Ebola, AIDS Manufactured by Western Pharma Companies, US DoD?

broderickBy Cyril Broderick, Ph.D.*

This open letter was originally published by The Liberian Observer on September 9, 2014. Dr. Broderick has since been targeted by mainstream US media outlets such as the Washington Post and the tabloidesque Daily Caller, which accuse him of spreading “conspiracy theories” concerning the Ebola outbreak in Western Africa. Perhaps such outlets should stop acting as lapdogs for the powerful and further interrogate Dr. Broderick’s claims. At the end of the day, it is not unreasonable to seriously examine whether the world’s foremost institution of professional killers–the US Department of Defense–may have a hand in the Ebola outbreak, particularly in light of the fact that 1) US DoD has long experimented with Ebola and similarly dangerous pathogens, and 2) Western African nations have never before experienced such a plague.-JFT

 Dear World Citizens:

I have read a number of articles from your Internet outreach as well as articles from other sources about the casualties in Liberia and other West African countries about the human devastation caused by the Ebola virus.

About a week ago, I read an article published in the Internet news summary publication of the Friends of Liberia that said that there was an agreement that the initiation of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa was due to the contact of a two-year old child with bats that had flown in from the Congo.

That report made me disconcerted with the reporting about Ebola, and it stimulated a response to the “Friends of Liberia,” saying that African people are not ignorant and gullible, as is being implicated. A response from Dr. Verlon Stone said that the article was not theirs, and that “Friends of Liberia” was simply providing a service. He then asked if he could publish my letter in their Internet forum. I gave my permission, but I have not seen it published.

Because of the widespread loss of life, fear, physiological trauma, and despair among Liberians and other West African citizens, it is incumbent that I make a contribution to the resolution of this devastating situation, which may continue to recur, if it is not properly and adequately confronted. I will address the situation in five (5) points:


Horowitz (1998) was deliberate and unambiguous when he explained the threat of new diseases in his text, Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola – Nature, Accident or Intentional. In his interview with Dr. Robert Strecker in Chapter 7, the discussion, in the early 1970s, made it obvious that the war was between countries that hosted the KGB and the CIA, and the ‘manufacture’ of ‘AIDS-Like Viruses’ was clearly directed at the other. In passing during the Interview, mention was made of Fort Detrick, “the Ebola Building,” and ‘a lot of problems with strange illnesses’ in “Frederick [Maryland].”

By Chapter 12 in his text, he had confirmed the existence of an American Military-Medical-Industry that conducts biological weapons tests under the guise of administering vaccinations to control diseases and improve the health of “black Africans overseas.” The book is an excellent text, and all leaders plus anyone who has interest in science, health, people, and intrigue should study it. I am amazed that African leaders are making no acknowledgements or reference to these documents.


I am now reading The Hot Zone, a novel, by Richard Preston (copyrighted 1989 and 1994); it is heart-rending. The prolific and prominent writer, Steven King, is quoted as saying that the book is “One of the most horrifying things I have ever read. What a remarkable piece of work.” As a New York Times bestseller, The Hot Zone is presented as “A terrifying true story.”

Terrifying, yes, because the pathological description of what was found in animals killed by the Ebola virus is what the virus has been doing to citizens of Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia in its most recent outbreak: Ebola virus destroys peoples’ internal organs and the body deteriorates rapidly after death. It softens and the tissues turn into jelly, even if it is refrigerated to keep it cold. Spontaneous liquefaction is what happens to the body of people killed by the Ebola virus! The author noted in Point 1, Dr. Horowitz, chides The Hot Zone for writing to be politically correct; I understand because his book makes every effort to be very factual. The 1976 Ebola incident in Zaire, during President Mobutu Sese Seko, was the introduction of the GMO Ebola to Africa.



The World Health Organization (WHO) and several other UN Agencies have been implicated in selecting and enticing African countries to participate in the testing events, promoting vaccinations, but pursuing various testing regiments. The August 2, 2014 article, “West Africa: What are US Biological Warfare Researchers Doing in the Ebola Zone?” by Jon Rappoport  pinpoints the problem that is facing African governments.

Obvious in this and other reports are, among others:

(a) The US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), a well-known centre for bio-war research, located at Fort Detrick, Maryland;

(b) Tulane University, in New Orleans, USA, winner of research grants, including a grant of more than $7 million the National Institute of Health (NIH) to fund research with the Lassa viral hemorrhagic fever;

(c) the US Center for Disease Control (CDC);

(d) Doctors Without Borders (also known by its French name, Medicins Sans Frontiers);

(e) Tekmira, a Canadian pharmaceutical company;

(f) The UK’s GlaxoSmithKline; and

(g) the Kenema Government Hospital in Kenema, Sierra Leone.

Reports narrate stories of the US Department of Defense (DoD) funding Ebola trials on humans, trials which started just weeks before the Ebola outbreak in Guinea and Sierra Leone. The reports continue and state that the DoD gave a contract worth $140 million dollars to Tekmira, a Canadian pharmaceutical company, to conduct Ebola research. This research work involved injecting and infusing healthy humans with the deadly Ebola virus. Hence, the DoD is listed as a collaborator in a “First in Human” Ebola clinical trial (NCT02041715, which started in January 2014 shortly before an Ebola epidemic was declared in West Africa in March.

Disturbingly, many reports also conclude that the US government has a viral fever bioterrorism research laboratory in Kenema, a town at the epicentre of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. The only relevant positive and ethical olive-branch seen in all of my reading is that Theguardian.com reported, “The US government funding of Ebola trials on healthy humans comes amid warnings by top scientists in Harvard and Yale that such virus experiments risk triggering a worldwide pandemic.” That threat still persists. [Emphasis added. -JFT]


The U. S., Canada, France, and the U. K. are all implicated in the detestable and devilish deeds that these Ebola tests are. There is the need to pursue criminal and civil redress for damages, and African countries and people should secure legal representation to seek damages from these countries, some corporations, and the United Nations. Evidence seems abundant against Tulane University, and suits should start there. Yoichi Shimatsu’s article, The Ebola Breakout Coincided with UN Vaccine Campaigns, as published on August 18, 2014, in the Liberty Beacon.


Africa must not relegate the Continent to become the locality for disposal and the deposition of hazardous chemicals, dangerous drugs, and chemical or biological agents of emerging diseases. There is urgent need for affirmative action in protecting the less affluent of poorer countries, especially African citizens, whose countries are not as scientifically and industrially endowed as the United States and most Western countries, sources of most viral or bacterial GMOs that are strategically designed as biological weapons. It is most disturbing that the U. S. Government has been operating a viral hemorrhagic fever bioterrorism research laboratory in Sierra Leone. Are there others? Wherever they exist, it is time to terminate them. If any other sites exist, it is advisable to follow the delayed but essential step: Sierra Leone closed the US bioweapons lab and stopped Tulane University for further testing.

The world must be alarmed. All Africans, Americans, Europeans, Middle Easterners, Asians, and people from every conclave on Earth should be astonished. African people, notably citizens more particularly of Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone are victimized and are dying every day. Listen to the people who distrust the hospitals, who cannot shake hands, hug their relatives and friends. Innocent people are dying, and they need our help. The countries are poor and cannot afford the whole lot of personal protection equipment (PPE) that the situation requires. The threat is real, and it is larger than a few African countries. The challenge is global, and we request assistance from everywhere, including China, Japan, Australia, India, Germany, Italy, and even kind-hearted people in the U.S., France, the U.K., Russia, Korea, Saudi Arabia, and anywhere else whose desire is to help. The situation is bleaker than we on the outside can imagine, and we must provide assistance however we can. To ensure a future that has less of this kind of drama, it is important that we now demand that our leaders and governments be honest, transparent, fair, and productively engaged. They must answer to the people. Please stand up to stop Ebola testing and the spread of this dastardly disease.

Thank you very much.


Dr. Cyril E. Broderick, Sr.

*Dr. Broderick is Associate Professor in the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources at Delaware State University. He received his Ph.D. in Plant Physiology from the University of New Hampshire. A native Liberian, Dr. Broderick is a former professor of Plant Pathology at the University of Liberia’s College of Agriculture and Forestry.

108 thoughts on “Ebola, AIDS Manufactured by Western Pharma Companies, US DoD?”

  1. All very interesting, and truly terrifying. I’m reminded of the movie 12 Monkeys.

    Which is why items 4&5 depress me even more than 1-3, which set out the evidence of criminality. In item 5 he says: “To ensure a future that has less of this kind of drama, it is important that we now demand that our leaders and governments be honest, transparent, fair, and productively engaged. They must answer to the people.”

    This is a dream that cannot happen. The state is itself the enemy; it cannot be reformed. Why do you think the dozens of Deep Underground Military Bases exist? Why does the Doomsday Seed Bank exist (at the top of Norway, deep underground)? They’ve been planning this for a long time. Whether this is just a dry-run, a test, or if it is Game On, it’s only a matter of time before the First Commandment on the Georgia Guide Stones is implemented: “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.” (http://vigilantcitizen.com/sinistersites/sinister-sites-the-georgia-guidestones/)

    They intend for the world of Orwell’s 1984 to come to be, and as Stalin said back when Orwell was still alive, it one must break eggs to make an omelet.

  2. With all due respect to Dr. Broderick whose motivations I do not mean in any way to impugn, but what makes him think that SEEKING HELP from the very people who ARE THE ABUSERS (e.g., the DoD, the clandestine ‘services’, the U.N., the worst of the worst because they hide under a mountain of do-gooder bureaucracy, the universities that survive on ‘grant’ money, which is simply extorted tax dollars, the ‘medical’ community, which perpetuates most of the lies, the pharmaceutical companies, the ‘legal’ system, which enforces the lies, etc., WILL OBTAIN THE RESULTS HE DESIRES? All the polite pleading hasn’t stopped them thus far. Dr. Broderick (and so many others) needs to be disabused of the idea that all of this is some kind of big, unintended accident.

    1. Yes, it’s a bit like complaining about pedophile priests to the bishops and Vatican. Only after civil prosecutions did they admit the need to clean their own house, although many of the cover-up artists like Cardinal Law of Boston have been promoted and are rarely prosecuted. But this was a church and state issue – where the state got the upper hand over much obstruction. Here you have something far more all-pervasive.

      I really believe that we are under less threat (so far) than the Africans who are regarded as a demographic nightmare, both to those who would exploit their resources and to those who get the brunt of the displacements caused by this exploitation. The weapons which have been developed are designed to kill people in plagues which mock the very charts of population expansion – where the plague itself becomes exponential in its growth. I imagine that some time in the future we will be asked to sign onto the “benefit” to resources and animals that this human butchery is causing, whether or not those who applaud it are involved in creating the process itself.

