Home

TS Radio: Mothers Day tribute and Operation Clean Sweep

Leave a comment

painy

Join us Sunday May 12th, 2013 at 7:00pm CST! More

Minnesota: MDH to add more deadly vaccines to childhood burden

1 Comment

strip banner

new-logo25Marti Oakley  ©copyright 2013 All Rights Reserved

____________________________________________________________________

Minnesota Department of Health is attempting to by-pass public hearings under the assumption that no giving_babies_drugs-18540one is watching and no one cares…..to increase the  number of types of childhood vaccines mandated for pre-school through secondary education.  Many of the child hood vaccines are made from aborted fetal tissue and may be linked to autism.  One jab of the needle and your infant or small child can have as many as one million strands of someone else’s, or several someone else’s DNA.  Also, there is a difference between efficacy and efficiency.  Efficacy simply means that the probability of a benefit to individuals in a defined population from a medical technology applied for a given medical problem under ideal conditions of use is possible, not proven or conclusive; simply assumed to be so.

__________________________________________ More

Rep. Collin Peterson: GMO’s are good for you!

3 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25Marti Oakley

_____________________________________________________________

The letter below was received from Rep. Collin Peterson, 7th District, Minnesota.  Peterson’s 1267436152letter details his love of gmo’s and his belief that no science exist to substantiate the claims that gmo is harmful to human health.  With numerous countries around the world banning the use of gmo seeds, the importing of gmo products into their countries, and the massive number of scientific studies that were actually done to document the threat to the environment and public health that these frankenfood creations are causing, it appears Mr. Peterson is oblivious to all.  Makes you wonder what planet this guy is on. 

Mr. Peterson’s comments are in black.

My responses are in blue.

_____________________________________________________________

Dear Mr. Oakley:

Thank you for contacting my office about genetically engineered foods. I appreciate hearing from you.

Dear Mr. Peterson:  I doubt that you appreciate hearing from me or anyone else who isn’t on the bio-piracy wagon.  I am fully aware that this is a very lucrative association for you , not only politically, but personally as well.

Since the first genetically engineered crops became commercially available in the mid-1990s, U.S. soybean, cotton, and corn farmers have rapidly adopted them.

Farmers have not rapidly adopted genetically engineered crops unless you considered being coerced, bullied, terrorized, threatened with lawsuits or finding that bio-pirates such as Monsanto have monopolized the market and have the Supreme Court of The United States firmly in their pocket and also a cushy little seat in the White House to protect their interests, willing adoption of these crops.

Since that time there has been no scientific evidence suggesting that these crops are harmful. More

Chemtrails: Courtesy notice delivered to Washington State Department of Ecology

2 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25Rebecca Em Campbell

Note:  Rebecca will be our guest on Monday May 13th, 2013 on TS Radio, at 3:00 CST!

____________________________________________________________

“Whereas beginning on October 24, 2012, the One People’s Public Trust (OPPT) has filed a series of Universal Commercial Code (UCC)-based public interest legal actions in Washington State, Washington DC and the Hague de-chartering and foreclosing upon all private, for-profit corporations masquerading as governments worldwide, such as the Washington State Corporation and its subsidiaries, among them its state Department of Ecology: Compilation of OPPT-Related Articles/Websites

_____________________________________________________________

One People’s Public Trust (OPPT)Public Interest Courtesy Notice

Filer Name:

Rebecca Em Campbell

Affiliation(s): One People’s Public Trust (OPPT)

Address:

107 Pine St., No. 332 Seattle, WA 98101-1550

Date:

April 10, 2013

Recipient:

Maia Bellon

Job Title:

Director

Alleged Government Agency/Corporation:

Washington State Department of Ecology

DUNS/SEC Corporate Code Number of Alleged Government Agency/Corporation:

DUNS No. 808882385

Address:

300 Desmond Drive Olympia, WA 98504-7600

Legal Matter:

Ongoing Toxic Biochemical Geoengineering (Chemtrails) Operations Portrayed as Weather Modification Contract Projects in Washington State. Whereas, the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) states that the Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) has primary supervisory responsibility for “weather modification” in Washington State;

Whereas, the aforementioned section of the RCW states that the Department of Ecology must give public notice in advance of permitting such “weather modification” in Washington State;

Whereas no public notices for contract bids/department acceptances of such bids for “weather modification” contracts can be found in any generally accessed publication/website of record in Washington State, yet persistent toxic biochemical contrails (chemtrails) frequently appear inthe skies over Washington State, often with perceptible injury to the people and environmentof this state since at least 1994:

Unsolved Mysteries

: Toxic Clear Gelatinous Blobs in Rainfall Sicken Residents of Oakville, Washington State-1994  Air Controllers in Washington State/British Columbia Concerned Over MassivePersistent Contrails (Chemtrails) Spraying-2002 Playing God with the Weather Over the San Juan Islands.

More

The Ruthie Report: Rusty Fleming updates news from the border

Leave a comment

banner logo

Join Ruthie May 9th, 2013 at 8:00pm CST! More

Death Panels Are Already At A Hospital Near You

Leave a comment

strip banner

new-logo25By author/contributor Marilyn M.  Singleton, M.D., J.D. a board-certified  anesthesiologist and Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)  member

___________________________________________________________________________________

When advance health care directives (“living wills”)  were popularized, the guiding principle was to allow patients to choose to “die  with dignity.” But one man’s dignity is another man’s poison. Surveys suggest  that half of those with a serious chronic illness prefer to die at home. The  other half prefer treatment in hospitals.

Advance directive legislation has evolved from a means  to ensure patient autonomy to a license for health providers to ObamacareHurtwithdraw medical  treatment—even against a patient’s wishes. Statutory advance directives provide  that individuals “have the right to give instructions about their own health  care,” but they fail to mention that such instructions may not be carried out if  individuals have chosen life. (See, for example, California Probate Code section  4701).

The Uniform Health Care Decisions Act (UHCDA), model  legislation developed in 1994, has been adopted in whole or in part by several  states. It provides that health-care providers—without legal consequences—may  decline to comply with an individual’s health-care decision that “requires  medically ineffective health care or health care contrary to generally accepted  health-care standards applicable to the health-care provider or institution.”  Not surprisingly, the key term, “medically ineffective” is not defined. Any  attempts at specificity would force an open debate on the morality of rationing  and “playing God.”

Patients must be informed of the rules before the final  seconds of the game. Under state laws, circumstances under which wishes can be  denied range from a terminal condition or permanent unconsciousness (Alabama) to  being permanently unconscious or “an incurable or irreversible condition” that  will cause death “within a relatively short time”  (Maine).

Unbeknownst to patients, many hospitals have policies  that flesh out treatment withdrawal standards. For example, Stanford Hospital’s  “Policy for Medically Ineffective (Futile) Treatment”  states:

Medically ineffective refers to treatment that would not  offer the patient any significant benefit. If an attending physician believes  treatment is not medically ineffective and assumes care of the patient,  treatment is not medically ineffective.

This tortured clarification anoints the physician as the  final arbiter. More

TS Radio: Conservatorship hell…The Story of Danny Tate

1 Comment

painy

Join us May 5th, 2013 at 7:00pm CST! More

Older Entries Newer Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 857 other followers

%d bloggers like this: