Context, Syntax

Context, Syntax

If 100 is compared to 75
The context, Syntax Defines the % Ratio
100 Dropping to 75 is a 25% loss
75 increasing to 100 is a 33.3% gain
75 is 75% of 100
100 is 100% of 100
Now if the Origin point is 100 then 75 increasing back to 100 is the same 100 Origin point and 0% change
If 75 is the Origin point then 100 decreasing to 75 is back to the same 75 origin point and 0% change again

This is where it gets tricky, Without Direction only a Focus point all possibilities are relevant
If 100 is the point of origin then 75 is seen as
25% loss or -25%, 33.3% gain or +33.3%, 75%, and both 75 and 100 are seen as 0% change to there own state regardless of the origin
If 75 is the Point of Origin then 100 is seen as
25% loss or -25%, 33.3% gain or +33.3%, 75%, and both 75 and 100 are seen as 0% change to there own state regardless of the origin

The Real Tricky part is in the use of Combination, Separation, and Multiplication...
100 can be Added, Subtracted, Multiplied, or Divided by 75
75 can be added, subtracted, multiplied, or divided by 100
The % these Ratios give are going to blow your mind, remember same Variables 75 and 100, yet Context and Syntax changed
100 added to 75 is 175 = +75% and 175%
100 subtracted from 75 is -25 = -125% or subtract 75 is 25 = 25%
100 Multiplied by 75 is 7500 = 7500% or +7400%
100 divided by 75 is 1.33 = 1.33%

75 Added to 100 is 175 = +75% and 175%
75 Subtracted from 100 is 25 = 25%
75 multiplied by 100 is 7500 = 7500% or +7400%
75 Divided by 100 = .75 or 1%

So just from the Simple Application of Mathematical Context, Syntax to 75 and 100 has resulted in % variables between -125% , to 7500%
If the Directional Context, Syntax is lost or misplaced but the % variable is retained then mixed with other syntax or Context's the Entire Perception Generated is Defective... and Hazardous...

If we add just one piece of Directional Focus to explain Context, Syntax Direction is Understood
A Point of origin dose not give the other Value a point of reference and so all its possible relationships are relevant
This means that the Relevance of DEPTH Perception Graded in an Orderly Understandable Fashion is the core or Syntax, Context
The Ability to Linguistically Communicate Syntax and Context Effectively is the core of Effective Translation

Without the relationship between values explained a point of origin : is like your home "point of origin" and if your at a different location and lost with no known relationship between the points all Possibilities are relevant yet irrelevant at the same time, until the relationship between points is explained and understood only then will the clear picture of different locations be one set obvious Context, Syntax rather then the mass of possible yet irrelevant uses of syntax, context without any factual or tangible variables that can correlate such a syntax, context Reinforcement or reliability over the other possibilities, nor rule the others out

a point of origin : is also like the amount of $ your house costs, while your current $ is different yet no context or syntax has been established are you still saving for the house so its a future point/plan/dream, or is it long in the past, It is being purchased, or sold? telling someone "house X$ i got y$ dose nothing to explain how the values relate

However if the Directional focus is taken to be irrelevant as in the use of semantics, Or Statistical Tricks then the (+/-) % is used to mask the underlying goal and the true intentional Context, Syntax Direction is being obfuscated through deliberate miss-perception reinforcement



Every Day, the Media, Advertising, Politics, Education, and Religions use a Mish-Mash of Spaghetti Syntax, Context to Confuse, Dumb-Down, and Program the Re-Education of Society to Parrot and Conform to Hypocrisy through CONSENSUS

This is why the Analysts, Intelligence operatives, Independent Critical thinkers who have the Intelligence, focus and will-power to find-out and understand are not so easy to SENSE CON like the rest of US

Fifth column

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column

A fifth column is a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group such as a nation from within, to help an external enemy.

Origin

The term originated with a 1936 radio address by Emilio Mola, a Nationalist General during the 1936–39 Spanish Civil War. As his army approached Madrid, a message was broadcast that the four columns of his forces outside the city would be supported by a "fifth column" of his supporters inside the city, intent on undermining the Republican government from within (see Siege of Madrid). The term was used as the title of Ernest Hemingway's only play, which he wrote while the city was being bombarded; the play was published in 1938 in his book The Fifth Column and the First Forty-Nine Stories.

In fact, this supposed "fifth column" did not prove very effective, as demonstrated by the fact that Madrid held out until 1939 despite very heavy fighting. Nevertheless, the term caught on and was used extensively, especially by those fighting the Fascists and Nazis.

The term was in wide use in Britain in the early stages of the Second World War where the fear of the fifth Column was used as justification for the mass internment, on the Isle of Man, of German nationals who resided in the United Kingdom. The United States and Canada interned U.S. and Canadian citizens of Japanese, German, and Italian descent around the same time (early 1940s), using similar justification.

Usage

With the grain requisition crises, famines, troubled economic conditions, and international destabilization in the 1930s, the leaders of the Soviet Union became increasingly worried about the possible disloyalty of diaspora ethnic groups with cross-border ties (especially Finns, Germans and Poles), residing along its western borders; this eventually led to the start of Stalin's repressive policies towards them, most notably to the national operations of the NKVD and forced population transfer.

In Europe, German minority organizations in Poland and Czechoslovakia formed the Selbstschutz and the Sudeten German Free Corps respectively , which actively helped the Third Reich in conquering those nations. After 1945, this was cited as justification for the wholesale expulsion of ethnic Germans from Czechoslovakia, Poland and the Soviet Union, as well as return to these countries of territories which had been annexed by Germany.

Modern usage

• North Koreans in Japan, particularly those affiliated to Chongryun (which is affiliated to the government of North Korea) may sometimes be seen this way by some Japanese and have been the victims of verbal and physical attacks, more frequently since the government of Kim Jong Il acknowledged it had abducted Japanese nationals and tested ballistic missiles.
• Some Israeli Jews, including politicians, rabbis, journalists, and even historians, have referred to the Arab citizens of Israel, 20% of Israel's population within the pre-1967 borders who are Arabs, as being a "fifth column" inside the State of Israel as Arab Israelis frequently identify more with the Palestinian cause of an independent state.

Pop culture

• Author and Radio Personality Michael Savage frequently claims that in the United States the Fourth Estate has now become the Fifth Column
• In the NBC mini-series, TV series & ABC TV series adaptions of V, a group of rebel aliens and humans call themselves "The Fifth Column".
• In the television series Stargate SG-1, the Jaffa resistance is sometimes referred to as the "Jaffa Fifth Column".
• In the MMORPG City of Heroes, the Fifth Column are a Nazi-themed terrorist organisation that has infiltrated the United States.
• Ernest Hemingway wrote a propaganda play in 1937 entitled The Fifth Column about the Spanish Civil War.
• The "Fifth Column" was a recurring nemesis for the Green Lama in the 1940s pulp stories.
• In the television series Jeremiah, forces of the Army of Daniel that infiltrated the Thunder Mountain complex of the Western Alliance were referred to as the "Fifth Column".
• The Agenda, a current affairs television program aired by TVOntario has a blog colled "The Fifth Column"

Note : Between the Re-Education Indoctrination, and the Current Strategic Systematic Global Agenda, Terrorists are today's Targets Labeled as "A Group of people who Morally Resist and Undermine the GLOBAL GOVERNMENT, GLOBAL RULER SHIP, GLOBAL SUBMISSION, GLOBAL CONTROL SYSTEM. The Conditioning process is aimed to gain subconscious support for the Detainment and persecution of anyone with the attitude they are Morally FREE of the Larger Corrupt Group "Global Governance Agenda", Enticing the Mentality of the Followers of the Larger Group of Global Governance Indoctrinated Puppets to Justify INTERNMENT of others who do not Submit and Follow the "Global Governance Agenda"

Freedom, Escaping the Matrix, Quadruple Integrity Mentality

If a Free man is not of a Quadruple Mentality his Delusional and already a Serf to the System...