      If I were an African, I would be very paranoid indeed. In the past, whatever the origin of this virus, the sensible thing was for villages with an outbreak to isolate themselves until the virus burned itself out. Some people will always have innate immunity or will survive. But today they are being forced to appear in cities and special relief places for treatment, a situation that might save lives – or might actually spread the disease much wider. I now heard that North Africans are resisting a world football match because they don’t want west Africans to attend. It’s being treated as ignorance by people in the West. But I would imagine if the shoe were on the other foot – and it was some team in a region of the US suffering an outbreak, then even the World Series could be cancelled.

      It would be one thing if no nation in the world ever created these bio warfare labs, and were all about goodness and mercy. But the missionaries live in a country which sent smallpox blankets to the Indians and used deaths from anthrax to invade Iraq on false premises. Like the Catholic church which still harbors the protectors of pedophile priests, this country still has not cleansed itself of its filthy past – and past is prologue.

      1. Let me ask you this. Why release a bioweapon that you can’t control in an area you want to occupy? for what purpose?

        If I was the NWO I would simply use the media to CLAIM that there is a deadly plague and deploy my troops out on a humanitarian mission. I would build military camps to deal with the “disease” and establish checkpoints to interview all passers by. I would then have my troops run the peoples names through a database which will tell them whether someone may have been in contact with someone with ebola. with a 21 day incubation period that could mean anyone. If you are on the red list you will come up as having been in contact with a potential ebola victim and will be taken to “quarantine.” This would be much easier to sell to the stupid troops than rounding up Americans because they are dissidents or gun owners. They like cops, would tell themselves that they are doing a good thing. once in “quarantine” you will never be released and the outside world will be told that you died of ebola.

        this same scenario could be played out worldwide and would work. I think they will do this eventually.

        As a side note I heard on NPR that the stupid Africans don’t even believe that they have ebola there. Don’t you think they would know if people were dying all around them from the plague?

  3. With all due respect, has anyone actually seen any footage of actual ebola victims? All I have seen are crisis actors, and poor ones at that. I spent a couple of hours looking at video and couldn’t find one believable ebola victim. they seem to use makeup to take stills of white “victims” with obvious fake nasty sores and black people they just have them lay in the street and claim they are dead. they are already black so I guess that is enough of a disease for the american viewer. I did see one black girl that had blood or fake blood coming out of her ear and nose but that wasn’t really convincing. there is another photo of a black arm with some nasty lesions that I think are real but who knows when or what that was from.

    has anyone seen anything?

    1. Have not seen anything that looks remotely real.

      How is it we had an American photographer over there for a month, ‘documenting’ what he saw and all we see are his typed words and his pretty picture?

      So happy the highly educated Ashoka Mukpo had a miraculous recovery. He had landed the job with NBC hours before becoming sick!


      There may be truth to the issue of the west infecting folks with tainted vaccines in order to induce fear and panic.

    2. Thank you. I’ve looked for/wondered about the same thing myself. Personally, I’m in the “don’t trust any agenda that’s so clearly being pushed” camp, but I’m always open to new evidence.

    3. Nope! I have not seen any proof of it either. They are lying and getting away with it as usual. Nodisinfo.com is also doing a great job of exposing this hoax along with a lot of youtubers.

  4. We are being lied to. The people involved in the #Ebola news here in the USA have different names than what we have been told and their purported credentials are a lie. There was no death related to Ebola. Duncan by another name is married to Pham which is not her name. Brantly is married to Writebol and they have different names; they have three adult children who are part of the scam as well as other relatives in the scam.


    It Works Global is providing some of the “cast” in this latest BS. This includes the nurse who appeared on Anderson Cooper with her “Attorney” where she trashed the competence of the Dallas Hospital. She is actually, in real life, in a relationship with the man that appeared as her attorney and they both have different names. They also supplied the actor for Nurse Vinson.


    The Senate Appropriations Committee had false witnesses with FALSE credentials appear before them and they are, again, defrauding the American people. Brantly actually appears sitting with the President. His purported wife Amber is with him. Amber – the thin one is actually his daughter and they are using an obsese It Works Global look-a-like for public appearances.

    Dr. Seemi Yasmin appears to be a fraud and under another name is engaged to one of the men who appeared before the Senate Committee using a false name and false credentials. When you look up LinkedIn under the name Mary Asner you find a woman that looks just like Yasmin who works in the pharmaceutical industry and this includes a history with Nycomed. On October 1, 2011, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited acquired Nycomed.


    We are clearly under a coup and all the bickering is for show. These people have no problem creating fraudulent public records. These people that supposedly represent us are alleged criminals and robbing the people blind with multiple fabricated events, false witnesses before Congress and the assistance of government sanctioned frauds through It Works Global. The photographic evidence does not lie.

    I have found many more of the actors in this complicated scam including the children they used to represent the children of the phony Brantly family. I don’t have it all documented as of yet because it is a never ending maze!!

    1. If your assertions prove correct, I wouldn’t be at all surprised. I know there was a very suspicious UN/NGO link from the very beginning. My biggest problem is matching faces from photos. Tracking down and including public record info would help make this even more compelling (though a lot more work, I know). Good job, though…it was photographic evidence that really helped blow apart (forgive the pun) the Boston Bombing event.

      1. In this case, I would be concerned that something else is afoot in Africa – two possibilities: blocking Chinese investment/exploitation and population control.

        1. I’ve been looking at press releases (especially out of S. Africa) for the last 4-5 years and it appears that China is the new colonial power for the 21st century on the African continent. Look at infrastructure companies, power and water, mining, manufacturing, etc. There is a huge influx of mainland China investment. (See mining weekly and engineering weekly.) Also:
          And yes, population control has been one of the goals of the elite in Africa (as well as control of the white population in Europe) for at least 100 years now. I think it was Kissinger who spoke about that decades ago. It became an open policy in the 1970s under the U.N. of course. The Chinese have a disproportionate number of men, since red China’s one-child policy coerced many people to kill their female children. It would seem they have plenty of men to export to other countries for the purposes of colonization through corporate ‘partnerships’ with African governments.

        2. Crickey, that sounds sinister. We haven’t heard much about the Chinese male/female imbalance here in the U.S., but it’s a huge problem. Expect an exploding sex-trafficking problem in the future…but I hadn’t considered the plundering of Africa for its women.

    2. Well, I have one on my own doorstep. Grab on to your seats, everybody. The “terminal cancer patient” who is planning her assisted suicide on Nov. 1, Brittany Maynard, is my niece! (My real name is “Alison Maynard.”)

      I learned about her plan from Anne Berg’s post on this blog. My jaw almost hit the floor.

      Brittany has been estranged from our family for some time. My brother was divorced from her mother, Debbie Ziegler, about 27 years ago. I can’t go into the details. I did not reveal my connection to her earlier, because he did not want me to blog about it. I’ve decided there is too much public interest at stake not to come forward with this information at this point, however.

      i remembered last weekend about Debbie’s brother, David Ziegler, who is eight years younger than she. I have determined with certainty that he is in military intelligence: the moron actually has his resume online–google it with “HUMINT” (which is short for “human intelligence.”) One of the courses he attended is called “Intro to Denial and Deception, CIA University, 2007.” He is obviously the missing link to this puzzle.

      Maybe I seem heartless, but I know Debbie and Brittany as scammers, and I believe Brittany’s planned death is a hoax: she will simply change her name and move somewhere else. The pictures of her in People magazine (Oct. 27 issue), as well as several of the stills in the magazine and the narrator in the video, by the way, are NOT BRITTANY. Thus, in her new location she will never be recognized. You can see what she looks like in a few of the still photos. That IS Brittany in the hammock with the dog. That is also her with her “husband” (a man who has no web presence whatsoever) in the “wedding photos” (which look completely staged to me).

      I am trying to figure out a way to ensure, after the fact, that Brittany did not really go through with assisted suicide on Nov. 1. Obviously I should have kept it a secret a little longer. In the meantime, there is a news article that she was seen, with her mother and husband at a dance club in Las Vegas last night! Not exactly your normal dying person with a brain tumor. Shame, shame on all you stupid cancer patients who insist on hanging on in pain and wasting away! Look at how much fun you could be having!

      1. It is obvious to me that the publicity surrounding this person going to Oregon is very manipulative and intended to change peoples’ thinking on assisted suicide, which failed the ballot box in my state, Massachusetts. Clearly, there is a push to get it to be a federal right, not just one for which you have to go to a state which allows it.

        The other states that seem to be coming on board have the sort of populations, ironically enough, which might proclaim their libertarian ways. But when you look closely at the situation for, say, men in their fifties and sixties, when “notice must be taken” (as in “Death of a Salesman” – Willie Loman’s wife telling her sons), then you might see the death rate is a little higher in those states than in more socially aware, socially responsible ones. I know that sounds like heresy here, and yet it is true – civilization has its discontents, but checking your blood sugar and getting by-pass surgery paid for by insurance might be the price we pay for taking notice.

        Naturally, some will say with Scrooge, that she should die and reduce the surplus cancer patient population. But why she should take the rest of us with her is the mystery. Perhaps to hone our society into one which is lean, mean and more profitable? I just don’t know. Let her drink the hemlock if she wishes, just don’t come knocking at my mom’s door (she is 91).

      2. dinophile, I am in shock too. Had no idea that this story, which I found in the local paper, would lead to you. Please keep us informed if you discover relevant information. I just read that visiting Las Vegas (of all places) was a dying wish of Brittany. There is also a fund raising site in her name to raise awareness of her “cause”.

      3. I heard a radio interview with Brittany (supposedly, anyway); it was clearly intended to garner support for assisted suicide. Brittany was incredibly well spoken and created a very sympathetic character. She talked a lot about how her decision would affect her family, blah blah blah. When she referred to assisted suicide as “a health care choice”, I had to turn it off before my head exploded.

      4. Agree with Musings. The elite will continue to push to NORMALIZE ALL that normal societies have always known to be ABNORMAL – and I mean everything, including of course, suicide, assisted or otherwise. All the things which kept societies together as functioning societies are meant to be not only discarded but villified as well.
        There will come a time (IF we permit it) when the state will tell people when it’s their turn to die. See the old movie “Logan’s Run” or the ‘classic’ Star Trek episodes titled “A Taste of Armageddon” and “The Mark of Gideon”. All ‘science’ ‘fiction’, all drama, all comedy, (filmed or written) purposely includes themes that may seem outlandish but are included to prepare or process the mind for ‘things to come’ so that when they occur, one is not as shocked, repulsed, indignant or incensed.

