Putting out the eyes of the Beast.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Friday, February 15, 2013
Meteorite Hits Russia! [HD] Feb 15th 2013
Here is an entire list of videos with footage: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLx0y_xxEQ4_fBHB_x4tSujJNcgcjporba
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
Dumbed-down populations accept outrageous vaccine logic
Dumbed-down populations accept outrageous vaccine logic
by Jon Rappoport
February 5, 2013
www.nomorefakenews.com
I've written articles attacking the theory and practice of vaccination from a variety of angles. But the whole issue also needs to be approached from the perspective of logic.
Unfortunately, generations of people have been shut out of learning logic in school. They don't know what it is. Therefore, vaccine advocates have been able to peddle their basic theory without much challenge.
It's time to put an end to that free ride.
First of all, I need to point out a massive contradiction. When a person receives a vaccine, it's said that his body produces antibodies against a particular germ and this is a good thing. Vaccination thus prepares the body for the day when that germ will really make its attack, at which point the immune system (including antibodies) will mount a successful defense.
However, let's look at another venue: for many diseases, when a person is given a blood test to see if he is infected, quite often the standard for infection is "presence of antibodies."
This makes no sense at all. If vaccination produces those antibodies, it is heralded as protection. But if a diagnostic blood test reveals those same antibodies, it's a signal of infection and disease.
Vaccine-produced antibodies=health. Antibodies naturally produced by the body=illness.
Logically speaking, you resolve a contradiction by dropping one of the two sides and admitting it is false. Or you go deeper and reject some prior premise that led to the contradiction in the first place.
So let's go deeper. What does vaccination supposedly do to "prepare" the body against the future invasion of a particular germ? It stimulates the production of antibodies against that germ.
Antibodies are immune-system scouts that move through the body, identify germs, and paint them for destruction by other immune-system troops.
However, since the entire immune system is involved in wreaking that destruction, why is bulking up one department of the immune system---antibodies---sufficient to guarantee future protection?
On what basis can we infer that bulking up antibodies, through vaccination, is enough?
There is no basis. It's a naked assumption. It's not a fact. Logic makes a clear distinction between assumptions and facts. Confusing the two leads to all sorts of problems, and it certainly does in the case of vaccination.
Furthermore, why does the body need a vaccine in order to be prepared for the later invasion of germs? The whole structure/function of the immune system is naturally geared to launch its multifaceted counter-attack against germs whenever trouble arises. The antibodies swing into action when a potentially harmful germ makes its appearance, at age five, eight, 10, 15.
It's said that vaccination is a rehearsal for the real thing. But no need for rehearsal has been established.
And why are we supposed to believe that such a rehearsal works? The usual answer is: the body remembers the original vaccination and how it produced antibodies, and so it's better prepared to do it again when the need is real. But there is no basis for this extraordinary notion of "remembering."
It's another assumption sold as fact.
The terms "prepared for the real thing," "rehearsal," and "remember" aren't defined. They're vague. One of the first lessons of logic is: define your terms.
A baby, only a few days old, receives a Hepatitis B vaccine. This means the actual Hep-B germ, or some fraction of it, is in the vaccine.
The objective? To stimulate the production of antibodies against Hep-B. Assuming the baby can accomplish this feat, the antibodies circulate and paint those Hep-B germs for destruction now.
From that moment on, the body is ready to execute the same mission, if and when Hep-B germs float in the door.
But when they float in the door, why wouldn't the body produce antibodies on its own, exactly as it did after the vaccination was given? Why did it need the vaccination to teach it how to do what it naturally does?
And why should we infer the baby body is undergoing an effective rehearsal when vaccinated, and will somehow remember that lesson years later?
The logic of this is tattered and without merit.
To these arguments of mine, some vaccine advocates would say, "Well, it doesn't matter because vaccines work. They do prevent disease."
Ah, but that is a different argument, and it should be assessed separately. There are two major ways of doing that. One, by evaluating claims that in all places and times, mass vaccination has drastically lowered or eliminated those diseases it was designed to prevent. And two, by a controlled study of two groups of volunteers, in which one group is vaccinated and the other isn't, to gauge the outcome.
Let's look at the first method of assessment. Those who claim that vaccines have been magnificently effective in wiping out disease have several major hurdles to overcome. They have to prove, for each disease in question, that when a vaccine for that disease was first introduced, the prevalence of the disease was on the rise or was at a high steady rate in the population.
Why? Because, as many critics have stated, some or all of these diseases were already in sharp decline when the vaccines were introduced for the first time.
For example: "The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition." Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977
In other words, for reasons having nothing to do with vaccination, the diseases were on the way out. Nutrition had improved, sanitation was better, etc.
So let's see the proof, for every disease which vaccines are supposed to prevent, that those diseases were significantly raging in the population when the vaccines were first introduced.
Then let's also see proof that, after the introduction of vaccines, the diseases in question weren't merely given new labels (or redefined) to hide the fact that they weren't really going away. There is testimony, for example, that in America, the definition of paralytic polio was changed after the introduction of the Salk vaccine, and by the new more restricted definition, far fewer cases of polio could be diagnosed---thus making it seem the vaccine was effective.
There are also questions about the success of the famous smallpox vaccine campaign in Africa and Latin America. When all was said and done, were new cases of smallpox then diagnosed as meningitis? Was destruction wreaked by the vaccine then called AIDS?
Researchers, including Robert Gallo, have warned that the smallpox vaccine, when given to people whose immune systems are already grossly weakened, can destroy what's left of the immune system---and immune-defense destruction is the hallmark of the definition of AIDS.
The second major way of assessing the success of mass vaccination is through a proper controlled study.
For any vaccine, this is how it would be done. Assemble two large groups of people. Total, at least eight thousand. Make sure these two groups are very well matched. That means: similar in age; very similar in medical history and medical drug history; similar exposure levels to environmental chemicals; very close nutritional levels, status, and dietary habits.
The first group gets the vaccine. The second group doesn't. They are tracked, with very few dropouts, for a period of at least eight years. The INDEPENDENT researchers note how many from each group get the disease the vaccine is supposed to prevent. They note what other diseases or health challenges the volunteers encounter.
Such a study, using these proper standards, has never been done for any vaccine.
If that fact seems rather illogical, you're right. It is.
Finally, vaccine advocates need to prove that substances in vaccines like mercury, formaldehyde, and aluminum, although classified as toxic when studied alone, are somehow exonerated when shot directly into the body through a needle. The (absurd) logic of this needs to be explained fully.
This is not a matter of claiming that "a particular disease," like autism, isn't caused by a particular chemical, like mercury. That's a logical ruse all on its own. We are talking about harm caused by toxins under any name or no name. When a person ingests cyanide, do we say he has a disease? Of course not.
Children in school, their parents, and teachers have never been exposed to logic, so it's easy to sell them vaccines as valid. But selling is not the same thing as science.
And "being a scientist" is not the same thing as knowing what science and logic actually are. The same fact can be applied to news anchors, public health officials, and politicians. They can say "the evidence for vaccinating is overwhelming," but so can a parrot in a cage, with enough training.
Of course, these so-called experts won't come out and engage in a serious debate about the theory and practice of vaccination. They refuse to.
Millions of people around the world would eagerly watch a true extended debate on the subject. Such debate used to be a standard practice when logic was studied, when it was understood to be vital for deciding the truth or falsity of a position.
Now, it's all about PR and propaganda, the modern version of logic for the dumbed-down crowd. ~
Jon Rappoport
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
by Jon Rappoport
February 5, 2013
www.nomorefakenews.com
I've written articles attacking the theory and practice of vaccination from a variety of angles. But the whole issue also needs to be approached from the perspective of logic.
Unfortunately, generations of people have been shut out of learning logic in school. They don't know what it is. Therefore, vaccine advocates have been able to peddle their basic theory without much challenge.
It's time to put an end to that free ride.
First of all, I need to point out a massive contradiction. When a person receives a vaccine, it's said that his body produces antibodies against a particular germ and this is a good thing. Vaccination thus prepares the body for the day when that germ will really make its attack, at which point the immune system (including antibodies) will mount a successful defense.
However, let's look at another venue: for many diseases, when a person is given a blood test to see if he is infected, quite often the standard for infection is "presence of antibodies."
This makes no sense at all. If vaccination produces those antibodies, it is heralded as protection. But if a diagnostic blood test reveals those same antibodies, it's a signal of infection and disease.
Vaccine-produced antibodies=health. Antibodies naturally produced by the body=illness.
Logically speaking, you resolve a contradiction by dropping one of the two sides and admitting it is false. Or you go deeper and reject some prior premise that led to the contradiction in the first place.
So let's go deeper. What does vaccination supposedly do to "prepare" the body against the future invasion of a particular germ? It stimulates the production of antibodies against that germ.
Antibodies are immune-system scouts that move through the body, identify germs, and paint them for destruction by other immune-system troops.
However, since the entire immune system is involved in wreaking that destruction, why is bulking up one department of the immune system---antibodies---sufficient to guarantee future protection?
On what basis can we infer that bulking up antibodies, through vaccination, is enough?
There is no basis. It's a naked assumption. It's not a fact. Logic makes a clear distinction between assumptions and facts. Confusing the two leads to all sorts of problems, and it certainly does in the case of vaccination.
Furthermore, why does the body need a vaccine in order to be prepared for the later invasion of germs? The whole structure/function of the immune system is naturally geared to launch its multifaceted counter-attack against germs whenever trouble arises. The antibodies swing into action when a potentially harmful germ makes its appearance, at age five, eight, 10, 15.
It's said that vaccination is a rehearsal for the real thing. But no need for rehearsal has been established.
And why are we supposed to believe that such a rehearsal works? The usual answer is: the body remembers the original vaccination and how it produced antibodies, and so it's better prepared to do it again when the need is real. But there is no basis for this extraordinary notion of "remembering."
It's another assumption sold as fact.
The terms "prepared for the real thing," "rehearsal," and "remember" aren't defined. They're vague. One of the first lessons of logic is: define your terms.
A baby, only a few days old, receives a Hepatitis B vaccine. This means the actual Hep-B germ, or some fraction of it, is in the vaccine.
The objective? To stimulate the production of antibodies against Hep-B. Assuming the baby can accomplish this feat, the antibodies circulate and paint those Hep-B germs for destruction now.
From that moment on, the body is ready to execute the same mission, if and when Hep-B germs float in the door.
But when they float in the door, why wouldn't the body produce antibodies on its own, exactly as it did after the vaccination was given? Why did it need the vaccination to teach it how to do what it naturally does?
And why should we infer the baby body is undergoing an effective rehearsal when vaccinated, and will somehow remember that lesson years later?
The logic of this is tattered and without merit.
To these arguments of mine, some vaccine advocates would say, "Well, it doesn't matter because vaccines work. They do prevent disease."
Ah, but that is a different argument, and it should be assessed separately. There are two major ways of doing that. One, by evaluating claims that in all places and times, mass vaccination has drastically lowered or eliminated those diseases it was designed to prevent. And two, by a controlled study of two groups of volunteers, in which one group is vaccinated and the other isn't, to gauge the outcome.
Let's look at the first method of assessment. Those who claim that vaccines have been magnificently effective in wiping out disease have several major hurdles to overcome. They have to prove, for each disease in question, that when a vaccine for that disease was first introduced, the prevalence of the disease was on the rise or was at a high steady rate in the population.
Why? Because, as many critics have stated, some or all of these diseases were already in sharp decline when the vaccines were introduced for the first time.
For example: "The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition." Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977
In other words, for reasons having nothing to do with vaccination, the diseases were on the way out. Nutrition had improved, sanitation was better, etc.
So let's see the proof, for every disease which vaccines are supposed to prevent, that those diseases were significantly raging in the population when the vaccines were first introduced.
Then let's also see proof that, after the introduction of vaccines, the diseases in question weren't merely given new labels (or redefined) to hide the fact that they weren't really going away. There is testimony, for example, that in America, the definition of paralytic polio was changed after the introduction of the Salk vaccine, and by the new more restricted definition, far fewer cases of polio could be diagnosed---thus making it seem the vaccine was effective.
There are also questions about the success of the famous smallpox vaccine campaign in Africa and Latin America. When all was said and done, were new cases of smallpox then diagnosed as meningitis? Was destruction wreaked by the vaccine then called AIDS?
Researchers, including Robert Gallo, have warned that the smallpox vaccine, when given to people whose immune systems are already grossly weakened, can destroy what's left of the immune system---and immune-defense destruction is the hallmark of the definition of AIDS.
The second major way of assessing the success of mass vaccination is through a proper controlled study.
For any vaccine, this is how it would be done. Assemble two large groups of people. Total, at least eight thousand. Make sure these two groups are very well matched. That means: similar in age; very similar in medical history and medical drug history; similar exposure levels to environmental chemicals; very close nutritional levels, status, and dietary habits.
The first group gets the vaccine. The second group doesn't. They are tracked, with very few dropouts, for a period of at least eight years. The INDEPENDENT researchers note how many from each group get the disease the vaccine is supposed to prevent. They note what other diseases or health challenges the volunteers encounter.
Such a study, using these proper standards, has never been done for any vaccine.
If that fact seems rather illogical, you're right. It is.
Finally, vaccine advocates need to prove that substances in vaccines like mercury, formaldehyde, and aluminum, although classified as toxic when studied alone, are somehow exonerated when shot directly into the body through a needle. The (absurd) logic of this needs to be explained fully.
This is not a matter of claiming that "a particular disease," like autism, isn't caused by a particular chemical, like mercury. That's a logical ruse all on its own. We are talking about harm caused by toxins under any name or no name. When a person ingests cyanide, do we say he has a disease? Of course not.
Children in school, their parents, and teachers have never been exposed to logic, so it's easy to sell them vaccines as valid. But selling is not the same thing as science.
And "being a scientist" is not the same thing as knowing what science and logic actually are. The same fact can be applied to news anchors, public health officials, and politicians. They can say "the evidence for vaccinating is overwhelming," but so can a parrot in a cage, with enough training.
Of course, these so-called experts won't come out and engage in a serious debate about the theory and practice of vaccination. They refuse to.
Millions of people around the world would eagerly watch a true extended debate on the subject. Such debate used to be a standard practice when logic was studied, when it was understood to be vital for deciding the truth or falsity of a position.
Now, it's all about PR and propaganda, the modern version of logic for the dumbed-down crowd. ~
Jon Rappoport
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
Monday, February 4, 2013
The Daily Messenger: Oh yeah....
The Daily Messenger: Oh yeah....
And now we all have to clean up the mess. It's all of our responsibility to do our part to make our world a better place. The devils are still going to be devils, no matter what, but we don't have to be.
By doing the right things as best as we can, others will see and begin to do their part eventually. We set the example. We pretty much boycott the mainstream. Go organic, refuse vaccines, refuse fluoride, refuse this and that, etc..., refuse to buy junk stuff from corporations when we can, and support locally to our local shops. And use only natural products as much as possible.
We see it daily. More and more people are finally waking up to the horrors of vaccines, chemtrails, fluoride, the entire scam, etc... and are doing their part to share the info by passing it on. They are changing their ways by supporting the right people, etc.. We appreciate it, because hey, we need all the help we can get.
We like gifting others too and help out when we can, whether it's money, time or other things. Even though we too are limited, we still manage to. I like to show family and friends the ins and outs of how to work affiliate programs, how to work them, how to incorporate them into blogs, etc.... I have two friends in the anti-vaccine network, and I'm in the process of teaching them how to make a few extra $$$, take classes to learn new skills, etc.. The two gals need help and I'm willing to give my time to help teach them. My hubby does the same with his circle of personal friends and contacts. You can find alot of free or low priced local classes on crafts, carpentry, sewing, jewelry, etc... if you look hard enough. I like to learn new skills and turn around teach others some of the things when possible. For example: I have a professional microderm machine which I use, but I also like to give friends a nice facial and barter with them for products, etc... That's one example.
My hubby always says, if we hit the lottery, we have a list of family and friends that we will gift and help out.
My family sometimes think I'm precocious, but it's because they have yet to see the bigger picture, and what's behind it all. You know, the true history of how things got this way, as described in DB's Indian picture and even long before then. I just ignore their criticisms and keep on. I know what I'm supposed to do. However the most critical one in my family is still beginning to start making better food choices. She dropped dairy and started using almond milk. I told her she will drop 5 or 10 lbs just doing that. If she would drop grains, it would be even more. You know things like that. We do get discouraged, but we presevere and keep going and do our best to make better choices.
We probably can't get rid of money and prisons, etc... but we can share, teach, gift, etc... and be of service to others and help make their lives easier if possible.
Thank you DB for that post/picture.
And now we all have to clean up the mess. It's all of our responsibility to do our part to make our world a better place. The devils are still going to be devils, no matter what, but we don't have to be.
By doing the right things as best as we can, others will see and begin to do their part eventually. We set the example. We pretty much boycott the mainstream. Go organic, refuse vaccines, refuse fluoride, refuse this and that, etc..., refuse to buy junk stuff from corporations when we can, and support locally to our local shops. And use only natural products as much as possible.
We see it daily. More and more people are finally waking up to the horrors of vaccines, chemtrails, fluoride, the entire scam, etc... and are doing their part to share the info by passing it on. They are changing their ways by supporting the right people, etc.. We appreciate it, because hey, we need all the help we can get.
