So This Is Why I’m Not Fat – Cannabis Could Be Used To Tread Obesity-Related Diseases

I have smoked cannabis for 5 and a half years now, and during that time I’ve eaten a lot of takeaways and fast food. I’m one of those people that eats quite (ok very) unhealthily, yet manages to somehow not put on weight.

Both myself and most people around me have commented at one point or another that they don’t know how I’m not fat from the amount of shit that I eat, and I always wondered.. Until now.

The Telegraph recently reported that scientists have found that compounds (I’m assuming cannabinoids) found in cannabis can increase the amount of energy that the body burns. As I smoke a lot of chronic, I am pretty sure that it is helping to speed up my metabolism, quite possibly to counterbalance those extra calories I consume during “The Munchies”.

Now OK prohibitionists, this might not be good for those in third world countries where food is harder to come by, but over here in Western society we have a lot of fat people. People who could probably use burning off a bit of excess energy.

Anyway, The Telegraph reports that: “Test in animals have already shown the compounds can help treat type two diabetes while also helping to reduce levels of cholesterol in the blood stream and fat in key organs like the liver”

And guess who is behind this development? G.W Pharmaceuticals. With their government-approved status we are learning more and more about this amazing plant. The Telegraph says “They are now conducting clinical trials in 200 patients in the hope of producing a drug that can be used to treat patients suffering from “metabolic syndrome”, where diabetes, high blood pressure and obesity combine to increase the risk of heart disease and stroke.”

We discover more and more wonderful medicinal uses for cannabis everyday. Just how many remain locked inside unexplored cannabinoids? We shall see over the next few years as more and more studies are done into the cannabis plant.

Keep Toking,

Nuff Said

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9383640/Cannabis-could-be-used-to-treat-obesity-related-diseases.html

Picture – Georgia Toons

Safe Rolling

Faye Sakellaridis

Can pure ecstasy, known as MDMA, be taken safely by adults? Dr. Perry Kendall, a British Columbia doctor, says yes, it can.

Kendall says that he is not advocating for the drug to be legalized. According to him, he is asking a "hypothetical question," which is: "If those drugs were to be legalized, what would be the best way of doing it?"

Still, Kendall critiques the way the Canadian government is going about regulating and controlling psychoactive substances. He says that Canada should approach it in an "evidence-based way," by looking at "what works and what doesn't work." The current "regulatory regime" is, according to Kendall, "not optimal."

Essenctially, Kendall is arguing for drug policy to be based wholly on empirical evidence. That does seem most logical, and it is not unlike the arguments made by marijuana legalization advocates here in the United States.

Kendall compares MDMA to alcohol, which, like ecstasy, can be dangerous, even fatal, if abused. Alcohol can be arguably more dangerous that MDMA.

He also says that MDMA, if taken under the right circumstances in non-toxic dosages, can treat mental conditions such as post traumatic stress disorder.

Medical literature ascribes the euphoria and social intimacy of MDMA to the waves of serotonin it sends flooding through the brain.

His rhetoric continues to run parallel with marijuana advocates here in the US: "What is fundamentally the difference between that and a psychoactive substance that makes people feel good and gives them some energy, which as far as we know isn't addictive, doesn't cause cancer, doesn't destroy the brain?" he asks.

But other findings run counter to this. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police in B.C., who have a team dedicated to finding illegal drug labs, maintain that no amount of the substance is safe. Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health has a list of MDMA's potential health effects, which include teeth grinding, sweating, increased blood pressure and heart rate, anxiety, blurred vision, nausea, vomiting and convulsions, even at low doses.

Steve Outhouse, a spokesman for Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq, responded to Kendall's statements, saying, "Our government is not contemplating any changes that would make ecstasy legal, so we have no further comment to make at this time."

Still, the medical establishment widely agrees that the substance is not addictive, and new research suggests that the negative effects associated with the drugs may be exaggerated.

Despite all this debate, MDMA still remains a highly criminal substance in Canada. It was recently put at the top of Canada's drug scheduling list under the federal governments omnibus crime bill, carrying similar penalties to cocaine and heroin.

The fact this discussion about MDMA is even happening is a positive step. The drug may continue to frighten some people for the foreseeable future, which is an understandable effect of Reefer Madness-esque scare tactics, not to mention all too real tragedies that have resulted from its abuse. Hard facts and solid drug education based on the empirical approach that Kendall is in favor of may ultimately be the most effective way to protect public safety.

Image by Chris Breikss, courtesy of Creative Commons licensing

Get Higher With Mangos

Posted by Nuff Said

So this week we learned that eating Mangos (or indeed drinking Mango smoothies) before smoking can increase the effects of cannabis.

This is because cannabis contains a chemical called Myrcene. Now grade bud generally contains a comparatively higher concentration of myrcene than the regular shit you sometimes pick up.

1stmarijuanagrowerspage states that: “Mangoes, Lemon grass, and other less-common plants also contain high amounts of this chemical. Myrcene is believed to aid the potency of the marijuana high by allowing the psychoactive chemicals found in cannabis, namely THC, to cross the blood-brain barrier more efficiently.”

Mangos are good for you. So its good to eat them anyway, but if you want a chance of improving your high, test if it works for you next time you have some not-very-good weed.

Apparently you might not notice much of a difference if you smoke high grade after eating Mangos – you will usually be too high to notice much, plus the cannabis will have a higher concentration of Myrcene in it anyway.

Eat a mango

An hour later smoke a spliff

You should notice that it gets you higher than expected. Now this probably doesn’t work on everyone, but let us know if it works for you!

You can also try eating a shit load of Mango to see if the effects improve even further!

---
Follow ISMOKE Magazine on Twitter @ISMOKEMAG
ISMOKE Magazine on Facebook

Autistic researcher Gary McKinnon fighting for proper pretrial examination

Russia Today
20 July, 2012

British hacker Gary McKinnon has refused a medical test to see if he’s fit for extradition to the US. His mother says the expert assigned to the case has no experience with Asperger’s Syndrome, and extradition could cause McKinnon to commit suicide.

Gary McKinnon, 46, has admitted to hacking US military computer databases in a search of UFO evidence. But his interest is no excuse in the US, where he could face up to six decades behind bars if convicted.

He’s been fighting extradition since 2006. Last April, McKinnon’s family had him examined by three leading Asperger’s experts, who concluded that he wasn’t fit for trial due to a very high risk that he could take his own life.

At the last court hearing on July 5, judges were told Home Secretary Theresa May was “close” to making a decision on the matter, though she admitted to being “personally concerned” McKinnon wasn’t properly examined, giving his family until July 19 to agree to new state-administered tests.

Britain’s National Autistic Society supported the McKinnon family’s experts’ report, and has recommended that the Home Office put new examiners on McKinnon’s case.

Now, the Home Office says the matter will be discussed at the High Court on July 24.

McKinnon’s family says he has already lost ten years of his life to the extradition battle, and voiced hopes that he would be allowed to stay in Britain.

Dozens of British MPs from various political parties have formed a coalition to fight what they call a “one-sided” extradition policy with the US.

Drawn up in a post-9/11 panic, it allows Washington to demand any person it wants without having to provide any evidence and London has no other choice than to obey.

Source: http://www.rt.com/news/mckinnon-refuse-medical-tests-636/

Criminalising Drugs is Harming Medical Research – An Interview with Professor David Nutt

David Nutt, former adviser to the UK government, says the ban on drugs like ecstasy is hampering neuroscience

"I can show you 150 papers telling you how the brain reacts to an angry face, but I can't show you a single paper that tells you what cannabis does." (Image: Tony Buckingham)

How do the drug laws in most countries affect scientific research?
One of the things I find very disturbing about the current approach to drugs, which is simply prohibition without necessarily any full understanding of harms, is that we lose sight of the fact that these drugs may well give us insights into areas of science that need to be explored and may give us new opportunities for treatment.

In what way?
Almost all the drugs of interest in terms of understanding brain phenomena such as consciousness, perception, mood and psychosis are illegal. And so there is almost no work done in this field.

How bad is the impact?
The effects these laws have had on research is greater than those caused by the US government hindering stem cell research. No one has done an imaging neuroscience study of smoking cannabis. I can show you 150 papers telling you how the brain reacts to an angry face, but I can't show you a single paper that tells you what cannabis does.

Any examples of missed opportunities?
There were six trials of LSD as a treatment for alcoholism, the last one in 1965. The evidence is it's as good as anything we've got, maybe better. But no one is using it for this. I wonder how many other opportunities have been lost in the past 40 years with important drugs, like MDMA (ecstasy) and its empathetic qualities or cannabis for all its possible uses and insights into conditions like schizophrenia. All those opportunities have been wasted because it is virtually impossible to work with a drug when it is illegal.

