Other
See other Other Articles
Title: Coral Snake's Bites of the Week 2007-24
Source:
00-Hotherp Reports
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jul 17, 2007
Author: Coral Snake
Post Date: 2007-07-17 03:52:39 by Coral Snake
Keywords: Federal Reserve, Money, Depopulation, FDA, Global Warm, Pope, Staking, Rothhschild
Views: 522
Coral Snake's Bites of the Week 2007-24 Depopulation is again a major theme in the bites this week with the Food and Drug Administration / Federal Drug Administration drawing two for its further attack on natural food supplements and for soon approving meat from cloned animals for human consumption. Big Pharma also pulls one for introducing autism causing mercury based preservatives to its vaccines. David Mayer de Rothschild also gets the fangs for being the true face behind the "global warming" fraud whose purpose is also "crisis nanagement" totalitarianism and depopulation. Out side of the depopulation theme the Federal Reserve System gets one for its counterfeiting and inflation of the dollar and thed Pope and his Jesuit General Peter Hans Kolvenbach get one for their recent declaration that the Roman Church is the "only true church" there by opening the way for the return of barbaric ancient punishments like “staking” (burning alive at the stake) and confession generating torture against Protestants and Secularists when the Illegal Alians (mainly Roman) reach the numbers necessary to take over America. As always Remember the KEY and enjoy. This week The WORST of Gun Guys is going to be posted separately from the other bites because of the storage space considerations in the posting box. [From http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php DOLLAR DECEPTION: Ellen Brown, July 3 2007 It has been called "the most astounding piece of sleight of hand ever invented." The creation of money has been privatized, usurped from Congress by a private banking cartel. Most people think money is issued by "fiat" by the government, but that is not the case. Except for coins, which compose only about one one-thousandth of the total U.S. money supply, "all" of our money is now created by "banks". Federal Reserve Notes (dollar bills) are issued by the Federal Reserve, a "private" banking corporation, and "lent" to the government. Moreover, Federal Reserve Notes and coins together compose less than 3 percent of the money supply. The other 97 percent is created by commercial banks as loans. Don't believe banks create the money they lend? Neither did the jury in a landmark Minnesota case, until they heard the evidence. "First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly" (1969) was a courtroom drama worthy of a movie script. Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank's foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. "Consideration" ("the thing exchanged") is an essential element of a contract. Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan. The courtroom proceedings were recorded by Associate Justice Bill Drexler, whose chief role, he said, was to keep order in a highly charged courtroom where the attorneys were threatening a fist fight. Drexler hadn't given much credence to the theory of the defense, until Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. " "It sounds like fraud to me"," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated: "Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . "did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry". That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. "Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this." A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note." The court rejected the bank's claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house. To Daly, the implications were enormous. If bankers were indeed extending credit "without" consideration – without backing their loans with money they actually had in their vaults and were entitled to lend – a decision declaring their loans void could topple the power base of the world. He wrote in a local news article: "This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for "upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery".]" [From http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php From time to time, however, the curtain has been lifted long enough for us to see behind it. A number of reputable authorities have attested to what is going on, including Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. He declared in an address at the University of Texas in 1927: "The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing." The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . "Bankers own the earth". Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, "if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit"." Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in the Great Depression, wrote in 1934: "We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. "Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit". If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. "We are absolutely without a permanent money system". When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. "It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon"." Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged: "Banks create money. That is what they are for. . . . The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all. . . . "Each and every time a Bank makes a loan . . . new Bank credit is created -- brand new money". Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of "U.S. News and World Report": "[W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower's deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. "The money is not taken from anyone else's deposit; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It's new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.]" [From http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php How did this scheme originate, and how has it been concealed for so many years? To answer those questions, we need to go back to the seventeenth century. The Shell Game of the Goldsmiths In seventeenth century Europe, trade was conducted primarily in gold and silver coins. Coins were durable and had value in themselves, but they were hard to transport in bulk and could be stolen if not kept under lock and key. Many people therefore deposited their coins with the goldsmiths, who had the strongest safes in town. The goldsmiths issued convenient paper receipts that could be traded in place of the bulkier coins they represented. These receipts were also used when people who needed coins came to the goldsmiths for loans. The mischief began when the goldsmiths noticed that only about 10 to 20 percent of their receipts came back to be redeemed in gold at any one time. They could safely "lend" the gold in their strongboxes at interest several times over, as long as they kept 10 to 20 percent of the value of their outstanding loans in gold to meet the demand. They thus created "paper money" (receipts for loans of gold) worth several times the gold they actually held. They typically issued notes and made loans in amounts that were four to five times their actual supply of gold. At an interest rate of 20 percent, the same gold lent five times over produced a 100 percent return every year, on gold the goldsmiths did not actually own and could not legally lend at all. If they were careful not to overextend this "credit:, the goldsmiths could thus become quite wealthy without producing anything of value themselves. Since only the principal was lent into the money supply, more money was eventually owed back in principal and interest than the townspeople as a whole possessed. They had to continually take out loans of new paper money to cover the shortfall, causing the wealth of the town and eventually of the country to be siphoned into the vaults of the goldsmiths-turned-bankers, while the people fell progressively into their debt. Following this model, in nineteenth century America, private banks issued their own banknotes in sums up to ten times their actual reserves in gold. This was called "fractional reserve" banking, meaning that only a fraction of the total deposits managed by a bank were kept in "reserve" to meet the demands of depositors. But periodic runs on the banks when the customers all got suspicious and demanded their gold at the same time caused banks to go bankrupt and made the system unstable. In 1913, the private banknote system was therefore consolidated into a national banknote system under the Federal Reserve (or "Fed"), a privately-owned corporation given the right to issue Federal Reserve Notes and "lend" them to the U.S. government. These notes, which were issued by the Fed basically for the cost of printing them, came to form the basis of the national money supply. Twenty years later, the country faced massive depression. The money supply shrank, as banks closed their doors and gold fled to Europe. Dollars at that time had to be 40 percent backed by gold, so for every dollar's worth of gold that left the country, 2.5 dollars in credit money also disappeared. To prevent this alarming deflationary spiral from collapsing the money supply completely, in 1933 President Franklin Roosevelt took the dollar off the gold standard. Today the Federal Reserve still operates on the "fractional reserve" system, but its "reserves" consist of nothing but government bonds (I.O.U.s or debts). The government issues bonds, the Federal Reserve issues Federal Reserve Notes, and they basically swap stacks, leaving the government in debt to a private banking corporation for money the government could have issued itself, debt-free.] [From http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php Theft by Inflation M3, the broadest measure of the U.S. money supply, shot up from $3.7 trillion in February 1988 to $10.3 trillion 14 years later, when the Fed quit reporting it. Why the Fed quit reporting it in March 2006 is suggested by John Williams in a website called "Shadow Government Statistics" http://(shadowstats.com), which shows that by the spring of 2007, M3 was growing at the astounding rate of 11.8 percent per year. Best not to publicize such figures too widely! The question posed here, however, is this: where did all this new money come from? The