When a Freeman is Captured, Indoctrinated and Re-Educated, he becomes a part of the System...
When a Freeman joins the system with his integrity intact, with the mask of the system used to blend in he is a double agent...
Of course the System knows about Double agents and has Triple agents who are part of the system that act like they are FREE to the System Insiders to gain trust and intelligence on the Double agents...
Their for only the Quadruple Freeman is on the lookout for such Scheming and is on guard for such a Triple cross...

Their for only those who are free with the Mentality that is aware of Infiltrators infiltrating Freedom movements within an oppressive indoctrinating control system are really FREE, the rest are just a Compartmentalized part of the system...

This is whats meant by Escaping the MATRIX...

UNESCO Chair admits organization was founded to push global governance

Source : http://mathaba.net/news/?x=624433

Under President Barack Obama

, US restated its commitment to work close with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

By Jurriaan Maessen, Aug 21, (infowars) -- This is another clear-cut example of Obama intent on joining ranks with an organization that feverishly promotes global governance.

Conspiracy theory? Unfortunately not.

During a meeting in 2009, Mr. Olabiyi Babalola Joseph Yai (pictured), Chair of UNESCO’s executive board, admitted the organization was created to “think global governance”:

“You will recall, dear colleagues, that I said, before Mr Ban Ki Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, that UNESCO’s role is to think global governance. That is why the Organization was founded. We come to the rescue of the system especially when the economic machine runs out of steam, as it clearly has today. It is thus a matter of urgency to set up a long-term working group on global governance. I hope that a State or group of States will seize on this worthy proposal, and that the Organization, as of this session, will give it the attention it warrants.”

The Chair also had a word or two on the current US president:

“And as the election of Barack Hussein Obama reconciles America with itself, and with the world, it invites to say, in solidarity, “I too am America”, and gives us “the audacity of hope” for the real return of the United States to this Organization.”

At her instalment as Secretary-General of UNESCO in October 2010, Irina Bokova stated:

“I am convinced of the need for global governance, founded on universal ethics, in order to take up these common challenges.”

These statements do not fall out of the clear blue sky. UNESCO’s founder, Vice President of the Eugenics Society and foremost transhumanist Julian Huxley explained why global governance is crucial in his UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy:

“Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”

Another “founding father” of the scientific dictatorship, Sir Bertrand Russell explained:

“Every government

that has been in control of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen …”

Obama's US Assassination Program? by Chuck Norris

Obama's US Assassination Program? Part 1

by Chuck Norris (more by this author)

Posted 07/27/2010 ET
Updated 07/28/2010 ET

Sound too conspiratorial to be true? Like the cover-up ops of spy novels? Well, it's reality. And it is possibly the most bizarre, inhumane and abusive way that the White House is expanding its power over the American people.

It's not an extremist belief or theory of the far right. It's a fact that has been confirmed by The New York Times, The Washington Post and MSNBC and even documented by the far-left online magazine Salon.com.

And it's the gravest nightmare of U.S. citizens and abandonment of our Constitution to date: a presidential assassination program in which U.S. citizens are in the literal scopes of the executive branch based upon nothing more than allegations of terrorism involvement as the branch defines it.

Of course, the CIA has executed covert assassinations of foreigners for decades. But tragically, Obama is expanding this program to include American, non-Islamic, stateside, homegrown terrorists.

It all started in January, when The Washington Post reported: "As part of the operations, Obama approved a Dec. 24 strike against a (Yemeni) compound where a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was thought to be meeting with other regional al-Qaeda leaders. Although he was not the focus of the strike and was not killed, he has since been added to a shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing or capture."

"A shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"?

That's right. No arrest. No Miranda rights. No due process. No trial. Just a bullet.

While the Obama administration continues its Bush-blaming for the economy, it is mega-morphing Bush policy in covert ops overseas, which was, according to the Post, "to kill U.S. citizens abroad if strong evidence existed that an American was involved in organizing or carrying out terrorist actions against the United States or U.S. interests."

Well, in recent weeks, the Obama administration has taken this overseas killing op to a new low: stateside assassinations.

A former director of national intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, confessed before Congress: "We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that."

If you are wondering who the "we" are to whom Adm. Blair refers, they are Smith, Wesson and the White House.