      5. Interesting about the “dying wish,” too, because in the video she says it is to see the Grand Canyon, but her mother says it is Macchu Pichu. So now it’s Las Vegas? (Can you give me the link to that, by the way, Anne?)

        Yes, it is definitely an agenda, musings. I’m proud because at last we have a name for one of the spooks directing these productions. I wonder if David Ziegler has been involved in other hoaxes. I will try to find out.

        Another irony is that, in my own blog post about the connections among group psychotherapists in Sandy Hook, I went off on a brief tangent to describe the website the twin daughters of Thomas Langner, Gretchen and Belinda, had, which solicited money “to help us get well” (when their “disease” is simply expensive dietary preferences). I put that in, stating, “This shows that members of this family know to do this”–i.e., solicit donations by preying on other people’s pity. And now I see a member of my OWN family doing this! LOL

  5. Incredibly, I agree with Patrick, and with Jo as well. I don’t think that the American power system can be reformed. It has developed a terrorist Divide and Ruin policy that can be partially stymied, perhaps, but not eliminated. James has published a series of articles exposing Washington’s climate, psyops, drug, and germ warfare, the product of an unaccountable power system that is no longer amenable to the American people’s control.

    The major value of these pieces is to inform the people of the evil of Washington, already understood by the majority of the world’s people. The real question is how to replace it with a people’s power system.


    A nice thought, but as we all know, the legal system exists only at the convenience of our rulers, and is merely for show. There is no justice possible anymore. The legal system exists only to pile drive the dissident into submission or death, and make it look like his own fault. If there was any money in it, justice would be the norm. We haven’t been fed a constant diet of apocalyptic, and dystopian future movies for nothing.

    1. Hitting one of the proverbial nails on the proverbial head. It’s called just-(us)ice for a reason. It’s admiralty law (where pirates rule). That’s why you’ll see the ‘american’ flag with the yellow fringe in the court room.
      If Rich’s comment doesn’t clarify it enough for some of us perhaps visiting this site will add to your knowledge. I stumbled across it myself. I am not associated with this site in any way.

  7. What links the hysteria about Ebola and the projected suicide of Brittany is, in my opinion, the fear of death. I mentioned previously the political psychologist Drew Westin, who quoted from 250 experiments that provided evidence that considering our mortality makes us more culturally conservative. This is unfortunate in that we have all been born, we are living, and we are going to die. I’m sorry, it’s a terrible system, but neither I, nor any of us, were consulted in the matter, and there is nothing in general that we can do about it.

    If you believe that people have the right to live however they want, with the usual restrictions, then they have the right to die however they want, because death is the last part of life. It is natural and reasonable to fear dying, but, in my opinion, it is irrational to fear death, since it is nothing. What we actually fear is Nothingness, and especially so in the West where individualism has deprived us of adequate communal identification. The fear of death is a major weapon of power in the War on Terrorism, and is obvious in the fear of Ebola.

    It has been suggested that Brittany’s illness and projected suicide is a scam. The original divorce decades ago was apparently not a happy experience, as is commonly the case, and there appears to be animosity between the families. I can’t comment on this. However, if it is the case that Brittany’s situation is not a scam, which may be conceivable, then she has a perfect right to end her life as she wishes, and go dancing in Las Vegas if that’s what she wants to do.

    I say this because some people believe–I shall refer to them in the usual way as religious loonies–that God in his Infinite Wisdom and Perfect Love has given Brittany brain cancer, and that He should be allowed to determine when and how she dies, even if this is in excruciating and degrading torment. I disagree. If this is not a scam, and even if Brittany craves the limelight, then she not only has the right to publically to die as she chooses, but is doing society a public service by publicizing and legitimating this right for everyone.

    Roman nobles often ended their lives at public banquets surrounded by their friends and families, and in modern times this choice is available to anyone. If you think this is wrong, than don’t do it. But we do not have the moral right to tell other persons how to live their lives, or to end them. Especially if one claims to be a libertarian and to consider freedom the highest good.

    1. Assisted suicide is open to abuse, though, Mark (Folktruther). For example, I called the Multnomah County medical examiner to see if I could request an autopsy, thinking that would be a pretty good check on whether a death occurred! He told me I couldn’t–not even her father could–without her husband’s consent or a court order, because it is considered a death from natural causes. He didn’t know if a doctor would even be required to sign a death certificate. He did say a doctor was not required to see a body. He or she writes the prescription and then certifies death from a natural disease process.

      In the video, Brittany says she will be surrounded, on Nov. 1, by her mother, stepfather, husband, and “best friend”–who is a physician and not named. Right.

      This opens up huge conflicts for doctors, since it requires a big rationalization of the Hippocratic Oath. And imagine the pressure sick people will now be under to end their lives, particularly if there are financial problems in the family and an insurance policy payable on death.

      I wonder how this ties with Obamacare, by the way. Oh, yeah: the cost of healthcare is what usually leads to those very financial problems!

      1. I have never really given this assisted suicide/euthanasia discussion much thought… until now. I have done a little reading on this Brittany Maynard case and one commentary hit home with me and the link will be at the bottom of this comment. The writer of the article brings up how terminally ill people who fought to the end were considered courageous, now however, people choosing to end their life are being hailed as the courageous ones. This is not good. Will those who chose to see it through be labeled as cowards, uselessly clinging to life, afraid to face death?

        I also read that Maynard lived life to the fullest, running marathons, a year in southeast Asia, climbed Kilimanjaro. How sad she chooses to celebrate her end with a night partying in Vegas. Been there, done that, talk about nothingness.


    2. As to Mark’s point about Brittany being able to go dancing in Las Vegas if she chooses to, well: if she’s healthy enough to still go out and enjoy life, why on earth is she ending it all prematurely?

      I found a website put up by an Australian woman who urges Brittany to reconsider, and interviews several people who have had terminal diagnoses, but reversed their cancers by switching to a plant-based diet.

    3. You attempt to place all those who know that God exists into your invented category of ‘loonies’ in order to separate yourself from them and to disparage them. That’s fine. I hope, at some point in the future, you will come to a different conclusion. You deny God but you also disparage Him by attaching human shortcomings to Him, such as arbitrariness or whimsy. As a Roman Catholic, I know that God permits illnesses and other perceived crosses to happen (He doesn’t “send” them) and it is all part of life and of learning and of death. To deprive a person of the natural act of dying is to deprive them of what should be preparation for the final act of death. It also deprives those people who either love or who can assist the person toward that final act, of their own experience, which is very often a great learning experience BECAUSE it is uncomfortable and painful. Humans learn through all experiences, whether happy or painful – but I venture to say that the painful ones are the ones that deepen our comprehension of our own lives and the lives of others and (dare I say it), of God. ‘Modern’ ‘medicine’ has so twisted the process of dying that most of us are apoplectic about it. ALL THAT ASIDE, you’re correct in that we may not (yet) have the state-given ‘right’ to tell other people how to live, but as a God believing Catholic, I DO have the God-given, moral duty to admonish those who would consider committing suicide or who would promote it. I know that the only freedom we truly have is to love God with all our heart, all our soul, and all our mind. Freedom, IN AND OF itself, is NOT the ‘highest good’ because it can be used by the state to ‘legalize’ and to then enforce that which is abominable. Sure, as an INDIVIDUAL, you have the God-given freedom to do ANYTHING you like and it may impact some people, even quite a few, even perhaps hundreds. If it’s deemed an evil act by someone or by a group, you may be extemporaneously punished for it (street justice) or if the laws of the particular state deem it to be a violation, you may be prosecuted & punished.
      BUT, once the state gives itself the power of GOD to do ‘what it wilt’ we are ALL in danger and you may find what you thought was your freedom to choose has come to an end.

      1. There is no point in engaging Mark on these issues; he does not understand them but is contemptuous of those who do. This is a combination that makes reasoning close to impossible.

        But I will engage YOU, stlonginus, because you do understand these issues, and have raised some valid points. Allow me to expand upon them.

        First, you don’t have to be a Catholic to “know that God permits illnesses and other perceived crosses to happen (He doesn’t “send” them) and it is all part of life and of learning and of death.” Anyone who studies and believes the Bible–even just the Old Testament–knows this. When someone argues that Bible believers’ logic about the existence of evil in the world requires that God engineers all evil things, we are witnessing either simple ignorance or nefarious sophistry. I really don’t care, in Mark’s case, because he is not persuasible. But many readers might be, so it’s worth the effort to explain it–or at least summarize the explanation.

        God created us because He wanted a family, and the soul of a healthy family is love. Sure, He could have created a race of automatons, emotional robots, but genuine love has a voluntary element. To have a true family, God needed to create people who VOLUNTEER to love Him back. Thus, we were created with free will. Otherwise, we would not have truly chosen Him–however large a percentage of that choice involved God choosing us first.

        That is, He gave us free will. And free will, necessarily, means that if you want to rape a baby, God–however horribly He feels about it–can’t always stop you from doing it. If you could never actually destroy that young life, you never had free will to start. To be free is to be free to choose nightmarish evil–and to make horribly scarred victims. Since God established this rule, a freedom He freely chose to extend to us, He has to simply stand back and cry along with us when evil is expressed in the world.

        You go on to say: “To deprive a person of the natural act of dying is to deprive them of what should be preparation for the final act of death.” This is certainly true, but it is a lot bigger than that. It is to do with the nature, the value, of human life itself. Mark approvingly referenced Roman civilization, which the West was largely a repudiation of. In Rome it was absolutely normative, should a woman give birth to a child that was not wanted, to simply place it in a field do die, and be eaten by wild animals. They did this without any pang of conscience at all–because it wasn’t an even remotely morally dubious thing to do. (As Christianity arose, Christians would rescue and raise those children in the closing centuries of the Roman empire.)

        Since Mark doesn’t actually comprehend libertarian thought, he assumes that it can be confused with libertinism–personal freedom with no moral boundaries. It’s true that you don’t have to be a Christian to be a libertarian, genuine Christianity is essentially libertarian: don’t render to Caesar what does not belong to him. Biblical morality requires that we love one another–which is the essence of the core of libertarianism, the non-aggression principle. Jesus told His followers if we love Him we will follow His commands–which included all of the moral Law of the Old Testament. Libertines need not apply.

        But getting back to Mark’s enthusiasm for suicide, and its connection with abortion, the modern expression of the Roman practice of infanticide. Romans had no moral qualms about murdering born children, and we have increasingly trained our emerging generations to feel actual pride in supporting the secret practice at a slightly earlier stage. In America, to make the murder legal, the Supreme Court had to concoct a justification of it as being a matter of “privacy,” because the idea was still so abhorrent in the decadent 1970s. But today, people have all but thrown off that cloak, positively reveling in the practice, which goes Rome one better, because the Romans were entirely indifferent to human life, not delighted in the “right” to slaughter it.

        The reason suicide and murdering the sick and the old was always anathema in the West is that God’s point of view is that if a human society freely chooses to embrace the idea that human life is not sacred, one thin will lead to another, and no one will like what eventuates–any more than wide-spread baby rape will mark a happy culture. We call these things “the thin end of the wedge.” Once sexual profligacy is normalized, a sexual free-for-all is inevitable. Once human beings are expendable, at whatever age and whatever condition, the very mindset of the culture adapts to that false “freedom,” and utter inhumanity will be the inevitable result.

        And Bible-believers don’t want THAT.

      2. Perhaps I should say one more thing, lo these many hours later, to wrap up the message–or at least summarize it. It is this: a civilization lives and dies, revolving around the moral assumptions it is based upon. A cheerful attitude about extinguishing human life is a very bad premise. That this conversation can even be seriously engaged demonstrates my premise that Western civilization is no more. We are now exploring the new terrain of a new civilization, with new premises, new assumptions about reality.

        I argue that it is not a good place we are discovering.

      3. upon reading this, my natural suspicious instincts said that assisted suicide could easily be manipulated to eventuate undesirable deaths – which is contrary to my initial stance of freedom to choose to die.

        I disagree with patrick that this (topic of assisted suicide) even being discussed demonstrates the beginning of humanities demise; rather, I think it is healthy to broach the topic from as many angles as possible, as even my own basic beliefs were swayed when put in this new light.

      4. Thank you,for your defense of our Creator,Sir or Madam. In the end of all that is Life here on Earth,we will indeed meet Him…Believers and Unbelievers alike. THAT is the”Peace that passeth Understanding.”

        1. This god stuff really gets old you guys. Can we keep the religion out of it?

          On Saturday, October 25, 2014, Memory Hole wrote: > Ray commented: “Thank you,for your defense of our Creator,Sir or Madam. In the end of all that is Life here on Earth,we will indeed meet Him…Believers and Unbelievers alike. THAT is the”Peace that passeth Understanding.”” >

        1. if you are referring to the guy who was a former church of satan high priest, whose foundation is built upon david icke and company, then no. recynd77 – we have been at this before, you said we could agree to disagree, no?

          On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 10:37 PM, Memory Hole wrote:

          > Recynd77 commented: “Reply to Gran1te, do you believe in Natural Law? > Universal Law?”

        2. I didn’t remember discussing this with you before, but I believe you. I was not trying to be “smart” or sneaky. And of course I’ll let it go.

        3. That was the first link to Mark Passio that I recall ever being posted here too.
          I ought to remember too, because I LOVE listening to Mark Passio. I highly recommend listening to his radio show starting at episode 1 sequentially. He was just figuring it out for the first season of shows and you need to skip the first 15 minutes of each hour as they are heavy with calendar events for the Philadelphia area but the rest of the content is great.


        4. Sorry recynd, I guess I was moody earlier when I posted that. You definitely are a more courteous person than I.

          I thought you were lds and we had a brief back and forth re: religion just a few months ago? fwiw, i’m your average ex-lds – always trying to confirm my decision… sigh. it’s what it is.

        5. Thank you…apology accepted and very appreciated. Knowing a little about your background is very helpful, too. I “get it”. Leaving the LDS church is a lot different than leaving most other churches. And yes, I am very actively LDS, but I converted as an adult, so I think that gives me a little more…perspective.

          [The rest of this post is REALLY off-topic, so for those not interested, please feel free to skip.]

          I know you didn’t ask, but for the sake of sharing, my own spiritual journey was (from what I can tell) the opposite of yours: I went from agnostic/atheist(ish) as a teen, to dabbling in the occult and New Age-y stuff in my younger adult years. After coming to my senses in my mid-20s (and after marrying an inactive Mormon), I drifted back to the watery Christianity of my childhood, and then finally converted to the LDS church when I was about 30, after several years of investigation on my own terms. (Though inactive, my husband always had a strong testimony/conviction of his Mormon beliefs and shared them with me, though not with any expectation of my converting…I’d made that very clear.). After converting, I maintained activity enough to take out my Endowments and be sealed to my family, but for many years, I was a pretty poor member…certainly not Temple-worthy. However, when I “woke up” politically, I had a concurrent spiritual awakening, and for about five years now, I’ve been going strong.

          I confess, I like church culture the least. What I love is the doctrine, and it affects every aspect of my life for the better. For me, it fills in the blanks of traditional Christianity, and the more I learn about the Bible and Christianity in general, the more sense Mormon doctrine makes.

          Though it is (sadly) not always reciprocated, I feel a great kinship towards my more mainstream Christian brothers and sisters, especially those who don’t adhere to any denomination (like Chris White, for one example, whose “debunking” of Jordan Maxwell is second-to-none, and some other of the more Christian “Truthers”). In fact, I attend a non-denominational weekly Bible study to supplement my daily scripture study.

          I DO try to be considerate, though I am far from perfect (I recently called Mark an idiot, and that wasn’t kind or helpful…but I can’t bring myself to apologize. I suspect he has recovered, if he even noticed.) But I actually like you, and respect what you have to say. When I asked you if you believed in Natural or Universal Law, I did it in an attempt to find some sort of common ground, not to trap or trick you.

      5. Actually, Recynd, it is perfectly appropriate to reference God as a primary assumption in building an argument, and there is no reason whatever to let an atheist intimidate you into ceding the terrain. Atheists have spent decades forcing God out of the public square, and getting away with it, and now they feel like it is perfectly natural to strut about in a perfectly atheistic conversation zone. I say, NUTS TO THAT!

        The West was characterized by a foundational assumption that the Bible is true. This prevailed for around 1,500 years. It is only very recently that anyone would presume to tell us to shut up about that, and it is only VERY recently that they would feel like us not doing so is somehow an invasion of their rights to live in an environment pristinely free from references to God. Well, this kind of asininity can’t bully ME, and I’d advise you to take the same stance. If they don’t like it, they can piss up a rope.

        1. You’re right Patrick. I don’t care for the bible stuff much either but you are exactly right about others controlling the dialogue. Historically I mean, I’m not talking about granite.

        2. Codswallop.

          If you reference “God” in a jury trial, your case will end in a mistrial.

          If you reference “God” in a scientific paper, your paper will not get published and that will be the end of your career. (Deservedly.)

          No one can verify what “God” thinks or says. You think it’s self-evident, but I assure you it is not. Everyone has a different view of what “God” says. Referencing God, far from making your argument, invalidates it.

          You say, “The West was characterized by a foundational assumption that the Bible is true. This prevailed for around 1,500 years.” Huh? Well, maybe in the Dark Ages, which is WHY they were called the Dark Ages.

          Plato and Aristotle proved things by observation, deduction, and induction. They didn’t rely on “God” (or “the gods”) for their proofs. Western thought and rules of logic derived from THEM, about 2400 years ago.

      6. First, I think that we (as English speakers) should separate the verb “to know” into two different words- since their is obviously two different meanings. The believers say they “know” god exists, they know their church is true, but this has nothing to do with the earthly, material, scientific “knowledge” that comes from the scientific method, that these same believers (or anyone who employs science) rely on everyday.

        From a scientific perspective, this ability to know something without any proof (or evidence of replicable behavior) is contrary to all that has been taught – it’s a complete violation of rules. To the believer, this knowledge (of god) is omnipresent, universal, and impossible to be measured or constrained by rules. I think much of the resentment between believers and non, stem from not acknowledging the differences in the use of the word.

        I think if we could somehow delineate which version of knowledge is being referred to, neither party would take as much offense – and arguments could be nipped early. But this doesn’t seem likely…

        I know I am not the only one when I say that its annoying for others to – in the name of their god – assume they need to help me, or it is their duty to intervene, or inform, or advise… I’m a big boy. I’m well aware of my stance on god, as I’m sure you are. As my mother would say, “tend to number 1.”

        Now, what stlonginus said was fine, I didn’t feel like non-believers were singled out, or that the intent was patronizing at all. He was simply putting into context the topic.

        What Patrick says, however, is provocative, and some may say, offensive. He starts by demeaning Mark, then subsequently lumps all atheists – now and forever – into the same category as Mark. He goes on to speak in absolutes:

        “…we are witnessing either simple ignorance or nefarious sophistry…”

        Followed by what god’s intentions were:

        “God created us because He wanted a family…To have a true family, God needed to create people who VOLUNTEER to love Him…”

        Again, I am frustrated that Patrick – choosing to represent believers – claims to know god’s intentions, needs and wants. How can he possibly know this – or even pretend? Yet it is discussed so matter-of-factly that no one mentions this blatant fallacy.

        “He gave us free will. And free will, necessarily, means that if you want to rape a baby, God–however horribly He feels about it…”

        By this point, I’m gnashing my teeth with all sorts of counter-arguments to this delusional, instigating diatribe. Now the “atheists” are compelled to say something to right the ship (for the sake of the blog’s integrity) or ask the believers to take it down a notch.

        One thing that James does, that has made this blog (and himself) the most credible of the so-called conspiracy sites, is provide sharp analysis with moderate and rational intonation. Although he allows for ANYONE to voice their opinion, the rest of us are here to break down and level out the extremes. This is done primarily by leaving emotion at the door.

        And that’s how it should be. It’s ok now and then to vent on Mark – he probably loves it anyways. But by invoking a defensive posturing to ones beliefs, people instinctively let emotion creep in, and then the bs begins. This isn’t just Patrick – or this site – but certainly we can at least pretend we are above attacking other’s beliefs – or non-beliefs?

        For the record, I’m agnostic (which we all know everyone should be). jk 🙂

        1. hey, that was a damn good comment! It must have took some time to delineate your thought so well.
          as for patrick, I tend to skim through his comments to look for the meat as I don’t have as much time to read as he has to write. so he may have written some things that I don’t agree with but I applauded his unwillingness to speak based on others reaction to it even though I empathized with your comment to begin with.
          I am more tolerant with the religious stuff on this blog than I am in real life(although I let the jehova’s in and debate their interpretation of what the bible even says somewhat frequently) just because we are all watching the world crumble around us and it’s natural for people to fall back on their belief systems. I just don’t get it when people are all eyes to see a lot of this stuff but are blind as a bat when it becomes apparent that the religious institutions that delivered them their beliefs are involved up to their knickers in creating this new world. but bible thumpers that are into fighting this evil are always welcome in my house.

        2. For what its worth, I avoid church like the plague. Never liked it, never will. I actually answered the last question at my United Methodist confirmation wrong. It went something like: Given all you have learned, can one still know God without the church? uhhh yup. The Minister just about needed CPR.

      7. “Again, I am frustrated that Patrick – choosing to represent believers – claims to know god’s intentions, needs and wants. How can he possibly know this – or even pretend? Yet it is discussed so matter-of-factly that no one mentions this blatant fallacy.”

        Gran1te, theology is indeed a hotly debated field of thought. Mine has developed over long years of study; all I can claim is that I know more about the nature of God’s intentions than I used to. I certainly can defend my position. To understand the problem of evil, one must understand the fact of free will. ipso facto. Similarly, ethics presuppose an unchanging standard, otherwise no one could claim that Nazism is any worse than altruism; and if such a standard defining good and evil exists, it had to come from somewhere.

        One thing is absolutely true: either God exists, or He does not. The question is, does the physical evidence of the observable universe support His having created it, or does a purely material explanation better fit the evidence? I can assure you that the scientists who argue for creation/intelligent design are among the most rigorous thinkers alive; their arguments have nothing to do with faith, only the physical evidence we can observe. And the evidence for God is found in every direction. Far from starting out trying to prove that “God did it,” most of them very reluctantly concluded that God HAD to have done it. Admitting the truth about where the evidence led them is quite as dino says: it is a career killer in this post-Western civilization.

        So when you formulate your argument this way:

        “From a scientific perspective, this ability to know something without any proof (or evidence of replicable behavior) is contrary to all that has been taught – it’s a complete violation of rules. To the believer, this knowledge (of god) is omnipresent, universal, and impossible to be measured or constrained by rules.”

        …you are demonstrating a complete misunderstanding of the topic. The scientific method was developed by thinkers who knew that God exists, that He is rational, having created a set of rules by which the universe functions in a predictable way. The scientific method was developed to ascertain what those rules are, and how to apply them to discover the workings of creation. It is only very recently that science has been absconded with by a philosophy of pure materialism. These atheistic thinkers have essentially stolen the “scientific method” from the theistic men who invented it. It is the ultimate form of arrogance. It is as annoying as Obama telling people who created industries “you didn’t build that.”

        Dino is also quite right when she states that the civil court system does not acknowledge appeals to theological truth. What she does not mention is that this is a very recent development. My thesis is that the 20th century was a transition phase, as the West was eclipsed by this new civilization we are witnessing the formation of, and it took long enough that no one lived through the whole transition–so everyone thinks the set of assumptions that prevail today are simply the obvious, self-evident, nature of reality. This New Civilization, whatever it will come to be called, openly rejects the eternal verities that everyone knew to be true when the West still existed. Even the bad guys, in old movies about cowboys and Indians, as they were about to die, told the one who shot them, “see you in Hell,” and no one watching the picture thought anything of it–because everyone knew that if you freely choose to be evil, you will pay in the next life. It was completely believable that a villain would know he was soon to “meet his maker”–another familiar rhetorical example.

        This is elemental.

        So the debate is not, Gran1te, between believers and unbelievers, as you state, but between those who claim this new civilization as their own and those who decry the usurpation. I’m not saying the West can be restored–I’m just arguing that I refuse to allow the New Civ to make me a pariah for holding to the position Galileo and Newton and Aquinas and Luther and Calvin and Shakespeare all held. The New Civilization wants to send all that down the Memory Hole, and I resent it.

        And stating one’s theological conclusions matter-of-factly is perfectly fine, as far as I’m concerned–just as fine as atheists matter-of-factly presuming a mindless universe of pure materialism. Atheists may be offended by having to hear people talk as if God is obviously real, but that’s their problem, not mine. It is only offensive to them because they choose to react that way.

        My discussion of stlonginus’ comment was thus perfectly apt. No one has to agree with me. But it certainly was not offensive in any objective way.

      8. recynd – thanks for that thoughtful post and your nice comments. it seems a bit backwards – your course to lds, that is, but I’m glad it works for you. I too had to supplement with a 2nd (and at one point a 3rd) church because aside from seminary, there was little in the line of scripture study. I dreaded church, but my gma was the opposite – the whole purpose was a social thing for her.

        I blame being lied to by religion as my reason for my disdain, but like a bitter divorce, I should really just get over it.

        Ya I really thought you were coming at me with the natural law questions haha. Took me on a 3 hour debunking journey of passio too. Next time I will try for a little more productivity. Cheers!

    4. Anyone who wants to can commit suicide, and they do. What is under discussion is “physician-assisted suicide” since it is done by a person with a license to practice medicine and an oath to protect the patient from death if possible. The people caring for a dying person, whether paid employees, doctors, or family members are tasked with responding to emergencies where life could be retrieved. Their failure to act can be considered by some as negligence in a court of law. But in the case of terminal illnesses, where pain is often a major factor at the end, where the patient is otherwise young and vigorous, there is the possibility of hastening the death with drugs to end suffering.

      I get it. But for some reason it seems that all along people have gotten it. They have given extra morphine, the breathing has been gently suppressed to allow the patient to die, a patient who is in severe pain if unmedicated and who is hoping for the release of death. The patient, without medical intervention, would have died long since. This is an active ongoing situation in my immediate family at this moment, but no one is talking about moving to Oregon. Why? Because everyone knows the means is in hand already, and always has been. Why “legalize” what is socially acceptable?

      No, I believe this new kind of legislation is designed to help create a new world of teaching people who are made obsolete by a reckless society to get lost. It’s treated like some noble thing, some esoteric knowledge with elite trappings, something enlightened futuristic societies must have. But under it is crude genocide and nihilism.

      1. In addition to nefarious motives, there is a HUGE market for body donations. Just think of all the revenue generated by carefully killed patients:

        From a 2000 article (caps mine)

        “Strict federal laws ban any buying or selling of hearts, lungs, livers or other organs needed for transplant. … The Clinton administration adopted rules in 1998 requiring hospitals to notify organ agencies of all deaths. That makes it more likely that families will hear from a tissue bank within four hours of a loved one’s death. The rules are designed to increase the number of organ transplants.

        But organ donors rose by less than 1 percent in 1999, according to the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations. The big beneficiaries are tissue banks and companies that showed gains in donors of as much as 40 percent, records and interviews show.

        The reason for the disparity: Organs can only be harvested from donors who are BRAIN DEAD but whose HEART and other organs are still functioning. Once the heart stops, organ donation is ruled out. Tissue still can be recovered. The government is trying new methods to increase organ and tissue donations.”

        “The biggest deal in the industry was struck 13 years ago. Osteotech opened its doors in New Jersey without access to bodies. So the company spent $10 million to start a nonprofit tissue bank serving as its exclusive broker of human bones. The publicly traded company is now the nation’s largest producer of bone products.

        As for the tissue bank? The Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation is the world’s largest.

        The bank’s chief executive, Bruce Stroever, predicts the industry will double, to $1 billion, by 2003.”
        A recent radio show I listened to had the total revenue generated by a single donor body (once everyone got a piece, financial and otherwise) at $11.4 million. While “selling” is illegal, of course administration, shipping, storing, handling fees are legal.


        Look for the organ donation article after her alleged death.

    5. The inevitability of death has probably been forgotten by many, if they ever knew it. I grew up in Southern California. My grandparents all lived on the East Coast. When most of them died (by the time one long-lived grandfather died, I was already in Massachusetts and married), there was a parental plane trip, we were left behind, and it took me years to see the grave where one of my grandmothers was buried, while I still have not been to where the other two are, but I think it is Brooklyn.

      Recently, Ben Affleck appeared on Henry Louis Gates’s genealogy show and he said something obvious but profound. Looking at his vast family going back to the 17th century, he said “Each of them has two dates – a beginning and an ending. Obviously, there I am in the tree and some day mine too will have the end number.” It kind of hit him in the face.

      I am sure that my own family’s earlier generations had probably too much death around them, so much that they wanted to construct a paradise for us where we didn’t think so much about it. The terrified WASP’s that some of them were decided collectively to do something about death, flatten it, let it be mowed clean, so it couldn’t be seen from the street. Hospitals shut it away and then embalmers did hair and make-up to whisk the impression of end-stage suffering away from us. Sometimes we have seen privileged glimpses of how it all ends.

      Our very tendency to live in fantasy, almost on a continuous drip has made the vast majority of Americans gullible about the cheerful parents of Sandy Hook, for example. We wouldn’t know reality anymore, and it has a lot to do with the powerful culture of denial. Even this euthanasia is an attempt to keep everything clean and simple and sanitized.

      I would not welcome death at this stage of my life, and even my elderly mother whose every sense is failing has a certain zest for it, for getting out to her favorite coffee shop and (aargh!) listening to Rush Limbaugh (who is so loud he gets through to her better than the living people around her). But her choice at 91 is not to complain, and to enjoy life at the level where she feels comfortable, privileged as it happens for having made far too many children, leaving us to distribute the burden of her care quite equitably, with a little outside help. I know she’s a lucky woman, though no one would have forecast it, her history wasn’t “made”, it simply happened, and not by someone else’s policy (as much as I used to blame Catholicism for “too many useless eaters” – my under appreciated brothers and sisters, back in the day).

      1. Musings – we are blessed to have you and all the best to your Mom. Please do enjoy the zest for life she still has left for Rush & the coffee shop. Was shocked to hear Rush’s amazing story on how he is totally deaf and still has prospered on a talk radio career!

        Grandpa always had this gift to hear what he wanted to and not the rest. For some reason, he always had a hounding wife, or after her demise, girlfriends or children, who he pretended not to hear when they nagged him and he ignored. But he absolutely heard my little girl voice and every other conversation he choose to engage in.

        Momma has terrible tales of how death was dealt with during childhood, the body was brought back to the house. Terrors upon terrors, her older 10 year old sister was tragically killed in a car accident, and everyone, including the 4 younger siblings were required to hold the body in their lap. Grandpa refused to pay the medical bills as his daughter died, who knows what the ramifications of that meant.

