 - 1940, well before mandatory vaccination programs, the British Association for the Advancement of Science reported a 90% decrease in childhood diseases due to improved sanitation and hygiene practices. By 1945, US medical authorities noted a 95% drop in deaths from the leading childhood infectious diseases (diphtheria, pertussis, scarlet fever and measles), well before mass-immunizations began.

A recent WHO report found that third world disease and mortality rates had no direct correlation with immunization programs, but closely relate to hygiene and diet standards.

Truth No. 3

No evidence links vaccines with infectious disease declines. Proper hygiene and diet practices may be far more effective.

Myth No. 4: Sound immunization theory and practice prove the effectiveness of vaccines

Although vaccines stimulate antibody production, no evidence suggests that alone assures immunity. A 1950 British Medical Council-published study found no relationship between antibody count and disease incidence. Natural immunization involves many bodily organs and systems. Artificially producing antibodies can't achieve it.

Research also shows how squalene adjuvants harm the human immune system, making it susceptible to numerous illnesses and diseases ranging from very annoying to life threatening. In addition, the "herd immunity" notion of mass-immunizations effectiveness is largely discredited. Just the opposite is true as evidence shows that fully vaccinated populations have experienced epidemics numerous times in the past.

Further, vaccine effectiveness "remains scientifically unproven" because no double blind studies have been conducted to do it. Significantly, recent disease outbreaks have affected more vaccinated children than unvaccinated ones. And the common practice of "one size fits all" is troublesome. It lets tiny new-borns get the same dosage as a five year old. It tolerates dubious quality control practices producing what's known as "Hot Lots" - ones associated with disproportionately high death and disability rates.

Shockingly, the FDA refuses to act preventatively against them. In fact, individual vaccine lots have almost never been recalled even when associated with severe adverse reactions. Instead, they're administered under the assumption that all recipients respond the same, regardless of race, ethnicity, genetic makeup, or other characteristics.

A recent New England Journal of Medicine-reported study found that a significant number of Romanian children receiving polio vaccine contracted the disease. Evidence linked antibiotic injections to it. One innoculation raised the polio risk eight-fold; two - nine shots, 27-fold, and 10 or more 182-fold.

New research may reveal other unknown hazards, but public safety won't be addressed until government health officials act responsibly, report accurately, and adequately protect their populations from vaccines they never should allow.

Truth No. 4

Many supposed vaccine truths have, in fact, been proved false.

Myth No. 5: Childhood diseases are extremely dangerous

False. Even CDC data show a 99.8% pertussis recovery rate during the 1992-94 period. One Cincinnati Children's Hospital infectious diseases expert said at the time: "The disease was very mild, no one died, and no one went to the intensive care unit."

Nearly always, childhood infectious diseases "are benign and self-limiting. They usually impart lifelong immunity, whereas vaccine-induced immunization (when achieved) is only temporary." In fact, it can increase vulnerability later on by postponing better tolerated childhood illnesses until adulthood when death rates (though still low) are far higher.

Most important is that nearly all common infectious diseases are rarely dangerous, and, in fact, can develop strong, healthy adult immune systems when they're most needed. In addition, few people know that children who didn't contract measles have a higher incidence of skin diseases, degenerative bone and cartilage ones, and tumors while ovarian cancer is higher among mumps-free adult women. The human immune system benefits from common childhood infectious diseases. Freedom from them may be harmful later on.

Truth No. 5

Childhood disease dangers are greatly exaggerated to scare parents into getting their children vaccinated with unsafe drugs.

Myth No. 6: Polio vaccinations were very successful

False again. In 1955, when the Salk vaccine was introduced, polio was considered the most serious post-war public health problem. A year later, six New England states reported sharp rises ranging from more than double in Vermont to a 642% increase in Massachusetts. Other states also were badly impacted enough for Idaho and Utah to halt immunizations due to increased incidence and death rates.

In his 1962 congressional testimony, Dr. Bernard Greenberg, Biostatistics Department head at the University of North Carolina, reported sharp polio increases from 1957 to 1959 and a Public Health Service whitewash that suppressed it. In 1985, the CDC reported that 87% of US cases between 1973 and 1983 were caused by the vaccine. Later it added that it caused nearly all imported cases, and most of the victims were fully vaccinated.

Further, misdiagnosing, poor reporting, and cover-ups suggest that the actual number of vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) cases "may be 10 to 100 times higher than that cited by the CDC."

In 1977, even Jonas Salk admitted that mass inoculations caused most polio cases since 1961.

Truth No. 6

The Salk vaccine proved highly dangerous. Information about it was suppressed, and declines in the disease were well underway when mass-immunizations were begun. In Europe, they occurred in countries that used, then rejected the vaccine proving it was never needed in the first place. Showing also that the same is true for other diseases, including Swine Flu with the WHO and CDC admitting that most cases are mild, unthreatening, and generally pass without treatment, let alone risking dangerous unneeded vaccines.

Myth No. 7: Lack of an initial adverse reaction proves vaccines are safe

Documented long-term health problems include arthritis, chronic headaches, rashes indicative of disease, non-healing skin lesions, seizures, autism, anemia, multiple sclerosis, ALS, cancer, and many others. Ingredients common to all vaccines are at issue. Squalene adjuvants are a biological time bomb that can harm or destroy the human immune system.

Other ingredients are known toxicants and carcinogens, including thimersol (a mercury derivative), aluminum phosphate, formaldehyde, phenoxyethanol, and numerous gastrointestnal toxicants like liver toxicants, cardiovascular and blood toxicants, and reproductive toxicants. "Chemical ranking systems rate many vaccine ingredients among the most hazardous substances" known, even in microscopic doses.

"Millions of children (and adults) are partaking in an enormous crude experiment, and no sincere, organized effort is being made to track the negative side effects or to determine the long-term consequences."

Dr. Bart Classen's epidemiological research found vaccines as the cause of 79% of insulin type I diabetes cases in children under 10. The sharp rise in numerous other diseases may also be linked with mass-immunizations. California's autism rate skyrocketed 1000% in the last 20 years. In the 1990s, MMR vaccine usage in Britain (for measles, mumps and rubella) occurred at the same time autism rose sharply. The January 2000 Journal of Adverse Drug Reactions reported that no adequate testing was done, so the vaccine never should have been licensed.

The Autism Society says: "Autism is a complex developmental disability that typically appears during the first three years of life and is the result of a neurological disorder that affects the normal functioning of the brain...."

According to the CDC and National Vaccine Information Center, one in every 150 US children develop the disease. Tens of millions are affected worldwide, making it more common than pediatric cancer, incurable type 1 (juvenile-onset) diabetes and AIDS combined. In the early 1940s, prior to mass immunizations, autism was so rare that few doctors ever encountered it. Today it's a global pandemic.

Truth No. 7

Long-term vaccination reactions have been suppressed and ignored in spite of the alarming correlation between their use and the rise of autoimmune and other diseases. Vaccines aren't for protection. They're for profit and other nefarious purposes. Avoiding them is essential to protecting human health and well-being.

Myth No. 8: Vaccines are the only available disease prevention option

"Historically, homeopathy has proven many times...more effective than allopathic (conventional) medicine in the treatment and prevention of disease." During the 1849 US cholera outbreak, homeopathic hospitals documented a 3% death rate compared to 48 - 60% in conventional ones. It's as true today, and recent epidemiological studies show homeopathic remedies far superior to vaccines in preventing diseases. They're safe, effective, and toxin and side effect-free, yet most insurers won't cover them.

Truth No. 8

Alternative treatments and remedies have been safe and effective for generations, yet the medical establishment and governments attack and spurn them.

Myth No. 9: "Vaccinations are legally mandated and unavoidable..."

All states require them. However, laws vary by state, legal exemptions exist, and all states offer one or more of the following:

-- all states allow medical exemptions for persons susceptible to adverse reactions; parents can cite this for their children based on family history;

-- 48 states offer religious exemptions but may require membership in an established religious organization; "according to federal precedent, personal religious beliefs may be sufficient for a religious exemption regardless of which religious organization you belong to, or whether or not you belong to an organized religion at all;" in addition, the Supreme Court defined religion broadly for legal purposes; and

-- 17 states allow philosophical or personal exemptions.

All public and private schools must comply with federal and state vaccination laws and permit legal exemptions.

Truth No. 9

Some vaccines are mandated, but most, perhaps all, US citizens may use legal exemptions to avoid them. In a recent article, however, Phillips states:

"All non-medical exemptions in the US are ultimately provided conditionally. That is, states have the right to require immunization for everyone, legally exempt or not, during an (emergency) outbreak, other than (for) those" with medical exemptions.

Myth No. 10: Governments place public health concerns above all others

Vaccination history shows "documented instances of deceit portraying vaccines as mighty disease conquerors, when in fact vaccines have had little or no discernible impact - or have even delayed or reversed - pre-existing disease declines....Conflicts of interest are the norm in the vaccine industry." Government agencies like the FDA and CDC are stacked with corporate officials who return to high-paying industry jobs provided they place profit considerations over public health and safety.

In November 2000, concern over this and adverse reactions got the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) to pass a unanimous resolution at its 57th meeting calling for a moratorium on mandatory childhood vaccinations and for doctors to insist on "truly informed consent for (their) use...."