Now we know what deputy national security adviser John Brennan meant when he admitted in May, "And under President Obama, we have built upon the work of the previous administration and have accelerated efforts in many areas." (Remember when Bush's eavesdropping on U.S. citizens seemed harsh?)

Brennan further explained then that the problem of homegrown terrorists ranks as a top priority because of the increasing number of U.S. individuals who have become "captivated by extremist ideology or causes." He went on to say, "There are ... dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world and ... are very concerning to us."

Do you think "different parts of the world" doesn't include their country of origin?

Conveniently, the Obama administration also is integrating a pervasive plan to ensure the termination of radicals as the feds deem them abroad and domestic, too, with the resurrection of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, introduced by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif. Also known as H.R. 1955, it was passed in the House by the Democratic majority but was rejected by the Senate.

Everyone thought that legislation was dead until the Obama administration resurrected its tenets in its 52-page "National Security Strategy," released in May. So alarming is the feds' potential abuse of power that officials from London to the Kremlin are recognizing the threat to U.S. citizens.

The European Union Times reported, "Foreign Ministry reports circulating in the Kremlin today are warning that an already explosive situation in the United States is about to get a whole lot worse as a new law put forth by President Obama is said capable of seeing up to 500,000 American citizens jailed for the crime of opposing their government."

Woodrow Wilson, during his reign as president, incarcerated more than 2,000 U.S. citizens for speaking out against the government. And now for the first time since, a U.S. president is highlighting the threats of homegrown terror and literally hunting U.S. citizens as terrorists. One senior administration official said, "For the first time since 9/11, the (national security strategy) integrates homeland security and national security."

And what type of "integration" does that entail?

President Obama explained in an often overlooked statement within the "National Security Strategy": "We are now moving beyond traditional distinctions between homeland and national security. ... This includes a determination to prevent terrorist attacks against the American people by fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home."

Could it be any clearer? Right out of the horse's mouth. Or do I need to spell out what "fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home" means?

Remember the words "a shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"?

That's right. No arrest. No Miranda rights. No due process. No trial. Just a bullet.


Obama's US Assassination Program? Part 2

by Chuck Norris (more by this author)

Posted 08/03/2010 ET
Updated 08/03/2010 ET

Last week, I gave evidence of how the Obama administration is importing its overseas policy of assassination and implementing it stateside against U.S. citizens it deems as radical threats to American security and safety. (If you have not read Part 1, please do so before you read the rest of Part 2.)

I will reiterate a couple of key points. Deputy national security adviser John Brennan explained that the problem of homegrown terrorists ranks as a top priority because of the increasing number of U.S. individuals who have become "captivated by extremist ideology or causes." He went on to say, "There are ... dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world and ... are very concerning to us."

A former director of national intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, even confessed before Congress: "We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that."

President Barack Obama himself explained in an often overlooked statement within the "National Security Strategy": "We are now moving beyond traditional distinctions between homeland and national security. ... This includes a determination to prevent terrorist attacks against the American people by fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home."

Now it finally is coming to light why, back on Dec. 16, President Obama signed an executive order "designating Interpol as a public international organization entitled to enjoy certain privileges, exemptions, and immunities."

It all comes down to one basic verb. Can you find it in the following paragraph?

Obama's executive order reads, "By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL)..."

There's the magic verb: "to extend"!

As I wrote earlier in the year in a column on Interpol, titled "Obama's Secret Vault," is it also just coincidental that Interpol is exempt from typical American search and seizure laws?

Anyone still not connecting the dots?

There is one more titanic element that I must stress. The one overriding dilemma for Americans in Obama's hunt for homegrown terrorists is that he has changed the definitions of terrorism and terrorists. Their definitions no longer necessarily include or imply Islamic extremism or extremists.

Don't ever forget: Obama and his administration repeatedly have played down the actual threat of terrorism by Islamic jihadists. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama promised to close down Gitmo in the first year of his presidency because, he said, it was an affront to American values and justice. He also promised to end the "warrantless wiretaps" of George W. Bush. In March 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano proclaimed there is no terrorism -- only "man-caused disasters." In the same month, the Obama administration also proclaimed that there are "no enemy combatants" and "no war on terror" -- only "overseas contingency operations." And in May 2010, Brennan, Obama's top counterterrorism adviser, added, "Nor we do describe our enemy as 'jihadists.'"