How do you see change coming about?
The scientific bodies in the UK are the ones that should really be challenging the government. I will try to get the Royal Society and the Academy of Medical Sciences to support my campaign for a more rational approach to the regulation of drugs for research.

You were sacked as a UK government adviser for comparing the risks of horse riding with taking MDMA. Do you still take this line?
It is still a very important discussion. It raises the question of what the appropriate comparisons are. Where do you draw the line on harm? Should it be drawn equally across all sorts of endeavours and activities that humans engage in?

Should recreational-drug laws be relaxed?
If you are using a drug less dangerous than alcohol, that is a rational choice. If you are using drugs that are more harmful than alcohol, essentially heroin or other forms of opiates and crystal meth and cocaine, then that's different.

As head of the UK Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs you've written a book, Drugs: Without the hot air. Who is it for?
Parents and those with no scientific background can read it, children can read it and hopefully the media and politicians will read it. I hope we can start having more of a discussion about drugs.

Profile

David Nutt is the Edmond J. Safra Professor of Neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London. He headed the UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs technical committee for seven years

Your Cellphone Will Kill You And Your Kids, And Cut Your Fertility

Visit the Mercola Video Library

By Dr. Mercola

If you think the jury's still out on whether cell phones can be dangerous to your health, then you might want to take the time to listen to this video. Dr. Devra Davis, author of the book, "The Secret History of the War on Cancer," has been researching the safety hazards of radiation emanating from your cell phone.

Like many people, Dr. Davis just didn't believe the possibility of cell phones being dangerous―until she studied it. And now, with the toxicological and epidemiological evidence to back up her claims, she's trying to get the word out that cell phone radiation is not only dangerous, but can be downright lethal.

In her lecture, Dr. Davis explains how the biological impact of your cell phone is notrelated to its power, which is quite weak, but rather to the erratic nature of its signal and its ability to disrupt resonance and interfere with DNA repair. This is now believed to be the most plausible theory for understanding the wide array of health impacts discovered, which includes cancer...

Can Your Cell Phone Cause Cancer?

One interesting case that can serve as an illustrative warning of the cancer-causing potential of cell phones is that of a young woman with no other predisposing risk factors for cancer who came down with multi-focal breast cancer. The case was revealed in the May issue of the Environmental Health Trust's newsletterⁱ. As it turns out, the young lady had the curious habit of tucking her cell phone into her bra...

Two cancer specialists, Robert Nagourney and John West, concluded there was only one other possibility that might have directly contributed to her breast cancer. "We connected the dots," the patient said. And the dots―quite literally the pattern of the cancer, and distribution of the cancerous cells―lined up perfectly with the shape of her cell phone.

While her doctor can't prove the cell phone caused her cancer, it should serve as a potent warning not only to other women who might tuck their phones in their bras, but also to those of you who keep your phones in your pants pocket or shirt pocket as well. As a general rule, you'll want to avoid carrying your phone anywhere on your body. Keep in mind that the most dangerous place to be, in terms of radiation exposure, is within about six inches of the emitting antenna. You do not want any part of your body within that proximity.

Why Carrying Your Cell Phone on Your Body is a Bad Idea...

Regardless of the area exposed to the continuous radiation emitted by your cell phone, there's the potential for harm, although certain areas are clearly more vulnerable than others.

For example, research published in 2009 showed evidence that wearing a cell phone on your hip may weaken an area of your pelvisⁱⁱ. Using an X-ray technique used in the diagnosis and monitoring of patients with osteoporosis, researchers measured pelvic bone density in 150 men who regularly carried their cell phones attached to their belts. The men carried their phones for an average of 15 hours each day, and had used cell phones for an average of six years. The researchers found that bone mineral density was lowered on the side of the pelvis where the mobile phones were carried, raising the possibility that bone density could be adversely affected by the electromagnetic fields emitted by cell phones.

It's important to realize that as long as your cell phone is on, it emits radiation intermittently, even when you are not actually making a call. So wearing a cell phone on your hip for 15 hours a day is giving that area of your body nearly continuous radiation exposure.

Previous studies have found that cell phone radiation can affect men's sperm count, and the quality and motility of their sperm, and this may be a far greater issue than its effect on bone density. One such study, published in PLoS Oneⁱⁱⁱ found that:

"RF-EMR in both the power density and frequency range of mobile phones enhances mitochondrial reactive oxygen species generation by human spermatozoa, decreasing the motility and vitality of these cells while stimulating DNA base adduct formation and, ultimately DNA fragmentation. These findings have clear implications for the safety of extensive mobile phone use by males of reproductive age, potentially affecting both their fertility and the health and wellbeing of their offspring."

Men in particular may want to reconsider carrying their cell phones on their belts or in their pocket, in close proximity of their reproductive organs. In addition, you have a number of other sensitive organs in that general area, including liver, kidneys, colon and bladder—all of which are susceptible to radiation.

Recent Evidence Identifies Strong Cell Phone Cancer Link

Last year, an Israeli research group reported a sharp increase in the incidence of parotid gland tumors over the last 30 years, with the steepest increase happening after 2001. Your parotid gland is a type of salivary gland, located closest to your cheek—the same area where most people typically hold their cell phones. The researchers found a four-fold increase in parotid gland cancers from 1970 to 2006, while rates of other salivary gland cancers remained stable^iv.

That same year, Dr. Siegal Sadetzki, the principle investigator of a 2008 study, testified at a U.S. Senate Hearing that cell phones were identified as a contributor to salivary gland tumors. The report states that your risk of getting a parotid tumor on the same side of your head that you use for listening to the mobile phone increases by:

• 34 percent if you are a regular cell phone user and have used a mobile phone for 5 years.
• 58 percent if you had more than about 5,500 calls in your lifetime.
• 49 percent if you have spoken on the phone for more than 266.3 hours during your lifetime.

World Health Organizaion Classifies Cell Phone Radiation as Class B Carcinogen

Cell phone subscriptions are now estimated at 5.9 billion globally^v—that's 87 percent of the world population! I think it's safe to say, we've already passed the point of no return when it comes to this technology. But as cell phone use continues to grow unabated, a growing body of researchers is speaking out against the technology, warning that it may have serious biological side effects that must be acknowledged and remedied.

Fortunately, their warnings are slowly but surely beginning to be heard.

On May 31, 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO)/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) issued a report admitting cell phones might indeed cause cancer, classifying radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" (Class 2B)^vi. The classification came in part in response to research showing wireless telephones increase the risk for brain cancer.

According to the press release^vii:

"Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk."

"Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings," said IARC Director Christopher Wild, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting."

Children are at Greatest Risk—Including While in Utero

Sadly, children and teens are at greatest risk—both for parotid gland tumors and brain tumors—as their thinner skull bones allow for greater penetration of cell phone radiation. The radiation can enter all the way into their midbrain, where tumors are more deadly. In addition, children's cells reproduce more quickly, so they're more susceptible to aggressive cell growth. Children also face a far greater lifetime exposure. According to Professor Lennart Hardell of Sweden, those who begin using cell phones heavily as teenagers have 4 to 5 times more brain cancer as young adults!

The following image, used with permission from the book Public Health SOS: The Shadow Side of the Wireless Revolution, clearly shows the differences in depth of penetration between adults and young children.

Pregnant women would also be wise to avoid cell phones as much as possible. In 2008, researchers analyzed data from nearly 13,000 children and found that exposure to cell phones while in the womb, and also during childhood, were linked to behavioral difficulties.^viii Using handsets just two or three times a day during pregnancy was enough to raise the risk of their babies developing hyperactivity and difficulties with conduct, emotions, and relationships by the time they reached school age—and the risk became even greater if the children also used the phones themselves before the age of seven.

Overall, the study revealed that mothers who used mobile phones were 54 percent more likely to have children with behavioral problems. Later on, when the children began using cell phones themselves, they were:

• 80 percent more likely to suffer from behavioral difficulties
• 25 percent more at risk from emotional problems
• 34 percent more likely to suffer from difficulties relating to their peers
• 35 percent more likely to be hyperactive
• 49 percent more prone to problems with conduct

Experts Adamantly Claim Harmful Effects are Now Provable

Experts in the area of the biological effects of electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) and wireless technologies believe there's virtuallyno doubt that cell phones and related gadgets are capable of causing not only cancer but contributing to a wide variety of other conditions, from depression and diabetes to heart irregularities and impaired fertility. Researchers have now identified numerous mechanisms of harm, which explain how electromagnetic fields impact your cells and damages your DNA.

One such expert is Dr. Martin Blank, PhD, one of the most experienced researchers of the cellular and molecular effects of electromagnetic fields in the U.S. He gave an informative speech at the November 18, 2010 Commonwealth Club of California program, "The Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields," co-sponsored by ElectromagneticHealth.org. In it, he explained why your DNA, with its 'coil of coils' structure, is especially vulnerable to electromagnetic fields of all kinds.

As described in the International Journal of Radiation Biology, April 2011^ix, DNA possesses the two structural characteristics of fractal antennas: electronic conduction, and self-symmetry.

These properties contribute to greater reactivity of DNA to electromagnetic fields than other tissues, making the long-term consequences of repeated microwave exposures to our genetic material of great concern. Dr. Blank is adamant when he says that there IS evidence of harm, and that the harm can be significant. He also points out that the science showing harmful effects has been peer-reviewed, published, and that the results have been replicated, evaluated and "judged by scientists capable of judging it." I wrote an in-depth article about these findings back in January of last year. If you missed it, go ahead and review it now.

An analysis of the range of known mechanisms of action, including DNA effects, was published in November 2010 in "Non-Thermal Effects and Mechanisms of Interaction Between Electromagnetic Fields and Living Matter^x." Furthermore, the mobile industry's ownresearch in the 13-country Interphone study^xi showed a 40 percent increased risk of brain cancer from 1,640 or more hours of cell phone use, and independent Swedish research published in 2007 showed a 540 percent increased risk of brain cancer from greater than 2,000 hours of cell phone use^xii.

My Top Tips for Cell Phone Safety

It's worth remembering that the telecommunication industry is much larger than the medical industrial complex, and they have far more influence than the drug companies. They're also mirroring many of the same tactics as the tobacco industry to pedal their wares. This includes attempting to discredit researchers who publish unfavorable cell phone studies.

As Dr. Davis shows in her lecture above, the results of any study can be accurately predicted by looking at its sponsorship. According to a review by Dr. Lai in 2008, the probability that a study will find "no effect" is two to three times higher in industry-funded studies, while independently-funded studies into the health effects of mobile technology are TWICE as likely to find a positive result.

So please, be aware that there is already robust scientific evidence that cell phones and other wireless devices pose significant health risks to all of us—especially to children and pregnant women. So while such findings are not being widely publicized as of yet, it makes sense to take action now to protect yourself and your children. You can help to minimize your exposure to electromagnetic radiation from cell phones and other wireless devices by heeding the following advice:

• Children Should Always Avoid Using Cell Phones: Barring a life-threatening emergency, children should not use a cell phone, or a wireless device of any type.
• Reduce Your Cell Phone Use: Turn your cell phone off more often. Reserve it for emergencies or important matters. As long as your cell phone is on, it emits radiation intermittently, even when you are not actually making a call. If you're pregnant, avoiding or reducing your cell phone use may be especially important.
• Use a Land Line at Home and at Work: Although more and more people are switching to using cell phones as their exclusive phone contact, it is a dangerous trend and you can choose to opt out of the madness. SKYPE offers a portable number via your computer that can plug into any Ethernet port while traveling.
• Reduce or Eliminate Your Use of Other Wireless Devices: You would be wise to cut down your use of these devices. Just as with cell phones, it is important to ask yourself whether or not you really need to use them as often as you do. And most importantly, do not even consider having any electronic or wireless devices in the bedroom that will interfere with the quality of your sleep.
If you must use a portable home phone, use the older kind that operates at 900 MHz. They are not safer during calls, but at least many of them do not broadcast constantly even when no call is being made. Note the only way to truly be sure if there is an exposure from your cordless phone is to measure with an electrosmog meter, and it must be one that goes up to the frequency of your portable phone (so old meters won't help much). As many portable phones are 5.8 Gigahertz, we recommend you look for RF meters that go up to 8 Gigahertz, the highest range now available in a meter suitable for consumers.
Alternatively you can be very careful with the base station placement as that causes the bulk of the problem since it transmits signals 24/7, even when you aren't talking. So if you can keep the base station at least three rooms away from where you spend most of your time, and especially your bedroom, they may not be as damaging to your health. Another option is to just simply turn the portable phone off, only using it when you specifically need the convenience of moving about while on a call.
Ideally it would be helpful to turn off your base station every night before you go to bed.
You can find RF meters as well as remediation supplies at www.emfsafetystore.com. But you can pretty much be sure your portable phone is a problem if the technology is DECT, or digitally enhanced cordless technology.
• Use Your Cell Phone Only Where Reception is Good: The weaker the reception, the more power your phone must use to transmit, and the more power it uses, the more radiation it emits, and the deeper the dangerous radio waves penetrate into your body. Ideally, you should only use your phone with full bars and good reception.
• Avoid Carrying Your Phone on Your Body as that merely maximizes any potential exposure. Ideally put it in your purse or carrying bag. Placing a cell phone in a shirt pocket over the heart is asking for trouble, as is placing it in a man's pocket if he seeks to preserve his fertility.
• Don't Assume One Cell Phone is Safer than Another: There's no such thing as a "safe" cell phone. This is particularly true for industry promoted SAR ratings, which are virtually useless in measuring the true potential biological danger as most all of the damage is not done by heat transfer, which SAR measures.
• Keep Your Cell Phone Away From Your Body When it is On: The most dangerous place to be, in terms of radiation exposure, is within about six inches of the emitting antenna. You do not want any part of your body within that area.

What Is Common Purpose?

The Common Purpose organisation began in 1984 working on School teachers adult education and local government, it was soon infiltrating all public bodies training people for leaders in the "New Way " with its own methods drives and directives, Peter Mindyourson is the top Rothschild apparatchik in charge who instigated the disaster of the Millenium Dome Company, with its attempted imitation of the 1951 Festival of Britain, "Tonies Dome " quickly managed to lose £800 million, and £300 million of which was secretly funneled into one of New Labours 7000 subversive government quangos, to encourage the drive to celebrate diversity, Multicultuarism, government people trafficking and the promotion of Homosexuality.
Records now have to be kept in Schools and nurseries of any child who says something which can be construed as sexist or racist, and these children are then questioned about the beliefs and home lives of parents and a watch put on them, as soon as children enter senior school they are encouraged to enroll for youth Common Purpose training.
These Common Purpose leaders and there are 80, 000 trainees in 36 cities are to be brought to power when Britian is totally ruled by the EU, and it is their brainchild using the subliminal methods of Edward Bernays and Ivan Pavlov of Pavlovs dogs fame, and Operation Monarch mind control
with NLP and masss hypnosis, the idea is that they will promote under managers and staff who will also be Common Purpose.
Cherie Blair's Matrix Chambers is said to hold much legal preporatory paperwork on this, although to her credit Cheri is said to have baulked at this total betrayal of the British nation to the EU and the extinguishing of Britian's sovereignty, and bitterly argued with Peter Mandelson, as Cheries own family fought in W W II to not enter the EU.
Today Common Purpose runs the NHS with its top heavy bureaucratic pen pushers three to every one actual worker and deaths in hospitals and care homes are now an official secret, the BBC, has been advocating Homosexuals and freemasons to top positions for some while, and the contents of some dumbed down BBC material in terms of unnecessary violence heterophobia and pornography is obvious.
The heavy Common Purpose influence in the police and the legal profession, shows they are totally out of touch with the public, if you try to report a crime you will yourself be verbally abused and investigated, and court decisions often beggar belief with no bearing on reality, the Royal Mail, church, schools, local councils, the Civil Service, government ministries, and even Parliament all contaminated with political correctness.
Common Purpose is listed as registered charity no 2832875 Common Purpose describes itself as being in Adult education.
The intel and police are so infltrated with anti-British trainnes that any Cheif Constables and senior members not involved are removed, Cressida Dick who is the Common Purpose senior oficer who authorised the "shoot to kill" murders on the young Brazilian jean Charles De-Menez who was shot 7 times in the head without warning is reminiscent of an Israeli style attack in the occupied territories.

Royal Mail under studies by Prof.John Manning and bullyonline boss Tim field, has been named for the worst employer in the whole of Europe for managerial racial and sexual bullying and harassment, suicides are hidden under the Official secrets act, and Peter Mandelson promised the Royal mail union the CWU and the teaching union the NUT, that if they supported him getting Tony Blair and New Labour elected he would not bring in automated sorting machines for the post office and there would not be any job losses, mail Union boss Allan Johnson suddenly leaves and is made an MP,

and 30,000 postmen are being bullied and pushed into leaving their jobs or reasons are manufactured to sack them to bring in automation.

Bullying is part and parcel of Common Purpose, from workers in job centres and social security to policemen, intimidation and condescension is the game, Common Purpose is about brainwashing and eliminating democracy.

Kevin Field

More information see Brian Gerrish UKcolumn.co.uk

Undercover Journalist - Plans In Place To Evacuate London In Event Of Olympic Catastrophe

Hi Tap, I prepared a few e-Mails on Topical Issues to send, but during their preparation I came across the fact that a Journalist 'Infiltrated G4S, & actually applied & was accepted, for training, as one of the 'ZION' SECURITY STAFF at The Olympics.

He then approached MAJOR NEWS NETWORKS, but was told there was a Blackout on this type of information. [WASP:- ARE THES PEOPLE ALREDY BRAIN DEAD?]

- G4S security staff have been caught doing drug deals while in training with no retribution. Uniforms have also been handed out to unauthorized personnel as well as uniforms being stolen. G4S staff have also been caught taking photographs on their cellphones of secure locations.

Media Whitewashes Olympics Security Scandal

June 28th, 2012 Robert

Revelations about casket linings, plan for evacuation of London blacklisted

By Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, June 28, 2012

British news channel ITV has whitewashed the Olympics security scandal by failing to mention the explosive revelations of ‘Lee Hazledean’, an undercover journalist who infiltrated G4S, the world’s largest security provider, and blew the whistle on how 200,000 casket linings have been prepared for a terrorist attack that could prompt the evacuation of London.

The ITV report focuses on comparatively tame “security breaches” such as improper training of employees and their failure to conduct sufficient vehicle checks in preparation for the London Olympics which begins on July 27.

The report also reveals how sniffer dogs tasked with finding explosives have not even been trained in bomb detection. It also highlights how lorries and vans belonging to contractors have not been adequately searched.

The report also reveals how sniffer dogs tasked with finding explosives have not even been trained in bomb detection. It also highlights how lorries and vans belonging to contractors have not been adequately searched.

- Hazledean was able to get the job of a security officer via a simple application process. No background checks were carried out and his personal references were not checked.

- Hazledean was successful in taking guns, knives and explosives through both metal detectors and body scanners on numerous occasions during dummy runs.

- Hazledean was told that metal detectors and body scanners would be deactivated at peak times in order to get crowds into the Olympic venue quicker.

- Hazledean was also informed that 200,000 casket linings that can hold four dead bodies each have been shipped into London in preparation for the Games.

- Thousands of foreign troops under the auspices of the United Nations have also been brought into London.

- Plans for an evacuation of London in the aftermath of a deadly terrorist attack have been discussed at great length. G4S employees were briefed on the evacuation plan to a greater extent than the time spent on training them to conduct security screening.

Not a single one of these revelations appeared in the ITV News piece. Other news networks like Channel 4 refuse to cover the story at all.

Listen to an interview with Hazledean conducted by Tony Gosling

The ITV REPORT, failed to mention that system was designed to fail.

There are also going to be PREDATOR DRONES CIRCLING OVERHEAD,so lets hope the are not controlled by G4S Security Staff!

REGARDS ............... WASP

Posted by Tapestry

LSD as a Spiritual Aid

Albert Hofmann

The following is excerpted from Spiritual Growth with Entheogens edited by Thomas B. Roberts, available from Inner Traditions.

Albert Hofmann, Ph.D., Dr.Pharm.H.C., Dr.Sc.Nat.H.C., is best known for his serendipitous discovery of LSD and for his chemical work identifying the active principles of the sacred mushroom of Mexico. He was the retired director of research for the Department of Natural Products at Sandoz Pharmaceutical Ltd. in Basel, Switzerland. Dr. Hofmann was a fellow of the World Academy of Science and a member of the Nobel Prize Committee, the International Society of Plant Research, and the American Society of Pharmacognosy. He wrote many scientific papers and several books: The Botany and Chemistry of Hallucinogens and Plants of the Gods with Richard Evans Schultes, The Road to Eleusis with R. G. Wasson and Carl Ruck, LSD: My Problem Child, and Insight/Outlook.

Born January 11, 1906, Albert celebrated his 100th birthday in excellent health with thousands of grateful admirers at the Spirit of Basel -- a celebration of his life's work (www.lsd.info/en/home.html). Albert died two years later, on April 29, 2008, four months after his wife, Anita, had passed away. His archives and legacy are managed by Dieter Hagenbach at www.gaiamedia.org.


