Consumercidal Happenings

Christina England
Vac Truth
January 20, 2012

The end of last year was masked with sadness for Belgium parents Raphaël Sirjacobs & Béatrice Dupont, as their nine week old daughter Stacy Sirjacobs lost her fight for life. Stacy died just one week after her first vaccinations and left her twin sister Lesly behind. Devastated by their loss their parents are convinced that vaccines and hospital failures were the cause of their beautiful daughters death.

Stacy and Lesly were born one month premature by Caesarean section and spent the next four days in an incubator. Stacy needed resuscitation at birth.

Following medical advice parents Sirjacobs and Dupont decided to have the twins vaccinated. Stacy was slightly unwell with a cold on the day of her vaccinations but doctors assured her parents that it was safe to give her the vaccinations.

(It is worth noting that there is a history of Sudden Infant Death and allergies in the family. The twins were being prescribed a milk supplement due to a milk allergy at the time Stacy became ill)

The twins received Prevenar, a vaccine against meningitis and pneumonia, Infanrix Hexa, a six in one vaccination for diphtheria, tetanus, polio, pertussis, hepatitis B and Haemophilus type B, and finally the Rotarix, a preventive vaccine for gastroenteritis.

This means that these tiny vulnerable babies received a staggering nine vaccines in one day, vaccines that may have caused one of them to die.

A week after her vaccinations Stacy became unwell with a fever of 39.9 degrees C. Her parents decided to administer Perdolan to lower her fever. As their daughter was still very poorly they called the hospital who advised them to bring their daughter in.

The medical staff diagnosed Stacy with a slight chest infection and infection in her blood and told her parents not to worry as this was “not serious”. Stacy was then given medication and put on a drip feed and kept in for observation.

Stacy’s father informed me that all links to the vaccines were strongly denied.

Despite Stacy having a heartbeat of 200 to 230 beats per minute the pediatrician told her parents that she was fine and that she was probably suffering from gastroenteritis (an illness that this little girl had been vaccinated against!).

The worried couple decided not to leave their daughter and remained by her bedside. During the evening they informed the nurse that their daughter had diarrhea but to their astonishment, they were told that the baby had been changed and they were to let her get some sleep and change her when she woke up.

During the night, Stacy continued to suffer ‘abnormal diarrhea’, and despite frantic pleas from her parents the nurse refused to do anything, even though by this time Stacy was restless and in obvious distress. Stacy’s father says that they reported to nursing staff that Stacy was covered in small red spots and had difficulty breathing.

According to Stacy’s father, Stacy’s medical records states that at 19.45 a doctor telephoned his brother to ask his permission to do a lumbar puncture and put Stacy on the antibiotic Ampire, while they were awaiting the results. Authorization was denied …

Stacy died a short time later.

Stacy’s father says: (translated from French by Google translate)

“The nurse 23h phone to the pediatrician to inform him that the little Stacy is worse, this one happens to 11:45 p.m. ET begins to make attempts at resuscitation. He informed at the time the parents that the baby is not breathing on their own, and asks them to leave the room. Would follow three hours, during which everything is sought to revive the girl, who is declared dead at 3am. But in fact, the heart stopped beating Stacy at midnight.

The pediatrician then began to explain to parents that the little one died of sepsis and meningitis, while in order to make such a diagnosis, it would have had to do a lumbar puncture which was not performed, or that would have required at least one blood culture or stool, the results will not be known until 3 or 4 days”.

Stacy’s death was recorded as: ‘Meningitis’.

It is interesting and extremely sad that this little girl died of an illness that she was vaccinated against just one week before she died. It is obvious from the information that I have from the father that this tiny vulnerable baby was left to suffer in considerable pain, dirty and in distress, whilst the pleas of her parents were ignored.

Vaccinations are administered to a child based on the age of the child from the day that they are born. Due to the advances in medicine, babies are being saved at an earlier and earlier stage in their development. We know that Stacy was born at approx one month premature, which means that she was given her eight week old vaccinations at just a month old; she was also unwell at the time she was vaccinated. It is my opinion that her small immature immune system could not cope with the onslaught of deadly toxins and chemicals that are in our vaccines today.

Stacy’s devastated parents are so outraged by what they have discovered since their baby’s death, that they are now asking the world to join them in a worldwide protest. They want the world to hold a global event in memory of Stacy and the many hundreds of children that have been killed or injured by vaccinations worldwide. They feel that vaccine deaths are being covered up and ask the citizens of the world to stand united for one day against vaccine damage. They say:

We are the parents of Stacy, who died a week after HER first vaccines; we are organizing a global event in honor of Stacy, Nova and all other vaccine victims worldwide. We are summoning every citizen of every country to take to the streets in their own cities, towns and villages: things must now change!

Remember to invite local journalists, the media and any victims or parents of victims prepared to tell their story. Make placards, banners and signs: UNCENSORED VACCINE INFORMATION, FREEDOM OF CHOICE!

The event is to be held on the January 20th 2012. If it is not possible for you to attend one of the many protests that are being held, then perhaps you could go along to your local church and light a candle to register your protest at what is happening around the world.

Sirjacobs and Dupont are right; something radical does need to be done to make the authorities listen to parents.

Vaccine deaths are being reported around the world at an alarming rate. In May 2010 The Times of India (2) reported that 128 deaths had occurred during the previous year and the figure appeared to be rising with each year. Their report suggested that the Indian government was covering up vaccine deaths. Arun Ram reporting for the Times wrote:

“The government tries to pass on every death as unrelated to vaccine. It sometimes merely does a culture of the vaccine in question. Just because a vaccine is not found to be contaminated, it doesn’t mean the vaccine has not caused the death,” says Dr Puliyel.

In March 2011 Neil Z miller (3) wrote that in the USA more than 2,000 babies died after receiving pneumococcal and Hib vaccines and yet nothing whatsoever was done. He reported that whilst these vaccines were suspended in Japan after just four deaths, the news of over 2000 deaths in the USA was barely even reported. According to Miller, Paul Offit had called the Japanese authorities foolish, saying that the babies probably died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). In fact he passed their deaths off as anything he could, except the vaccines that is. Miller wrote:

According to Paul Offit, media spokesperson for the vaccine industry, “the Japanese Ministry of Health was foolish to suspend the Hib and pneumococcal programs.” Offit thinks the deaths were probably caused by SIDS, or underlying conditions, or another cause – anything except the vaccines. Often, children get sick and die by chance.

