The Other Sabu: An Alternative Theory With Unanswered Questions
This Post has been re-written, and updated via Image or Link below
US Government Agencies Will Soon Be Able To Access Foreign Medical Dossiers Due To Patriot Act
The US Patriot Act has suddenly scared an entire nation, and it’s not the US itself this time. The Netherlands is currently going nuts about the US government being able to request medical details of all its citizens when the Dutch Electronic Patient Database (EPD) is implemented next month. This will not be the only country that freaks out because of the Patriot Act, as this sort of thing is likely to happen a lot more often. A recent study explained that US government agencies can secretly request anyone’s data if they are using a cloud-computing service which ‘conducts systematic business in the US’. It is already sufficient when the service provider is somehow a subsidiary of a US company.
That turns out to be a problem in the Netherlands, because the company that has developed the EPD and will be hosting the patients’ data on its cloud computing systems is the US-based CSC. The Dutch government and the organization responsible for implementing the EPD are convinced there is no problem, because there are clear contracts which have assigned Dutch jurisdiction, and fortunately the Dutch have stringent data protection laws that will protect patients’ sensitive data. Because that’s what data protection laws do, right?
False! At least with regard to information law, researchers from Amsterdam University warn that this analysis is way too simplistic. According to the scholars, it is quite possible the US government agencies can circumvent data protection laws and could easily request access to medical information of every single person in the Netherlands. The study doesn’t just cover the Netherlands (though it is especially timely for that), but rather looks at how these risks may apply more globally. Here are just a few of the findings that should raise eyebrows across the globe:
“When using a cloud service provider that is subject to U.S. jurisdiction, data may be requested directly from the company in question in the United States. […] From a legal point of view, access to such information cannot be denied and cloud service providers can give no guarantees in this respect. […] The possibility that foreign governments request information is a risk that cannot be eliminated by contractual guarantees. Nor do Dutch privacy laws offer any safeguards in this respect. […] It is a persistent misconception that U.S. jurisdiction does not apply if the data government requests for information do not apply to Dutch users of the cloud. […] legal protection under specific U.S. laws applies primarily to U.S. citizens and residents. […] Given the nature of intelligence work, it is not possible to gain insight into actual requests for information by the U.S. authorities […] Cloud providers will typically not be able to disclose whether such requests are made”
If the above doesn’t yet lead to a new international outrage against the US Patriot Act, then the following sentence on the extra-territorial effects of the Patriot Act should at least send shivers down the spines of sovereignty-loving non-US government officials:
“The transition to cloud computing will, in principle, result in a lower degree of autonomy […]”
via TechDirt
Feds Keeping People Sick: The Vitamin D story
Dr. Lee Hieb explains how medical ‘consensus’ robs patients of their health
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/feds-keeping-people-sick-the-vitamin-d-story/#f56ZwVCQghm81KD3.99
No one said it better than Michael Crichton – who, in addition to being a best selling author, was also a physician.
During a lecture at Cal Tech, he said, “Let’s be clear: The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right. … The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.”
The medical community has always been subject to “group-think,” but in recent decades we have become the leaders. Numerous physician-scientists have been ostracized, defrocked, de-licensed and in some cases driven to self-destruction by a medical community that has embraced consensus in science.
In essence, “We don’t care about your data; we all agree you are wrong.”
I once had a paper rejected from a major spine journal with a one line denouement: “Everyone knows you can’t do that.”
With time, ultimately, truth prevails, and renegade but correct physicians are vindicated – but not in time to save those patients who die from the mistaken consensus. Today, this “group-think” is depriving people from some of the best and cheapest medical treatment available – supplementation with adequate Vitamin D3.
Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with childhood rickets – a bone disorder – for over a hundred years. And it has been known since the 1970s that those living on the equator, regardless of particular locale, have lower rates of multiple sclerosis, colon cancer and depression. But more recently, many astute observers have discovered that low Vitamin D leads to many other disorders, including cardiac arrhythmia, breast cancer, adult fractures, dementia, heart attack risk and even diabetes.