We like gifting others too and help out when we can, whether it's money, time or other things. Even though we too are limited, we still manage to. I like to show family and friends the ins and outs of how to work affiliate programs, how to work them, how to incorporate them into blogs, etc.... I have two friends in the anti-vaccine network, and I'm in the process of teaching them how to make a few extra $$$, take classes to learn new skills, etc.. The two gals need help and I'm willing to give my time to help teach them. My hubby does the same with his circle of personal friends and contacts. You can find alot of free or low priced local classes on crafts, carpentry, sewing, jewelry, etc... if you look hard enough. I like to learn new skills and turn around teach others some of the things when possible. For example: I have a professional microderm machine which I use, but I also like to give friends a nice facial and barter with them for products, etc... That's one example.
My hubby always says, if we hit the lottery, we have a list of family and friends that we will gift and help out.
My family sometimes think I'm precocious, but it's because they have yet to see the bigger picture, and what's behind it all. You know, the true history of how things got this way, as described in DB's Indian picture and even long before then. I just ignore their criticisms and keep on. I know what I'm supposed to do. However the most critical one in my family is still beginning to start making better food choices. She dropped dairy and started using almond milk. I told her she will drop 5 or 10 lbs just doing that. If she would drop grains, it would be even more. You know things like that. We do get discouraged, but we presevere and keep going and do our best to make better choices.
We probably can't get rid of money and prisons, etc... but we can share, teach, gift, etc... and be of service to others and help make their lives easier if possible.
Thank you DB for that post/picture.
Saturday, February 2, 2013
Cat Rescue and The Great Cat Rescue of 1995
I'm very resourceful when it comes to urgent matters such as this.
This pic is of Rebecca Ventouris cat rescues. She or they were able to get this cat down. I have a similar story of my own mamma cat back in 1995. My story is below this pic.
The Great Cat Rescue of 1995
I had a mamma cat (yellow long haired tabby named Jasmine) that got stuck way up in a tree like that. She had kittens who needed her.
So we call the fire dept and they said we don't rescue cats from trees. I'm like "then why do you guys get depicted as cat rescuers"? So then I'm trying to figure out how to get her down. I put her kittens and food in a basket and take it out there for her to hear and see them. She was not coming down.
The man across the street was a painter, and he had several scaffolding things, so he got to work stacking several layers of them, with us hoping that maybe Jasmine would jump down. He was still a few short and she still didn't want to attempt a jump.
We somehow tied her laundry basket of kittens and food securely to the end of one of those long ladders which reached the branch perfectly right under her. I was on the top scaffold steadying the ladder while not looking down and poking the limb she was on with it.
After poking the branch several times. She finally jumped right in the basket and I nearly lost it, but I held on hard and kept it steady, thank God. I then lowered the ladder rung by rung until I got to the basket and then took her out and handed her to someone on the level below me. I handed the basket of kittens down too and worked my way back down to the ground. The whole neighborhood knew about it. That was referred to the Great Cat Rescue of 1995.
Too bad there were no digital cameras or cams back then, and I didn't own a regular camera either, so I wasn't able to capture those moments on film.
This pic is of Rebecca Ventouris cat rescues. She or they were able to get this cat down. I have a similar story of my own mamma cat back in 1995. My story is below this pic.
The Great Cat Rescue of 1995
I had a mamma cat (yellow long haired tabby named Jasmine) that got stuck way up in a tree like that. She had kittens who needed her.
So we call the fire dept and they said we don't rescue cats from trees. I'm like "then why do you guys get depicted as cat rescuers"? So then I'm trying to figure out how to get her down. I put her kittens and food in a basket and take it out there for her to hear and see them. She was not coming down.
The man across the street was a painter, and he had several scaffolding things, so he got to work stacking several layers of them, with us hoping that maybe Jasmine would jump down. He was still a few short and she still didn't want to attempt a jump.
We somehow tied her laundry basket of kittens and food securely to the end of one of those long ladders which reached the branch perfectly right under her. I was on the top scaffold steadying the ladder while not looking down and poking the limb she was on with it.
After poking the branch several times. She finally jumped right in the basket and I nearly lost it, but I held on hard and kept it steady, thank God. I then lowered the ladder rung by rung until I got to the basket and then took her out and handed her to someone on the level below me. I handed the basket of kittens down too and worked my way back down to the ground. The whole neighborhood knew about it. That was referred to the Great Cat Rescue of 1995.
Too bad there were no digital cameras or cams back then, and I didn't own a regular camera either, so I wasn't able to capture those moments on film.
Thursday, January 31, 2013
The Daily Messenger: It Is Now a Crime to Unlock Your Smartphone
The Daily Messenger: It Is Now a Crime to Unlock Your Smartphone: This is now the law of the land: ADVISORY BY DECREE OF THE LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS IT SHALL HENCEFORCE BE ORDERED THAT AMERICANS SHALL ...
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
This problem is also easy to solve. Don't ever get a damn smartphone to begin with.
I have lived this long without one. Even most of my single adult life, I didn't have a landline, and most of the time, no car. I used my bike and went everywhere on it. Had a thing on the back to haul small stuff in.
No smart phone? Problem solved.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
The AAP has revised their Vaccine Refusal Form
Dr. Tenpenny on Vaccines
The AAP has revised their Vaccine Refusal Form. Now it says:
"I know that failure to follow the recommendations about vaccination may endanger the health or life of my child and others with whom my child might come into contact. I therefore agree to tell all health care professionals in all settings what vaccines my child has not received because he or she may need to be isolated or may require immediate medical evaluation and tests that might not be necessary if my child had been vaccinated."
You certainly do not want to sign this form as is. It's just one more step toward complete control over your medical decisions, and trains parents to fear the worst if they don't vaccinate. Unless you're having an adverse vaccine reaction, there's no universal need for medical professionals to know what vaccines you have or have not had.
http://www2.aap.org/immunization/pediatricians/pdf/RefusaltoVaccinate.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEVER EVER sign this form! It can and most likely will be used against you at a later date.
Better yet, stay away from drug and shot pushing pediatricians and go to a chiropractor and/or naturopath instead. We get so many emails, calls, posts, etc... from frantic parents upset because their doctors fired them. GOOD!
There is no law anywhere that enforces parents to go to a regular MD for well baby visits. If they're healthy, they don't need a damn doctor. A good chiropractor to keep their spine in alignment (which helps immunity, btw), and a good naturopath/homeopath is all that they need. This rampant vaccine damage and deaths can easily be soloved by just refusing to go to mainstream doctors. How freaking hard is that to understand? The sooner folks stop supporting them, the sooner it will stop. Spread the word!
This problem with doctors turning away patients is so easy to solve. Just quit supporting them and use the alternative ones. It's really that easy.
Also See: AnaiRhoads.org Why Signing a Waiver to Avoid Vaccines Can Be Considered Abuse
She is referring to the Refusal To Vaccinate From developed by The American Academy of Pediatrics, not a regular religious or conscientious exemption letter or form. However, there are a couple of states that model their state's exemption form after this deceptive form. You can REFUSE to sign those too, or edit the form.
Any form one affixes their initials to, dates and affixes their signature to at the end is a LEGAL document. All statements prior to your signature you must agree to fully OR restrict your signature to say that you are signing under TDC - threat, duress, and coercion. The form that Ingri's daughter was told she needed to fill out for this daycare is posted here: ChildCareExemptForm.pdf. On this form, she crossed out all the "nots" and in her personal statement she further clarified that she understands fully the risks of vaccinating her child.
Basically, by initialing and signing this form as is, you are admitting to understanding that "vaccine preventable" diseases are extremely deadly and ALSO admitting to negligence for willfully denying your son/daughter the so called life saving protection that vaccines offer. These forms are MEANT to not only be intimidating but to catch the legally ignorant off guard.
So if must continue supporting the mainstream insanity culture, at least consider these alternatives...
A modified AAP form is posted here that you may wish to use with your doctor: AAPmodified.htm
AAPmodified.doc MSWord .DOC file
AAPmodified.pdf PDF file, best for printing.
You may also use one or both of these to give to your doctor:
(.doc) http://www.vaclib.org/letters/Letter-to-doctor.doc
(.pdf) http://drtenpenny.com/Documents/Vaccine_Refusal_Form.pdf
Not all State employees are aware of the law and many exhibit the Hitler Complex. Take a firm stand. Some individuals have had difficulty getting the required forms. Such arrogance on the part of State employees should be reported to the Director of your state Department of Health.
The AAP has revised their Vaccine Refusal Form. Now it says:
"I know that failure to follow the recommendations about vaccination may endanger the health or life of my child and others with whom my child might come into contact. I therefore agree to tell all health care professionals in all settings what vaccines my child has not received because he or she may need to be isolated or may require immediate medical evaluation and tests that might not be necessary if my child had been vaccinated."
You certainly do not want to sign this form as is. It's just one more step toward complete control over your medical decisions, and trains parents to fear the worst if they don't vaccinate. Unless you're having an adverse vaccine reaction, there's no universal need for medical professionals to know what vaccines you have or have not had.
http://www2.aap.org/immunization/pediatricians/pdf/RefusaltoVaccinate.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEVER EVER sign this form! It can and most likely will be used against you at a later date.
Better yet, stay away from drug and shot pushing pediatricians and go to a chiropractor and/or naturopath instead. We get so many emails, calls, posts, etc... from frantic parents upset because their doctors fired them. GOOD!
There is no law anywhere that enforces parents to go to a regular MD for well baby visits. If they're healthy, they don't need a damn doctor. A good chiropractor to keep their spine in alignment (which helps immunity, btw), and a good naturopath/homeopath is all that they need. This rampant vaccine damage and deaths can easily be soloved by just refusing to go to mainstream doctors. How freaking hard is that to understand? The sooner folks stop supporting them, the sooner it will stop. Spread the word!
This problem with doctors turning away patients is so easy to solve. Just quit supporting them and use the alternative ones. It's really that easy.
Also See: AnaiRhoads.org Why Signing a Waiver to Avoid Vaccines Can Be Considered Abuse
She is referring to the Refusal To Vaccinate From developed by The American Academy of Pediatrics, not a regular religious or conscientious exemption letter or form. However, there are a couple of states that model their state's exemption form after this deceptive form. You can REFUSE to sign those too, or edit the form.
Any form one affixes their initials to, dates and affixes their signature to at the end is a LEGAL document. All statements prior to your signature you must agree to fully OR restrict your signature to say that you are signing under TDC - threat, duress, and coercion. The form that Ingri's daughter was told she needed to fill out for this daycare is posted here: ChildCareExemptForm.pdf. On this form, she crossed out all the "nots" and in her personal statement she further clarified that she understands fully the risks of vaccinating her child.
Basically, by initialing and signing this form as is, you are admitting to understanding that "vaccine preventable" diseases are extremely deadly and ALSO admitting to negligence for willfully denying your son/daughter the so called life saving protection that vaccines offer. These forms are MEANT to not only be intimidating but to catch the legally ignorant off guard.
So if must continue supporting the mainstream insanity culture, at least consider these alternatives...
A modified AAP form is posted here that you may wish to use with your doctor: AAPmodified.htm
AAPmodified.doc MSWord .DOC file
AAPmodified.pdf PDF file, best for printing.
You may also use one or both of these to give to your doctor:
(.doc) http://www.vaclib.org/letters/Letter-to-doctor.doc
(.pdf) http://drtenpenny.com/Documents/Vaccine_Refusal_Form.pdf
Not all State employees are aware of the law and many exhibit the Hitler Complex. Take a firm stand. Some individuals have had difficulty getting the required forms. Such arrogance on the part of State employees should be reported to the Director of your state Department of Health.
Avocado and Guacamole
From: http://www.afinninthekitchen.com/2013/01/roasted-guacamole.html
Roasted Guacamole
Makes about 4 cups
1 large poblano pepper
1/4 of a large white onion, finely chopped
3 heaping tablespoons of fire roasted tomatoes (from a small can)
Small handful of cilantro, roughly chopped, plus additional for garnish
1 fresh jalapeno, ribs and seeds removed, finely chopped
1 clove garlic, finely chopped
4 avocados
1 lime
1/2 teaspoon sea salt
Tortilla chips, for serving (blue corn is my favorite)
Heat oven to broil.
Place poblano on a rimmed baking pan and place on oven rack in the upper third of the oven. Broil until skin is blackened, turning with tongs until all sides are black. Move pepper to a heat-proof bowl and cover with aluminum foil or a plate. Allow to sit for at least 5 minutes.
Using fingers, peel away the black skin and pull out the remaining inside ribs, seeds, and stem. Cut the remaining pepper into chunks and place in a large bowl.
Add the onion, roasted tomatoes, cilantro, jalapeno, and garlic.
Cut the avocados in half, remove the pit, and spoon the remaining flesh into the bowl with your vegetables. Cover with the juice from 1 lime and add salt.
Using a fork, mash together until well combined, allowing some chunks to remain. Taste and add additional salt to taste.
Serve immediately with tortilla chips.
Guacamole tends to brown quickly when allowed to sit. If storing for a longer period of time, covering the surface with a thin layer of lime juice will help.
Note: To me the chips are optional. I personally don't like the chips, so I eat it by itself.
Roasted Guacamole
Makes about 4 cups
1 large poblano pepper
1/4 of a large white onion, finely chopped
3 heaping tablespoons of fire roasted tomatoes (from a small can)
Small handful of cilantro, roughly chopped, plus additional for garnish
1 fresh jalapeno, ribs and seeds removed, finely chopped
1 clove garlic, finely chopped
4 avocados
1 lime
1/2 teaspoon sea salt
Tortilla chips, for serving (blue corn is my favorite)
Heat oven to broil.
Place poblano on a rimmed baking pan and place on oven rack in the upper third of the oven. Broil until skin is blackened, turning with tongs until all sides are black. Move pepper to a heat-proof bowl and cover with aluminum foil or a plate. Allow to sit for at least 5 minutes.
Using fingers, peel away the black skin and pull out the remaining inside ribs, seeds, and stem. Cut the remaining pepper into chunks and place in a large bowl.
Add the onion, roasted tomatoes, cilantro, jalapeno, and garlic.
Cut the avocados in half, remove the pit, and spoon the remaining flesh into the bowl with your vegetables. Cover with the juice from 1 lime and add salt.
Using a fork, mash together until well combined, allowing some chunks to remain. Taste and add additional salt to taste.
Serve immediately with tortilla chips.
Guacamole tends to brown quickly when allowed to sit. If storing for a longer period of time, covering the surface with a thin layer of lime juice will help.
Note: To me the chips are optional. I personally don't like the chips, so I eat it by itself.
Friday, January 25, 2013
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Seven ways GMO toxicity affects animals, plants and soil
Citizens Action Network
Seven ways GMO toxicity affects animals, plants and soil
Wednesday, January 23, 2013 by: Jonathan Benson
In the aftermath of the defeat of Proposition 37 in California, many more Americans are now aware of the existence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their unlabeled presence throughout the food supply. But with this awareness has come a lot of confusion, as the processed food and b...iotechnology industries have spent a lot of money and effort spreading propaganda and lies about GMOs. So to help set the record straight, we have outlined seven specific ways in which GMOs damage animals, plants, soil, and ultimately humanity.
1) GMOs disrupt digestion. Purveyors of GMOs claim that the human body is unable to tell the difference between GMOs and natural food. But a 2004 study published in the journal Nature Biotechnology tells a different story, having found that transgenic plant DNA actually persists in the human gastrointestinal tract upon consumption. According to this important study, which is the closest thing to a human clinical trial that has ever been conducted with GMOs, genetic material from GMOs actually transfers into the DNA of living bacteria in the gut, where it reproduces indefinitely.
http://www.anh-usa.org/genetically-engineered-food-alters-our-digestive-systems/
2) GMOs cause cancer. The most recent study to identify a link between GMO consumption and the formation of cancer, the so-called Seralini Study provides solid evidence showing that GMOs are processed by mammals far differently than natural foods. According to this study's findings, rats fed a lifetime of GMOs sprayed with the toxic Roundup (glyphosate) herbicide developed serious tumors that took over their entire bodies. An earlier study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences arrived at similar results, with the addition of organ failure as a symptom of GMO consumption.
http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_gmo_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html
3) GMOs increase herbicide use. Contrary to industry claims, GMOs have not reduced the need for chemical inputs, but rather greatly expanded it. According to a comprehensive, 16-year review of chemical use in conjunction with the advent of GMOs in 1996, researchers from Washington State University's Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources found that herbicide use has increased by an astounding 527 millions pounds since GMOs were first introduced. To make matters worse, Roundup, the chemical of choice for many GMOs, has been found to persist in soils, waterways, and other environmental nooks and crannies, and sometimes it even ends up contaminating water supplies.
https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/genetically-modified-crops-pesticides_n_1931020.html
4) GMOs damage native species. A major point of contention with GMOs is that they can very easily pass their traits onto non-GMO, organic, and native crops and other plants, effectively destroying their very integrity permanently. Hundreds of farmers have actually been sued by Monsanto and other GMO giants over the years after their crops were inadvertently contaminated by GMOs. GMOs are also responsible for killing off bees, bats, butterflies, and other pollinators, whose bodies are unable to handle the onslaught of altered DNA and chemicals that are characteristic of GMO technologies. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035511_insecticide_bees_collapse.html)
5) GMOs pollute the environment. Mainstream scientists and industry spokespersons often gloat about the supposed environmental benefits of GMOs. But the truth of the matter is that GMOs and the chemicals used to grow them are a major source of environmental pollution. A 2011 study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Science found that the Bacillus thuriengensis (Bt) bacteria engineered into Monsanto's GM corn can now be found in hundreds of streams and waterways throughout the U.S. Midwest. Another study published in the journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry revealed that Roundup herbicide is also present in many waterways and groundwater sources throughout America as well.
http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-carcinogenic-roundup-herbicide-contaminating-water-supply/
6) GMOs deplete soil minerals, destroy beneficial bacteria. The presence of Roundup, Bt bacteria, and other GMO byproducts in our water and soil would only be half as bad if these toxins merely persisted as innocuous pollutants. But studies have shown that these chemicals actually degrade and deplete soils of vital minerals and beneficial bacteria, both of which protect crops from pests, viruses, and other threatening elements. Glyphosate, the active component in Roundup, also does not biodegrade, which means it is continually accumulating in the environment without restraint, perpetually altering soil composition and contaminating natural resources. (http://www.psrast.org/soilecolart.htm)
7) GMOs spawn crop-destroying 'superweeds,' 'superbugs.' The basic premise behind how GMOs work portends that artificially engineering crops with resistance to certain chemicals and exposures that would otherwise harm or kill them can improve yields and protect the environment. And this built-in resistance has allowed farmers to indiscriminately spray chemicals like Roundup on their crops without worrying about killing them. But this system is now failing, as the weeds and pests targeted by GMO technologies have mutated and developed resistance to crop chemicals and Bt toxin. As a result, pestilence and disease is on the rise due to GMOs, which spells eventual disaster for the food supply.
http://grist.org/article/first-came-superweeds-and-now-come-the-superbugs/
To learn more about the dangers of GMOs, visit the Institute for Responsible Technology:
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/health/gmo-toxicity-affects-animals-plants-and-soil-336742.html
http://essentialstuff.org/index.php/2011/12/13/Cat/how-gmos-destroy-life-soil-and-your-gut-probiotics/
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038792_GMO_toxicity_digestion_cancer.html
______________________________________________
About
Citizens Action Network's (CAN) goal is to bring like minded people together that want to effect positive change in their communities. Power in numbers!
Description
What kind of world do we want to live in? Do we want to live in a world governed by fear, corporate control and violence? That is one way of looking at the development of the current global agenda. Or do we want to live in a world where peace, sustainability and compassion are cultivated as vital principals for our existence? Both realities exist side by side.
On the individual level there is alw...ays a choice. Peace is a choice. Every minute of the day in all our activities choosing peace, as the underlying stream we operate from is a personal choice, like any choice we make, (an important choice that has an impact on our environment).
Yes, the people have the power to say no, to protest, to get together and stand up to injustice. The people have the power to get educated, to buy only organic, healthy products, to promote and to share news and information they believe in, to cut out the corrupted media outlets, the people have the power to turn off the TV and create new, free technologies, the people have the power to heal themselves, each other and the planet. When people get sufficiently fed up with the crap they are being fed, they will rise and let the leaders know, exactly what they think, about the way they are being treated and demand new laws.
Seven ways GMO toxicity affects animals, plants and soil
Wednesday, January 23, 2013 by: Jonathan Benson
In the aftermath of the defeat of Proposition 37 in California, many more Americans are now aware of the existence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their unlabeled presence throughout the food supply. But with this awareness has come a lot of confusion, as the processed food and b...iotechnology industries have spent a lot of money and effort spreading propaganda and lies about GMOs. So to help set the record straight, we have outlined seven specific ways in which GMOs damage animals, plants, soil, and ultimately humanity.
1) GMOs disrupt digestion. Purveyors of GMOs claim that the human body is unable to tell the difference between GMOs and natural food. But a 2004 study published in the journal Nature Biotechnology tells a different story, having found that transgenic plant DNA actually persists in the human gastrointestinal tract upon consumption. According to this important study, which is the closest thing to a human clinical trial that has ever been conducted with GMOs, genetic material from GMOs actually transfers into the DNA of living bacteria in the gut, where it reproduces indefinitely.
http://www.anh-usa.org/genetically-engineered-food-alters-our-digestive-systems/
2) GMOs cause cancer. The most recent study to identify a link between GMO consumption and the formation of cancer, the so-called Seralini Study provides solid evidence showing that GMOs are processed by mammals far differently than natural foods. According to this study's findings, rats fed a lifetime of GMOs sprayed with the toxic Roundup (glyphosate) herbicide developed serious tumors that took over their entire bodies. An earlier study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences arrived at similar results, with the addition of organ failure as a symptom of GMO consumption.
http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_gmo_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html
3) GMOs increase herbicide use. Contrary to industry claims, GMOs have not reduced the need for chemical inputs, but rather greatly expanded it. According to a comprehensive, 16-year review of chemical use in conjunction with the advent of GMOs in 1996, researchers from Washington State University's Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources found that herbicide use has increased by an astounding 527 millions pounds since GMOs were first introduced. To make matters worse, Roundup, the chemical of choice for many GMOs, has been found to persist in soils, waterways, and other environmental nooks and crannies, and sometimes it even ends up contaminating water supplies.
https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/genetically-modified-crops-pesticides_n_1931020.html
4) GMOs damage native species. A major point of contention with GMOs is that they can very easily pass their traits onto non-GMO, organic, and native crops and other plants, effectively destroying their very integrity permanently. Hundreds of farmers have actually been sued by Monsanto and other GMO giants over the years after their crops were inadvertently contaminated by GMOs. GMOs are also responsible for killing off bees, bats, butterflies, and other pollinators, whose bodies are unable to handle the onslaught of altered DNA and chemicals that are characteristic of GMO technologies. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035511_insecticide_bees_collapse.html)
5) GMOs pollute the environment. Mainstream scientists and industry spokespersons often gloat about the supposed environmental benefits of GMOs. But the truth of the matter is that GMOs and the chemicals used to grow them are a major source of environmental pollution. A 2011 study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Science found that the Bacillus thuriengensis (Bt) bacteria engineered into Monsanto's GM corn can now be found in hundreds of streams and waterways throughout the U.S. Midwest. Another study published in the journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry revealed that Roundup herbicide is also present in many waterways and groundwater sources throughout America as well.