In October 1999, Dr. Bart Classen, founder and CEO of Classen Immunotherapies, told Congress:

"It is clear....that the government's immunization policies are driven by politics and not by science. I can give numerous examples where employees of the US Public Health Service....appear to be furthering their careers by acting as propaganda officers to support political agendas. In one case....employees of a foreign government, who were funded and working closely with the US Public Health Service, submitted false data to a major medical journal. The true data indicated the vaccine was dangerous; however, the false data" indicated no risk.

In addition, "four letters from the FDA/Public Health Service....clearly reveal(ed) that the anthrax vaccine" approved for US military personnel was done "without the manufacturer performing a single controlled clinical trial." They're essential to determine safety and effectiveness. Failure to conduct them proved devastating to the health and well-being of recipients and still does today. Besides, all vaccines are unsafe and some are extremely dangerous.

US military forces receive many or all of the following vaccinations:

-- three shots for hepatitis B;

-- two for hepatitis A;

-- annually for influenza so all military personnel will get Swine Flu shots;

-- all military personnel must have documented proof of receiving MMR vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella; those without them them get single doses;

-- two varicella (chicken pox) shots;

-- smallpox doses every ten years;

-- three for polio for adults never vaccinated; those fully vaccinated get a booster shot;

-- tetanus-diphtheria and pertussis vaccinations for personnel who haven't have them in the past 10 years;

-- tetanus every 10 years;

-- typhoid vaccinations in either oral or injectable forms;

-- a multiple dose series for anthrax;

-- yellow fever every 10 years in some cases;

-- three for rabies and later boosters;

-- tuberculosis screening and shots;

-- single pneumococcal doses;

-- meningococcal vaccinations every five years before deployment to certain regions; and

-- three Japanese encephalitis doses in some cases.

Multiple vaccinations for all US military personnel practically assures damage to their immune systems and severe health problems later on.

Truth No. 10

Public health officials approve dangerous vaccines on unsuspecting recipients and profit handsomely for their efforts.

Final Comments

All vaccines are biological weapons that weaken or destroy the human immune system. They often fail to protect against diseases they're designed to prevent and often cause them. The H1N1 vaccine is experimental, untested, toxic, extremely dangerous, and essential to avoid even if mandated.

In a December 1994 Medical Post article, Dr. Guylaine Lanctot said:

"The medical authorities keep lying. Vaccination has been a disaster on the immune system. It actually causes a lot of illnesses. We are actually changing our genetic code through vaccination....100 years from now we will know that the biggest crime against humanity was vaccines."

Dr. Viera Scheibner is internationally known as perhaps the leading expert on adverse vaccine reactions. Her analysis concluded that "there is no evidence whatsoever of the ability of vaccines to prevent any diseases. To the contrary, there is a great wealth of evidence that they cause serious side effects."

Nonetheless, immunization programs proliferate because the profit potential is enormous despite growing numbers of reputable scientific figures citing concerns.

Currently, over 200 new vaccines are being developed "for everything from birth control to (curbing) cocaine addiction." Around half of them are in clinical trials using human guinea pigs putting their health and safety on the line unwittingly.

New delivery systems are also being developed that include nasal sprays, mosquitoes, and genetically engineered fruits containing vaccine viruses. With every country in the world a potential buyer, health and safety considerations are suppressed for the sake of profits. Unless somehow this madness is stopped, the harm to our children and society will be catastrophic.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website:

Monday, August 03, 2009

The Myth Of Free Market Health Care In America

by Shikha Dalmia

ObamaCare is in retreat. That much was clear the moment the president started springing B-grade Hollywood references to "blue pills and red pills" in its defense during his news conference last week. But before ObamaCare can be beaten back decisively, its critics need to answer this question: How did his plan for a government takeover of roughly a fifth of the U.S. economy get this far in the first place?

The answer is not that Democrats have a lock on Washington right now--although they do. Nor that Republicans are intellectually bereft--although they are. The answer is that both ObamaCare's supporters and opponents believe that--unlike Europe--America has something called a free market health care system. So long as this myth holds sway, it will be exceedingly difficult to prescribe free market fixes to America's health care woes--or, conversely, end the lure of big government remedies.

The fact of the matter is that America's health care system is like a free market in the same way that Madonna is like a virgin--i.e. in fiction only. If anything, the U.S. system has many more similarities than differences with France and Germany. The only big outlier among European nations is England, which, even in a post-communist world, has managed the impressive feat of hanging on to a socialized, single-payer model. This means that the U.K. government doesn't just pay for medical services but actually owns and operates the hospitals that provide them. English doctors are government employees!

But apart from England, most European countries have a public-private blend, not unlike what we have in the U.S.

The major difference between America and Europe of course is that America does not guarantee universal health insurance whereas Europe does. But this is not as big a deal as it might seem. Uncle Sam, along with state governments, still picks up nearly half of the country's $2.5 trillion annual health care tab.