Therefore, we are left to wonder: To the Obama administration, what exactly qualifies as radical extremism and terrorism, and who is on its "shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"? Consider even now who might fall into this category of non-Islamic, non-jihadist, stateside, homegrown terrorists. Do I need to make a list?

That's another thing that really chaps my hide. While Obama ratchets up the power and pursuit of homegrown U.S. terrorists, why in God's name is he loosening his grip over Muslim extremists who are planning, recruiting and seeking to carry out harm against the very U.S. citizens he has sworn to protect?

Am I missing something?

Has the White House not completely strayed when the president of the United States minimizes the role of Islamic jihadists, reserves the right to assassinate U.S. citizens regarded as terrorists without due process or a trial, increases the powers of law enforcement agencies (such as Interpol) that are not bound to search and seizure laws, sues the state of Arizona for enforcing illegal immigration and border control, and does nothing to prohibit an Islamic victory mega-mosque on the edge of ground zero?

I guess the Obama administration forgot to read the Dec. 4, 1981, Executive Order 12333, signed by then-President Ronald Reagan: "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination. ... No agency of the Intelligence Community shall participate in or request any person to undertake activities forbidden by this Order."

Tragically, the administration also is abandoning the fundamental principles of due process, habeas corpus and our Constitution, which states in the Sixth Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence."

God, help us. God, protect U.S. citizens. God, save our courts. God, save our land. God, restore our republic.

(Check out other reasons I oppose the Obama administration in my new patriot service announcement at http://www.BlackBeltPatriotism.com.)

Conclusive: Global Distribution of Rockefeller-Funded Anti-Fertility Vaccine Coordinated by WHO

Conclusive: Global Distribution of Rockefeller-Funded Anti-Fertility Vaccine Coordinated by WHO -Infowars

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
August 27, 2010

In addition to the recent PrisonPlanet-exclusive Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction — which outlines the Rockefeller Foundation’s efforts in the 1960s funding research into so-called “anti-fertility vaccines”– another series of documents has surfaced, proving beyond any doubt that the UN Population Fund, World Bank and World Health Organization picked up on it, further developing it under responsibility of a “Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation”.



Just four years after the Rockefeller Foundation launched massive funding-operations into anti-fertility vaccines, the Task Force was created under auspices of the World Health Organization, World Bank and UN Population Fund. Its mission, according to one of its members, to support:

“basic and clinical research on the development of birth control vaccines directed against the gametes or the preimplantation embryo. These studies have involved the use of advanced procedures in peptide chemistry, hybridoma technology and molecular genetics as well as the evaluation of a number of novel approaches in general vaccinology. As a result of this international, collaborative effort, a prototype anti-HCG vaccine is now undergoing clinical testing, raising the prospect that a totally new family planning method may be available before the end of the current decade.”

In regards to the scope of the Task Force’s jurisdiction, the Biotechnology and Development Monitor reported:

“The Task Force acts as a global coordinating body for anti-fertility vaccine R&D in the various working groups and supports research on different approaches, such as anti-sperm and anti-ovum vaccines and vaccines designed to neutralize the biological functions of hCG. The Task Force has succeeded in developing a prototype of an anti-hCG-vaccine.”

One of the Task Force members, P.D. Griffin, outlined the purpose and trajectory of these Fertility Regulating Vaccines. Griffin:

“The Task Force has continued to coordinate its research activities with other vaccine development programmes within WHO and with other international and national programmes engaged in the development of fertility regulating vaccines.”

Griffin also admitted to the fact that one of the purposes of the vaccines is the implementation in developing countries. Griffin:

“If vaccines could be developed which could safely and effectively inhibit fertility, without producing unacceptable side effects, they would be an attractive addition to the present armamentarium of fertility regulating methods and would be likely to have a significant impact on family planning programmes.”

Also, one of the advantages of the FRVs over “currently available methods of fertility regulation” the Task Force states, is the following (179):

“low manufacturing cost and ease of delivery within existing health services.”