http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-carcinogenic-roundup-herbicide-contaminating-water-supply/
6) GMOs deplete soil minerals, destroy beneficial bacteria. The presence of Roundup, Bt bacteria, and other GMO byproducts in our water and soil would only be half as bad if these toxins merely persisted as innocuous pollutants. But studies have shown that these chemicals actually degrade and deplete soils of vital minerals and beneficial bacteria, both of which protect crops from pests, viruses, and other threatening elements. Glyphosate, the active component in Roundup, also does not biodegrade, which means it is continually accumulating in the environment without restraint, perpetually altering soil composition and contaminating natural resources. (http://www.psrast.org/soilecolart.htm)
7) GMOs spawn crop-destroying 'superweeds,' 'superbugs.' The basic premise behind how GMOs work portends that artificially engineering crops with resistance to certain chemicals and exposures that would otherwise harm or kill them can improve yields and protect the environment. And this built-in resistance has allowed farmers to indiscriminately spray chemicals like Roundup on their crops without worrying about killing them. But this system is now failing, as the weeds and pests targeted by GMO technologies have mutated and developed resistance to crop chemicals and Bt toxin. As a result, pestilence and disease is on the rise due to GMOs, which spells eventual disaster for the food supply.
http://grist.org/article/first-came-superweeds-and-now-come-the-superbugs/
To learn more about the dangers of GMOs, visit the Institute for Responsible Technology:
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/health/gmo-toxicity-affects-animals-plants-and-soil-336742.html
http://essentialstuff.org/index.php/2011/12/13/Cat/how-gmos-destroy-life-soil-and-your-gut-probiotics/
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038792_GMO_toxicity_digestion_cancer.html
______________________________________________
About
Citizens Action Network's (CAN) goal is to bring like minded people together that want to effect positive change in their communities. Power in numbers!
Description
What kind of world do we want to live in? Do we want to live in a world governed by fear, corporate control and violence? That is one way of looking at the development of the current global agenda. Or do we want to live in a world where peace, sustainability and compassion are cultivated as vital principals for our existence? Both realities exist side by side.
On the individual level there is alw...ays a choice. Peace is a choice. Every minute of the day in all our activities choosing peace, as the underlying stream we operate from is a personal choice, like any choice we make, (an important choice that has an impact on our environment).
Yes, the people have the power to say no, to protest, to get together and stand up to injustice. The people have the power to get educated, to buy only organic, healthy products, to promote and to share news and information they believe in, to cut out the corrupted media outlets, the people have the power to turn off the TV and create new, free technologies, the people have the power to heal themselves, each other and the planet. When people get sufficiently fed up with the crap they are being fed, they will rise and let the leaders know, exactly what they think, about the way they are being treated and demand new laws.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Stem-Cell Teeth !
I would be surprised if this ever comes to reality. It's the FDA, ADA and other pharmaceutical interests that are keeping this from going forward. They make lots of money poisoning us with mercury fillings, estrogen-laden fillings, root canals, fake implants, dentures, etc...
We have to get rid of our current system before we will be allowed cutting edge tech such as this. The elite probably already has access to all cutting edge tech.
I am surprised that the stem cell tech is available for cartilage and joints from Dr. John Lieurance and his partner in FL.
http://www.repairstemcells.org/Treatment/Success-Stories/Regrow-Missing-Teeth.aspx
We have to get rid of our current system before we will be allowed cutting edge tech such as this. The elite probably already has access to all cutting edge tech.
I am surprised that the stem cell tech is available for cartilage and joints from Dr. John Lieurance and his partner in FL.
http://www.repairstemcells.org/Treatment/Success-Stories/Regrow-Missing-Teeth.aspx
Saturday, January 19, 2013
BACK TO EDEN Film
We need to do this with our various berries and we need to plant apple, pear, and cherry trees too.
Same with the onions we like to grow, which were accidental at first.
BACK TO EDEN shares the story of one man’s lifelong journey, walking with God and learning how to get back to the simple, productive methods of sustainable provision that were given to man in the garden of Eden. The organic growing system that has resulted from Paul Gautschi’s incredible experiences has garnered the interest of visitors from around the world. However, never until now have Paul’s methods been documented and shared like this!
http://backtoedenfilm.com/index.html
https://vimeo.com/28055108
BACK TO EDEN Film Playback Problems
Having trouble viewing Back to Eden? Common solutions to this problem.
Note: Number 4 worked for me.
1. Make sure you let the video buffer (upload) all the way before trying to watch.
2. Turn off all virus protection and advertisement block software.
3. Check and update your Flash player from this page: vimeo.com/help/flash
4. Turn off HD (High Definition) by clicking “HD” at the bottom right hand side of the player. This allows the video to playback in SD (Standard Definition).
5. Buy DVD
Same with the onions we like to grow, which were accidental at first.
BACK TO EDEN shares the story of one man’s lifelong journey, walking with God and learning how to get back to the simple, productive methods of sustainable provision that were given to man in the garden of Eden. The organic growing system that has resulted from Paul Gautschi’s incredible experiences has garnered the interest of visitors from around the world. However, never until now have Paul’s methods been documented and shared like this!
http://backtoedenfilm.com/index.html
https://vimeo.com/28055108
BACK TO EDEN Film Playback Problems
Having trouble viewing Back to Eden? Common solutions to this problem.
Note: Number 4 worked for me.
1. Make sure you let the video buffer (upload) all the way before trying to watch.
2. Turn off all virus protection and advertisement block software.
3. Check and update your Flash player from this page: vimeo.com/help/flash
4. Turn off HD (High Definition) by clicking “HD” at the bottom right hand side of the player. This allows the video to playback in SD (Standard Definition).
5. Buy DVD
Monday, January 14, 2013
The Daily Messenger: Just some of the ingredients they put in your "flu...
The Daily Messenger: Just some of the ingredients they put in your "flu...: 2-Phenoxyethanol is an anti-bacterial agent being used as a replacement for the preservative Thimerosal (mercury). It’s considered a very to...
_____________________________________
http://vaxtruth.org/2011/09/the-flu-vaccine-what-your-doctor-wont-tell-you-or-probably-doesnt-even-know/
_____________________________________
http://vaxtruth.org/2011/09/the-flu-vaccine-what-your-doctor-wont-tell-you-or-probably-doesnt-even-know/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)