government did not step up its output of coins, and no gold was added to the national money supply, since the government went off the gold standard in 1933. This new money could "only" have been created privately as "bank credit" advanced as loans. The problem with inflating the money supply in this way, of course, is that it inflates prices. More money competing for the same goods drives prices up. The dollar buys less, robbing people of the value of their money. This rampant inflation is usually blamed on the government, which is accused of running the dollar printing presses in order to spend and spend without resorting to the politically unpopular expedient of raising taxes. But as noted earlier, the only money the U.S. government actually issues are coins. In countries in which the central bank has been nationalized, paper money may be issued by the government along with coins, but paper money still composes only a very small percentage of the money supply. In England, where the Bank of England was nationalized after World War II, private banks continue to create 97 percent of the money supply as loans. Price inflation is only one problem with this system of private money creation. Another is that banks create only the principal but not the interest necessary to pay back their loans. Since virtually the entire money supply is created by banks themselves, new money must continually be borrowed into existence just to pay the interest owed to the bankers. A dollar lent at 5 percent interest becomes 2 dollars in 14 years. That means the money supply has to double every 14 years just to cover the interest owed on the money existing at the beginning of this 14 year cycle. The Federal Reserve's own figures confirm that M3 has doubled or more every 14 years since 1959, when the Fed began reporting it. "That means that every 14 years, banks siphon off as much money in interest as there was in the entire economy 14 years earlier". This tribute is paid for lending something the banks never actually had to lend, making it perhaps the greatest scam ever perpetrated, since it now affects the entire global economy. The privatization of money is the underlying cause of poverty, economic slavery, underfunded government, and an oligarchical ruling class that thwarts every attempt to shake it loose from the reins of power. This problem can only be set right by reversing the process that created it. Congress needs to take back the Constitutional power to issue the nation's money. "Fractional reserve" banking needs to be eliminated, limiting banks to lending only pre-existing funds. If the power to create money were returned to the government, the federal debt could be paid off, taxes could be slashed, and needed government programs could be expanded. Contrary to popular belief, paying off the federal debt with new U.S. Notes would "not" be dangerously inflationary, because government securities are already included in the widest measure of the money supply. The dollars would just replace the bonds, leaving the total unchanged. If the U.S. federal debt had been paid off in fiscal year 2006, the savings to the government from no longer having to pay interest would have been $406 billion, enough to eliminate the $390 billion budget deficit that year with money to spare. The budget could have been met with taxes, without creating money out of nothing "either" on a government print press "or" as accounting entry bank loans. However, some money created on a government printing press could actually be good for the economy. It would be good "if" it were used for the productive purpose of creating new goods and services, rather than for the non-productive purpose of paying interest on loans. When supply (goods and services) goes up along with demand (money), they remain in balance and prices remain stable. New money could be added without creating price inflation up to the point of full employment. In this way Congress could fund much-needed programs, such as the development of alternative energy sources and the expansion of health coverage, while actually "reducing" taxes. Complete Article here: http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollar-deception.php It seems that they are finally passing the bill to give the FDA the power to enforce the Codex Alementarius or New World Order standards for food supplements designed for the subtle persuit of depopulation and sheeple culling here in America.Basically the Codex is built around the MINIMUM daily requirement for certain vitamins as being the ABSOLUTE daily allowance for them under government standards and eliminating certain health promoting supplements altogether. According to an article at http://rense.com/: [From http://www.rense.com/general77/tyr.htm FDA Tyranny To Become Law On Wednesday, July11, 2007 the House passed HR.2900 without allowing the Ron Paul (R-TX) amendments to protect dietary supplements. Representatives Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), John Dingell (D-MI), Henry Waxman (D-CA), and others falsely proclaimed that they were doing America a favor by passing this sweeping FDA-supported legislation that grants the rouge agency more power and money, and even transforms it into a quasi drug company. Both the House and Senate (S.1082) http://www.newstarget.com/021836.html have made the fatally flawed assumption that the reason for so many deaths and injuries from drugs was due to the FDA's lack of resources. In reality, it is the INTENTION of FDA management that is the problem, combined with the simple fact that multiple drugs are extremely toxic and don't work as advertised. Giving the FDA more power and money will only cause the agency to speed more drugs onto the market faster with even less safety testing while abusing its power and actively stamping out competition to drugs. FDA management is in bed with Big Pharma and this new legislation makes matters significantly worse through the creation of the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA. This new entity places the FDA in charge of drug design, drug patents, drug licenses, and the creation of new marketing entities/companies. Such a relationship with private industry is an unprecedented conflict of interest, totally at odds with drug safety. The current commissioner of the FDA, Andrew von Eschenbach, M.D. is little more than a Big Biotech sales rep with massive industry connections. < The House, like the Senate, will continue to allow direct to consumer advertising of new drugs with unknown risks a flagrant safety risk that will cost many people their lives. Congressional leaders said they couldn't prevent this advertisement for fear of violating the first amendment rights of drug companies. What a joke. The FDA routinely squashes the first amendment rights of American citizens to understand natural health options and the science that explains how they can prevent and treat disease. Thus, the first amendment argument is simply a matter of convenience. The FDA wants to actively suppress information that will help people, yet allow highly risky and misleading promotion of toxic substances often for untested uses. The FDA even wants to prevent citizens from suing drug companies when they are injured, thus protecting Big Pharma. FDA tyranny, based on this type of arbitrary and unrestrained exercise of power, is used to promote and protect the pharmaceutical industry while at the same time undermining the dietary supplement industry. Complete Article here: http://www.rense.com/general77/tyr.html When not pushing dangerous drugs and food additives like Aspartame and Celebrex the FDA performs other services for the depopulation arm of the N W O. One of these is their soon aproval of meat from CLONED animals without any assurance that such meat is safe. This sort of thing is enough to make one a pure vegan except for the fact that the VEGATABLES are being manipulated into biowar depopulation poison by the FDA and Monsanto too!!!! According to an article at http://news.bbc.co.uk/: [From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6288814.stm US could approve clones as food The US could approve cloned animals for use as food in two to three years, according to experts. But cloned meat is unlikely to appear on supermarket shelves in Britain or elsewhere in Europe anytime soon. Currently, most cloning is carried out for scientific reasons, but it could one day be used to help improve the quality and efficiency of livestock. However, observers say cloning is not likely to supercede any of the other techniques used by livestock breeders At a news conference in London, scientists said they could think of absolutely no health risk to consumers from eating cloned meat.] [From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6288814.stm Meat and milk He continued: "The big advantage of the Dolly technology (somatic cell nuclear transfer) is that you know what the animal's potential is, because you are taking the DNA from an adult." "You could even take cells from a beef carcass on the slaughterline and recreate the animal that produced that very impressive carcass." However, researchers said there needed to be more research on some of the stillbirths and abnormalities which are more common in cloned animals compared to those born naturally. The efficiency of the cloning process remains a key issue in the viability of commercialisation. Early attempts at cloning produced very few viable clones; most of the animals died during gestation or shortly after birth. Nikki Osborne, senior science officer at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), said: "We are totally opposed to the cloning of animals for food production purposes. "The process is inefficient, and has a huge potential to cause the animals involved unnecessary pain, suffering and distress - for absolutely no valid reason." Professor Keith Campbell, from the University of Nottingham, one of the original Dolly scientists, said some groups had reported an efficiency of 80% in terms of successful births and embryo transfers for cattle. Dr Simon Best, chairman of the BioIndustry Association, warned that labelling cloned food for no scientific reason risked delaying the introduction of cloned meat in Europe and would be unhelpful and confusing for consumers. "It's a Pandora's box and we could end up with the