Already in 1978, the WHO’s Task Force (then called Task Force on Immunological Methods for Fertility Regulation) underlined the usefulness of these vaccines in regards to the possibility of “large scale synthesis and manufacture” of the vaccine:

“The potential advantages of an immunological approach to fertility regulation can be summarized as follows: (a) the possibility of infrequent administration, possibly by paramedical personnel; (b) the use of antigens or antigen fragments, which are not pharmacologically active; and (c) in the case of antigens of known chemical structure, there is the possibility of large-scale synthesis and manufacture of vaccine at relatively low cost.”

In 1976, the WHO Expanded Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction published a report, stating:

“In 1972 the Organization (…) expanded its programme of research in human reproduction to provide an international focus for an intensified effort to improve existing methods of fertility regulation, to develop new methods and to assist national authorities in devising the best ways of providing them on a continuing basis. The programme is closely integrated with other WHO research on the delivery of family planning care by health services, which in turn feeds into WHO’s technical assistance programme to governments at the service level.”

Although the term “Anti-Fertility Vaccine”, coined by the Rockefeller Foundation, was replaced by the more bureaucratic sounding “Fertility Regulating Vaccine (FRV), the programme was obviously the same. Besides, The time line shows conclusively that the WHO, UN Population Fund and World Bank continued on a path outlined by the Rockefellers in the late 1960s. By extensions, it proves that all these organization are perfectly interlocked, best captured under the header “Scientific Dictatorship”. The relationshipbetween the WHO and the Rockefeller Foundation is intense. In the 1986 bulletin of the World Health Organization, this relationship is being described in some detail. While researching the effectiveness of “gossypol” as an “antifertility agent”, the bulletin states:

“The Rockefeller Foundation has supported limited clinical trials in China and smallscale clinical studies in Brazil and Austria. The dose administered in the current Chinese trial has been reduced from 20 mg to 10-15 mg/day during the loading phase in order to see if severe oligospermia rather than consistent azoospermia would be adequate for an acceptable, non-toxic and reversible effect. Meanwhile, both the WHO human reproduction programme and the Rockefeller Foundation are supporting animal studies to better define the mechanism of action of gossypol.”

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

In August of 1992, a series of meetings was held in Geneva, Switzerland, regarding “fertility regulating vaccines”. According to the document Fertility Regulating Vaccines (classified by the WHO with a limited distribution) present at those meetings were scientists and clinicians from all over the globe, including then biomedical researcher of the American Agency for International development, and current research-chief of USAID, Mr. Jeff Spieler.

In 1986 Mr. Spieler declared:

“A new approach to fertility regulation is the development of vaccines directed against human substances required for reproduction. Potential candidates for immunological interference include reproductive hormones, ovum and sperm antigens, and antigens derived from embryonic or fetal tissue.(…). An antifertility vaccine must be capable of safely and effectively inhibiting a human substance, which would need somehow to be rendered antigenic. A fertility-regulating vaccine, moreover, would have to produce and sustain effective immunity in at least 95% of the vaccinated population, a level of protection rarely achieved even with the most successful viral and bacterial vaccines. But while these challenges looked insuperable just a few years ago, recent advances in biotechnology- particularly in the fields of molecular biology, genetic engineering and monoclonal antibody production- are bringing antifertility vaccines into the realm of the feasible.”

“Vaccines interfering with sperm function and fertilization could be available for human testing by the early 1990s”, Spieler wrote.

In order for widespread use of these vaccines, Spieler writes, the vaccine must conquer “variations in individual responses to immunization with fertility-regulating vaccines”.

“Research”, he goes on to say,”is also needed in the field of “basic vaccinology”, to find the best carrier proteins, adjuvants, vehicles and delivery systems.”

In the 1992 document, the problem of “variations in individual responses” is also discussed:

“Because of the genetic diversity of human populations”, states the document, “immune responses to vaccines often show marked differences from one individual to another in terms of magnitude and duration. These differences may be partly or even completely overcome with appropriately engineered FRVs (Fertility Regulating Vaccines) and by improvements in our understanding of what is required to develop and control the immune response elicited by different vaccines.”

The picture emerging from these facts is clear. The WHO, as a global coordinating body, has since the early 70s continued the development of the Rockefeller-funded “anti-fertility vaccine”. What also is becoming clear, is that extensive research has been done to the delivery systems in which these anti-fertility components can be buried, such as regular anti-viral vaccines. It’s a mass-scale anti-fertilization programme with the aim of reducing the world’s population: a dream long cherished by the global elite.

I-Dosing Bineural-Beats

Bi Neural - Beats is the REAL TERM
Its simply the SENSE Receptor's Ability to Receive SENSE DATA at 2 Different Frequencies, and the Process where the difference is Subtracted leaving the Resonant FREQUENCY
Example
100 Hertz in right ear, 107 Hertz in left ear "Cycles per second" the BRAIN will Subtract 100 from 107 and Equate 7 Cycles per second as a RESONANT FREQUENCY

THE BRAIN WAVES OPPERATE IN THE 1-40 CYCLES PER SECOND Hence the ability to Change and modify BRAINWAVE ACTIVITY

Now LAWS ARE BEING PASSED, making it a CRIME ON PAR WITH ILLEGAL DRUG USE
WHY?
Music producers have been slipping this technology in to song and advertising to INDUCE THE HYPNOTIC BRAINWAVE ACTIVITY, or the LUST AND WANT implantable MALLEABLE BRAINWAVE STATE
Whats the Concern?
If someone is unaware of the INDUCED STATE BEING INDUCED, they are able to be slipped in to states that they normally would not be in or even sometimes able to access...
This technology THREATENS THE ESTABLISHMENT'S CONDITIONING PROGRAMING, as it may INDUCE CRITICAL THINKING OR ENLIGHTENED PERSPECTIVES THAT WOULD BE BLOCKED BY INDOCTRINATED SOCIAL CONDITIONING "Much like Marijuana"

http://www.infowars.com/i-dosing-another-excuse-for-government-control-over-our-lives/

I-Dosing: Another Excuse for Government Control Over Our Lives

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 24, 2010

I don’t know about you, but I am not about to run out and experiment with the latest fad, known as “i-dosing,” a gimmick that supposedly uses binaural tones to create euphoria. “Simply put, i-dosing is the attempt to achieve a perceived drug ‘high’ from listening specially-engineered sounds and music,” reports Psychology Today. “Is it a real drug? Probably not.”

But don’t tell that to the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. The government agency has declared that i-dosing induces the same kind of mind-altering effects as marijuana, cocaine, peyote, and opium. “Kids are going to flock to [i-dose websites] just to see what it is about and it can lead them to other places. If you want to reach these kids and save these kids and keep these kids safe, parents have to be aware, and they’ve got to take action,” said Mark Woodward, the spokesman for the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs.

So dire is the threat, Oklahoma’s Mustang High School recently sent home letters to parents warning them of the dangers of i-dosing.

State lawmakers and Congress have yet to catch on and propose draconian laws to prevent this scourge from spreading. But give them time.

Back in 2001 a link between heavy television watching and Alzheimer’s disease was discovered, but the government is not clamoring to outlaw the idiot box or pass laws limiting the number of hours spent before it.

Real honest pharmaceutical drugs — antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — are in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans. In addition, illegal drugs like cocaine and LSD end up in water, as a studies in Europe reveal. Not only are public officials not doing anything about this involuntary form of drug dosing, they are refusing to disclose results of pharmaceutical screenings.

But never mind this involuntary dosing — so-called researchers are now advocating the government put lithium in the water in order to curb suicide. “We already know that lithium can act as a powerful mood stabilizer for people with bipolar disorder, and treating people with lithium is also associated with lower suicide rates,” said one researcher, who added that this outrageous prospect “certainly merits more investigation.”

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Eventually the corporate media will hype the exaggerated threat posed by i-dosing to the point where the government will dream up and enforce – ultimately by way of SWAT team – myriad laws that will add thousands of individuals to the state’s prison-industrial complex.

Kurt Nimmo edits Infowars.com. He is the author of Another Day in the Empire: Life In Neoconservative America.