        Praise the Lord! Momma high tailed it out of that place, although we still went back for funerals and visits. They probably created laws that bodies were no longer allowed in the home, but the funerals were still heart wrenching with hours where the family spent required private time with the body.

        Our new tradition of making the funeral process as short as possible and cremation seems a whole lot easier. How ridiculous is it that folks actually spend their hard earned dollars to buy a plot of land to bury their bodies for eternity? This appears to be yet another scam where the owners continuously sell the same plot over and over. Funeral directors have advised us, it is illegal to disburse the ashes, they just have not figured out how to monitor that.

      2. Dear PS — Oh my, that is gruesome stuff. So much for the “good old days”, huh? My father’s funeral had some funny moments actually, like when the minister who didn’t even know us asked us to raise our hands if we accepted Jesus Christ as our lord and savior (this was my step-mother’s doing I am sure). And here we were putting this atheist to rest, with his cowboy hat on his casket (my step-mother again). I am sure my mother’s funeral will be heavily influenced by her on-site daughter-in-law who will insist on additional Rosary time (when my mother, like my father, has pretty much dumped formal religious ceremonies, especially ones she liked a long, long time ago, like the Rosary). You can imagine how confusing it gets! I just hope we don’t have a big family fight. We acquiesced in everything with my dad because of regard for his wife. But my mother has only her potentially brawling offspring to leave behind. “Apres moi le deluge” would make an apt phrase for her these days!

      3. Being out of town, you pretty much have to acquiesce to what those dealing with the ‘event’ decide. In a way we were fortunate in that we could openly discuss what a funeral should not be and not worry about following protocol.

        Now that I managed not to have a heart attack and my daughter managed not to go into premature labor, with her first born, there is humor to be found in my beloved Mother’s passing. It was not unexpected, but still hard. We agreed in two weeks, my older siblings would be healed enough and that would give those out of town sufficient notice to come together for the final farewell.

        Of course the normal response was yes of course, can I do this or that? My oldest niece declared the only date available would be in 6 weeks, the date already set aside for the baby shower and what the heck, we kill two birds with one stone, or something to that effect!

        My older sisters were a wreck and just said well ok. I was the only paying attention and realized said niece was the only one with a conflict and got into her face about what could possibly be more important than my Mother’s funeral. She had an event in VT, that ended on Thursday. I offered to pay airfare and car rental to get her there and back on Saturday. Who would of thought there are no airports in VT?

        It just goes on and on how heartless this grown woman was, including posting pictures of the party that happened on that Friday night in VT, and of course there was no sympathy from me that she had to drive all night to make it.

        My daughter has a friend that is a bagpipe artist and wanted him there, Grandma surely loved those Irish tunes. Said niece declared they were not allowed in church, they are, and since she was college degreed in the French horn, she should be in charge of music.

        Lord help us, she realized every city’s orchestra only has one French horn position, and they generally keep that job their entire lives so she switched to being a licensed psycho therapist!

        She had planned on a multitude of religious songs Mom probably never heard, but low and behold, we were blessed with soft bagpipe music while watching the frantic professional trying to figure out where the musicians were. The proceedings were delayed a bit, while the late comers rushed to get their instruments in place, and one never showed up at all.

        Always felt like Mom had something to do with our moments of levity and our time to hug her beloved friends gently who came in with their walkers and their adult children. My daughter was her favorite out of the six of them and never showed her any disrespect, while the other grandchildren have no clue what that word means.

    1. Heck, all Gore needed to do was carry his home state of Tennessee and he would’ve won the election, regardless of what happened in Florida. They have only themselves to blame.

  8. No, Musings, anyone who wants to commit suicide CAN’T do so. That is the whole point. Some people are so debilitated that they need help to end their lives. What we are now talking about is legalizing what is commonly done to dying persons, and giving it a sense of dignity. Not incidentally, half the cost of medical care for a person’s whole lifetime is spent in the last six months of their lives.

    I find it remarkable that a people ruled by a homicidal power system, that background evidence suggests has actually caused this Ebola crisis for political purposes, are against easing the suffering of dying persons. The American people acquiesce in the killing of hundreds of thousands of non-White people, and strongly in favor of capital punishment, support a power system that degrades people with drugs, infectious diseases, and delusive fears. And yet are bent on restricting birth control and death control by the people themselves, while Proclaiming their devotion to Freedom.

    It is because people, largely without our conscious awareness, identify with power rather than with the people ruled by power, the vast majority. The State has always maintained that it alone was authorized to take human life, prohibiting the people from taking their own. This doctrine was incorporated in religious and, in modern times, other social and cultural dogma. The stats on homicide in the US still include suicides as part of the collective figure, since all these numbers are formulated largely from the perspective of power. You have to be a highly trained economist, as an obvious example, to believe the numbers of the unemployment index.

    Commenters are not attacking the corporate-Washington power system for deliberately producing Ebola and creating hysteria about it, but are attacking the right of dying persons to voluntarily end their lives. Until a truth consensus is developed that focuses on the power interests of people rather than anti-people power, the population cannot form a people’s power system. Clearly, we have a long way to go.

    1. “Not incidentally, half the cost of medical care for a person’s whole lifetime is spent in the last six months of their lives.”

      Not incidentally indeed! But is this a reflection of the burden on society that the elderly pose, or perhaps a way for the greed and power hungry oligarchy to steal as much of one’s estate before you pass it on to you heirs as they can? If they had avoided allopathic medicine like the plague except in the case of traumatic injury would they even be on deaths door?

      No one is attacking the right of dying persons to end their lives, they want to prevent the state from being able to murder people at will. you don’t think hospitals aren’t already filled with demons who would kill a single forlorn person for the bounty of their bodyparts? You don’t think the hospitals aren’t already infested with intelligence agents? do you really think they aren’t already doing this at many hospitals? Just wait until they can write on a piece of paper that the poor chump committed suicide.

      1. As self euthanasia(a term that will replace suicide I’m sure) becomes more accepted, I would bet the pharmaceutical companies will create a brain death drug, for the purpose of keeping the organs fresh. Euthanasia centers like in “Soylent Green” will probably cost more than a nice funeral I would bet.

    1. Does anyone know what happened to Adam Lanza’s body? I never saw a reference to any funeral or cremation (and did look for that online at one point).

        1. Ha! Again a problem with the narrative. Find-a-Grave says cremation and NBC says burial.

          I like the specificity (I’m being sarcastic) of the NBC article. The source is a “family spokesman”–unnamed–and the body is going to an “undisclosed location.” Nothing said about where it was before it was picked up, either.

          Anything goes, these days.

      1. I believe the last time we heard of the alleged Adam Lanza’s whereabouts was his location inside a body bag in the medical examiner’s office. One curious employee brought her husband in during the wee hours to get a glimpse of his body. What they saw or did not see we will we never know. The employee was terminated afterwards.

        Of course, we out in the trenches have no way to confirm this story and so many others regarding Sandy Hook. Quote from the New Yorker article where phantom Peter Lanza was interviewed by Andrew Solomon: “Lanza declined to say how his son’s body was disposed of. No one knows that and no one ever will, he said.”

        1. Yeah: he’s not going to say what he did with Adam’s corpse because there was no corpse.

          Thanks for reminding me about the employee who brought her husband in to see the “body.” She was never named (either), I take it.

      2. While we are on the subject of Adam Lanza, and this having nothing to do with Ebola aside for the possible false flag connection, Hamden mayor says fringe elements still deny the SH shootings.


        Below are two excerpts that caught my attention. Newtown is no stranger to media and bright lights, actually it was very much welcomed, and now they fear scrutiny of the same. However, there are still “Newtown parents” frequently found on the talk circuit – for a fee I assume.

        “But Norwalk Fire Chief Denis McCarthy, another commission member, said a hearing in Newtown could bring in more big TV trucks, bright lights and the scrutiny of national media when the town may still be healing and is nearing the second anniversary of the murders on Dec. 14.”

        “Hamden Mayor Scott Jackson, chairman of the 16-member commission created by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, said Friday morning that fringe elements are still denying the shootings ever occurred. “We have families who lost loved ones, and people around the country and around the globe tell them that it never happened,” Jackson said. “How many times would any of us have to sit and read that garbage before we started to pull back from any part of the process?”

        Then we have this confirming their newfound modesty:
        “No ceremony accompanied the groundbreaking. Town officials have said they want to protect the privacy of Newtown citizens.”

        1. Consigli Construction is making out very well, isn’t it? Got the contract to demolish the old school, as well as the contract to build the new one.

          Another Italian name. Mark my words, Anthony Consigli has intimate knowledge about what really happened on Dec. 14, 2012 (meaning, nothing happened).

          This was not the contractor whose number was on Malloy’s speed dial when he was mayor of Danbury, was it? Can’t remember that one’s name.

          The secrecy surrounding construction is creepy. What don’t they want the public to see–are they building shrines to Satan inside? Constructing chandeliers from the skulls of dead children?

          Or maybe it’s those tunnels…

        1. Thanks for finding that article. Right: Malloy was mayor of Stamford, not Danbury.

          Just had a thought that, although I firmly agree the reason the demolition contractors were sworn to secrecy was because there was no “blood and guts” inside, as well as because they would see the school was clearly abandoned, there might have been another reason: to avoid them revealing that required asbestos abatement procedures were not implemented.

      3. dinophile – you made an excellent point.


        ~If the building is closed to normal users, it may be necessary to seal it off from outside atmosphere so that no accessible air is contaminated. Examples of asbestos removal enterprises include the Jussieu Campus (begun circa 1996 and still going on as of 2005) and the Tour Montparnasse (in 2005, projected duration was three years if the tower was emptied of its users, and ten years if it were not).[citation needed]

        An asbestos-containing building that is to be torn down may have to be sealed, and to have its asbestos safely removed before ordinary demolition can be performed. The asbestos removal may take longer and cost more than the actual demolition. For example, the former seat of parliament of East Germany, the Palast der Republik, was stripped of most of its asbestos between 1998 and 2001, before it was finally demolished starting in 2006.[citation needed]~

        1. Thanks, Anne. Yes, I’ve been thinking more about this, too. It cannot be doubted that the Sandy Hook School, having been built in 1956, was riddled with asbestos, since virtually all construction materials contained asbestos in those days. We’ve surmised on this site.(as has Fetzer) that asbestos is the reason the school was abandoned. Asbestos left in place does not hurt anyone. It only becomes a problem if you want to renovate, because if you disturb it it becomes friable and airborne, and it causes problems in your lungs when inhaled.

          This is, then, similar to the theories about the real reason the World Trade Center Towers came down–too expensive to renovate–so the owners had to concoct the 9/11 fiction to get around the requirements.