Actually, Paul Offit could be right, many of the vaccinated babies could be dying as a result of SIDS because in May 2011 an interesting article hit the internet by storm stating that a study published in the Journal of Human and Experimental Toxicology found that the countries that administered the highest number of vaccines during the first year of life experienced higher infant mortality rates. (4)

This is not new because studies have been stating that vaccines were causing children to die for many years.

The Pourcyrous study (5) was the first study to examine the impact of multi-vaccinations on the immature brain. It is clear from the results of this study that the more vaccines a child has, the larger impact the vaccines have on the child’s brain. Massroor Pourcyrous, MD, Sheldon B. Korones, MD, Kristopher L. Arheart PhD, Henrietta S. Bada, MD studied 239 preterm infants who were given either a single vaccine or multiple vaccines, their results are as follows:

Abnormal elevation of CRP level occurred in 85% of infants administered multiple vaccines and up to 70% of those given a single vaccine. Overall, 16% of infants had vaccine-associated cardiorespiratory events within 48 hours postimmunization. In logistic regression analysis, abnormal CRP values were associated with multiple vaccines (OR, 15.77; 95% CI 5.10-48.77) and severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (OR, 2.28; 95% CI 1.02-5.13). Cardiorespiratory events were associated marginally with receipt of multiple injections (OR, 3.62; 95% CI 0.99-13.25) and significantly with gastroesophageal reflux (GER) (OR, 4.76; 95% CI 1.22-18.52).

This study has had so much impact that it has now being quoted in papers and books on adverse reactions to vaccines and SIDS worldwide.

As today saw the news that yet another vaccine is to be added to babies vaccine schedule, the Meningitis B vaccine (6), we to ask ourselves how many Stacy’s will it take before action is taken?

This article has been written in memory of Stacy Sirjacobs and the many hundreds of babies who have lost their life after receiving what the governments tell us are ‘safe vaccines’.

Sources:

1. Citizen Action for Uncensored Vaccine Information and Freedom of Vaccination Choice – 20th January 2012 http://sanevax.org/citizen-action-for-uncensored-vaccine-information-and-freedom-of-vaccination-choice-20th-january-2012/
2. Daily Paul reporting on The Times of India article written by Ron Paul http://www.dailypaul.com/166249/128-kids-died-after-vaccine-in-2010-govt-cant-say-why-the-times-of-india
3. Neil Z Miller http://ebookcashstreams.com/HotNewsBlog/2011/03/2000-babies-died-in-the-united-states-after-receiving-vaccines/
4. New Study: More Vaccines Increase Infant Mortality Rates http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/05/04/0960327111407644
5. The Pourcyrous Study The Journal of Pediatrics http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476%2807%2900185-0/abstract
6. Daily Mail – New vaccine against deadly meningitis B ‘will be available in the spring’ by Jenny Hope http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2088176/New-vaccine-deadly-meningitis-B-available-spring.html#ixzz1jpErW3Ff

To: English Wikipedia Readers and Community
From: Sue Gardner, Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director
Date: January 16, 2012

Today, the Wikipedia community announced its decision to black out the English-language Wikipedia for 24 hours, worldwide, beginning at 05:00 UTC on Wednesday, January 18 (you can read the statement from the Wikimedia Foundation here). The blackout is a protest against proposed legislation in the United States – the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate – that, if passed, would seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.

This will be the first time the English Wikipedia has ever staged a public protest of this nature, and it’s a decision that wasn’t lightly made. Here’s how it’s been described by the three Wikipedia administrators who formally facilitated the community’s discussion. From the public statement, signed by User:NuclearWarfare, User:Risker and User:Billinghurst:

It is the opinion of the English Wikipedia community that both of these bills, if passed, would be devastating to the free and open web.

Over the course of the past 72 hours, over 1800 Wikipedians have joined together to discuss proposed actions that the community might wish to take against SOPA and PIPA. This is by far the largest level of participation in a community discussion ever seen on Wikipedia, which illustrates the level of concern that Wikipedians feel about this proposed legislation. The overwhelming majority of participants support community action to encourage greater public action in response to these two bills. Of the proposals considered by Wikipedians, those that would result in a "blackout" of the English Wikipedia, in concert with similar blackouts on other websites opposed to SOPA and PIPA, received the strongest support.

On careful review of this discussion, the closing administrators note the broad-based support for action from Wikipedians around the world, not just from within the United States. The primary objection to a global blackout came from those who preferred that the blackout be limited to readers from the United States, with the rest of the world seeing a simple banner notice instead. We also noted that roughly 55% of those supporting a blackout preferred that it be a global one, with many pointing to concerns about similar legislation in other nations.

In making this decision, Wikipedians will be criticized for seeming to abandon neutrality to take a political position. That’s a real, legitimate issue. We want people to trust Wikipedia, not worry that it is trying to propagandize them.

But although Wikipedia’s articles are neutral, its existence is not. As Wikimedia Foundation board member Kat Walsh wrote on one of our mailing lists recently,

We depend on a legal infrastructure that makes it possible for us to operate. And we depend on a legal infrastructure that also allows other sites to host user-contributed material, both information and expression. For the most part, Wikimedia projects are organizing and summarizing and collecting the world’s knowledge. We’re putting it in context, and showing people how to make to sense of it.

But that knowledge has to be published somewhere for anyone to find and use it. Where it can be censored without due process, it hurts the speaker, the public, and Wikimedia. Where you can only speak if you have sufficient resources to fight legal challenges, or if your views are pre-approved by someone who does, the same narrow set of ideas already popular will continue to be all anyone has meaningful access to.

The decision to shut down the English Wikipedia wasn’t made by me; it was made by editors, through a consensus decision-making process. But I support it.

Like Kat and the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation Board, I have increasingly begun to think of Wikipedia’s public voice, and the goodwill people have for Wikipedia, as a resource that wants to be used for the benefit of the public. Readers trust Wikipedia because they know that despite its faults, Wikipedia’s heart is in the right place. It’s not aiming to monetize their eyeballs or make them believe some particular thing, or sell them a product. Wikipedia has no hidden agenda: it just wants to be helpful.

That’s less true of other sites. Most are commercially motivated: their purpose is to make money. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a desire to make the world a better place – many do! – but it does mean that their positions and actions need to be understood in the context of conflicting interests.