More importantly, contrary to popular mythology, America does offer public care of sorts. It directly covers about a third of all Americans through Medicare (the public program for the elderly) and Medicaid (the public program for the poor). But it also indirectly covers the uninsured by--at least in part--paying for their emergency care. In effect, anyone in America who does not have private insurance is on the government dole in one way or another.

This is not radically different from France, where the government offers everyone basic public coverage, of course--but a whopping 90% of the French also buy supplemental private insurance to help pay for the 20% to 40% of their tab that the public plan doesn't cover.

Meanwhile, in Germany, about 12.5% of Germans who are civil employees or above a certain income opt out of the public system altogether and rely solely on private coverage--even though they know it is well nigh impossible to return to the public system once they switch. And more Germans likely would go private if they were not legally banned from doing so.

The most striking similarity between America, France and Germany, however, is the model of "insurance" upon which their health care systems are based. In other insurance markets, the more coverage you want, the more you have to pay for it. Consider auto insurance, for instance. If you want everything--from oil changes to collision protection--you'd have to pay more than someone who wants just basic collision protection. That's not how it works in health care.

For the same flat fee--regardless of whether it is paid for primarily through taxes as in France in Germany or through lost wages as in America--patients in all three countries effectively get an ATM card on which they can expense everything (barring co-pays) regardless of what the final tab adds up to. (Catastrophic coverage plans are available in America, but the market is extremely limited for a number of reasons, including the fact that most states have issued Patients Bill of Rights mandating all kinds of fancy benefits even in basic plans.)

Thus, in neither country do patients have much incentive to restrain consumption or shop for cheaper providers. In America and Germany, patients don't even know how much most medical services cost. In France, patients know the prices because they have to pay up front and get reimbursed by their insurer later--a lame attempt to ensure some price consciousness. But since there is no cap on the reimbursed amount, the French sometimes shop for doctors based on such things as office decor rather than prices, according to a study by David Green and Benedict Irvine, researchers at Civitas, a London-based think tank. (Green and Irvine reported this as a good thing.)

So what are the consequences of this "insurance" model and how are the three countries coping with it?

America, as Obama continuously reminds us, spends 16% of its gross domestic product on health care--the highest percentage in the world. If current trends persist, in 75 years health care will consume about 50% of the GDP--and all of the federal budget. But France is not doing a whole lot better. Its health care system is the third most expensive in the world with over 11% of its GDP going toward health care--nearly three times more than the amount in 1960. The French fork over more than 20% of their income in taxes for public coverage (and another 2.5% to purchase supplemental private coverage)--yet their public program suffers from chronic deficits. Germany, similarly, spends about 11% of its GDP on health care with Germans contributing more than 15% of their income toward buying health care.

If France and Germany are not spending even more on health care, one big reason is rationing. Universal health care advocates pretend that there is no rationing in France and Germany because these countries don't have long waiting lines for MRIs, surgical procedures and other medical services as in England and Canada. And patients have more or less unrestricted access to specialists.

But it is unclear how long this will last. Struggling with exploding costs, the French government has tried several times--only to back off in the face of a public outcry--to prod doctors into using only standardized treatments. In 1994, it started imposing fines of up to roughly $4,000 on doctors who deviated from "mandatory practice guidelines." It switched from this "sticks" to a "carrots" approach four years later, and tried handing bonuses to doctors who adhered to the guidelines.

Meanwhile, in Germany, "sickness funds"--the equivalent of insurance companies--have imposed strict budgets on doctors for prescription drugs. Doctors who exceed their cap are simply denied reimbursement, something that forces them to prescribe less effective invasive procedures for problems that would have been better treated with drugs. But the most potent form of rationing in France and Germany--and indeed much of Europe–is not overt, but covert: delayed access to cutting-edge drugs and therapies that become available to American patients years in advance.

The point is that there is no health care model, whether privately or publicly financed, that can offer unlimited access to medical services while containing costs. Ultimately, such a model arrives at a crossroads where it has to either limit access in an arbitrary way, or face uncontrolled cost increases. France and Germany, which are mostly publicly funded, are increasingly marching down the first road. America, which is half-publicly and half-privately funded, has so far taken the second path. Should America offer even more people such unlimited access through universal coverage, it too will end up rationing care or facing national bankruptcy.

The only sustainable system that avoids this Hobson's choice is one that is based on a genuine free market in which there is some connection between what patients pay for coverage and the services they receive. That is emphatically not what America or any Western country has today. Looking to these countries for solutions as Obama and other advocates of universal health coverage are doing will lead to false diagnoses and false cures.

-----
Got comments? Email me, dammit!
Permanent link for this article which can be used on any website: