Sunday 28 October 2012

Her Majesty's BBC Saville Cesspit - MI5 'll Fix It





BBC Saville Cesspit Guarded by Her Majesty's MI5 


For more than fifty years the BBC denied, that secret service vetting was taking place. Broadcast unions, constantly raised the issue. The BBC denied it both formally and informally. Alasdair Milne then Director-General, said, "I cannot believe this is true, just seven months later, he was forced to admit it, 'It is one of those things one knew about, felt a bit grubby about. I think most of us did but didn't tackle it as radically as we should have done." Like the issue of paedophillia today, this is still the odious culture of the BBC today.

After newspaper disclosures in August 1985, the BBC finally confirmed, the secret service political vetting system of its staff. MI5's recommendation's are final. The BBC were so secretive on political vetting, to the extent of not telling even their own chairperson, Stuart Young until early 1985 ? Apart from the embarrassment of having to admit, clandestine vetting, the answer lies in the peculiar status of the corporation and the considerable numbers of its pedophile employees. 

The whispers of a child sex scandal centred on Jimmy Savile, it's entertainment anchorman were around for over thirty years. Information surfaced that Jimmy Savile was a full member of  Paedophile Information Exchange (P.I.E) an organisation which campaigning for the abolition of the age of sexual consent in the UK.

The BBC's relationship with the British state and Her Majesty, was outlined in a memorandum of the 1971 Franks Commission on the Official Secrets Act. The official view is that the Governors of the BBC, are persons holding office under Her Majesty, as per the meaning of Section 2 of the 1911 Official Secrets Act, that the Director-General and his staff ,are people employed under persons who hold such office.

This ruling clearly bound BBC staff as being employed by persons holding office under Her Majesty and thus in possession of secret information. Hence their special relationship and obligations to the British State. It was on this pretext that political vetting by MI5 was introduced and preserved with secrecy. The BBC do not view themselves a State servants: Their staff's legal status is neither that of civil servants nor that of  those employed by a commercial organisation.

A letter was been sent to Lord Patten, Chairman of the BBC, quite few years ago, stating "I am placing this information before you in this open letter as I feel that the BBC should now initiate a full investigation into these reports suggesting that during the 1970’s and early 1980’s the BBC’s editorial policy was influenced in favour of P.I.E. This alleged infiltration of the BBC by P.I.E in large numbers, might also explain how Savile was able to operate as a sexual predator for his extended tenure at the BBC without challenge or prosecution.Neither could it be possible in such large numbers for such an extended period without the dark hand of MI5.


Stuart Hood believed if the BBC was honest, it would admit that it must support central political authority of the Queen by virtue of the Her Majesty's licence-fee system. But like their paedophiles, the Corporation has always had fantasies of grandeur about itself as a social organisation beyond accountability. It also with the help of MI5, prevented investigation or prosecution as the writer of the of the following letter was to discover along time ago. "I will pursue my objective of securing a full investigation into the alleged membership of Jimmy Savile of the organisation, P.I.E. I will also continue to seek a full and open investigation of the influence, if any, that P.I.E exerted on BBC editorial policy during the 1970's and 1980's. I also expect the authorities to investigate whether any BBC employees were members of P.I.E or expressed sympathy and support for the aims and objectives of P.I.E." Sadly he was foiled and frustrated.

Margaret Thatcher who had a considerable number of paedophiles in her Tory Cabinet as well as the BBC, once threatened to "veto" a BBC Panorama programme about MI5 and MI6 because it was going to reveal details about the way they operate and questioned their total lack of public accountability. In a  "top secret and personal" letter, cabinet secretary, Sir Robert Armstrong, recommended that Margaret Thatcher invoke rarely used powers to silence them.

Today Britain's Secret Services, MI5 and MI6 are demanding changes to the UK's justice system, with secret service courts to intern any member of the public without trial, such as whistle blowers on paedophiles or those with liberal politics. MI5, still secretly controls the hiring and firing of BBC staff. For example they blocked the appointment of an editor of The Listener. MI5 originally operated, unknown to almost all BBC staff, from Room 105, an out-of-the way office, on the first floor of Broadcasting House, on which George Orwell modelled his ' Ministry of Truth in 'Nineteen Eighty-Four.' Behind that door sat Brigadier Ronnie Stonham, 'Sp.A. to D.Pers.' As assistant to Christopher Martin, with a team of three female assistants, he liaised with MI5.


BBC staff applying for promotion needed MI5 approval, with their continuous political surveillance on everyone, including directors, film editors, actors and people such as Jimmy Savile. Some had their files stamped with a symbol, like a Christmas tree. Meaning a second, secret file held in Room 105. Intimate personal details containing purported 'security' information, collected by secret agents which in reality was political. A staff member may be shortlisted the second file, a buff folder with a round red sticker and the sign 'secret,' given to the department head, to sign for it.

Concealed from the individuals concerned, who have no clue about what is being used against them, similar to the secret courts to sentence people to long term of internment, similar to Marian Price in British Occupied Ireland.Their details are fed into a computer containing the details of millions of British 'subversives' ?. When MI5 regards a person as a 'security risk' or politically incorrect, it is enough to blacklist him or her for life. A bizarre aspect, is that BBC boards, are expressly forbidden to ask openly about political views at interview, while it is a priority in secret. Senior executives are fearful of speaking out about vetting, because of the Official Secrets Act, with  victims of blacklisting, generally too scared to admit it. neither can they speak about the numerous MI5 paedophile proteges within the BBC.


Sir Hugh Greene a former director-general, said: 'In my day we would never have allowed jobs like The Listener to go to MI5.' Then MI5's claims were challenged, they were often at best, over-zealous and at worst ,false information against applicants, for political spite or to leave the door open for an MI5 paedophile protege. An example of MI5 blacklisting of potential BBC personnel at its most sinister, was in 1981, when a board considered whom to appoint editor of the BBC's Listener. Richard Gott the Guardian's features editor,  with a brilliant presentation was chosen.

However, MI5 disapproved. 'His file went off for "colleging," the secret BBC term for MI5 vetting and it was blocked. They said he was politically unsuitable Their phrase "He digs with the wrong foot" being the same terms, used for a Catholic seeking employment witha boss from the Orange Order In British Occupied Ireland. So, what do the BBC and MI5 achieve from their secret black- balling ? The reasons for this clumsy, dishonest and very unfair system can only be PIE whose key aim was to secure a reduction of the age of consent in the UK to FIVE and then abolish it altogether. Within the BBC they became creators in public discourse with programmes such as Hearts and Minds, grooming public political opinion for MI5 with even their own programmes such as Spooks. 

The Paedophile organisation secured significant support within Her Majesty's parliament, the entertainment industry, the media and similar, professional, organisations. It was reported that the organisation's membership list was found to contain the names of nationally known politicians, entertainers and people engaged in professions, including the medical and legal profession. The influential nature of its membership and the extent of support in places like the BBC among ‘opinion formers’ probably explains how it managed to remain in existence in Britain for so long. Independent investigations indicate clearly that the tentacles of P.I.E extended deep in the British establishment as well as the BBC and Parliament.


In October 2004, stories were published implying the BBC Director General had suggested that the dumbing down of the BBC was the consequence of its growing number of female executives: "Too many dumb, dumb, dumb cookery and gardening shows . . . I have nothing against women. I've worked with them all my life. It just seems to me that the television service has largely been run by women for the last four to five years and they don't seem to have done a great job of work." 

The system where all staff were politically vetted by the Secret Services and their decision given in writing without anyreasons for their recommendations was enough to blacklist him or her permanently. Members of board interviews were told not to ask questions. For many years a BBC staff member was used as MI5 Liaison Officer but in 1982 Brigadier Ronald Stonham, moved into Room 105 along with the  Director of Personnel, Christopher Martin. In 1985. The BBC stated, "Only relatively few members of staff go through this [vetting] procedure. They are necessarily involved in sensitive areas or require access to classified information.' 
They are liars. Considerable evidence shows that vetting was used in a political context, not for security reasons.


Whitehall euphemisms for vetting became standard during post-interview discussions. 'Does he play with a straight bat?' or 'Does he have snow on the right foot?' typical BBC expressions for political suitability that can be found on the streets of loyalist sectarian Belfast. Politics and sexual orientation rather than security were much more relevant. MI5 reserve their strongest objections to BBC drama producers. Television drama reflects the latest radical mood with hard-hitting, naturalistic dramas which portray working-class people in a sympathetic light who might with affirmation challenge the whole paedophile British class sytsem, sparked off political controversy such as recent Jimmy Savile controversy. Drama has a powerful hold on peoples hearts and minds and a source of political influence much safer then to have MI5 programmes like Spooks in place. 

One applications as a film editor on a six-month attachment to the BBC Community Programmes Unit was unsuccessful. A senior executive sitting on the interview board, explained why. The applicant was interviewed but as soon as he left the room, MI5 said there had been a mistake. His file had a Christmas tree, meaning a security file was because of something to do with sympathies for Welsh nationalism. He didn't get the job. His Welsh nationalist activities amounted to learning the Welsh language, because he was working on programmes of Welsh interest. This is also true for applicants with Scottish or Irish sympathies.


Many sources spoke of Savile’s membership of P.I.E which was known to many others within the BBC, who were either sympathetic or were members themselves. There was no effective pursuit of Savile, his friends in the BBC or the organisation, by either MI5 or the BBC, during the many years of P.I.E’s existence. Contrasted against their thorough vetting of BBC staff, with liberal thoughts or politics, there can be but one conclusion on the generic nature and extent of BBC/MI5 paedophile patronage. Savile must have been vetted by MI5. Savile was known, by many of his contacts, to be a child sex abuser for over 50 years. Savile was a procurer for royalty and the wealthy. Savile was a protected man. This cesspit, is at the core of the British ruling class, protected by both MI5 and the BBC, they are filth.

Friday 26 October 2012

Savile a cornerstone of the establishment

Hi Tap, I thought it was it is time to move on from SAVILE, & look at the Deeper Implications, & show just how widespread this Paedophilic Practice is , & the Extent to which it is accepted as Normal Behaviour in the Elitist Circles. It appears to underpin much of Recent History, & explains much, & why those who should have been removed from Public Office, just end up with getting their Wrists Slapped, & sometimes not even that. Those in Authority who do address the issue, & seek to investigate claims, get Tared & Feathered, by The Elite Parasites who seek to stop such Investigations. BUT NOW I AM NOT SO SURE WE CAN MOVE AWAY FROM SAVILE, HE APPEARED TO BE A CORNER STONE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. It is well known that he vas vetted by The Intelligence Services, who it appears didn't want to loose him. He always struck me as a Complete Arse'ole quite frankly, but he was in an Industry that could exercise tremendous leverage over the record buying teenagers, as well as Culturally  Influencing them. Had he not been so important they would have OUTED HIM. was this due to His GANGSTER & IRA CONTACTS. He would also have been a Key Informant, in his roll of Supplier, in Keeping Tabs on The Users. This information would have been very important, to keep them under control.

The Savile Affair is gathering a Momentum all of its own, which will as I predicted produce a Monumental Avalanche, when That 'Butterfly Gets out of Control' It is only through Alternative media that this Information ever saw the 'Light of Day', it was only then after Blogs spread this information that the Main & Controlled Media  had to follow suit, with still The BBC dragging it's heels, & a great reluctance to admit anything. We will see Major Heads Roll, when The Rats Start Leaving The Sinking Ship. As you have rightly pointed out Tap. I am of the opinion that RANTZEN, is Highly Implicated, by Association, as Savile was not the type to keep his mouth shut was he?
If Clark was responsible for allowing Savile to have The Keys Of BROADMOOR SECURITY HOSPITAL, (and if he wasn't more serious questions need to be asked), then THATCHER will be Involved by Association also, not only via Clark, but through Savile who was a Personal Friend of hers, as it is doubtful he would have kept his Big Mouth shut on such an Issue. It also appears he was a Friend of The Krays, he had links with The IRA, associated with TOP COPS. He was also on Friendly Terms with Boothby, Driberg & Many Other Deviants.

TAP -  MPs are begging the BBC to make this all go away.  It's much bigger than the BBC.  Cameron's response is minimal as he knows the scandal has legs and could overwhelm his government.
The Sunday People reveals how Savile once told one of their journalists that he could fix anyone with just one phone call – to the IRA terrorists.

Savile said: "All I have to do is call my friends in the IRA. They’ll have someone waking up in hospital the next morning eating their breakfast through a f***ing straw
CAMERON, & ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THESE SLIMY PERVERTERS, & PURVEYORS  OF JUSTICE WILL BE PUTTING THEIR 'BALLS ON THE BLOCK' IN NO UNCERTAIN MANNER, ALSO NOW IS THE TIME TO ASK SOME VERY PERTINENT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BBC, & THE POWER THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN. 
THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT, TO SET A PENALTY FOR NON COMPLIANCE OVER LICENSING. AS WAS POINTED OUT IN THE BLOG, SEVERAL WEEKS AGO. THIS IS IN BREACH OF COMMON LAW. 
WE SHOULD BE ASKING, WHAT RIGHT HAVE THEY TO CHARGE ANY LICENSE  FEE AT ALL, OR SHOULD THEY EVEN BE ALLOWED TO EXIST IN THEIR PRESENT FORM AS THEY ARE NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.
It appears the only thing Savile hasn't done is to Commit Murder, though with the Villains he associated with he could well have arranged Contracts on those he wanted removed for causing him problems. No doubt in the forthcoming weeks we wi;ll be enlightened on this issue.

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

Tuesday 23 October 2012

NJ “Weedman” found not guilty in jury nullification victory

Image source
JG Vibes
Activist Post

With few options left for people to protect themselves from the ever growing police state, an old and long forgotten aspect of constitutional law is making a huge comeback, and becoming very popular in cases where people are facing jail time for nonviolent offenses.

This reemerging defense is the act of jury nullification, which is basically the right for any juror to not only judge the facts of the case, but to also actually judge the validity of the law itself. This means that if a jury feels that a defendant is facing an unjust charge they actually have the right to rule in their favor even if they are technically guilty.

Ed Forchion is a medical cannabis user and cancer patient known as the “NJ weedman”. Ed claims dual residency in Pemberton Township, New Jersey and Los Angeles, California. Due to his residency in California he has a prescription for Cannabis and is legally allowed to grow and consume the plant in that state.

However, he is not legally allowed to possess the plant in the state of New Jersey and unfortunately while in New Jersey on April 1, 2012 Forchion was stopped by police and found with a pound of cannabis and $2,000, enough to get slapped with a distribution charge.

At an earlier trial last spring, he was convicted of possession, but that jury could not reach a unanimous decision on the more serious distribution charge, leading to this week’s retrial. With the distribution charge he was facing 10 years, and it is likely that the jury couldn’t send him away with a clear conscience. Ed’s primary strategy throughout his whole ordeal has been jury nullification, much to the dismay of Superior Court Judge Charles Delehey, who presided over both trials.


Forchion was passionate in his closing arguments, wearing a shirt that said “Marijuana … It’s OK. It’s Just Illegal” and telling the jury that he had been munching on pot cookies throughout the whole trial. Then at one point he was nearly held in contempt of court for trying to advance his jury nullification argument.

Considering the fact that most of the nonviolent offenses on the books today are extremely unpopular for a variety of reasons, you would think that jury nullification would be household knowledge, or taught in schools even. However, this is a very well guarded secrets, with many judges actually preventing the defense from informing juries of their right to nullify laws that they feel are unjust.

When Forcion started to talk about nullification, Delehey quickly stopped him, reminding him that he wasn’t allowed to go there, but Forchion fought back with intelligence and intensity. Frustrated, the judge ordered the jury out of the room and told him he would be held in contempt if he continued to speak the truth.

According to Phillyblurbs the judge told him “If you want to make a martyr of yourself, the court will deal with you. You’ve done everything you can to disrupt this trial.”

There has been a constant tug of war between the defendant and the judge for the past year. During last May’s trial, Forchion and his supporter’s placed pamphlets about jury nullification on cars parked in the jury parking lot and were very vocal about the illegitimacy of the law and the juries right to decide the validity of the law.

In pretrial motions, which were subsequently barred from being argued before the jury, Forchion challenged the constitutionality of the state’s criminal code now that New Jersey has a Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana law that recognizes the benefits of cannabis.

He said Thursday he looks forward to the state Appellate Division reviewing that motion when he appeals the possession conviction, which he still faces sentencing on. Oddly enough, it will be the same judge who decides his sentence, but he will still have the ability to appeal, which can possibly lead to another acquittal.

J.G. Vibes is the author of an 87 chapter counter culture textbook called Alchemy of the Modern Renaissance and host of a show called Voluntary Hippie Radio. He is also an artist with an established record label and event promotion company that hosts politically charged electronic dance music events. You can keep up with his work, which includes free podcasts, free e-books & free audiobooks at his website www.aotmr.com.

Saturday 20 October 2012

Scientists: Creativity Part of ‘Mental Illness’

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

If you like to express yourself through painting, writing, or any other form of artistic action, scientists now say that you must be suffering from a mental illness of some kind. In a new display of how truly insane the mainstream medical health paradigm has become, mainstream media outlets are now regurgitating the words of ‘experts’ who say that those who are creative are actually, more often than not, mentally ill.

After all, more than 50% of the United States is, by definition of the psychiatrists of the nation, mentally ill. Even questioning the government is considered a mental disorder. It should come as no surprise to know that upwards of 70% of the psychiatrists who write the conditions are — of course — on the payroll of those who produce the drugs to ‘treat’ the conditions. It should also therefore come as no surprise to note that the DSM (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, which is the foundation of the entire diagnosis system) now contains over 900 pages of bogus disorders.

And perhaps creativity may soon be added to the massive textbook, which labels people who are shy, eccentric, or have unconventional romantic lives as mentally ill.

Is it any wonder that the 4th edition of the manual, which added hundreds of new ways to diagnose patients, led to a 40 times increase in bipolar disorder diagnoses. Even the lead editor of the DSM-IV Allen Frances, MD, has stated the book is utter nonsense:
There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bull****. I mean, you just can’t define it, he said.
Real information like this is what has led the mainstream news to re-title their pieces regarding the new classification of creativity as a mental illness, changing the headlines to more ‘ginger’ ways of linking the two together. Meanwhile, the writers of the study claiming that creativity is part of a mental illness are quite clear in stating that creativity is literally a mental illness. The extent in which you wish to ‘treat’ your creativity, however, is apparently up to you and your doctor.


Be of caution, however, as you have to decide at ‘what cost’ you will allow your creativity to exist. As the study writer stated:
If one takes the view that certain phenomena associated with the patient’s illness are beneficial, it opens the way for a new approach to treatment. In that case, the doctor and patient must come to an agreement on what is to be treated, and at what cost.
As expected the way to ‘treat’ your creativity is of course to take pharmaceutical drugs in the form of anti-depressants or hardcore psychotropic drugs. The same drugs that virtually all suicidal massacre shooters have taken before or during their rampages.

As virtually everything we think and do is classified as a symptom of a mental disorder, the mainstream psychiatric paradigm will continue to grow like a massive parasite alongside the pharmaceutical industry that profits off of the absolute laughable diagnoses of regular adults, children, and even toddlers. Until we realize that we need to shift into a new health paradigm that is centered around personal health freedom and shed corporate science as a whole, we will continue to see insane headlines classifying thought and emotion as mental illness.

Explore More:


This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

Thursday 18 October 2012

Decriminalize Drug Possession, UK Experts Say

Phillip Smith
Stop The Drug War

In a report six years in the making, the United Kingdom Drug Policy Commission, a non-governmental advisory body chaird by Dame Edith Runciman, has called for a reboot of British drug policy and for decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use.

The report, A Fresh Approach to Drugs, found that the UK is wasting much of the $4.8 billion a year it spends fighting illegal drugs and that the annual cost to the country of hard drug use was about $20 billion. A smarter set of drug policies emphasizing prevention, diversion, and treatment would be a more effective use of public resources, the report found.

Some 42,000 people in the UK are convicted each year of drug possession offenses and another 160,000 given citations for marijuana possession. Arresting, citing, and jailing all those people "amounts to a lot of time and money for police, prosecution, and courts," the report said.

"To address these costs, there is evidence to suggest that the law on the possession of small amounts of controlled drugs, for personal use only, could be changed so that it is no longer a criminal offence. Criminal sanctions could be replaced with simple civil penalties, such as a fine, perhaps a referral to a drug awareness session run by a public health body, or if there was a demonstrable need, to a drug treatment program. The evidence from other countries that have done this is that it would not necessarily lead to any significant increase in use, while providing opportunities to address some of the harms associated with existing drug laws," the report recommended.


"Given its relatively low level of harm, its wide usage, and international developments, the obvious drug to focus on as a first step is cannabis, which is already subject to lesser sanctions than previously with the use of cannabis warnings. If evaluations indicated that there were no substantial negative consequences, similar incremental measures could be considered, with caution and careful further evaluation, for other drugs," the report said.

But while the commission was ready to embrace decriminalization, it was not ready to go as far as legalizing drug sales.

"We do not believe that there is sufficient evidence at the moment to support the case for removing criminal penalties for the major production or supply offences of most drugs," it said.

Still, policy makers might want to consider lowering the penalties for growing small numbers of marijuana plants to "undermine the commercialization of production, with the associated involvement of organized crime."

The report also called for a review of harsh sentences for drug offenses, a consistent framework for regulating all psychoactive substances—from nicotine to heroin—and for moving the policy prism through which drug policy is enacted from the criminal justice system to the public health system.

But the Home Office, which currently administers drug policy in Britain, wasn't having any of it. Things are going swimmingly already, a Home Office spokesperson said.

"While the government welcomes the UKDPC's contribution to the drugs debate, we remain confident that our ambitious approach to tackling drugs - outlined in our drugs strategy - is the right one," the spokesperson said. "Drug usage is at it lowest level since records began. Drug treatment completions are increasing and individuals are now significantly better placed to achieve recovery and live their lives free from drugs."I want to take this opportunity to thank the UKDPC for its work in this area over the past six years."
Please visit and support StopTheDrugWar.org to help end prohibition.

Wednesday 17 October 2012

Illegal Downloaders Are Best Customers, Too

by Staff Report

Survey Says: Illegal Downloaders Also Purchase More Legal Music Than Those That Don't Pirate ... The argument has long been that music piracy leads to a massive loss of revenue when accumulated across the millions of songs downloaded illegally. That's what groups like the RIAA have pushed for years. According to the American Assembly's upcoming Copy Culture Survey, however, that's just not the case. As it turns out, those that pirate in the United States also purchase around 30% more music than those that don't. – Geekosystems
Dominant Social Theme: If they steal, there's no appeal. Lock 'em up.
Free-Market Analysis: We've written about copyright and its criminalization numerous times and this article on Geekosystems and the one it is based on at The American Assembly are no surprise: Illegal downloaders are apt to be large record purchasers.
This simply makes sense. Those who are obsessed with film spend money on movies. Those who like to read spend money on books. The issue of downloading as copyright crime is a completely separate one.
Or at least it should be. Over and over, though, we hear how much money illegal downloaders are costing the record and movie industry. In fact, illegal downloaders are those individuals most likely to SUPPORT these industries.
Kim Dotcom of Megauploads – himself in copyright trouble – is currently creating something called Megabox that will disenfranchise the record companies that have been so aggressively punitive with their customers.
Dotcom's idea is to empower the musicians themselves by providing them a facility that they can use to market their own tunes and keep most of the profits. Some say this was the real reason Dotcom was targeted.
If musicians were in charge of their own sales, the chances of copyright infringement prosecutions would likely go down a good deal. That's because musicians would be reluctant to take adversarial stances to the audiences that consume their product. Here's some more from the larger article in The American Assembly:
Where do Music Collections Come From? ... In our last installment, we noted that there's a sharp generational divide (in the US and Germany) in attitudes toward copying and file sharing, with those under 30 showing more acceptance of these practices in general and much more acceptance of sharing within loosely-defined communities of 'friends.' Not rocket science, right? But how does that translate into actual behavior? Here are average music file collections, divided by age group:
... 18-29 year olds and 30-49 year olds show very similar patterns of purchasing digital music and ripping their own CDs. Age makes virtually no difference in the scale of either practice. The difference in average collection size comes, instead, from higher levels of 'copying from family and friends' and 'downloading for free.' This is part of what we mean when we say that copy culture is youth culture.
US P2P users have larger collections than non-P2P users (roughly 37% more). And predictably, most of the difference comes from higher levels of 'downloading for free' and 'copying from friends/family.'
But some of it also comes from significantly higher legal purchases of digital music than their non-P2P using peers–around 30% higher among US P2P users. Our data is quite clear on this point and lines up with numerous other studies: The biggest music pirates are also the biggest spenders on recorded music.
This is the key sentence: "The biggest music pirates are also the biggest spenders on recorded music."
Do you think, dear reader, that record company and movie executives are unaware that their largest audiences are those that pilfer music as well? Of course not.
Do you think these top execs are unaware that their aggressive tactics are alienating their top customers? Sure they are.
So why continue such counterproductive techniques? The raid and subsequent imprisonment of Kim Dotcom can be said to have backfired in some regards, turning the Megaupload owner into a kind of digital martyr and providing him with sympathy he would not otherwise have.
There must be another reason and as we have suggested in the past, there probably is. Both the music and movie industry are power elite constructions and it seems to us their stances are deliberately provocative.
The idea, in other words, is not to discourage illegal downloading for its own sake but to create such an atmosphere of paranoia that legitimate Internet discourse is discouraged and even abandoned.
We can trace these tactics back to the invention of the Gutenberg Press and the subsequent battle of the elites of the day to create copyright as a weapon to slow down the free flow of information.
Today, the battle has been joined once again and even more determinedly. The results will not be good for either the music or money businesses but those who actually own these industries don't really care.
The group in aggregate that exercises ownership is what we call the power elite, and they've been challenged as never before by the Internet and the information that has been dispersed.
The solution is to use copyright once again as a weapon. Websites are going dark, ISP providers are pressured to perform "watchdog" functions and gradually the Internet is made over into a series of discreet archipelagos, each one by law unable to share even rudimentary information with the rest.
It has been suggested that when information is cheap or free, society benefits and living standards rise. In fact, historically, this may be the case. Britain enforced copyright harshly and as a result information was expensive. Germany was copyright tolerant and as a result, information was easily dispersed, leading to a kind of golden age several hundred years ago.
The British, already entangled in Money Power, looked on enviously as Germany produced artists, philosophers and musicians. This, it has been claimed by some non-mainstream historians, was a primary reason for both World Wars. The power elite was determined to crush a potential rival.
There are many aspects to copyright and many reasons to believe the issues are far more complex than ones regarding "stealing." We're not going to argue the merits of copyright anyway. Our position has remained consistent. If you wish to enforce it, go ahead. Just don't ask government to do it for you.
But if you are a sensible artist, you will probably forego copyright prosecutions in favor of dispersing your work as widely as possible. A popular artist is a profitable one. Touring is one way to capitalize on popularity.
Sure, touring is inconvenient and live performances are a lot of work. But no one ever said an artist's life would be easy – or not any easier than another.
Conclusion: Anyway, change is coming to the entertainment industry. The power elite is going to lose yet another battle. It is not a good season for them. But they will make lives miserable as they retreat. See "Dotcom May Reap Bitter Fruits From Being a Pioneer."

Tuesday 16 October 2012

Finally.... Gary McKinnon's Decade Long Threat of US Jail is Over



RT Report
"My son has now been under arrest for longer than any British citizen ever has. He hasn't raped anyone, he hasn't murdered anyone, so can't understand how this can be happening to him, as no matter how much anyone may choose to exaggerate his crime, the fact is that his crime was tapping on a keyboard in his bedroom in north London in search of information on aliens from outer space..."
Janis Sharp -  hardcore campaigner and mother of Gary.
  :: Full Mckinnon archive here ::
Janis Sharp has said she is "overwhelmed and incredibly happy" after the announcement that her son, British computer hacker Gary McKinnon, will not be extradited to the US.
Mr McKinnon, 46, who admits accessing US government computers but claims he was looking for evidence of UFOs, has been fighting extradition since 2002. His mother told a press conference that Mr McKinnon "couldn't speak" when he heard the news. Mr McKinnon, from Wood Green, north London, who has been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism, faced 60 years in jail if convicted in the US.

Monday 15 October 2012

Fighting Cancer: Another Study Reveals the Cannabis and Cancer Link

Elizabeth Renter
Activist Post

Does marijuana cause cancer? Revealing the link between cannabis and cancer yet again, researchers with the California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco have released findings that further bolster cannabis as an anti-cancer solution. The researchers have found a compound in the much-talked-about plant could “halt the spread” of many types of aggressive cancers, including breast cancer.

The Cannabis and Cancer Link

Cannabidiol is the compound, and while it fights cancer cells, it does not produce the high feelings commonly associated with cannabis. Instead, it seems to “switch off” the gene responsible for metastasizing breast cancer.

They reportedly found the compound doesn't only stop the breast cancer cells from growing, but even causes them to return back to normal cells, cancer-free.

Further exemplifying the benefits of marijuana and showing the cannabis and cancer relationship, a similar study was published last year after the group found promising results in mice. Now, they say they are “on the verge” of publishing another study on animals that further expands these results.
The preclinical trial data is very strong, and there’s no toxicity. There’s really a lot or research to move ahead with and to get people excited,” said study co-leader Dr. Sean McAllister.

The research is a long way off from developing a medication or cancer-treatment for humans, but it is another step in the right direction. They are said to be developing human trials and look forward to testing it in combination with current chemo therapies. A real measure of success, however, would be found if the natural substance could be used without traditional chemo.

As we reported just a few months ago, the effectiveness of this go-to traditional cancer treatment is highly questionable, furthering the need for a natural alternative. Scientists looking at cancer cells unexpectedly found that chemo actually damages healthy cells and causes them to release a protein that actually increases tumor growth. In addition, it makes the tumor more resistant to future treatment.

This is in addition to all of the side effects brought on by this poison—including the well-known hair loss and nausea, as well as long term cognitive dysfunction.

Other studies have been made over the past decades much like this one linking cannabis and cancer prevention: Manuel Guzman located in Madrid, Spain discovered that cannabinoids substantially inhibit the growth of tumors in a variety of lab animals. In the study he also found that not one of these tested animals endured any kind of side effects seen in many similar chemotherapy treatments. It is becoming increasingly clear that you can sidestep any of the misery associated with traditional cancer treatments and embrace the potent, effective healing powers of THC and cannabidiol (CBD).

Now we just have to cross our fingers that Big Pharma won’t stake her claim on the natural compounds, patenting them, creating perverse versions of them in a lab to bottle and affix with an exorbitant price.

Additional Sources:
DailyMail

Explore More:

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

Tuesday 9 October 2012

Savile. People are still missing the big story.


People are still missing the big story.  He was a paedophile procurer.
He delivered kids to Prime Minister Edward Heath.
Prince Charles admitted being entertained by his 'ladies'.
The media are only scratching the surface.
Sure Savile was a rapist and a paedophile, and maybe worse.
But it's who he procured kids for that would really shock the nation.
 

Friday 5 October 2012

ATOS profits pile up while misery for disabled grows

At last, the big bucks to be made out of forcing disabled people through humiliating tests to cut their benefit are out in the open, thanks to detective work by a member of the Scottish parliament.
The Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has consistently refused to publish details of its contracts with French IT firm ATOS who are pushing two million people through benefit cut tests, claiming commercial confidentiality.
Nevertheless, Kevin Stewart, member of the Edinburgh parliament for Aberdeen, made a demand under freedom of information to see papers relating to the ATOS contract for Scotland and northern England.
A risk assessment document produced by ATOS arrived in his in box with the figures removed as usual. But by transferring it into a different text format – bingo, the truth popped out.
And so it transpires that if ATOS can push 15% more people than their target through the humiliating and meaningless tests, their profits will soar to £40m on a £207m contract. Even if they fall 15% below target they will still make £28m.
The total value of ATOS UK-wide contracts is £400m. That suggests that they will make a profit of between £55m and £82m on the whole contract.
The ATOS profit of £82m alone would pay disability living allowance for more than 20,000 people a year. If you take the value of the whole contract, it could pay for 22,000 people for five years.
The government must be looking for a huge number of people to be forced off benefit, if the whole process is to be worthwhile. The DWP has always refused to put a figure on it, but campaigners believe the government wants to reduce by half the 3.2 million who currently receive the benefit.
So that’s the cost-benefit-risk analysis – which shows there is absolutely no risk at all for greedy ATOS. But what about the actual real-life costs:
More than 40% of appeals against ATOS rulings succeed, and when you look only at those who appealed with help from the Citizens Advice Bureau, that rises to a staggering 70%.
The decisions being made are beyond belief:
Aaron Moon lost his leg when a soldier in Afghanistan. He only just survived a massive number of injuries. Some days he can’t get his prosthetic limb on because it’ so painful. He’s deemed fit for work.
Colin Traynor was deemed fit for work. He had never been able to get a job because of his frequent epileptic seizures. His appeal was upheld, but by that time Colin had died from a massive seizure – his parents say his condition was exacerbated by stress.
From Facebook posts we find a man who this week is in hospital having treatment on his injured spine – and next week he will hear whether his appeal has been successful.
Another woman posts that she had her eighth heart attack on the way from the test centre to the taxi rank. During the test the doctor said the blood pressure machine must be broken, because “you look fine”. The women got home from hospital 10 days later to find she had been deemed fit for work and her benefits stopped.
Last year, 1,100 people who failed the test never managed to get a job because they died.
Remember it was a Labour government that replaced incapacity benefit and income support for new claimants with Employment Support Allowance in 2008. And Labour will continue the attack on welfare if it wins the next election.
Communities need to unite to defend people from these cruel tests. But the truth is that even a universal boycott – people refusing to go, DWP staff refusing to implement the decisions – will not prevent the government from forging ahead, though action on this issue by benefits and health professionals is long overdue.
We need to make a political change, to a democratic society where every citizen is supported to make the best of their life, to contribute what they can, and everyone receives enough of society’s shared resources to live well. Removing the power of vulture corporations like ATOS to profit from misery would be a crucial step towards this.
Penny Cole

New study suggests humans are not naturally violent

J.G. Vibes
Activist Post

A new study published last month in Nature Journal suggests that humans are naturally good. This study adds to the mounting evidence against the popular misconception that corruption is a trait of human nature.

In ten experiments using economic games, scientists observed that faster decisions result in more cooperation and generosity, while slower, calculated decisions show a decrease in cooperation and generosity. The conclusion is that the automatic reaction is to be friendly, generous and cooperative, and only upon further consideration do humans become greedy or violent.

From the study:
“To explain these results, we propose that cooperation is intuitive because cooperative heuristics are developed in daily life where cooperation is typically advantageous. We then validate predictions generated by this proposed mechanism. Our results provide convergent evidence that intuition supports cooperation in social dilemmas, and that reflection can undermine these cooperative impulses.”
Any scientific studies these days should be taken with a grain of salt, because we are without a doubt living in an era of soviet style science, where state and corporate entities are using the scientific establishment to project a particular worldview into the mainstream consciousness. This is why it is important to always look for funding sources and seek many different avenues of research. However, in this case, this particular study is just one of many proposals put forward by the scientific community in the past several decades stating confidently that corruption has nothing to do with human nature, as the popular misconception states.

The first time this issue was brought up in the mainstream scientific community was in 1986 when scientists from around the world got together to discuss the psychological and biological evidence proving that human nature is no excuse for violent behavior. The findings that were released came to be known as “The Seville Statement”. 


This statement made 5 propositions, which are:
1. “It is scientifically incorrect to say that we have inherited a tendency to make war from our animal ancestors.”
2. “It is scientifically incorrect to say that war or any other violent behavior is genetically programmed into our human nature.”
3. “It is scientifically incorrect to say that in the course of human evolution there has been a selection for aggressive behavior more than for other kinds of behavior.”
4. “It is scientifically incorrect to say that humans have a ‘violent brain’.”
5. “It is scientifically incorrect to say that war is caused by ‘instinct’ or any single motivation.”
Since the Seville statement there have been many more studies reconfirming the propositions put forward. Just this past February a new study by a biologist named Frans de Waal showed that animals are naturally prone to cooperation when in the right circumstances. 

As I discussed in the article Human Nature a Self Fulfilling Prophecy, the actions that people carry out today, and the actions that have been carried out throughout history are the result of environmental factors, as well as psychological trauma and manipulation, they can not be chalked up to “human nature”.

To chalk the violence that we see around us up to human nature, is to avoid admitting there is a problem, thus preventing any progress from being made towards peace. If we think that human beings are dangerous and violent creatures, then some of us will be able to rationalize and justify malevolent behavior by writing it off as human nature, instead of condemning it as we should.

If we actually condemn this behavior instead of making empty excuses for it, we will without a doubt drastically lower the level of violence on this planet. Individually, and as a species, we can only go as far as our imagination will take us. We are only capable of what we can imagine, and if all we can imagine is violence, submission, and domination, then that’s all were ever going to get.

J.G. Vibes is the author of an 87 chapter counter culture textbook called Alchemy of the Modern Renaissance and host of a show called Voluntary Hippie Radio. He is also an artist with an established record label and event promotion company that hosts politically charged electronic dance music events. You can keep up with his work, which includes free podcasts, free e-books & free audiobooks at his website www.aotmr.com .