The use of soma (which is the Iranian haoma) is one among many examples of the religious use of drugs and intoxicants that have strange psychological effects. In our own day, Aldous Huxley has advocated the use of mescaline. The weird and glorifying properties of such plants and concoctions have given man a heightened religious experience, a window, as it were, on a world that is normally beyond the range of humdrum senses. --Ninian Smart, The Religious Experience of Mankind, 1984

Before I start with the report on the role LSD has played in my spiritual development, some general remarks on this very special psychopharmacon are appropriate.

LSD is not a product of planned research. I did not look for it, it came to me. This means to me that a higher authority thought it was necessary now to provide mankind with an additional pharmacological aid for spiritual growth.

LSD is not just a synthetic substance from the laboratory. After the discovery of lysergic acid amide and lysergic acid hydroxyethylamide (very closely related to lysergic acid diethylamide) as the entheogenic principles of Ololiuqui, an ancient sacred plant of Mexican Indians, LSD had to be regarded as belonging to the group of natural entheogenic drugs of Mesoamerica.

These two characteristics of LSD legitimate its use in a religious framework.

Now I come to the report of how LSD was a spiritual aid to me and how it influenced my worldview (Weltanschauung).

After my first experiences with LSD, the question arose for me: Which is true, the picture of the world as we perceive it with our everyday consciousness or the overwhelming image under the influence of entheogens?

This caused me to analyze what we know about the mechanism of perceiving reality.

Perception presupposes a subject that perceives and an object that is perceived. In human relations the subject that perceives is the individual human being, more exactly his consciousness, and the object perceived is the outer material world.

It is of the greatest importance to be aware of the fundamental fact that the outer world consists objectively of nothing more than matter and energy.

In order to make conspicuous the mechanism of our experiencing reality, I have chosen a metaphor from television. The material world functions as transmitter, emanates optical, acoustical, gustatory, olfactory, and tactile signals that are received by the antennae, by our sensory organs, eyes, ears, tongue, nose, and skin and are conducted from there to the corresponding center in the brain to the receiver. There these energetic and material signals are transformed into the spiritual phenomena of seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touching. One does not know how this transformation of material and energetic impulses into the psychic dimension of perception takes place. It includes the mystery of the connection between the material and the spiritual world.

The transmitter-receiver metaphor of reality makes evident that the picture of the outer world comes into existence inside, in the consciousness of the individual.

This fundamental fact signifies that the screen on which the colorful world is perceived is not in the outer but in the inner space of every human being. There are no colors, no sounds, no taste, no odors in the outer world. Everyone carries within himself his own personal image of the world, an image created by his private receiver. There is no common screen outside. This makes us fully aware of the cosmogenic (worldcreating) power invested in every human.

Before making use of these considerations to explain the ability of LSD and the other entheogens to change the experience of reality, our knowledge about the essence of consciousness must be reviewed.

Consciousness defies a scientific definition and explanation; for it is what is needed to contemplate what consciousness is. It can only be circumscribed as being the receptive and creative center of the spiritual ego, which has the faculties of perceiving, thinking, and feeling, and which is the seat of memory.

It is of fundamental importance to be aware of how consciousness originates and develops.

The newborn human possesses solely the faculty of perceiving -- possesses, or more correctly, is this mystic nucleus of life. He owns -- to use again the metaphor of television -- a blank videocassette, where the incoming stimuli from the outer world are transformed into images and sensations that can then be stored in the memory, providing the groundwork for thinking. Without these signals from outside, no consciousness could develop.

There is common consent that the evolution of mankind is paralleled by the increase and expansion of consciousness. From the described process of how consciousness originates and develops, it becomes evident that its growth depends on its faculty of perception.

Therefore every means of improving this faculty should be used.

The characteristics of entheogens, their faculty to improve sensory perception, makes them inestimable aids in the process of expanding consciousness.

It was LSD, the most potent entheogen, that, to use Blake's famous line, cleansed my doors of perception and made me see everything as it is, infinite.

In my childhood I experienced spontaneously some of those blissful moments when the world appeared suddenly in a new brilliant light, and I had the feeling of being included in its wonder and indescribable beauty. These moments remained in my memory as extraordinary experiences of untold happiness, but only after the discovery of LSD did I grasp their meaning and existential importance.

As mentioned at the beginning of this short essay, it was my experiences with LSD that caused me to think about the essence of reality. The insights I received, as described, increased my astonishment about the wonder of existence, of which we become conscious in enlightened moments.

Teaser image by Peter Kaminsky, courtesy of Creative Commons license.