kind of meaningless labels you have on cigarettes, for instance," he said.] Complete article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6288814.stm Pope Benedict delivered a message that shows without question that ROME NEVER CHANGES ITS SPOTS!!! His message is basically when one takes the sugar sweet homilies out of it and reads it for what it actually says is that Rome is re exerting the idea that their institution is the ONLY TRUE CHURCH. Basically this means that the "Separated Brethren" status that Protestants have enjoyed with Rome since Vatican II is OVER and the COUNCIL OF TRENT prevails again. This also means that the Pope may one day even wear his triple tiered behave crown and re assert his TEMPORAL AUTHORITY and assert the right to PUNISH the Protestants now restored to HERETIC status by Rome. This makes it all the more important to fight illegal immigration as the majority of the Mexicans are ROMANS and it is highly possible that punishments like STAKING (Burning alive at the stake), TORTURE and BEHEADING could make a comeback in a newly Catholicized America. According to an article at http://news.scotsman.com/: [From http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1077832007 THE Vatican yesterday published a controversial document that said the only full true Church created by Christ was the Catholic faith. Running to 15 pages and issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (bolding by Coral Snake - This is the current name for the "Holy Office" of the INQUISITION), formally headed by Pope Benedict when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, it also said other faiths suffered from "defects". The paper emphasised the closeness with the Orthodox faiths and said they were true churches but were suffering from a wound as they did not recognise the primacy of the Pope. However, it said the "wound is still more profound" in the Protestant denominations - a statement that is likely to deepen the rift with Protestants.] Complete article here: http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1077832007 The main partner with government “regulators” like the FDA that approve the assorted dangerous drugs and food additive poisons of the Depopulation arm of the N W O is none other than Big Pharma themselves. Currently there is a controversy weather FDA approved Big Pharma created vaccines containing mercury based preservatives are responsible for a form of mental retardation in children called autism. Here for your an article about a family of an autism victim that is taking the Big Pharma vaccinators to court over their son's autism posted at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=467323&in_page_id=1774: Who is telling the truth about MMR jabs and autism? By GILL SWAIN A first word book for babies lies open on a table in Jackie and John Fletcher's living room. Each page is devoted to one single-syllable word. Robert, their 15-year-old son, sits quietly, gazing at the simple, colourful pictures. He cannot read or say the words, but studies the images intently, just as he did when he was 13 months old, before his development was halted. A month after his first birthday, Robert had a devastating epileptic fit. Dismissed initially as a febrile convulsion common in young children, it turned out to be the first of thousands of fits, damaging Robert's brain. His ill health has dominated his parents' lives. The change in their bright, loving toddler was sudden. Ten days before his first fit, Robert had been vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). Unlike his two older brothers, who had been given the jabs in single doses, Robert had been injected with three viruses at once. To the Fletchers, the connection seemed obvious - especially when Jackie heard about other children who had also apparently reacted to the MMR jab, developing bowel disease, autism, epilepsy, arthritis and other conditions within two weeks of having the vaccination. Now a recent study has shown that as many as one in 58 children in Britain may have some form of autism - a far higher number than was previously thought to have been affected. Two of the seven academics at Cambridge University who were involved with the research believe this may be linked to the MMR vaccine. Their colleagues, including autism expert Professor Simon Baron-Cohen who led the study, reject this view. Thirteen years ago Jackie, a former bank clerk, set up a pressure group JABS - Justice, Awareness and Basic Support. This body became the main voice of protest and source of advice for parents who believed their children were seriously damaged by the MMR injection. Almost single-handedly she has answered the hundreds of phone calls, letters and e-mails JABS receives every week. There are 2,000 members, but many other parents have sought its information and advice about MMR. Jackie has worked tirelessly to get compensation for affected families and force the NHS to offer single jabs. In 1995, she contacted gastroenterologist Dr Andrew Wakefield after he published a study suggesting a link between bowel disease, autism and the measles virus, and began advising parents to request to be referred