My hope is that when Wikipedia shuts down on January 18, people will understand that we’re doing it for our readers. We support everyone’s right to freedom of thought and freedom of expression. We think everyone should have access to educational material on a wide range of subjects, even if they can’t pay for it. We believe in a free and open Internet where information can be shared without impediment. We believe that new proposed laws like SOPA and PIPA, and other similar laws under discussion inside and outside the United States, don’t advance the interests of the general public. You can read a very good list of reasons to oppose SOPA and PIPA here, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Why is this a global action, rather than US-only? And why now, if some American legislators appear to be in tactical retreat on SOPA?

The reality is that we don’t think SOPA is going away, and PIPA is still quite active. Moreover, SOPA and PIPA are just indicators of a much broader problem. All around the world, we’re seeing the development of legislation intended to fight online piracy, and regulate the Internet in other ways, that hurt online freedoms. Our concern extends beyond SOPA and PIPA: they are just part of the problem. We want the Internet to remain free and open, everywhere, for everyone.

Make your voice heard!

On January 18, we hope you’ll agree with us, and will do what you can to make your own voice heard.

Sue Gardner,
Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation

Rosemary Mathis, Vice President of Victim Support, SANE VAX, INC.

(NaturalNews) On January 12, 2011 the Annals of Medicine published a ground-breaking peer-reviewed paper titled, Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?, 1written by renowned researchers Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., and Christopher Shaw, Ph.D., with the Neural Dynamics research Group, University of British Columbia, in Vancouver. 2.

The article points out to the medical community what most consumers now know about the fraudulent global health agency policies in combination with the pharmaceutical companies lack of science based evidence demonstrating the safety and efficacy of Gardasil and Cervarix before they were unleashed on unsuspecting parents of adolescents.

Clinical Trials on Healthy People vs. Mass Vaccination Campaigns

Tomljenovic and Shaw clearly state the obvious in their abstract by stating that vaccines represent 'a special category of drugs generally given to healthy individuals and therefore a small level of risk for adverse reactions is acceptable.'

Merck's clinical trials were flawed because they used an aluminum adjuvant as a 'placebo' and only used saline as a comparative for minor, non-serious adverse reactions. With serious adverse reactions, they pooled the results from the saline group and the aluminum 'placebo' group. By doing this, they concealed the true rate of serious reactions.

If FDA approved drugs and vaccines were as safe and effective as Pharma would like consumers to believe the risk level should be negligible to none. The FDA removal of drugs after they have been on the market and damaged desperate people looking for cures who then have to file lawsuits to recover damages is simply unacceptable.

Medical Ethics Questioned

The authors also point out the myth of informed consent - basically a waiver signed by medical consumers that they have been 'educated' about the risk vs. benefit ratio of the drug about to be administered. Tomljenovic and Shaw open their paper citing that 'medical ethics demand that vaccination be carried out with the participant's full and informed consent' and not just the handing out of the HPV vaccine Patient Product Insert - prepared by none other than the vaccine's manufacturer.

What the authors do not cover in this paper is what happens to informed consent when governments grant children the right to consent to medical procedures, such as California's recent passage of AB 499 - basically granting parental rights of children ages 12 and older to the state for the treatment of STD's. Is it really because the 'state' knows better - or is it because legislatures have been paid off by the pharmaceutical companies?

The authors go on to state:

"What is more disconcerting than the aggressive marketing strategies employed by the vaccine manufacturers is the practice by which the medical profession has presented partial information to the public, namely, in a way that generates fear, thus promoting vaccine uptake.........It thus appears that to this date, medical and regulatory entities worldwide continue to provide inaccurate information regarding cervical cancer risk and the usefulness of HPV vaccines, thereby making informed consent regarding vaccination impossible to achieve."

Money Talks - Nobody Walks - but the Vaccine Injured

According to Maplight California - a web site that reveals money's influence on politics, contributions from interest groups to CA legislators who supported the bill were $2,174,648 - more than 28 times the $76,404 given to interest groups who opposed the bill.It is also interesting to note that republican based groups and pro-life groups were on the dissenting side vs. the overwhelming number of liberal and democratic groups supporting the bill.

Similar bills are now in front of South Carolina and Florida legislatures. We are now personal witnesses to the erosion of medical ethics encouraged by politicians abundantly rewarded with special interest contributions.

Tomljenovic and Shaw continue their message by reminding medical professionals that 'contrary to claims that cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide, existing data show that this only applies to developing countries. In the Western world cervical cancer is a rare disease with mortality rates that are several times lower than the rate of reported serious adverse reactions (including deaths) from HPV vaccination.'

The author's state - what should become the mantra of all medical practitioners and consumers concerned about vaccine safety and efficacy:

Future vaccination policies should adhere more rigorously to evidence-based medicine and ethical guidelines for informed consent.

Tomljenovic and Shaw cite these key messages:

- To date, the efficacy of HPV vaccines in preventing cervical cancer has not been demonstrated, while vaccine risks remain to be fully evaluated.

- Current worldwide HPV immunization practices with either of the two HPV vaccines appear to be neither justified by long-term health benefits nor economically viable, nor is there any evidence that HPV vaccination (even if proven effective against cervical cancer) would reduce the rate of cervical cancer beyond what Pap screening has already achieved.

- Cumulatively, the list of serious adverse reactions related to HPV vaccination worldwide includes deaths, convulsions, paraesthesia, paralysis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), transverse myelitis, facial palsy, chronic fatigue syndrome, anaphylaxis, autoimmune disorders, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolisms, and cervical cancers.

- Because the HPV vaccination programme has global coverage, the long-term health of many women may be at risk against still unknown vaccine benefits.

- Physicians should adopt a more rigorous evidence-based medicine approach, in order to provide a balanced and objective evaluation of vaccine risks and benefits to their patients.

- The almost exclusive reliance on manufacturers' sponsored studies, often of questionable quality, as a basis for vaccine policy-making should be discontinued.

- Greater efforts should be made to minimize the undue commercial influences on academic institutions and medical research, as this influence may impede unbiased scientific inquiry into important questions about vaccine science and policies.

- Passive adverse event surveillance should be replaced by active surveillance to better understand the true risks associated with vaccines, particularly new vaccines.

The abstract of Tomljenovic and Shaw's paper, Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds? is posted on the SANE Vax Inc. web site. The entire paper can be accessed via this link on or after January 12. Share the 12-page paper with your medical practitioner, school nurses, and boards of education considering enforcing state legislation, and parents or guardians considering HPV vaccination for their child. Should you have difficulty accessing the entire paper you may contact the corresponding author via email at lucijat77@gmail.com.

The entire paper can be accessed via this link on or after January 12. Share the 12-page paper with your medical practitioner, school nurses, and boards of education considering enforcing state legislation, and parents or guardians considering HPV vaccination for their child.

Medical consumers need to demand the healthcare industry stop focusing on 'drug policies' and direct efforts toward uncovering science-based evidence to identify those actually at risk for the disease. As Tomljenovic and Shaw readily point in their dissertation on the HPV vaccine, the risk of cervical cancer is relatively small to justify a mandatory mass vaccination program with vaccines of questionable safety.

SaneVax Inc. views the presentation of partial and/or non-factual information regarding cervical cancer risks and the usefulness of HPV vaccines, as cited above, to be neither scientific nor ethical. These practices do not serve public health interests, nor are they likely to reduce the levels of cervical cancer. Independent evaluation of HPV vaccine safety is urgently needed and should be a priority for government-sponsored research programs.

Sources:

1.Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?Annals of Medicine,

http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/ebm/record/22188159/full_citation/Human_papillomavirus__HPV__vaccine_policy_and_evidence_based_medicine:_Are_they_at_odds

2. Maplight California -AB 499 - An Act to Amend Section 6926 of the Family Code, Relating to Minors

http://maplight.org/california/bill/2011-ab-499/1007609/total-contributions

Story by Norma Erickson and Leslie Carol Botha of SANEVAX, INC.

Please visit our site at http://sanevax.org/

About the author:
THE SANE VAX MISSION is to promote Safe, Affordable, Necessary & Effective vaccines and vaccination practices through education and information. We believe in science-based medicine. Our primary goal is to provide the information necessary for you to make informed decisions regarding your health and well-being. We also provide referrals to helpful resources for those unfortunate enough to have experienced vaccine-related injuries.

Articles on this site are written by Norma Erickson, President and Leslie Carol Botha, women's health educator, broadcast journalist and Vice-President Public Relations for SANE Vax, Inc. We also allow content from various contributing authors. Other members include Rosemary Mathis, mother of a Gardasil-injured daughter and Vice President Victim Support; Janny Stokvis, Vice-President Research, Freda Birrell, Secretary and HPV vaccine lobbyist United Kingdom /Scotland, and Linda Thompson, Treasurer.

We are demanding the HPV vaccines be taken off the market until an independent study on their safety and efficacy has been conducted. Until then, we are committing our efforts to an educational media campaign to alert the public about the dangers of the HPV vaccines.

SANE Vax, Inc. is involved in the ground-breaking production of the One More Girl Documentary which will premier in 2012. Please join our cause by contributing to this project by contacting Ryan Richardson, Producer at ryan@onemoregirlfilm.com.

For more information, please visit our site at http://sanevax.org/.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034636_vaccinations_quack_science_medical_journals.html#ixzz1jf7SSzw9

A good summary of the situation with Steve Jobs recent & sad demise is reprinted from Mercola.com below. The statements by Dr Gonzalez are most helpful in understanding the Jobs situation and that of pancreatic cancer and orthodox medicine more generally.

Below that article is a copy of the writing on Job's death by Orac from scienceblogs. Not that he is to be agreed with on much that he says, but the approach he is taking is useful for one thing. Ordinarily his writing would be discounted as pure orthodox pseudoskeptic rubbish, but in this case he actually points out the usual reflexive orthodox pseudoskeptic reaction in some other skeptics, earning him merit for actually applying some thought to the issues at stake. Most unusual!

download gonzalez article in pdf here

=> Read more!

This will only be available until next Sunday, 9th October, so see it now.

The big day has finally arrived and the doors are now open to the FREE Food Matters Online Screening Event!

The full movie is located here:
http://www.FoodMatters.tv/ScreeningEventCinema

Grab a comfortable chair, a big glass of water, a notepad and pen and get ready to write notes!

Remember, you can pause, fast forward and rewind the movie at any time.

Doors close midnight Saturday the 8th of October along with the 50% off special offer on the Food Matters DVD and Detox Guide.

Enjoy Food Matters. We are very proud of the documentary and are excited to be sharing this information with the world!

Let's use this information to make the world a happier and healthier place!
In good health,

James & Laurentine
Producer / Directors 'Food Matters'
www.foodmatters.tv
enquiries@foodmatters.tv

Vaccine proponents have long used a ridiculous false dichotomy between methyl and ethyl mercury as a supposed reason to keep injecting toxic mercury into our children's veins. The research below puts the practice into serious question. Of course, pharmaco has known for a long time about the toxicity of the adjuvant ethyl mercury: this is why they do not do such research as provided by Dr King below.

By Eileen Dannemann
Vaccine Liberation Army
September 29, 2011

The vaccine purveyors often argue that “ethylmercury” compounds (THIMEROSAL) are safe, while admitting that “methylmercury” compounds are harmful.

Hence industry uses the FDA-approved purportedly “safe” ethlymercury compound found in Thimerosal.
Having thoroughly reviewed two key published studies on mercury metabolism, one in rats and one in human infants, what Dr. Paul G. King noticed and articulated, among other realities, in his latest posting is that during the metabolic process in the human and animal bodies the supposedly “harmless” ethylmercury compound, Thimerosal, is metabolized (converted) into the toxic and “harmful” methylmercury.

And then in turn, the harmful methylmercury is metabolized (converted) into the most harmful, long-term-toxic, “inorganic” mercury that is retained in bodily tissue.

In the rat study, which Dr. King cites, the lab rats were raised for the purpose of this study and had no reported mercury levels in their blood before the experiment.

There were three groups in the study:
1. A test group of Thimerosal-(ethylymercury)-treated rats;
2. A test group of methylmercury-chloride-treated rats; and
3. A control group of rats treated with a ‘water’ placebo.

At the end of the experiment, as expected, the water-treated control group had no reported levels of mercury in their blood or organs.

The group treated with methylmercury chloride (which vaccine purveyors routinely “sound bite” as the harmful organic mercury as compared to the “safe” Thimerosal, ethylmercury), as expected, had both methylmercury and inorganic mercury in their blood and organs.
Note: “Inorganic” mercury is the end product of mercury metabolism.

The methylmercury subject group confirmed that the metabolic pathway for mercury in the human and animal body consists in the reduction/conversion of the harmful methylmercury into a more harmful “inorganic” mercury which is tissue-bound, and long-term-toxic.

Hence, both the originating substance (methylmercury) and its conversion/reduction, inorganic mercury was found.