Most recently, studies have demonstrated that higher levels of Vitamin D improve longevity and are beneficial at preventing influenza – even better than vaccination. Studies showing beneficial effects of high vitamin D levels are quite convincing. They not only show a correlation between low Vitamin D blood levels and the problem, but show improvement in the disease or prevention of the condition when levels are raised up through supplementation.
As an example, it has been shown in the laboratory that heart muscle does not contract well unless adequate Vitamin D is present. An Italian population study showed that low Vitamin D was proportional to atherosclerotic plaques (clogging of the arteries). Furthermore, a Japanese study of dialysis patients demonstrated that correcting Vitamin D deficiency significantly lowered death from heart attacks and heart disease in general.
These are only a few of the rapidly expanding body of literature supporting the role of Vitamin D in multiple disease prevention. But to achieve the positive effects seen in many diseases, blood levels need to be in the range of 50 to 100 ng/dl, not the 20 ng/dl that laboratories report as the lowest range of “normal” (how labs determine “normal” is the subject of another column). Specifically in the case of breast cancer, if one achieves blood levels above 55 ng/dl, the risk of breast cancer is diminished 85 percent.
It is the observation of many, many practicing clinicians that 1) most patients test in the low 20s, and 2) 400 iu of Vitamin D a day – the government recommended daily allowance doesn’t raise the levels at all. Studies of equatorial inhabitants demonstrate that some of the longest-lived people on the planet obtain 30,000-40,000 iu of Vitamin D (specifically D3) a day from the sunlight – nature’s source of the vitamin. Given that, it is not suprising that supplementing 10,000 iu a day of Vitamin D3 has been shown to have no adverse effects.
As an Orthopaedic Surgeon, I deal with bone disorders daily, and have long been interested in this topic. I quit testing for Vitamin D levels in untreated people after every one of my patients tested in the low 20s. I only tested my husband because he was convinced that golfing in Arizona 18 holes, six days a week would raise his level. It did not – his level was 22 ng/dl.
As a final fact, D3 supplementation is cheap. For less than $12 a month you can easily take 10,000 iu of Vitamin D3 a day.
Now, given all this, what would you do?
I, for one take 10,000 units of Vitamin D3 a day. I have done so for over 7 years, and my levels of 55 ng/dl are barely in the optimal range of 50-100ng/dl. I recommend the same to all my patients. But I must warn them that the government, via the Institute of Medicine and the FDA, disagree and believe people should take only 600-800 iu a day.
Now it doesn’t take a medical degree to figure out that a cheap treatment that has such potential upside with so little (if any) downside is worth doing as real preventive medicine. But the government consensus – developed by intellectuals who feel they are infinitely smarter than we are, and should be able to make our choices for us – is that there is no evidence for the beneficial claims.
Really? If they emerge from their collective basement, they will find pages and pages of references. Don’t believe it? Do a simple Google search. Or just read the newspaper. Besides frequent articles in medical and general science journals supporting Vitamin D3 supplementation, there are monthly news stories about this rapidly advancing science.
Sadly, the government doesn’t just want to discourage you from taking extra Vitamin D, they want to prohibit it. Senator Dick Durban, D-Ill., in 2011 introduced a bill (innocuously labeled the “Supplement Labeling Act”) which would so over-regulate the supplement industry that they could no longer supply products such as Vitamin D3 at a cost affordable to the average consumer.
And state medical boards, which are now populated by many non-physicians, sanction physicians who step out of this approved “consensus” – what they call “standard of care.” According to them, if you are not doing what 90 percent of your colleagues are doing, you are by definition wrong. And they can punish you, even to the extent of taking away your license. So, regardless of progress in science, if 90 percent of doctors are recommending an inadequate dose of Vitamin D, your doctor must give you this wrong advice.
To be a scientific leader in this new world order is to be wrong. If the phone company had this philosophy, we would still be tied to land line rotary dials.
