Doctors engaged in widespread medical fraud at Madison protests with fake doctor's notes

If you're an eighth grader and you show up to school with a fake doctor's note excusing your suspicious absence the day before, you would probably face detention or some other punishment, including a possible investigation for truancy. But if you're a teacher and you call in "sick" with a fake doctor's note handed to you at a protest in Madison, Wisconsin, then that's apparently okay... because that's what countless public school teachers have been doing the past week.

Masterminding the effort are rogue medical doctors committing medical fraud by carrying out obviously contrived conversations with protestors then writing them doctors' notes to excuse them from work for such things as "fatigue" or "emotional stress."

What we have, then, is a tag team of fraud: The teachers who have abandoned their public duties and abandoned their students by calling in "sick," and the medical doctors who are promoting the whole charade by pretending to diagnose these teachers with some sort of ailment that gets them off the hook.

This sends a really powerful message back home to all the students in the Madison public school system: "Do as we say, not as we do."

Doctors engaged in widespread medical fraud at Madison protests with fake doctor's notes
Mike Adams, Natural News, February 20, 2011

545 vs. 300,000,000 People - By Charlie Reese

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

545 vs. 300,000,000 People - By Charlie Reese
This is billed as Charlie Reese's final column. I don't know whether it is or not - but it certainly is an all-time classic. Few people can match Reese in clarity of thought.

And yes, do check out this poem, allegedly also penned by Reese:

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.

Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.

Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...

Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'

When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.

Oh the heights of irony...

Supposed experts interviewed by ABC News claim it is unethical to refuse the vaccine. “Does Americans’ right to determine what is best for themselves and their families trump the federal government’s efforts to head off what it believes could be a flu pandemic?” writes Patrick Jonsson for ABC News. “The US government says it has no intention of forcing vaccinations, but its entire flu strategy could be undermined – endangering public health, they say – if a substantial portion of the US population opts out of the $3 billion program.”

The corporate media’s own polls reveal that around two-thirds of parents have serious reservations about the vaccines’ effectiveness and safety. Millions of people simply distrust the government and do not buy into the propaganda.

“Many of the concerns by parents are based on the perception that this vaccine has been rushed into production and may not be safe,” Tom Skinner, a CDC spokesman, told Fox News. “We understand parents’ concerns – they want what is best for their children. We often tell people the best antidote for fear is information. And we ask them to really seek out sound and reliable information from sources they trust.”

According to the CDC, parents need to stop listening to a large number of doctors and virologists who say the vaccines are dangerous and instead get their information exclusively from the corporate media.

Corporate Media: Is Not Taking the Vaccine Unethical?
Kurt Nimmo, Infowars, October 12, 2009

I honestly don't even know where to begin... So the same media outlets that for years have been lying about things they did report on while covering up other things they had an obvious ethical obligation to report on are now trying to tell me what's ethical and what is not. The same people who have no problem quoting unnamed anonymous sources as if their words were the Gospel are now trying to teach me ethics.

Hey, ABC, where were you for Ellen Mariani? Because, see, your viewers may have cared to know that some of the victims of the crime of the century were less than happy about the story they were told about that crime. They may have also cared to know that the most serious post-9/11 terror attack on the US soil was planned not by a Muslim group but by American-born White anti-government extremists. Or those of your viewers who are concerned about their finances -and who isn't? - might want to know what their money is really worth. To that end would be nice of you to try and give them an idea as to what the Federal Reserve is all about. Strangely, I can not recall you ever covering the topic.

Just to clarify things a bit - this rant is not exclusively directed at the ABC News as pretty much all the major news outlets in the US and in much of the Western World act rather similarly. Well, they seem to be owned by pretty much the same group of players so why should that not be so?

Be that as it may - I would very much rather have an old whore extol the virtues of chastity to me than have mainstream media tell me what is or is not ethical for the simple reason that I expect the former to be far more entertaining than the latter. OK, mainstream media, now that you've heard this little rant - carry on. Keep on doin' Pravda and Der Sturmer proud!

Zero: an investigation into 9/11

Google Video link

Zero's home website

This is a professional grade documentary examining the many aspects of 9/11 the US government and mainstream media have chosen to ignore, distort or conceal. Highly recommended.

$700 billion is nothing

Voters are rightly furious at the proposal to spend $700,000,000,000 that the government doesn't have to bail out Wall Street bankers who created the current economic crisis in the first place. But why then aren't we concerned about the trillions of dollars the Federal Reserve is pumping into the system? Or the trillions missing from the Pentagon? Or the quadrillion dollar derivatives bubble.

For more news and economic analysis, visit:

http://www.corbettreport.com

YouTube link

"Open Complicity: Anatomy of the 9/11 Cover-Up"

4 May 2007
By Boris Epstein

The following is a very interesting, though somewhat controversial documentary produced by A2planet/Ann Arbor 9/11 Truth. To preempt any misunderstanding, I would like to restate here - once again - that material I present is not necessarily material I agree with in its entirety. The reason I am restating it here is that the film touches on some very emotive issues and I can foresee a lot of people jumping to conclusions here whereas the truth of the matter is that I have as of yet not even fully formed an opinion about it - other than to say that ideas presented there are certainly worth a look and a thought. So without further ado I am now going to let the film speak for itself.



Google Video link

Hours after 9/11 attacks, Rumsfeld allegedly said, 'My interest is to hit Saddam'

According to NBC's chief Pentagon correspondent, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that his "interest is to hit Saddam Hussein" just hours after the attacks on September 11, 2001, "even though all indications pointed at al-Qaida as the guilty party," a Rhode Island newspaper reports.

At the annual Business Expo at the Rhode Island Convention Center Tuesday, NBC's Jim Miklaszewski "advanced a theme garnering attention since former CIA director George J. Tenet made his public revelations last week," writes Tom Mooney for the Providence Journal.

"Some things are right on the mark, when he says the Bush administration appeared predisposed to attack Iraq," Miklaszewski says of Tenet's book At the Center of the Storm.

The NBC correspondent's "information" comes from "off the record" notes given to him from an unidentified person who was "in the White House situation room in the hours after the attacks."

"However, the notes describe, Miklaszewski said, then-Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld vowing to avenge the terrorist attacks by voicing frustration that attacks against the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in 1983 and the attack on the Cole, in 2000, had gone unavenged," Mooney writes. "Reading from his notes, Miklaszewski quoted Rumsfeld as saying five hours after the terrorist attacks: 'My interest is to hit Saddam Hussein at the same time we go after al-Qaida.'"

Hours after 9/11 attacks, Rumsfeld allegedly said, 'My interest is to hit Saddam', RAW STORY, May 2, 2007

And sure, why not? After all, that was what PNAC was set to do anyhow - and now that so much had happened and there was no need to answer for those missing $2.3 trillion - why not just go for it?

Oklahoma City Bombing: live local TV coverage soon after the event

from disinfo.com

Disinformation: After the bombing, while the rescue attempts were going on, the Oklahoma TV News stations were reporting that the police and ATF officials were saying that there were more undetonated bombs found in the building. The TV newsmen kept reporting this for hours. Police logs confirmed undetonated bombs were found, and so did FEMA reports. Even Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, on the morning of the bombing, said, "The reports I have is that one device was deactivated, and apparently, there's another device." But since then the government has claimed that all these reports and sightings of other bombs were wrong. That there was only the one McVeigh truck bomb. Does that make sense? Do you believe that?

Charles Key: Yes, the information is just very strong, and to me it's too strong to be able to try to discount it. We have affidavits in our report from paramedics and other rescuers at the scene who say they heard law enforcement people stating there were other bombs found in the building. And then you had bomb experts who had time to drive to a TV station, and sit there, and talk about the un-detonated bombs they had, bombs that were found in the building. You know, it's just too much competent information that can't be reasoned away as mistakes.

Disinformation: In that same TV interview, Governor Keating, who is an ex-FBI agent, said, ". . . obviously, whatever did the damage to the Murrah Building was a tremendous, very sophisticated explosive device." But explosives experts have made it clear that an ANFO bomb is an extremely rudimentary bomb. If someone blew up the building by placing charges on different columns inside the buildings, then that would take a sophisticated knowledge of explosives, right?

Charles Key: Yes. Authorities have said that an ANFO bomb is a very simple, crude bomb.

Disinformation: What might be the most intriguing information you put out in your Final Report is that the most preeminent experts on explosives--people like Sam Cohen and General Partin--have said an ANFO truck bomb could not have possibly done the damage to the Murrah Building. You've said that the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee tried very hard to find an expert or authority who would say that an ANFO bomb could have done the damage, but you weren't able to, right?

Charles Key: That's true. Yes. We couldn't find anybody who would put their name, put their opinion in writing, that an ANFO truck bomb could have done this. If somebody wants to claim that it could have been done, then they need to put in writing, show how it could work, and give examples of that. And nobody I know of has been able to do that. Not even the witnesses the government used in the trial could do it. They didn't do it...

http://www.disinfo.com/arch...
www.prisonplanet.tv

www.st911.org

YouTube link


See also:
The Oklahoma City Bombing

And now back to Oklahoma City and all those years and events since...