The Thimerosal Group: Unexpectedly, the rats treated with Thimerosal (ethylmercury) were found to have three types of mercury in the blood samples and their organs, ethylmercury (the originating “supposedly harmless” compound), methylmercury (the admittedly harmful compound) and inorganic mercury (the most harmful, tissue bound end product of mercury metabolism).

This observation begs an answer to the question: Where did the “methylmercury” come from since this group was only originally and solely treated with Thimerosal (an “ethylmercury” compound)?
Based on the published findings in the three groups of rats, the metabolic pathway for organic mercury involves the conversion of Ethylmercury (Thimerosal) into “methylmercury” and then the further reduction of “methylmercury” into inorganic mercury.

It may be that some of the “ethylmercury” (from Thimerosal) are also directly converted into inorganic mercury.

However, there are apparently no studies, in either humans or other animals, that establishes the biochemical conversion of ethylmercury compounds directly into the “inorganic” mercury.

In conclusion, in simple layman’s terms, these studies, as brought to light by Dr. King, establish that ethylmercury (Thimerosal), a “supposedly harmless” compound of mercury according to the vaccine establishment, is converted in the rat [1] and apparently in the human infant [2] into “methylmercury” which, the establishment admits is a harmful form of mercury.

It is then further reduced to the long-term most harmful, “inorganic mercury” that bioaccumulates in the tissues and organs.

Based on these findings, we can conclude that injecting the Thimerosal (ethylmercury), found in flu shots, into pregnant women (exposing the in utero fetus to mercury [see Table I on page 15 of Dr. King’s posting ( http://dr-king.com/docs/110915_PGKReviewOfUSSubmissionToUNEP_b.pdf )] and the egregious recommendation that children should be vaccinated, annually with Thimerosal-preserved inactivated-influenza vaccines from 6 months of age until 18 years of age is a perplexing interwoven government/pharmaceutical health strategy that afflicts, debilitates and destroy the lives of individuals and their families in the United States (US) and in any other nation that: a) recommends inactivated-influenza vaccines for pregnant women and children, b) permits those flu shots to be Thimerosal-preserved and c) follows the US recommendations for annual flu shots.

P.S. One more interesting observation: At sacrifice, the rats in the group that had been treated with Thimerosal-ethylmercury (supposed the harmless compound) had significantly higher levels of the long-term, harmful “inorganic” mercury in their brains than the rats in the methylmercury-chloride-treated group.

Perhaps we should inject the harmful methylmercury directly into our children’s arms instead of Thimerosal (ethylmercury).

It appears that if we use the harmful form of mercury right off the bat, there is less inorganic mercury in our children’s brains. But, on the other hand, if the establishment wants more inorganic mercury in our children’s brains and organs (which it appears they do) lets stick with Thimerosal.

The pharmaceutical companies stand to gain when we make our children sicker and sicker by injecting them first in-utero and then consistently, year after year, with a known and extremely dangerous neurotoxin.

And both the government and the pharmaceutical companies stand to gain when they injury the emerging generation with vaccines, misdiagnose them as mentally ill (Autistic, ADD, ADHD, Biopolar, OCD, etc.) and then dumb them down with a life long supply of psyche drugs which, according to the Mayo Clinic is resulting in the birth of an epidemic of deformed offspring.

References:
[1]Rodriques JL, Serpeloni JM, Batista BL, Souza S, Barbosa Jr F. Identification and distribution of mercury species in rat tissues following administration of Thimerosal or methyl mercury. Arch Toxicol 2010; 84: 891-896.
[2]Pichichero ME, Gentile A, Giglio N, Umido V, Clarkson T, Cernichiari E, Zareba G, Gotelli C, Gotelli M, Yan L, and Treanor J. (2008) Mercury Levels in Newborns and Infants After Receipt of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines. Pediatrics 2008; 121(2): e208-e214.

Eileen Dannemann is the founder, Student Vaccine Liberation Army
Contact information: Ncowmail@gmail.com

The rumors that mercury will be banned in vaccines and that vaccine promoters are quaking in their boots are wishful thinking. The coming treaty will allow mercury in vaccines. Here's the proof.
by Heidi Stevenson

1 September 2011

It's been bandied about that mercury will be banned in vaccines by a United Nations treaty. It isn't true. Claims that vaccine promoters are quaking in their boots are, sadly, mistaken. The stories are based on the fact that there is a mercury treaty being planned by the UN Environment Program, and that all nations signing it will be forced to go along with whatever it decides. However, it's deciding in favor of mercury in vaccines, not against it.

In fact, the UN has already prepared a document, "Addressing health in the mercury instrument", available here in PDF format, that addresses the issue. It belittles claims of mercury's danger in vaccines and makes statements that mercury is safe in vaccines. Yes, those statements are false—but when did that ever stop the vaccination juggernaut? And when was the UN ever against it?

Let's get real here. There is obviously an enormous and powerful campaign to keep mercury in vaccines. It's backed by Big Pharma, which are the biggest and most profitable multinational corporations in the world, and the biggest and nastiest governments in the world. While it's a nice dream, the simple fact is that the UN, which is in thrall to multinational corporations, will bow to their will.

The Geiers are American doctors who have studied mercury in vaccines and oppose it. Yes, it's true that the Geiers testified about the dangers of mercury in vaccines. Yes, of course their information is good. But that does not translate into an international ban on mercury in vaccinations. The document produced by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Addressing health in the mercury instrument (Advance copy), makes its views clear—and it belittles the Geiers' claims.
The UNEP Document's Claims

In the "Mercury Instrument", they claim that ethyl mercury, the formulation in vaccination's thimerosol, is safe. The document goes to great lengths to show that mercury in vaccines is perfectly safe, citing carefully selected documentation from the World Health Organization (WHO), the US Institute of Medicine (IOM), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the UK Committee on Safety of Medicine, the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, and several countries, including the US, Canada, Croatia, Japan, Norway, and Tajikistan.

The bottom line here is that, if the UN had the Geier brothers speak on the issue of mercury in vaccines, it was only for show. They had no interest in what the Geiers found or say. Their goal is to give an impression of allowing all views to be presented, and then do exactly what they set out to do in the first place: write a treaty that makes mercury in vaccinations legal.

As is discussed later, the implications will likely be far more dire than simply allowing mercury in vaccinations. Most likely, countries will be forced to allow manufacturers to use it!

Here's what the document says about the Geiers' testimony:

[A WHO agency] also reviewed a series of studies by Geier and Geier alleging reduction of neurodevelopmental disorders in the United States of America following discontinuation of thiomersal-containing vaccines in the national immunization programme. The Committee found a number of limitations, including: ... The Committee therefore found the conclusions made by these authors unconvincing.

The "Mercury Instrument" quotes the following in support of mercury in vaccines:

U.S. Institute of Medicine (2001). "The hypothesis that thimerosal exposure through the recommended childhood immunization schedule has caused neurodevelopmental disorders is not supported by clinical or experimental evidence."
American Academy of Pediatrics (2003). "No scientific data link thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines with any pediatric neurologic disorder, including autism."
UK Committee on Safety of Medicine (2003). "There is no evidence of harm caused by doses of thiomersal in vaccines, except for hypersensitivity reactions (such as allergic skin reactions). There is no evidence of a link between hypersensitivity reactions and the development of autism."
European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (2004). "Recent Evidence Supports Safety of Thiomersal Containing Vaccines."

Mercury Apologists Don't Have the Facts, But That Doesn't Matter

While it's true that the mercury-in-vaccines lobby does not have the real facts, it's never been true that it mattered. The usual methods of faking the science and simply yelling louder and louder that they have the truth has worked up to this point. There is no reason to believe that an agency in thrall to the same powers that the vaccine lobby bows to will behave in a manner that's any different.

As the UNEP's "Addressing health in the mercury instrument" clearly shows, the facts don't matter. The powers that be want mercury in vaccines. Therefore, they will have mercury in vaccines—and they will have a UN treaty guaranteeing it.
The Most Likely Result of a UN Mercury Treaty

It's clear that the UN has no intention of banning mercury in vaccinations. Thus, the likely result of a mercury treaty will be to force countries that now have restrictions on mercury use in vaccines to allow it.

Treaties are now written for the benefit of corporations, not for the benefit of nations or their people. The mercury treaty—which will state that mercury is safe for use in vaccines—will likely prevent nations from banning it. The result will almost certainly be exactly the opposite of the current claims being bandied about on the internet. Instead of mercury being banned from vaccines, countries may find that they are unable to ban its use by vaccine manufacturers.

By signing a treaty that specifically states that mercury may be used in vaccines, it will probably be illegal for signatory nations to refuse vaccines that contain mercury! So, be prepared to discover that single-vial vaccines will start to disappear, replaced by cheaper multi-dose vials with the mercury-laden preservative, thimerosol.

No, the upcoming mercury treaty will not ban mercury in vaccines. Instead, it will most likely have the opposite effect. It will probably prevent nations from banning mercury-laden vaccines.

Monsanto is literally trying to take over agriculture. To this end, they are buying out seed companies. You can help save one that's pledged to organic non-GM seeds.
by Heidi Stevenson

3 September 2011
Landreth Seed Catalog

The oldest American seed company needs your help. They sell nothing but heirloom organic seeds. There isn't a single genetically modified variety in stock. Landreth has been a gardener's mainstay for well over 200 years. But they're about to go under because of a corporate bank's insistance that a loan be paid in full by the end of the month.

Monsanto is taking over seed companies, and now owns 40% of the seed business. If their goal is to broaden seed varieties, they have a strange way of demonstrating it. It's growing more and more difficult to find organic seeds, and Monsanto's business methods have shown their desire to force out all seed varieties that aren't genetically modified, requiring ongoing payments to them.

You can help prevent this dark future by purchasing one of Landreth's gorgeous, locally published and printed, catalogs. It could become a collectible item—and if enough are sold by the end of this month, will pay off Landreth's loans, freeing it to continue as a bright spot in gardening and a hope for the future of agriculture. See more about it here.

=> Read more!

(Previous version of this notice stated that Merck had claimed no viral DNA in the Gardasil vaccine for "the last year." It has been corrected to read, "the last five years.")

Dear Canary Party members,

Please take a moment to read this press release from our friends at S.A.N.E. Vax. They tested 13 vials of the Gardasil vaccine, from six different countries, and found that all were contaminated with genetically modified HPV DNA. The vaccine maker Merck, has claimed for the last five years on the package insert that the vaccine contains NO viral DNA. That claim quietly disappeared from the insert this past April, without any explanation, warning or notice being offered to the pubic.

This is especially important information to get into the public view, as California has just passed a law allowing children as young as 12 to be given the vaccine with out parents even knowing about it.

As you read, keep in mind that the National Institutes of Health holds a patent on the technology that makes the HPV vaccine possible, profiting off of every HPV vaccine sold, and what that might mean with respect to the Department of Health and Human Services taking appropriate action on all the emerging and glaring problems with the these vaccines.

Please read and pass on to your lists and contacts.

Gardasil victim found to have HPV DNA in her blood 2 Years Post-Vaccination
13 different vaccine vials – 13 different lots of Gardasil from around the world tested
Results – 100% contamination with HPV Recombinant DNA.

SANE Vax Inc. contracted with an independent lab to test for contamination and found HPV recombinant DNA (rDNA) in 13 vaccine vials. The Gardasil vials with different lot numbers were from New Zealand, Australia, Spain, Poland, France and three states in the U.S. 100% of the samples tested positive for the presence of the genetically modified HPV DNA.

Dr. Sin Hang Lee, a pathologist at the Milford Hospital pathology laboratory well-known for using
cutting-edge DNA sequencing for molecular diagnoses, was initially contracted to examine a single sample of Gardasil for possible contamination. This sample tested positive for recombinant HPV-11 and HPV-18 residues, both of which were firmly attached to the aluminum adjuvant.

In a certified letter mailed to FDA Commissioner, Dr. Margaret Hamburg on August 29, 2011, SANE Vax Inc. requested ‘the FDA investigate the extent of the HPV DNA contamination in the Gardasil HPV4 vaccine currently on the market and take appropriate actions to ensure public safety regarding future shipments.’ 1.

Why Did SANE Vax Inc. Investigate Possible Gardasil Contamination?

The mother of a sexually naïve adolescent girl who developed acute onset Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis within 24 hours of her last injection of the Gardasil™ series contacted SANE Vax Inc. looking for more information.

In an effort to help her now very sick daughter the mother went to an MD practicing naturopath who conducted a toxicity test that eventually found HPV DNA in the girl’s blood. The significance of this finding is that it is highly unusual to find HPV DNA in the blood. HPV, if present in the body, exists in the epithelial (skin and mucosa) membranes. HPV or its DNA, by itself does not survive for any great length of time in the bloodstream. Why was the HPV DNA in her bloodstream two years post-vaccination?

Natural vs. Recombinant DNA

According to Dr. Lee, “‘Natural HPV DNA does not remain in the bloodstream for very long. However, the HPV DNA in Gardasil™ is not ‘natural’ DNA. It is a recombinant HPV DNA (rDNA) – genetically engineered – to be inserted into yeast cells for VLP (virus-like-particle) protein production. rDNA is known to behave differently from natural DNA. It may enter a human cell, especially in an inflammatory lesion caused by the effects of the aluminum adjuvant, via poorly understood mechanisms.

“Once a segment of recombinant DNA is inserted into a human cell, the consequences are hard to predict. It may be in the cell temporarily or stay there forever, with or without causing a mutation. Now the host cell contains human DNA as well as genetically engineered viral DNA.”
What is a Recombinant DNA Virus?

Recombinant DNA (rDNA) refers to novel DNA molecules engineered by joining natural or synthetic DNA segments to other DNA molecules so that they can replicate in a living cell. The possibility for these replicable forms of DNA as uncertain toxic substance or as environmental hazard has been a concern since rDNA technology was invented in 1973. Thus, rDNA is considered a potential biohazard, and NIH has mandated that research institutions monitor and regulate its use.2.
All recombinant or genetically engineered DNAs are considered potential biohazards if injected intramuscularly into the body. Merck’s Gardasil™ HPV4 vaccine is administered intramuscularly – as are many other vaccines. However, Gardasil™ is the first vaccine found to be contaminated by a genetically engineered DNA used to manufacture virus-like particle proteins for the vaccine.
SANE Vax Inc. believes the FDA should have required Merck to test for, evaluate and quantify the risks of residual recombinant HPV DNA in Gardasil™ before granting approval for marketing the vaccine. SANE Vax Inc. believes the FDA should require every lot of Gardasil™ be tested for residual HPV DNA prior to shipment.

Gardasil Patient Product Insert Stated No Viral DNA’s in the Vaccine.

In fact, Merck’s Gardasil™ Patient Product Inserts stated that there is ‘no viral DNA’ in the Gardasil vaccine. That is until April 2011 – when the line was glaringly absent from U.S. product inserts. 3.
The European Medicines Agency on line literature still states: ‘Gardasil is an adjuvanted non-infectious recombinant quadrivalent vaccine prepared from the highly purified virus-like particles (VLP’s) of the major capsid L1 protein of HPV types 6, 11, 16 and 18. The VLP’s contain no viral DNA; they cannot infect cells, reproduce or cause the disease.’ 4. SANE Vax Inc.’s research found that 100% of the 13 samples tested were contaminated with viral HPV DNA residue, including a synthetic construct for HPV11 major capsid protein L1 gene, a recombinant DNA genetically engineered specifically for manufacturing of the Gardasil vaccine. All DNA residue discovered was firmly attached to the insoluble aluminum adjuvant in the vaccine, requiring a new protocol for detection.5.

Dr. Lee firmly stated: “Based on medical literature and some of the FDA/Merck’s own publications, adventitious (coming from an outside source) DNA in an injectable protein-based vaccine may increase the risk of autoimmune disorders and gene mutation which may lead to malignancies.”
Merck, the FDA, CDC and the NCI Owe Medical Consumers Answers

SANE Vax Inc. wants to know how many adolescents who have suffered adverse reactions post Gardasil vaccination have HPV DNA in their blood. What are the medical ramifications should HPV DNA remain in the bloodstream for an extended period of time?
Does the aluminum adjuvant become the carrier for HPV DNA causing said DNA to remain in the blood and/or organs for an extended length of time?

Since viral DNA cannot replicate by itself (it needs a host cell) what happens if genetically engineered viral DNA enters a human host cell?

How will this now ‘genetically-engineered cell’ replicate? Will it mutate the host cell leading towards cancer?

How will genetically engineered cells affect the reproductive health of future generations?
How does the immune system react to the detection of a combination viral DNA and human DNA in what was once a ‘normal’ cell? Will the immune system fight the now genetically engineered human cell?

Medical consumers need to have these questions answered by Merck, the FDA, CDC, and NCI.

SANE Vax Inc.’s Position

SANE Vax Inc. believes the FDA and Merck should be transparent and tell medical consumers the potential health impacts the contaminant HPV DNA has brought upon the vaccinated children of the world. High rates of autoimmune disorders, 380 reports of abnormal pap tests, 137 reports of cervical dysplasia, and 41 reports of cervical cancer including Carcinoma in situ or Cervix carcinoma or Cervix carcinoma stage 0 or Cervix carcinoma stage I or Cervix carcinoma stage III 6 warrants an immediate investigation into Gardasil’s™ safety and efficacy.

SANE Vax Inc. believes the FDA and Merck should have tested, evaluated and quantified the risk of the residual recombinant HPV DNA in Gardasil™ before vaccine approval.

SANE Vax Inc. believes that both the FDA and Merck were at least negligent and perhaps fraudulent when claiming there was ‘no HPV (viral) DNA’ in the Gardasil™ vaccine.

Sources:
1. SANE Vax Inc. Letter to FDA Requesting Investigation into Gardasil Contamination
2. Policy on the use of Bio-hazardous Agents and Recombinant DNA in Research and Teaching Laboratories at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro
3. Gardasil™ Patient Product Insert
4. EMEA Scientific Discussion on Gardasil
5. Gardasil Contaminants by Country
6. VAERS Data

The direct link to SANE Vax's press release is here. http://sanevax.org/sane-vax-inc-discovers-potential-bio-hazard-contaminant-in-merck%E2%80%99s-gardasil%E2%84%A2-hpv-4-vaccine/ Please spread the word to your contacts and local media outlets.

Ginger Taylor, M.S.
Executive Director

A new Nature Medicine study may provide insight into why there's so much autoimmune disease today. Have the authors unintentionally pointed to the smoking gun that even vaccinators must acknowledge?
by Heidi Stevenson

29 July 2011

Adjuvants are known to increase the ability of vaccines to cause the immune system to make antibodies. Aluminum has been used because it's particularly effective. However, how it works was unknown until a study just published in the journal Nature Medicine. What they found is quite disturbing. Aluminum in vaccines causes cell death, but not of a normal sort, as in apoptosis.

This may be the explanation for much of the autoimmune disease that's experienced by so many people today. Freestanding DNA and other bits of cells are not normal.

=> Read more!

By Servando González
April 6, 2003
NewsWithViews.com

In a short, but forceful article, Peter Sparacino pointed out that constitutional tools are no longer valid in our losing battle against a government out of control, rapidly becoming a totalitarian dictatorship. According to Sparacino, neither the ballot box, nor the jury box can be used to stop its advances -- not even the cartridge box. The only thing left to fight back, he states, is freedom of the press.

But, as media critic A.J. Liebling rightly expressed, freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. Though in theory the opportunity to own his own printing press was open to every American citizen, in practice just a few, and lately only the very rich and powerful, were able to own one.

Granted, the media monopoly was never total, and many small presses proliferated, but the big ones, later joined by the network TV channels, just played the game, giving the false image of independent thinking. But suddenly, less than ten years ago, a technological breakthrough changed the rules of the game in a radical way, bringing about what media guru Marshal McLuhan envisioned more than thirty years ago: the global village. This revolutionary new medium is the Internet.

The Internet is a totally new type of communication medium that has changed our lives. It allows for easy, fast, and cheap exchange of ideas in an optimum way. Thanks to the Internet, owning your own press is as cheap as $20 a month. Almost anybody can afford it.

As soon as the people realized the power of the tool they had in their hands, many began using the Internet not only to gather the information they wanted, but also to become themselves providers of information. Sites offering the most surprising, contradictory, interesting, and useful information mushroomed, soon to be followed by many offering not-so-useful, in-your-face, sometimes disgusting or plainly gross content. But, even with its nasty aspects, the Internet radically changed the way most of us get the daily news.

Initially, the powerful media giants, both in printed and TV form, ignored the Internet as a curiosity or a passing fad. But sites like the Drudge Report, NewsMax, or WorldNetDaily, just to mention a few of the most successful, soon began attracting more and more readers, while newspapers like the New York Times, the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times began losing theirs. Soon after, the big TV networks experimented their own dramatic loss of viewers.

Faced with the strong, unexpected competition, the media giants joined the Internet bandwagon, but they were in for a big surprise. Contrary to the traditional printed media and TV, where money plays a cardinal role -- only the very rich can afford to hire the qualified personnel and promote and market the product -- the Internet seems to be a pure product of the human intellect. As the extraordinary success of the Drudge Report indicates, most people don't visit a site because it has a fancy design or is professionally made, but because it is a place where they can find provoking, non-mainstream ideas that make them think; exactly the type of thinking they were not able to find in the orchestrated, self-censored mainstream media. Consequently, a site made by a housewife right from her kitchen in Hot Springs, Arkansas, or by an almost unknown journalist from his home office in Oregon or Florida, can compete on equal footing with the New York Times. This is exactly how extraordinarily successful sites like the Drudge Report and WorldNetDaily were born. Like the Colt .44 in the Old West, the Internet became the great equalizer.

But the people who control the media monopoly were not going to see their power challenged without a fight. After their initial skepticism and scorn, and their failed attempts to extend their media monopoly to the Internet, they began a subtle process of infiltration. For example, I was surprised when, in June, 2001, the notorious Alexander Haig Jr. joined NewsMax's advisory board. It is probably only a coincidence, but lately NewsMax has become a sort of mouthpiece for the Republican Party and an uncritical provider of the Bush administration's propaganda. Its most recent no-brainer is a "boycott France" campaign. I stopped visiting the site several weeks ago. On the other hand, if only half of what I found in this article is true, perhaps NewsMax's problems have deeper roots than I thought.

There is a saying in Latin America: "A los periodistas se les paga o se les pega." ("Journalists: you buy them or you hit them.") I don't think it is much different here. I expect that after some unsuccessful attempts to derail some of the most successful sites, just to bring an example, the media powers will try to buy them. But, even though I don't think it would be easy for them to do it, and they may resort to strong arm tactics, the bottom line is that, because of its inherent characteristics -- the Internet is an off-shoot of the Arpanet, a military communications decentralized nodular network designed to survive a full scale nuclear attack on the U.S. -- the Internet is uncontrollable. It is a Hydra of innumerable heads.

They can keep buying and coercing people and eventually may get control over the most successful Internet sites, but other people will come forward, and their sites will rapidly become extremely successful. The attempts of the media monopolists to control the Internet the way they managed to get control of the printed press, the TV channels, and, most recently, am radio, will never be successful. Currently, they are extremely concerned about such a powerful tool in the hands of the American people. The Internet has become a growing obstacle to their plans.

Therefore, what will they do? Very simple: They will destroy it. The only solution to solve the Internet's growing challenge to the media monopoly is to shut it down and throw the key away.

How it will happen? One of these days, out of the blue, the Internet will be used for launching a devastating terrorist attack on the United States. Somehow, this cyberattack will cost the lives of scores of American citizens. In order to avoid more damage, the government, putting to good use the recently approved anti-terrorist laws, will shut the Internet down and ban the use of the Internet as we know it.

But most government agencies rely heavily on the Internet. How can they function without it? No problem. The replacement already exists; it is called Internet 2, reportedly a consortium being led by more than 200 universities working in partnership with industry and government to develop and deploy advanced network applications and technologies, accelerating the creation of tomorrow's Internet. But, contrary to the deceptive techno-babbling rhetoric, Internet 2 is nothing more than a controlled Internet, similar to the one currently in place in totalitarian countries like China and Cuba.

Internet 2 will be fully controlled by the state. In order to access it, or to have e-mail access, you must be a member of, or be affiliated to, any of the government-authorized organizations and have a sort of security clearance. Internet 2 will be out of the reach of the general public, and every person trying to have unauthorized access to Internet 2 will be charged with terrorist activities, and severely penalized

The unavoidable fact is that the Internet is incompatible with a totalitarian system of government. Therefore, either we are a bunch of delusionary paranoids, and what we see happening in this country is only a figment of our feverished imagination, and, consequently, the Internet will not be banned, or we are right, and it will disappear. Actually, the disappearance of the current free Internet will serve as a litmus test that will accurately mark our final loss of freedom.

The banning of the Internet, the cancellation of the Second Amendment rights, and the closing of our borders -- not to stop illegals from entering the country, but to stop Americans from fleeing it -- in exactly that order, will be important steps in the implementation of this evil plan.

In the meantime, hope for the best, and enjoy the Internet while you can.

© 2003 Servando González - All Rights Reserved

Servando González is a Cuban-born American writer. Among his most recent books are The Secret Fidel Castro: Deconstructing the Symbol and The Nuclear Deception: Nikita Khrushchev and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Currently he is working on Fidel Castro Supermole, the second volume of a trilogy he is writing on Castro. E-Mail: servando@earthlink.net