Science and medicine are not a vote. As Dr. Crichton pointed out, voting is for politicians. Science requires freedom to consider the alternatives, and in medicine, the freedom to make our own choices – not have government bureaucrats or the Institute of Medicine make them for us
via WND
March 18, 2013 – Decrypted Matrix Radio: National Security Letters, CIA Secrecy Rejected, NSA Profiteers, Eric Holder Crime Boss, Censorship, Monsanto Thugs
Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them
Appeals Court Rejects CIA Secrecy on Drones
Feds: No Warrant Needed to Track Your Car With a GPS Device
Cock-A-Doodle-Doo! Roosters Really Do Know What Time It Is by Circadian Rhythms
Former NSA director joins security firm Endgame’s board after it raises $23M
Eric Holder: Organized Crime’s Man of the Year
Google CENSORS AdBlock Plus from Play Store
What are my rights at CHECKPOINTS..?
Human Snatching Drones – Eagle Claw Design
Monsanto Protection Act EXPOSED
Every Week Night 12-1am EST (9-10pm PST)
– Click Image to Listen LIVE –
February 19, 2013 – Decrypted Matrix Radio: Obama Impeach Looming, DHS No Hesitation Targets, Bullet Buys, X-Ray Girl, Truth vs Lies
Obama Impeachment Commencing?
DHS Supplier Provides Shooting Targets of American Gun Owners
Feds buying enough bullets for ’24-year war’
The ‘Robocop’ headset that lets police see through walls and identify suspects just by LOOKING at them
Russian X-ray girl thrills Japanese scientists with her remarkable gift
Exposing Truth In The Face Of Lies
Every Week Night 12-1am EST (9-10pm PST)
– Click Image to Listen LIVE –
EXPERTS: “Feds Purposely Keeping U.S. Borders Wide Open”
Under the guise of environmentalism, various federal agencies and departments are blocking Border Patrol agents’ access to critical areas while contributing to widespread lawlessness along the U.S. border, according to experts. Criminals, meanwhile, are taking full advantage of the rapidly deteriorating situation.
Despite claims by the Obama administration that the American border is “safer” or “more secure” than ever, sources with knowledge of the reality on the ground say that is simply not true. In fact, as Mexico spirals deeper into chaos, conditions along the border are only getting worse — rapidly.
“Far from contained and secure, the Arizona Border remains a terribly dangerous sieve from which not only illegals enter America, but drug cartels operating as organized crime syndicates and even as terrorist cells are coming to and from across America’s supposed secure border,” noted private-sector intelligence analyst and border expert Lyle Rapacki with Sentinel Intelligence Services in an e-mailed briefing obtained by The New American.
And according to experts, the federal government itself is a major contributor to the problem. Its public-lands policies, for example, have essentially created vast “no-go” zones where the Border Patrol is barred from meaningful operations while criminals and traffickers run wild.
“Federal agencies are using environmental laws to keep agents from having unfettered access to the border and to pursue criminals on federal public land once the criminals have crossed,” Vice Chairman Zack Taylor of the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers (NAFBPO — symbolic badge shown above) told The New American. “The criminals have destroyed the federal public land and it makes no sense to keep Border Patrol off because it simply causes more damage.”
According to Taylor and other experts, the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture are the main culprits responsible for creating the dangerous situation. “It is a ploy of the open borders advocates to keep Border Patrol out and let the illegal aliens and drugs in,” he explained. “They are using the environmental protection laws to do that. That simple.”
And by restricting Border Patrol access to huge areas of public land — from Arizona and New Mexico to Montana and Idaho — the federal government is giving criminals the advantage. And they are using it to wreak havoc within America.
“If the agents cannot access the border area, they cannot patrol it,” Taylor noted. “The criminals then have an advantage and make good use of the advantage by smuggling drugs and aliens into the United States.”
Taylor said criminals occupy and monitor the vast off-limits areas to increase the chances of success in their smuggling operations. In some cases, traffickers’ networks of surveillance and communication can keep a constant view of corridors stretching from the Mexican border to Phoenix, he explained. And that makes bringing in drugs, illegal immigrants, and terrorists much simpler.
Of course, it is not just border states that are threatened. Hundreds of American cities now have active foreign-based criminal networks that operate with impunity. And very little is being done to stop it, experts say.
The press, meanwhile, has largely remained silent. “It is as if the administration has placed a gag order on them,” Taylor said. “They just won’t talk about it, much less report it.”
The state of Arizona has attempted to adopt some measures aimed at protecting citizens, but the Obama administration has responded with lawsuits and harassment. Lawmakers in the state, however, know that something must be done.
“Arizona is losing control of her sovereign land,” noted State Senator Sylvia Allen, chairman of the Arizona Senate Committee on Border Security. “Arizona is in a State of Emergency. If we want to protect our national and state sovereignty, we must secure our border and enforce our laws.”
Sen. Allen’s committee has heard testimony from citizens along the border area who reported home invasions, vandalism, theft, and a host of other criminal activities. Clearly, the state is facing a monumental crisis that needs to be addressed, she said. Yet, instead of helping, the federal government is making matters worse, according to a statement issued by Sen. Allen late last year. And the problems created by the executive branch are hardly isolated incidents.
“Why is the apparent official policy of the United States to ridicule and silence those who are trying to protect our state of Arizona? Why are the cartels protected?” she wondered. “Why do official U.S. government departments, sworn to protect American citizens, extend protection to gangs working with the drug cartels, and even to terrorists entering our nation from various border entry points?”
Sen. Allen and numerous other experts believe they know the answer — or at least part of it. The disastrous federal border policies, according to Allen, are connected to the emerging “North American Union” — a plan to essentially “merge” the United States with Mexico and Canada that is regularly and openly discussed by top officials including former Mexican President Vicente Fox, who told CNN that the merger is “inevitable.”
“There is a concerted, deliberate, and sophisticated program under way to erase our national boundaries and create a North American Union,” Sen. Allen explained. “The gift of sovereignty handed to us by our Forefathers would be extinguished, and we would become subjects, no longer free.”
Other critics of U.S. policies have noted the futility — insanity, perhaps — of fighting a multi-trillion-dollar terror war around the world and using the armed forces to secure land borders in Asia even as America’s own borders remain wide open for potential terrorists. Homeland Security, meanwhile, has been too busy hyping the threat of “right-wing extremism” to properly control the border. And the apparent lunacy does not end there.
The federal government is also shoveling billions of American tax dollars into the coffers of corrupt Latin American governments — purportedly to fight the “drug war” — even as narcotics flow virtually unhindered across wide swaths of the U.S. border. And if recent reports and statements by experts are to be believed, the problem goes even deeper than that.
The Obama administration is currently being investigated by Congress for trafficking thousands of high-powered weapons to Mexican drug cartels under Operation Fast and Furious. Some of those guns were later tied to the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
Meanwhile, lawmakers are also probing the administration’s money laundering activities through the DEA after a front page story in the New York Times exposed the scheme. According to sources and reports, the federal government may even be directly involved in fomenting the chaos south of the border: More than a few drug kingpins and some American officials have even said the U.S. government was purposefully providing weapons and protection to the criminal empires.
Another controversial policy that experts say is related to the overall plan is the President’s effort to provide covert “amnesty” for millions of illegal immigrants without even obtaining approval from Congress. “We have been betrayed by our leaders in a way that I just did not think was possible,” NAFBPO [National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers] Chairman and former Assistant Chief Patrol Agent Kent Lundgren explained in an exclusive interview with the Liberty News Network.
Critics of the policies — including lawmakers nationwide, NAFBPO, and countless other concerned groups — believe it is past time to rein in the administration and put an end to the lawlessness. But as Mexico descends into a bloody civil war that is seeping across the border, the time for action may be running out.
Related articles:
Border Group: Obama Amnesty “Contempt for Law”
WikiLeaks Exposes North American Integration Plot
Escalating Chaos on Our Border
Obama Scales Back Border Patrol Enforcement
Govt Proposes Unmanned Border Crossing from Mexico
Feds Prosecuted U.S. Border Agent for Mexico
ATF Linked to Border Agent’s Murder
Holder Admits Lies in Fast and Furious, Refuses to Resign
Internationalists Renew Call for a North American Union
Trafficker: U.S. Feds Aided Mexican Drug Cartel
Mexican Drug Trafficker Says He Worked With Feds
Reports: CIA Working with Mexican Drug Cartels
War on Drugs Grows FAST Abroad
Congress Probes DEA Drug Money Laundering Scheme
SOURCE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/10924-feds-purposely-keeping-us-borders-wide-open-experts-say