          While I’ve wondered how much of the asbestos abatement game is a scam, itself–and we must ask why crooked construction contractors do not also include crooked asbestos abatement companies–there would be permits and inspections required for asbestos abatement that no one wanting to reuse the property right away, for another purpose, would wish to comply with. Paying off each of, say, 30 actors with $50,000 apiece would be $1.5 million, probably much less than the abatement bill for that large building.

      4. Getting back to the secrecy agreements signed by the demolition contractors: I’ll bet they were not told about the health hazards. So this might constitute fraud in the inducement.

        Such agreements would also be against public policy, because the contractors are agreeing not to reveal illegal conduct they become aware of. In fact, they’re committing a crime themselves: they have become accessories after the fact.

  9. “No one is attacking the right of dying persons to end their lives…”

    Yes, they are, Fish, just as you are. It’s against some of the religions to commit suicide, and it used to be against the law, i.e. the power of the state. The reasons given by commenters are various, mostly in my opinion feeble, but not one commenter outside of myself expressed an opinion for such a law. Indeed, as I remember not one commenter favored birth control and abortion when that issue came up. And as far as I remember, only one commenter, Dinophile, actually expressed a protest against racism when it was flagrantly displayed.

    Besides, the right to determine one’s death is a side issue on this thread. James has printed a protest against Washington conducting bio-warfare by creating Ebola germs in its laboratories. Apparently the current outbreak was caused either inadvertently by these germs accidentally being released from a biolab, or intentionally, Washington wanting to create a pandemic for political purposes. It seems to me there is a hesitancy in opposing this horror directly , and condemning the American power system for, at best, gross negligence, or what is effectively mass murder.

    There is a constant concern on the internet about the passivity of the American people during a period when a despotic police state is being installed by Washington. I suggest that this lack of response is caused by a fear of being on the side of the powerless against power, on being on the side of the losers. Americans have no moral ideological basis to moralize us for opposing anti-people power, such as the religious basis that the Abolitionist had in apposing slavery. American power through the media and other truth organs has ideologically disarmed the American people from mass protest.

    Is it conceivable that the commenters on this blog also suffer from this fear? Is it possible that people wriggle around morally and intellectually to avoid frank and candid opposition to American power? Might this fear possibly repress a movement of the American people that is directed effectively against the abuses of the American power system? As they say in social science academic papers, more research is needed in this strangely neglected question.

    1. Mark
      I think the points brought up (over and again) are profound. Do you really believe that this divide and ruin government wouldnt jump at the chance to have the power to decide when we need assistance to die? Imagine the laws that would follow, and all the money to be made. Imagine being under conservatorship, knowing you are sane, knowing you want to live to see your grandkids next milestone, and then quietly accepting your impending death as a ‘choice’ that you didnt even get to make.

    2. I don’t think it’s the commenters on this blog that we need to worry about, Mark. They get it.

      I did, by the way, express that I am pro-choice, drawing long fiery rejoinders from Patrick! But I am not in favor of assisted suicide.

      Fishandroaches’ points are excellent. I have seen many examples of asset-stripping of old and vulnerable persons both in Colorado and Florida. That is one of the things our courts are primarily authorizing these days, through bogus guardianship proceedings and other means. If the “Dark Side” can not only surreptitiously murder the person whose fortunes have been targeted, but insulate themselves from any investigation into what happened–since, as a matter of law, death occurred via a “natural disease process”–they can dispense with a lot of red tape.

      1. My point in bringing up abortion in connection with euthanasia and assisted suicide is the cultural mindset they all share: human live is not sacred, thus the culture can feel good about “choosing” to snuff out the life of some category or another of human being, and not consider it murder.

        The last go-round, you, dino, quoted Black’s Law Dictionary to define away abortion being murder. By that logic, a legislature need only pass a law making it “legal” to kill people in a given category, and killing them would not be “murder.” This being so self-evidently preposterous, I did not fall back on the most obvious example of just that–Germany in the 30s–and offered an arbitrary category: the Irish. When you balked at that, I pointed out that America in fact did exactly that, except it was the Plains Indians who were murdered in their droves. One of Lincoln’s despicable generals coined the immortal phrase “the only good Indian is a dead Indian.” He was pro-choice, I suppose, about killing Indians in that he recognized they would not all be exterminated–the survivors were just “bad,” for remaining alive.

        Well, it might have been “legal” to kill Indians as we stole their lands, but killing them was still murder.

        This is the mindset I’m warning about. Human life is either of infinite value, or politicians and sophists can select whose killing is “murder” and whose killing is fine and dandy. It’s all pro-choice, and it is sickening to have a culture thinking that way.

        Was the fiery enough? Not very lengthy, though.

      2. Other arguments can be made, Patrick–and these situations distinguished–without reference to the “sanctity of life.”

        Exploitation, for example.

      3. Of course “other arguments can be made, and these situations distinguished–without reference to the “sanctity of life.”” That’s my point. In this new civilization, sophistry is the philosophy that gets us from what the West used to know to be true (for around 1,500 years) to just about whatever the new minds of our time want to believe.

        People today wish it to be the case that human life is not sacred, so they manufacture arguments to justify killing unborn infants; irascible, inconvenient, stubbornly clinging to life old people; people suffering from terrible diseases; Indians who are so inconsiderate that they insist upon living in the path of Yankee railroads; you name it. It all comes down to rationalizing murder by false logic. (Of course, in colleges today, the hapless cannon fodder of the New World Order are being taught that logic is whatever you want it to be–another facet of the same catastrophe.

        I write these things to point out that we are being hoodwinked. MHB specializes in examining fakery in contemporary culture. James Tracy doesn’t emphasize the philosophy, just the events, but I want people to see that the events are only possible because the post-modernism that characterizes this new civilization makes it possible for obvious falsehoods to not seem obviously illogical. As I always say, the chief object of education is to know when we’re being lied to–which is precisely why education was so thoroughly ruined as the 20th century slogged on. Today, most college-educated people are fools who think there is no standard of truth of morality to repair to, that everything is a matter of opinion. In other words, all education has become sophistry.

        Abortion is so intensely defended in our time because people want to experience no consequences for their actions. Assisted suicide is defended because people desire to experience no suffering. And offing old people will soon be widely accepted because those damned geezers have money their progeny wants to lay hands on. These three can indeed be separated via false logic, but in the end it all boils down to one thing: killing people and feeling good about it.

        1. “Abortion is so intensely defended in our time because people want to experience no consequences for their actions.”

          This is it. The number one problem in the world. People’s desire to be free of accountability, or responsibility. They love it when the government passes a law to help them with this. Abortion was the biggest reliever of responsibility yet, having to care and provide for the human life you created is just too much of a drag for some. Now, caring for Grandma is the next style cramper,

        2. Has anyone else here watched Mark Passio’s 7-hour lecture on Natural Law (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1pkJaNbzLU)? It’s fabulous; I actually got my teenage son to watch it. A great follow-up to that lecture is “Street-wise Spirituality”, another long one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOYTHg8cadY). The take-away (at least with regard to the discussion here), is that none of us is immune to the consequences of our actions. More specifically, the taking of life–regardless of reason (unless it is to preserve the life/liberty of another, as in self-defense)–violates Natural Law, is wrong, and will have consequences, both materially and spiritually.

          Whether or not one actually believes in Natural Law has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not it actually exists…it does, just as surely as gravity exists whether you believe in it or not. Whether an action is “legal” or “illegal” has no bearing on Natural Law (aka: “God”, the “Universe”); that designation is purely man’s creation and exists solely in the material world.

          I think it’s interesting that Western Civilization has “evolved” to the point where many don’t believe in Natural Law (and we’re certainly paying the price!); we certainly are not taught about it any longer, even in our churches. Could this be the factor that sets the modern world apart from all times past? Creation has finally forgotten its Creator…

          To those who support abortion (and/or euthanasia), I wonder, do you consider yourselves to be moral absolutists or moral relativists? How do you justify relativity in one area and not others?

        3. I have seen those and they are EXCELLENT!

          Recynd, with you being lds I was wondering if you had ever heard A True Ott speak at all? I have only heard two interviews but I found them interesting.

        4. Hi Fish: I have heard Dr. Ott’s name before, but I don’t think I’ve seen any of his work. When I Googled him, there was so much wacky stuff, I had a hard time knowing what was real and what wasn’t. I will be happy to check out the video you linked to, though.

        5. I know, right? I was, too. I don’t usually have the attention span to last several hours (let alone many), but I got through the first lecture in two sittings. The second lecture builds beautifully on the first, with enough new information to keep it worthwhile.

      4. Aborted fetal tissue et al., placenta and umbilical cord retrieval are all extremely profitable as well.

        (Ever wonder why the cord is clamped so quickly and so close to the baby after delivery? It’s to ensure that the cord is FULL. If hospital staff waited a minute or clamped the cord closer to the placenta, all the blood displaced by compression associated with natural birth would flow back to the infant. Instead the baby is essentially robbed of its blood at birth, setting it up for distress which entails $$ interventions, and the hospital has a lovely product to “sell.”)

    3. @Folktruther– I think most people here are attacking the notion that it’s okay to allow the state to accrue such power to itself that it can choose to eliminate people who’ve done nothing other than grow old or become ill or both. Suicide isn’t as easy as it sounds. Normally people, even sick people, will cling to life, even when it’s not the greatest. Yeah, there is a fear of death (and of judgment) but we also are made to live for as long as possible because life really is good (because from a religious view, it’s a reflection of God). I don’t disagree with all of your points..certainly not with the your contention that Americans have become passive, especially the men. But you must be aware of the diabolical psychological and chemical attack we’ve all, but especially the boys/men have almost grown used to thinking is normal.
      I think the AIDS ‘epidemic’ and all the smaller scares (SARS, H1N1, bird flu, Colombine, Sandy Hook, the ‘Batman’ theater episode, etc.) and now Ebola are testing the waters for future, more complete control. They can’t kill everyone, or even a majority at once nor do they want to do so. That wouldn’t serve them well at all. Who would pick up the pieces for them? I just received a book written by Dr. Leonard Horowitz and published in 1996 titled, “Emerging Viruses – Aids and Ebola – Nature, Accident or Intentional?” I’m looking forward to reading it. Also, you may want to visit here for some thoughts:

      Thank you to all here for an interesting discussion.

    4. Another issue is that if a standard of care for assisted suicide is created, physicians are LEGALLY obligated to follow it.
      Example: you are in a car accident, injuries meet criteria for standard of care for assisted suicide, and you are executed. Without your knowledge or consent.