Monday 1 October 2012

Cannabis and its Medicinal Value


Posted by
Dear ISMOKE Readers,
Here in the UK we are told by our government that the cannabis plant has no medicinal value. Please could you take a moment to review some of the information listed below and let me know whether you think the government itself has authority or any real value, when it comes to being experts on medicine? Thank you for your time.
Does Cannabis Cure Cancer?
THC (marijuana) Helps Cure Cancer Says Harvard Study
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSXhwP5QjUQ&NR=1&feature=endscreen
Medical Marijuana, A Cure for Cancer? 02/11
http://www.cannabisscience.com/download/cancer_extract_kills.pdf
Web MD, Cannabis Kills Brain Cancer Cells IN HUMANS:
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/brain-cancer/news/20090401/marijuana-chemical-may-fight-brain-cancer
CANNABIS SCIENCE: EXTRACTS KILL CANCER CELLS
http://www.cannabisscience.com/news-a-media/press-releases/220-cannabis-science-extracts-kill-cancer-cells.html
Cannabis THC at high doses in area, inhibits cholangiocarcinoma cancer:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19916793?itool=Email.EmailReport.Pubmed_ReportSelector.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=6
Cannabis Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor Growth in Half:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm
THC inhibits Lung Cancer Growth
http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v27/n3/abs/1210641a.html
CBD’s switch off Breast Cancer Gene:
http://www.examiner.com/cannabis-revolution-in-national/cannabidiol-researchers-discover-the-switch-to-turn-off-aggressive-breast-cancer-gene
Anticancer activity of cannabinoids:
http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/cancer/THC_cancer_se…p_1975.htm
9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Inhibits Cell Cycle Progression in Human Breast Cancer through Cdc2 Regulation:
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/13/6615.abstract
Antitumor Activity of Plant Cannabinoids with Emphasis on the Effect of Cannabidiol on Human Breast Carcinoma:
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/318/3/1375.abstract
Cannabidiol inhibits tumour growth in leukaemia and breast cancer in animal studies:
http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/bulletin/ww_en_db_cannabis_artikel.php?id=220#2
Suppression of Nerve Growth Factor Trk Receptors and Prolactin Receptors by Endocannabinoids Leads to Inhibition of Human Breast and Prostate Cancer Cell Proliferation:
http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/141/1/118
The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation:
http://www.pnas.org/content/95/14/8375.abstract
Marijuana Ingredients Slow Invasion by Cervical and Lung Cancer Cells:
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20071226/pot-slows-cancer-in-test-tube
Cannabinoids in intestinal inflammation and cancer:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442536?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=22
Cannabis compound clue to colon cancer:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926685.000-cannabis-compound-clue-to-colon-cancer.html?feedId=drugs-alcohol_rss20
Marijuana takes on colon cancer:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14451-marijuana-takes-on-colon-cancer.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news9_head_dn14451
The endogenous cannabinoid, anandamide, induces cell death in colorectal carcinoma cells: a possible role for cyclooxygenase 2:
http://gut.bmj.com/content/54/12/1741.abstract
Anti-Tumor Effects of Cannabis:
http://www.ukcia.org/research/AntiTumorEffects.php
Cannabidiol inhibits human glioma cell migration through a cannabinoid receptor-independent mechanism:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1576089/?tool=pmcentrez
Cannabinoid action induces autophagy-mediated cell death through stimulation of ER stress in human glioma cells:
http://www.jci.org/articles/view/37948
Cannabinoids Inhibit the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Pathway in Gliomas:
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/64/16/5617.full
Cannabis extract makes brain tumors shrink, halts growth of blood vessels:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/12088.php
A pilot clinical study of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme:
http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/ww_en_db_study_show.php?s_id=193
Cannabis use and cancer of the head and neck: Case-control study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2277494/
Cannabis and Cancer research and studies from around the world
GERMANY
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12648025
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19914218
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15026328
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16893424
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15361550
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19889794
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19015962
HUNGARY
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19608284
ISRAEL
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17237277
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11586361
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14692532
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16571653
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18286801
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16250836
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17934890
ITALY
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12052046
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19189054
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18354058
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19047095
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10913156
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9653194
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18088200
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16909207
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17342320
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19059457
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12723496
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442536
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16728591
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19539619
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16500647
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19189659
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14617682
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18938775
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11106791
JAPAN
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19394652
KOREA
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20336665
NEW ZEALAND
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442435
POLAND
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15451022
SAUDI ARABIA
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18197164
SLOVAKIA
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16835997
SPAIN
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11903061
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17675107
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17202146
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19425170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18454173
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17065222
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10700234
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16787257
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15958274
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16139274
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16624285
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16616335
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11269508
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19690545
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12511587
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20307616
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16818634
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17952650
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16818650
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16596790
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15638794
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15275820
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12133838
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18339876
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9771884
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10570948
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12182964
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19229996
SWEDEN
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19609004
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16337199
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16936228
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18546271
SWITZERLAND
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15453094
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19589225
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15047233
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19509271
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19480992
TAIWAN
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18387516
THAILAND
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19916793
UKRAINE
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18438336
UNITED KINGDOM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15454482
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17583570
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17931597
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18615640
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14640910
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20191092
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18025276
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/616322
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15753356
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12091357
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18199524
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19887554
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19457575
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16908594
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12130702
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11854771
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20053780
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16754784
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20090845
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15978942
I am proposing the evidence above as a question, and not as a claim.
Matt Aldridge
---
Follow ISMOKE Magazine on Twitter @ISMOKEMAG
ISMOKE Magazine on Facebook