The Qana controversy

The horrible news of a building that was destroyed in Qana today has been broadcast all over the world today. At the first glance, the picture appears fairly straightforward: the Israeli military fires a missile at the building, it collapses, scores of victims are burried in the rubble. Yet the reports on the incident are far from unanimous. This post is just a short summation of the different perspectives. I do not know what happened there but every time reports differ so wildly one is forced to think that not all is clear about the event in question.

According to Haaretz,

The Israel Defense Forces convened a press conference Sunday evening, admitting that while the IAF did indeed strike the building in which the civilians were killed, the attack itself occurred near midnight, while reports of an explosion and the structure's collapse were only received at around 8:30 A.M.

The air force did resume bombing Qana at 7:30 A.M., however the strikes were carried out on targets at a distance of 460 meters from the building.

"The question we don't have an answer to is what happened between 12 midnight and 8 in the morning," said IAF Brigadier General Amir Eshel.

Lebanese villagers in Qana who were witness to the bombing, however, say that the building's collapse occurred in the wee hours of the night.

Witnesses at the scene corroborated the IDF claim that the strike on the building, which is located in the Hariva neighborhood of Qana, was carried out at 1:00 A.M. After the initial strike, some of the building's residents exited in an attempt to survey the damage, in effect saving themselves.

A few minutes later, IAF planes struck the building once again, causing the walls to collapse on the residents who did not vacate, killing them in the process.

Arab media began reporting on the incident after dawn Sunday, approximately seven hours after the strike. The reports did not note, however, that the building collapsed a short time prior to Arab journalists' arrival on the scene.

Roughly the same scenario as that relayed by General Eshel was described by some of my Israeli webfriends. Some of them believe that the reason for the collapse of the building was an explosion of some of the Hezbollah's ordnance as according to some reports a missile-carrying vehicle was seen entering the parking garage under the building during the night.

According to IsraelInsider,

Israeli missiles, most fired from combat helicopters, struck this southern Lebanese village early Sunday. One missile hit near a large apartment building, with the concussion causing its collapse. CNN's Ben Wedeman, who was at the site, reported that no ordinance actually hit the building, but hit the ground nearby, creating a large crater. He speculated that the concussive impact cause the nearby four-story apartment to collapse.

I have thus far been unable to find Wederman's reporting on this in his own words.

The situation seems fairly confusing to say the least. This is about the only thing that can be said for certain. And in a case like this one must not exclude any reasonable hypotheses - including the one that Hezbollah had caused this deadly accident, or even set the explosives off on purpose, in order to present Israel as a plausible perpetrator and score a major PR coup. Such a turn of events is by no stretch an impossibility - one needs to look no further that the famous February 1994 Sarajevo market bombing or, for that matter, the events of 9/11.

For the record, I don't have an opinion as to what happened this morning in Qana. However, the very fact that the story most widely circulated - that the building's collapsed was a direct result of the Israeli attack - has so many inconsistencies associated with it is reason enough to take it with a grain of salt.

Bravo, Sibel!

Here is a letter the former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds has written to Thomas Kean, Chairman Of The 9/11 Commission.

A couple of comments here, if I may. The letter above summarizes the experiences of just one woman, working in a fairly low-level position for the FBI for a short period of a mere several months. Let us take it with a grain of salt, as she may be bitter or highly subjective for other reasons, and, for the sake of argument, discount half of what she is saying. We still get a very grim picture of glaring omissions in the relevant portions of the 9/11 report.

Let us also for the sake of argument assume that everything stated in the report is 100% true,- which may be the case,- but let us merely assume that the "omission ratio", so to speak, in parts of the reports other than the ones Sibel Edmonds' experience is relevant to, is comparable to that in the sections she is discussing in her letter. That leaves us with a report so incomplete as to be almost irrelevant. It is akin to a building which is made of quality materials,- but in which entire floors are missing.

Personally, having myself spent almost three years working in a government facility, I don't have any problem viewing all of Ms Edmonds' allegations as entirely realistic. I can very easily indeed imagine things like that happening.

So, my advice to those who choose to trust the 9/11 commission report is,- do what makes you happy, just remember,- there may be ten feet of snow between what you have chosen to believe and the truth, as this report appears to be a mass-scale snow job.

I would also like to add that I think we are all very lucky indeed that there are people like Sibel Edmonds out there, and should do what we can to help her weather the storm she is now in.