      Once you enter the hospital/healthcare facility, the staff must follow standard of care. If not, lawsuits and loss of license follow.

      Remember the scene in that Will Smith robot movie where he dives to save the drowning girl even though he is not supposed to because her chance of life is only 10%? She lives. But she *wasn’t* supposed to live.

    5. American’s have been reticent to condemn their perceived gov’t for a myriad of illegal, immoral actions, including human experimentation. I’m sure you’ve heard about the Tuskegee experiments. Here is more:
      written by Allen M. Hornblum titled, “Acres of Skin – Human Experiments at Holmesburg Prison” There are definitely a few places one should consider staying out of; prisons and the military; and now, we may well include hospitals.

      As for passivity, you can read one person’s take on resistance written in 2005 – search engine: The Coming Resistance – No Organization, No Leaders by Alan Stang

      1. I agree that hospitals are part of the same evil network.

        In 1999-2000, I litigated an election contest over a recall election in the Town of Castle Rock, Colorado, involving ballot-box stuffing with absentee ballots by operatives working for real estate developers who wanted their toadies to be retained in office. (An voting rights activist made a video of me talking about it, which is here:

        Embedded in it is a video one of my clients made on election day, which shows Scott Lamm, the son of former governor Dick Lamm, as one of the operatives.)

        We were assigned to a good judge, Scott Lawrence, who gave me several TRO’s against things the Town was doing, as well as a bogus ballot box set up by the operatives on the grounds of the rec center. He was a good man. Ten days before our hearing on the merits, Judge Lawrence was suddenly rushed into emergency surgery. They removed his voicebox and part of his tongue. He never returned to the bench, and died about a year later.

        While he had had a bout with throat cancer previously, this was so shocking, and the timing of it so suspicious, I have never gotten over it. We then did not get a replacement judge for some time: I had to threaten to sue State Judicial to get one. By this time, the irregularly retained councilmembers had been sworn into office. The citizens have never been able to regain control of their town government.

  10. I’m certainly open to this being a deep-statish enterprise, given all the work in government labs on enhancing the virulence of already virulent microbes. But I run into problems with details. One of them in Dr. Broderick’s letter is the following:

    “This research work involved injecting and infusing healthy humans with
    the deadly Ebola virus. Hence, the DoD is listed as a collaborator in a
    “First in Human” Ebola clinical trial (NCT02041715, which started in
    January 2014 shortly before an Ebola epidemic was declared in West
    Africa in March.”

    But if you look at the actual description of the trial NCT02041715 at


    that trial was actually a trial looking at tolerance in healthy humans
    of a proposed anti-ebola drug, TKM-100802, not of Ebola virus. That seems to me to be a 180-degree error, which raises doubts in my mind about the care with which the material in the letter was assembled.

    And it isn’t clear that particular trial ever got underway:

    “This study has suspended participant recruitment.
    (This clinical trial has been suspended following a clinical hold placed
    on the investigational new drug TKM-100802.)”

    Of course, it could simply have been shifted underground.

    But I’m interested in fairly air-tight observations, since in talking with “non-conspiracy” people, the bar for getting past their resistance is extremely high. In my experience, getting through to people on 9/11 is a piece of cake compared to this or Sandy Hook.

    1. Because most ‘Mericans don’t live in NYC but they do live (in their perceptions) in Sandy Hook (love that name) and they do fear the unseen, microscopic, ‘germ’, which this week cannot be airborne but last week could be airborne and the week before that……

  11. I agree that this discourse has been a very useful one. I, for one, have gained a better insight as to why the American people are so easily deluded by American power conspiracies, and why we are so political passive. We tend to identify with and internalize the ideological and conceptual distinctions that underlie the mainstream American truth consensus. We are afraid to think dissident truths, including of course power conspiracies, because we tend to identify with historical power rather than truth. Therefore we cannot form a truth basis for uniting the people effectively against anti-people power.

    For example, in political science the standard historical view is that the population is ruled institutionally by a government which is usually conflated with a ‘state.’ But in modern American, we are ruled institutionally by both the government and profit and non-profit corporations, notably including the mass media.

    If we identify ‘government’ as the enemy of the people, rather than the whole power system largely controlled by an oligarchical coalition of billionaires, we will serve the interests of the oligarchy rather than the interests of the people, since historically the biggest threat to the oligarchy has been government. Fox enthusiasts, like Pendanic, will conceive the major enemy in the power system as ‘socialism’ rather than the financial capitalism of the oligarchy.

    What it is necessary to do is to create a people’s truth dissensus, a dissenting consensus, to counter the mainstream power truth consensus. This is an historical process, but it is both politically and conceptually feasible in the 21st century. This is necessary not only to enlighten the mindless, clueless and politicallly delusional, to make it easier to think and discuss holistic reality-based truths, but also to establish a salutary distrust of anti-people power, generalizing the distrust of the American people for government to the governance of the entire power system.

    However this cannot be done without a truth revolution that would transform our world-views of reality, especially political and social reality. We are currently living in a schizoid society which has fragmented and split up the conceptual truth to prevent us from thinking about people and power in a simple holistic way. This is part of the Divide and Ruin strategy of the War on Terrorism. The same power process that produces chaos in the Mideast produces chaos in our conceptions not only of the Mideast, but of the entire world.

    However, and this is the red meat on the rug, if we create and legitimate conceptions and preconceptions that connect the truths, which provide an integrating world-view, it must be done in ways the subvert the Western and American ideological world-views that historically have legitimated American power. It is the fear of this truth revolution that must be combatted in a people’s truth dissensus.

    This is what we are currently doing, in a halting preliminary way, on this blog. Subverting American power conspiracies play a central role in this creative destruction, and as James has noted, they are increasingly indulged in. Subverting power conspiracies–and power has always conspired against the people historically–will pose a salutary paranoid approach to counter the schizoid truth. This will hopefully create the pathological dialectic that eventually, hopefully, will lead to a sense of political sanity. Otherwise our current pathological political derangement may well destroy us all. As the intelligence agencies say, some paranoids have real enemies.

    1. As long as we accept and rely upon public education as our main (and often only) source of knowledge, we’re sunk. It is going to become more difficult (and we all know it’s practically impossible now) to get people to think outside the dominant paradigm after the new educational policies are implemented. For those who aren’t aware of what’s going on, suffice it to say it’s cataclysmic…a “fundamental change”, if you will.

      I’m not sure how a “pathological dialectic” will eventually lead to any sort of “a sense of political sanity”, as you suggest it will. We’ve been enslaved for decades, and most of us don’t even know it…or worse, don’t WANT to know it. Before long, we won’t be ABLE to know it, if our “educators” have anything to say about it. But even if you do manage to “create a people’s truth dissensus, a dissenting consensus”, it’s going to be a day late and a dollar short, as the saying goes, and that’s assuming your consensus doesn’t get hijacked by the enemy first.

      I hate to be the voice of doom, but there is no historic justification for thinking there’s a chance in hell we’re going to turn this around on our own. Not without a cosmic shift in thinking and being, anyway. And not without tremendous humility. As Moses discovered, it’s MUCH easier to make slaves out of free men than it is free men out of slaves.

  12. I partially agree, Recynd. But our consciousness has been ideologically deranged not for decades, but for millennia, and not only in the USA but in every state power system in the world. And especially in the USA, which historically has been a barbaric homicidal racist culture, although technically and ideologically innovative in world important ways. We need help, Recynd, and while you and Rich rely on your gods for this assistance, I prefer the mundane aid of people.

    The American people, especially White people, need the help of the non-White people of other countries to evolve an ideological sense of pro-people decency. The consciousness of White people is to mired in reaction due to our loss of world and threat of loss of national power, with the rise of non-White people. Although capable of specialized bursts of creativity and intellectual courage, this blog being an example, we cannot overthrow the historical ideology of homicidal racist imperialism which historically has served our political interests.

    So a pro-people ideology must be developed historically in an international and world setting, not an American setting. This will be very difficult for Americans because or deranged ideological consciousness has been instilled largely through space-time conceptual restrictions. We have been taught to conceive America as a sub-world all its own, Exceptional, with the rest of the world fading into insignificance.

    And in addition to the space conceptual restriction, Democracy has focused our attention on the Now, ripping it from the past and future. We cannot understand history from the people’s perspective, from the perspective of the past, present and future persons of the earth. We therefore forget the past, deny the present, and ignore the future.

    1. “And especially in the USA, which historically has been a barbaric homicidal racist culture, although technically and ideologically innovative in world important ways. We need help, Recynd, and while you and Rich rely on your gods for this assistance, I prefer the mundane aid of people.”

      The mundane aid of people from a barbaric homicidal racist culture? Help from non-white people from other countries? Maybe like the ones who have us build military bases on their soil from which we bomb other non-white people? Mark, people are going to believe in something no matter what you call it. Money, political parties, TV news, feminism, science, you name it. Their gods have no power in the end. The true people power you desire was in the family unit, Gods mini government, but lies like yours have destroyed it, and with it hope.

  13. Pat B. – June 17, 2014

    What you are about to read is a documentation of my torture under a highly classified mind control operation, using advanced electromagnetic, nanoparticle and scalar weapons systems. It is not my intention to try to convince you. Suffice for me to know that the torture contractor knows that each and every word that I have written here is the truth and nothing but the truth. Historical precedents of similar occurrences in America are well documented. It is the responsibility of each and every citizen to acquaint themselves with their history in a democracy. I trust that you have not failed yourself in that regard.

    I am a black South African female of village and humble origins.

    Thank you.


    Please let every African that knows how to read, read this. For it is might be a warming of what will become of the entire continent.

  14. Pat B. – June 17, 2014

    What you are about to read is a documentation of my torture under a highly classified mind control operation, using advanced electromagnetic, nanoparticle and scalar weapons systems. It is not my intention to try to convince you. Suffice for me to know that the torture contractor knows that each and every word that I have written here is the truth and nothing but the truth. Historical precedents of similar occurrences in America are well documented. It is the responsibility of each and every citizen to acquaint themselves with their history in a democracy. I trust that you have not failed yourself in that regard.
    Thank you.


    Please let every African scholar, professional, student, journalist and activist and leader, that have integrity and care anything for the future of their children and the future of the continent, know about this documentation. For it may be what awaits Africa in the years to come. Informing the continent is the least that I can do before they kill me.

    I am a black South African female of village and humble origins who has resided in the US for more than 30yrs now.

    Thank you.

Comments are closed.