to him. She met the then Health Secretary Tessa Jowell to suggest a Government investigation. The official view is that MMR is safe. Several recent studies have found no link between the vaccine and conditions such as autism. Dr Wakefield's work itself has been discredited. Next week, he will appear before a disciplinary hearing at the General Medical Council to answer a number of charges, including publishing "inadequately founded" research. The Department of Health says the fact that some children who had the MMR jab subsequently became ill is a coincidence, with experts pointing out that children receive their MMR at an age many illnesses are first manifested. Meanwhile, Jackie and others who questioned the safety of the triple vaccine have been accused of scaremongering and putting children's health at risk. Whatever the criticisms, the campaign clearly struck a chord. The take-up rate of the MMR vaccine dropped from 92per cent in 1995 to 1996, to below 80per cent in the late 1990s - in some parts of London it was as low as 61per cent. Even now, the controversy is far from over. Last November, Dr Peter Fletcher (no relation), a former Government medical officer responsible for deciding whether medicines are safe, said he had seen a "steady accumulation of evidence" from scientists worldwide that the measles, mumps and rubella jab is causing brain damage in certain children. He added that if it is proven that the jab causes autism, "the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history". Jackie and John feel that parents are the victims - indeed, Dr Fletcher recently criticised the "very powerful people who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and [who] are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves". While the controversy has raged, Jackie has had the daily struggle of looking after a son increasingly disabled by his epilepsy. Robert suffers one or two fits most days and a cluster of half a dozen every eight or nine days. He uses a wheelchair, is incontinent and speaks only the words he knew as a baby. Yet he is good-natured and affectionate, reaching for his mother to plant a kiss on her cheek whenever she passes nearby. Jackie sleeps alongside him as most of his seizures occur at night. In the morning, she and John lift him out of bed, wash him, change his nappy, feed him then drive him to his special school. Taking Robert out socially causes mayhem, and holidays - rare as they are - usually end in trauma. "Birthdays and Christmases are the most difficult times because you normally buy presents reflecting your child's development, but all I get for Robert is replacements for his toys which have been lost or broken," says Jackie. "Occasionally, I see little flashes, maybe a sudden smile, of the boy he might have been." To compound the tragedy, in March the family's legal battle for compensation came to an end - not because a link between the MMR jab and Robert's epilepsy has ever been dismissed in court, but because of a legal technicality. "We recently had a report from Professor Marcel Kinsbourne, a Britishborn paediatric neurologist, now working in America, who told us that Robert would have qualified for compensation in the U.S." He said that the measles vaccine was a 'biologically plausible' cause of seizures, that Robert's first fit happened soon enough after his MMR jab to be caused by it and that there was no evidence of any other cause. He thought "on the balance of probabilities" that the jab caused Robert's epilepsy, and a barrister estimated Jackie would have had a 60 per cent chance of success in the States, though now it was too late. When Robert had his injection on November 23, 1992, the practice nurse noted an incorrect batch number. As a result, Jackie's lawyers spent years pursuing compensation from - as it turned out - the wrong manufacturer. When they discovered the makers were actually the American firm Merck, it was too late. Jackie was suing under the Consumer Protection Act which has a time limit of 10 years in which actions must be launched; this period had expired. At her home near Warrington, Cheshire, where Jackie and John live with their elder sons, Andrew, 24, and Stuart, 20, and Robert, she recalls that devastating day. "To lose in the end on a technicality was extremely hard to accept," says Jackie, 50. "I felt I'd let Robert down. We wanted to pay for male carers to look after Robert in his own home when we can't do it any more. "But I rationalised that Robert was no worse off that he'd been before." Robert was born in 1991. She had given up her job to look after her children, and her husband John was doing well as a manager of transport services for Cheshire County Council. "We were delighted to have a third boy. And Robert seemed like a perfect, healthy, contented baby," says Jackie. When it was time for Robert's immunisations, a health visitor explained to her about the new triple vaccine. "She told us how it had been used in the U.S. for 20 years without problems and that the diseases it prevented were deadly. "She said the possible reactions were minor, such as a slight rash or swelling, or a small rise in temperature-My dad drove us to the appointment - he still holds it against himself. There is guilt at all levels. "As a parent, you want to do the best for your children and to protect them. I have beaten myself up about having held Robert on my knee and consoled him when he cried as the needle went in." Robert seemed a happy, normal little boy, but ten days later an afternoon of drowsiness culminated in his first fit. "I found him with his head twisted upwards, his eyes rolled back, his limbs jerking violently and burning up," says Jackie. "It lasted three minutes, but afterwards his eyes glazed over, his breathing came in shallow gasps and his body was floppy. It was terrifying: I thought he was dying. "Rushed to hospital, Robert was covered in pink blotches. He woke up screaming and vomited several times before falling into a deep sleep. "He woke again at midnight, stood up in his cot and said: 'Hi, Mum.' I was so relieved. I thought things were OK," says Jackie. But over the next week his behaviour changed. "He wasn't as contented. He'd always been easy to keep amused, but now he would crawl around looking for things; then, finding them, toss them away." Three months after the first fit, Robert had another, then another after two weeks and a fourth after ten days. By then, his left side had weakened and he was losing the little speech he had. His father John says: "In photos at that time, he looks pathetic. The light had gone from his eyes." Whenever the Fletchers took Robert to hospital appointments (he saw a range of specialists, including a neurologist; an ear, nose and throat consultant; and a haematologist), they encountered other parents who said things like "our child was fine until MMR". They found they had been told the same things by doctors: that there was no connection with the vaccine because it contained dead versions of the viruses, or that they had never come across this before and would take a special interest. Jackie began trawling through medical books and in 1993 discovered fits can be caused by infections such as measles and mumps. She contacted a local health official, who had come across several cases, and he put a small advert in the local paper asking other parents of vaccine-damaged children to contact him in order to gauge the extent of the problem. A public meeting was attended by 150 people, and Jackie set up JABS. John, 55, says the negative reaction to their efforts have made him cynical. "We thought that if parents were concerned, the authorities would try to make the single vaccines easily available, not close ranks and pull up the drawbridge," he says. "It was a shock to discover no one was interested. Tessa Jowell promised to hold a forum on Dr Wakefield's work, but it was a private meeting of 37 experts chosen by the Department of Health behind closed doors. "The neurologist told us that Robert's ill health was 'probably the vaccine, but why pursue as you'll never get anywhere?'" The family think Dr Wakefield is being treated unfairly. "Parents have nothing but praise for him. No child has been injured by him. "It's appalling that the Government is determined to crucify Dr Wakefield to send a message to doctors never to question a procedure it has decided to follow," she says. Meanwhile, Jackie and John have faced a long personal battle for compensation for their son. They appealed to the Government's Vaccine Damage Unit, which compensates children damaged by any kind of vaccine, but their case was dismissed as they were unable to prove the "biological mechanism" that linked Robert's jab to his brain damage. So, the family joined 1,400 other parents in suing the pharmaceutical companies. After many battles over legal aid and running out of time for action, all of these cases have failed. "Families have been told that their child is an acceptable casualty of the vaccination system or an insignificant detail compared with the numbers saved from the diseases it prevents, but what happened to Robert is not acceptable," says Jackie. "Part of me still believes that a man on a white horse will come galloping up with the answer and justice will be done. Deep down, I feel that I have caused all Robert's problems by taking him for the MMR jab and I'm trying to fix it for him. But I can't."] (Coral Snake) I believe that this is of such importance that I placed the whole article between the squared praentheses rather than the snippets that are the usual bite. Guess who is Actually Running the "global warming" crisis management and depopulation scam. Here is a hint. It is NOT Al Gore. It turns out that Al Gore is simply acting as a puppet for the youngest member of the Rothschild family. Weather one thinks the Rothschild are simply the leader of a Zionist Jewish N W O (as most people on this forum do) or are simply puppets for the The Jesuit Order, the Pope and The Morgovenian Roman Black Nobility actually running the N W O (as I do) the Rothchilds are one of the LEADING 13 Satanic bloodlines in the world and should be regarded as a deadly dangerous family along with any crisis management or depopulation scheme they are involved in. In truth the man who is truly behind the “global warming crisis management and depopulation scam is David Mayer de Rothschild. Not only is Mr Rothschild the true power behind the "Global Warming" crisis management and depopulation scam but he also has some "scientific" theories about planetary locations within our solar system that makes the Tycho Brahe based Geocentric articles at http://www.reformation.org/ seem positively scientific by comparison as you will soon see in from an article posted at http://prisonplanet.com/: [From http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/090707closertosun.htm Top Global Warming Advocate: Jupiter, Saturn Closer To Sun Than Earth Live Earth kingpin dismantles his own credibility on national radio as propaganda bandwagon is massive flop Paul Joseph Watson Live Earth's half empty stadiums and lackluster TV viewing figures were preceded by another embarrassment after one of the propaganda bandwagon's kingpins and a top global warming advocate responded to a question about solar-system wide climate change by claiming that Jupiter, Mars and Saturn were closer to the sun than Earth. (bolding by Coral Snake) David Mayer de Rothschild is the youngest child (born 1978) of Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, of the British wing of the Rothschild banking family. Rothschild's recent book, 77 Essential Skills to Stop Climate Changes, calls for ordinary people to limit outward behavior and even work at home and was used as part of the PR blitz to accompany the Live Earth project.] [From http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/090707closertosun.htm Appearing on The Alex Jones Show this past Friday, Rothschild reacted to a point about massive climate change at every point of the solar system and its relation to natural sun cycles by claiming Mars, Saturn and Jupiter were closer to the sun than Earth! Here's a brief transcript of the exchange. ALEX JONES: "The polar icecaps of Mars are receding at several miles a year, much faster than ours and that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter are melting, in fact several of their moons were ice and are now liquid seas - how are SUV's causing that David Rothschild? ROTHSCHILD: "Because those planets are closer to the sun, my friend." (bolding by Coral Snake) ALEX JONES: "No, Jupiter and Saturn are not closer to the sun and neither is Mars." (bolding by Coral Snake) Rothschild then quickly changes the subject and when the point is raised again later in the show, he makes no effort to correct himself. (bolding by Coral Snake) [From http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/090707closertosun.htm Although Rothschild stresses the existence of just one earth on numerous occasions, it appears as though he thinks there is another one earth orbiting the sun - at a greater distance than Saturn or Jupiter! He also glibly repeats the charge that the radio station he was appearing on, the Genesis Communications Network, was bankrolled by the oil industry and that was the reason for challenging the monopoly on truth that the man-made global warming crowd attribute themselves. Deliciously ironic therefore it is that big oil men like the chairman of British Petroleum Peter Sutherland are fanning the flames of global warming hysteria in order to create artificial scarcity and drive up prices, while also getting fat off the peak oil scam, another charade manufactured by the oil companies and gleefully embraced by phony environmentalists. General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, also recently called for the elite to, "Address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide," (global government). In addition, it was the Rothschild family itself that helped fund the Rockefellers to create the first giant trusts and oil monopolies (bolding by Coral Snake) in the late 19th century. Every time a public figure or scientist dares to question the global warming orthodoxy, they are savaged as being in bed with oil companies and yet it is the oil company chieftains that are pushing climate change harder than anyone (bolding by Coral Snake).] Complete article at: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/090707closertosun.htm 
Bite One---> Federal Reserve System 
When the federal reserve keeps saying they are changing the basic designs of “money” to prevent counterfeiting they are overlooking the greatest counterfeiters in the nation's history, THEMSELVES!!! And on top of this this not only the FED but all of the big banks are in this artificial money creation scam which is known as Fractional Reserve banking. According to an article at http://www.webofdebt.com
HOW BANKS SECRETLY CREATE MONEY Bite Two ---> Food and Drug Administration / Federal Drug Administration (aka FDA) 
By Byron J. Richards, CCN
7-11-7 Bite Three ---> Food and Drug Administration / Federal Drug Administration (aka FDA) Bite Four ---> Pope Benedict XVI / Peter Hans Kolvenbach (Current Jesuit Superior General) 
Bite Five ---> Big Pharma
Last updated at 08:43am on 11th July 2007 Bite Six ---> David Mayer de Rothschild 
>http://www.prisonplanet.com/index.html
Monday, July 9, 2007 More next week.
(256 images)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]