Sandy Hook shooting - MSNBC reports that AR-15 rifle was left in the car

Editor's Note: Straight up reporting before it was necessary to blame the shooting on an AR-15.

Leaked Audio: Fox News Offers to Run Petraeus for President

PRWEb
Mari Bottari

Kathleen T. McFarlandThe Washington Post's Bob Woodward obtained an audio recording of a conversation between David Petraeus, the general turned CIA Director who recently resigned in the midst of a sex scandal, and Fox News contributor Kathleen T. McFarland. The conversation took place in spring 2011 in Kabul, during the time that Petraeus was the commander of U.S. and coalition forces there. McFarland is a national security analyst for Fox News and has a long resume working for GOP administrations going back to Reagan.

McFarland stresses that she had spoken "directly" to the Fox News chairman. "First of all, is there anything Fox is doing right or wrong that you want to tell us to do differently?" she asks, a remarkable request from a reporter to a sitting general in command of U.S. troops. When the general says Fox can be against Obama, but should not be against "Obama's war," McFarland says "the headlines are easy to fix. The lady who does that sits next to me." Generals editing headlines about the war they are running, what could go wrong?

Secondly, McFarland states that the "advice to you from Roger Ailes is. ... He says that if you're offered [JCS] chairman, take it. If you're offered anything else, don't take it; resign in six months and run for president."

Petraeus makes it clear that he is not interested in running for president, but he is apparently impressed both with Ailes who he describes as "brilliant" and with his offer to "quit his job" and "bankroll the campaign."

McFarland: ... is that next time you go to New York you're going to stop by and see him?

Petraeus: I'd be happy. I would love to see him. I haven't seen him in a while, so ...

McFarland: I think he would very much appreciate the conversation.

Petraeus: I would love to see. ... Yeah. He's a brilliant guy.

McFarland: He is simply brilliant. I don't know if you've ever ...

Petraeus: He is. Tell him if I ever ran [laughs] but I won't ...

McFarland: Okay, I know. I know.

Petraeus: But if I ever ran, I'd take him up on his offer.

McFarland: Okay. All right.

Petraeus: He said he would quit Fox.

McFarland: I know. Look, he's not the only one.

Petraeus: And bankroll it.

McFarland: Bankroll it? [Laughs]

Petraeus: Or maybe I'm confusing that with Rupert. No. [Laughter]

McFarland: I know Roger, he's done okay, but ... no, I think the one who's bankrolling it is the big boss.

Petraeus: That might be it.

McFarland: Okay. The big boss is bankrolling it. Roger's going to run it. And the rest of us are going to be your in-house.

Roger AilesPetraeus: Yeah, right. Okay.

McFarland: We're all set. ...

As for the Fox News chairman, Ailes says McFarland is a contributor, not staff, and that the whole thing was a joke.
Why are we not laughing?

The audio of this remarkable interview is here and the transcript is here.

Both Benghazi And The Petraeus Scandal Suggest US Media Is Way Too Cozy With The State

Business Insider
Geoffrey Ingersoll

If there is just one lesson to take away from the Benghazi and Petraeus affairs it's that the American media is way too cozy with heads of state.

Immediately following the Benghazi crisis, U.S. gersollmedia did its due diligence and flexed its sources, anonymous and otherwise, to uncover the truth about the attack — but then they purposely failed to report the details because of requests from the CIA and the Obama administration.

Michael Calderon of The Huffington Post reports that the AP, The New York Times and The Washington Post all withheld information at the behest of the CIA. Calderon also details how other news outlets failed to mention the true ties of CIA contractors Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

From his report:

ABC News, for example, reported that Doherty had been working to "round up dangerous weapons" in the country. One national security reporter told The Huffington Post that it was an "open secret" in national security circles that the former SEALs were working for the CIA.

The AP even went so far as to edit a Sept. 21 story it wrote, which revealed the employment status of Woods and Doherty; ensuring the edited version made no mention of Woods and Doherty's employment the CIA.

A statement written to HuffPo from AP spokesman Paul Colford:

"We omitted mention of the two former SEALs' CIA connection in subsequent versions of the story after CIA officials insisted that other lives would be endangered."

Another statement, from the New York Times, echoed this sentiment: "[We] agreed to withhold locations and details of these operations at the request of Obama administration officials, who said that disclosing such information could jeopardize future sensitive government activities and put at risk American personnel working in dangerous settings."

Ben Swann Explains Who Funded SOPA and PIPA Internet Piracy Bills

The Belief That CO2 Can Regulate Climate Is “Sheer Absurdity” Says Prominent German Meteorologist

NoTrickZone
P. Gosselin

Meteorologist Klaus-Eckard Puls

Physicist and meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls was interviewed by Bettina Hahne-Waldscheck of the Swiss magazine “factum“.

I’ve translated and summarized the interview, paraphrasing for brevity.

factum: You’ve been criticising the theory of man-made global warming for years. How did you become skeptical?

Puls: Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it. The CO2-climate hysteria in Germany is propagated by people who are in it for lots of money, attention and power.

factum: Is there really climate change?

Puls: Climate change is normal. There have always been phases of climate warming, many that even far exceeded the extent we see today. But there hasn’t been any warming since 1998. In fact the IPCC suppliers of data even show a slight cooling.

factum: The IPCC is projecting 0.2°C warming per decade, i.e. 2 to 4°C by the year 2100. What’s your view?

Puls: These are speculative model projections, so-called scenarios – and not prognoses. Because of climate’s high complexity, reliable prognoses just aren’t possible. Nature does what it wants, and not what the models present as prophesy. The entire CO2-debate is nonsense. Even if CO2 were doubled, the temperature would rise only 1°C. The remainder of the IPCC’s assumed warming is based purely on speculative amplification mechanisms. Even though CO2 has risen, there has been no warming in 13 years.

factum: How does sea level rise look?

Puls: Sea level rise has slowed down. Moreover, it has dropped a half centimeter over the last 2 years. It’s important to remember that mean sea level is a calculated magnitude, and not a measured one. There are a great number of factors that influence sea level, e.g. tectonic processes, continental shifting, wind currents, passats, volcanoes. Climate change is only one of ten factors.

factum: What have we measured at the North Sea?

Puls: In the last 400 years, sea level at the North Sea coast has risen about 1.40 meters. That’s about 35 centimeters per century. In the last 100 years, the North Sea has risen only 25 centimeters.

factum: Does the sea level rise have anything to do with the melting North Pole?

Puls: That’s a misleading conclusion. Even if the entire North Pole melted, there would be no sea level rise because of the principles of buoyancy.

factum: Is the melting of the glaciers in the Alps caused by global warming?

Puls: There are many factors at play. As one climbs a mountain, the temperature drops about 0.65°C per 100 meters. Over the last 100 years it has gotten about 0.75°C warmer and so the temperature boundary has shifted up about 100 meters. But observations tell us that also ice 1000 meters up and higher has melted. Clearly there are other reasons for this, namely soot and dust. But soot and dust do not only have anthropogenic origins; they are also caused by nature via volcanoes, dust storms and wildfires. Advancing and retreating of glaciers have always taken place throughout the Earth’s history. Glaciology studies clearly show that glaciers over the last 10,0000 years were smaller on average than today.

factum: In your view, melting Antarctic sea ice and the fracture of a huge iceberg 3 years ago are nothing to worry about?

Puls: To the contrary, the Antarctic ice cap has grown both in area and volume over the last 30 years, and temperature has declined. This 30-year trend is clear to see. The Amundsen Scott Station of the USA shows that temperature has been declining there since 1957. 90% of the Earth’s ice is stored in Antarctica, which is one and half times larger than Europe.

factum: Then why do we always read it is getting warmer down there?

Puls: Here they are only talking about the West Antarctic peninsula, which is where the big chunk of ice broke off in 2008 – from the Wilkins-Shelf. This area is hardly 1% of the entire area of Antarctica, but it is exposed to Southern Hemisphere west wind drift and some of the strongest storms on the planet.

factum: What causes such massive chunks of ice to break off?

Puls: There are lots of factors, among them the intensity of the west wind fluctuations. These west winds have intensified over the last 20 years as part of natural ocean and atmospheric cycles, and so it has gotten warmer on the west coast of the Antarctic peninsula. A second factor are the larger waves associated with the stronger storms. The waves are more powerful and so they break off more ice. All these causes are meteorological and physical, and have nothing to do with a climate catastrophe.

factum: Then such ice breaks had to have occurred in the past too?

Puls: This has been going on for thousands of years, also in the 1970s, back when all the talk was about “global cooling”. Back then there were breaks with ice chunks hundreds of square kilometres in area. People were even discussing the possibilities of towing these huge ice chunks to dry countries like South Africa or Namibia in order to use them as a drinking water supply.

factum: What about all the media photos of polar bears losing their ice?

Puls: That is one of the worst myths used for generating climate hysteria. Polar bears don’t eat ice, they eat seals. Polar bears go hungry if we shoot their food supply of seals. The polar bear population has increased with moderately rising temperatures, from 5000 50 years ago to 25,000 today.

factum: But it is true that unlike Antarctica, the Arctic is melting?

Puls: It has been melting for 30 years. That also happened twice already in the last 150 years. The low point was reached in 2007 and the ice has since begun to recover. There have always been phases of Arctic melting. Between 900 and 1300 Greenland was green on the edges and the Vikings settled there.

factum: And what do you say about the alleged expanding deserts?

Puls: That doesn't exist. For example the Sahara is shrinking and has lost in the north an area as large as Germany over the last 20 years. The same is true in the South Sahara. The famine that struck Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia was mainly caused by the leasing of large swaths of land to large international corporations so that they could grow crops for biofuels for Europe, and by war. But it is much easier for prosperous Europe to blame the world’s political failures on a fictional climate catastrophe instead.

factum: So we don’t need to do anything against climate change?

Puls: There’s nothing we can do to stop it. Scientifically it is sheer absurdity to think we can get a nice climate by turning a CO2 adjustment knob. Many confuse environmental protection with climate protection. it’s impossible to protect the climate, but we can protect the environment and our drinking water. On the debate concerning alternative energies, which is sensible, it is often driven by the irrational climate debate. One has nothing to do with the other.

Flashback: Broadcast Journalist Exaggerates Flood

America’s Permanent War Agenda: Secret Kill Lists, Global Drone Wars, Special Forces

Global Research
Stephen Lendman

Call it elevating Murder, Inc. to a higher level. A Washington Post Special Report discussed America’s permanent war agenda.
It includes targeted killings, Obama’s secret kill list, global drone wars, and White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan’s new rules for war playbook.

Established in 2003, Washington’s National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) provides terrorist related information for America’s intelligence community. Brennan initially ran the agency. It devised Washington’s so-called “disposition matrix.”

If America had a motto it would be war is good, the more wars the better. How else can generals add stars and profiteers cash in big?

Human lives don’t matter. Inviolable rule of law principles are trashed. Wealth, power and dominance alone matter. Imagine national policy wanting to destroy humanity to control it.

Democrat Obama has that in mind and more. Imagine what Romney’s planning. Think about it November 6. Voting either major party ticket assures permanent wars, destroying social America, and cracking down hard on resisters.

On October 23, the Washington Post headlined “Plan for hunting terrorists signals US intends to keep adding names to kill lists,” saying:

Information came from “dozens of current and former national security officials, intelligence analysts and others….” Evolving US counterintelligence policies are examined. Two follow-up articles are planned.

US special forces death squads operate in 120 or more countries. CIA agents kill globally. US citizens may be targeted at home or abroad. No one anywhere is safe.

Summary judgment means rule of law principles don’t apply. Last spring, Obama appointed himself judge, jury and executioner. Extrajudicial authority is official administration policy. Diktats decide who lives or dies.

Anyone can be targeted anywhere in the world for any reason or none at all. Obama usurped the power of life and death. He’s got final kill list authority.

Policy prioritizes killing by drones, death squads, or other means. Only eliminating America’s enemies matter. Whether real or imagined makes no difference.

Targeted victims are people who want to live free from America’s imperium. Washington calls them terrorists. Names go on kill lists.

Those around him say killing comes easy to Obama. Waging war on Islam is policy. So is take no prisoners. Counterterrorism is cover for wholesale or retail slaughter. Collateral deaths don’t matter.

Post writer Greg Smith said for “the past two years, the Obama administration has been secretly developing a new blueprint for pursuing terrorists, a next-generation targeting list called the ‘disposition matrix.’ ”

It contains names of terrorist suspects, covert plans to eliminate them, and in some cases sealed indictments. Officials interviewed said a “database (being compiled) is designed to go beyond existing kill lists, mapping plans for the ‘disposition’ of suspects beyond the reach of American drones.”

Regardless of whether US wars continue or end, killing America’s enemies remains policy. Suspects are guilty by accusation. Due process and judicial fairness are off the table. One unnamed official said:

“We can’t possibly kill everyone who wants to harm us. It’s a necessary part of what we do….We’re not going to wind up in 10 years in a world of everybody holding hands and saying, ‘We love America.’ ”

Smith didn’t say plans are to make sure they don’t. Peace and stability defeat America’s imperium. Violence and instability are essential to advance it.

He also didn’t expose Washington’s bogus war on terror. At issue is inventing global enemies, waging wars against them, and destroying democratic freedoms in the process. At stake is unchallenged dominance no matter how many corpses it takes to achieve it.

Other omissions including failing to explain coverup is policy. So is aggressive killing in multiple theaters. Mostly civilians are killed. Populations are terrorized.

At most, only 2% of victims are high-level combatants. Drone attacks are the recruiting tool of choice for militants, and targeted killings violate fundamental international law.

Like his predecessor, Obama claims success. It’s always in the eye of the beholder. Bin Laden’s alleged killing is cited. No matter that he died naturally in December 2001. Even modern technology can’t kill a dead man. Claiming it was staged hokum.

Big plans are being made. “White House counterterrorism adviser John O. Brennan is seeking to codify the administration’s approach to generating capture/kill lists, part of a broader effort to guide future administrations through the counterterrorism processes that Obama has embraced.”

Local Daily Extolls the Virtues of Pima County in Apologetic Report of Lawsuit Aimed at Keeping Pima County from Breaking Laws

J.T. Waldron

When propaganda gets this obvious, we ultimately choose not to run away from it and prefer not to rely on the hopes that people will ignore it.

It is far more productive to give it its due and shed light on it.

The Arizona Daily Star's sunday edition contains the article with a peculiar title that is self evident as propaganda:

What is the main, bulkier part of the title? You guessed it:

Pima Sees Gains in Election Security

What was the actual current news to be reported in the story?

The lawsuit by citizens to compel Pima County to follow existing election laws.

What's the damage?

The Arizona Daily Star has over 364,000 readers for its Sunday edition, which is about a third of the population of Pima County being falsely assured about "Elections Security". Another story that is being convoluted with this story about the lawsuit involves local election integrity commission member Mickey Duniho's analysis of a nationwide study showing consistent Republican favored margins in larger precincts for both primary and general elections since 2008.   This story had adequate, neutral treatment when it was reported by the same author on the previous Friday, the least favorable day for the 238,000 readers that would elect to check it out. Although the story has little to do with the lawsuit filed last Wednesday to compel Pima County to comply with existing election laws, it serves to confuse the simple lawsuit requiring official returns to be placed in the official returns envelop and legally proper numbers for the hand-count audits.

The only conceivable connection that Dunaho's emergency Election Integrity Commission meeting has with the lawsuit filed last Wednesday is that the anomalies he confirms could be resolved with the proper hand count audits requested in that lawsuit. So could a lot of other ways of cheating be discovered with proper hand count audits.

We put additional police in the streets to prevent all kinds of crimes. Not just one.

Incidentally, this is the only time that the plaintiffs in last Wednesday's lawsuit are mentioned.  Duniho is referred to as "a plaintiff in the lawsuit" but the author fails to mention the twelve others including Green Party Candidate Dave Croteau, Republican Candidate Bill Beard, Libertarian Elections Specialist Jim March and Paul Hilts, the chair of the Pima County Democratic Party Elections Committee.

The title, "Pima sees gains in election security" suggests to its readers, "nothing to see here. All is well." Quick browsers will think that is the point of the article.

The competing "gains in election security" were sprung from the records lawsuit involving the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) election and they were procedures that would not have been implemented without the public and legal scrutiny surrounding RTA election shenanigans.

While the additional measures are helpful, they are at best mere obstacles for Pima County to maneuver around should they wish to cheat in elections in the future. They are nice measures, but should be seen as window dressing until the core essential steps to counter black box voting machine fraud are implemented. In fact, Pima County's legal team is referring to these measures to block further scrutiny of the RTA ballots now in storage at the Iron Mountain facilities.

While spending 2.5 million dollars on procedures that are outside of the specific measures needed to resolve the lawsuits surrounding a two billion dollar bond election, Pima County could save a great deal of money by complying with the appellate court decision for prospective relief. By removing themselves as an obstacle to prospective relief through the courts, Pima County could assure the public that those "security measure" expenditures were also helping prevent future legal costs involving election transparency. They are refusing to do so at this time because compliance also means allowing a proper audit and forensic exam of the RTA ballots. They know the plaintiff will finally resolve in the courts that the RTA election was rigged. That is why they are choosing not to save time and money by letting this simple procedure forge ahead.

Additional elements designed to vindicate Pima County by the Arizona Daily Star seem to surround an exchange towards the end of the meeting between Pima County employee John Moffatt and Mickey Duniho. First, the idea that Moffatt continues to work for the county and is inextricably entwined within the Election Integrity Commission is an insult to the public. In court he admitted to being responsible for the convoluted logic that ultimately cost Pima County over one million dollars in legal fees to resist public records requests. Moffatt was also named in the IBeta report providing many ineffectual tests that were certain to be meaningless in the first Attorney General investigation of the RTA election. He was also found with his hand in the "evidence cookie jar" in violation of a court order when it was time to divvy up the data after the Democratic Party won the records case.

The video of the EIC meeting shows at the end John Moffatt's essential skill - groveling. Moffatt delivers a pathetic attempt at chastising those who would suggest that Pima County's elections division is capable of fraud. It was disturbing to see at this point that no-one was laughing. It's difficult to imagine the sense of being browbeaten when listening to this delivery up close and in person, but Mickey Duniho seems far more conciliatory for what he knows about Pima County. In fact, he was there when Moffatt violated the court order at the Pima County vault. Frankly, Moffatt should have been handed his ass for even suggesting that accusations of fraud in the Pima County Elections Division are inappropriate.

True to form, this relatively small exchange at the commission meeting affects a large chunk of what made this Sunday's article. Somehow the article extracts a statement from Mickey Duniho, "My feeling is that today elections in Pima County are processed in a very good manner. I don't see any major things that I want to change." The rest of the meeting, however, had Duniho stating that we have no reliance on the integrity of the elections because there is not a sufficient audit of the ballots after they are run through the black box voting machines. In his presentation at the beginning of the meeting, he states "The way we are doing it now where we do a hand-count by batch does not confirm the integrity of the elections." Fair reporting would mention the contradiction and get clarification from Duniho.

Why would the writer omit the fact that the window dressings mean nothing if you have the same crooks running the elections and they are still reserving the right to cheat by violating state laws?

Why does the establishment press insist on letting Pima County get away with rigging elections?

If reporter Carli Brosseau buys John Moffatt's spiel, does she get a chance to line up at Pima County's trough should things go south in the real world?

There is a real cost for preserving this illusion of election theater and I don't think the Star will be willing to pay for it.

The Double Standard Threats of Riots. Is It COINTELPRO?

Lone Star Watchdog

Riots are not good at all. The Double Standard Threats of Riots. Is itCOINTELPRO? I smell a rat when I hear about tweets and Facebook post calling for riots if Obama loses the election November. If Ron Paul supporters and Tea Party member called for riots if Ron Paul was not nominated as the GOP candidate. The SWAT teams would be kicking down our doors taking us to Gitmo so fast before we can say the word of Habeas Corpus. We would not hear the end of it on the cable news channels.

The hypocrisy of the US Army calling protest low-level terrorism and the US Marine Brandon Raub being detained for making Facebook post opposing the Federal Reserve. He was not calling for violence or riots. He was just giving an opinion. He was arrested and taken to a Psych ward. To the government, he is a threat top national security because he opposed the New World Order. Where are the arrest for those calling for riots this election day?

I am suspicious of the source of the people posting these comments. I wonder who do they work for and who is behind these calls for riots. There is a double standard that says the government is the driving force behind the calls for riots. Do you hear on the news of the police arresting those who made these twitter and Facebook post calling for riots if Obama loses? No we do not hear such news.

These calls for riots could be anotherFBI COINTELPRO operation with agent provocateurs on the internet making these Facebook and Twitter post calling for riots if Obama loses the election. This call for riots could be a tactic coming straight from the White House as a desperation attempt to scare people in re-electing him or their will be riots. If that happens. The President now has the excuse to call for Martial law after a national emergency has been declared.

During the Treyvon Martin case in Orlando. It is obvious the New Black Panther Party is a FBI COINTELPRO operation when the host were calling for riots and shooting of white people on the radio. They were not arrested, nor did the police with SWAT gear on kick in the doors. It shows a double standard and these calls for riots could be a COINTELPRO operation. If Alex Jones called for riots, he be shut down so fast before he could say the word censorship.

I hope there are no riots and the elections are peaceful. I will hope the best and be ready for the worst. It would not hurt to pray either.

NY Times Peddles War Propaganda | Interview with Daniel Simpson

DNC and RNC Both Railroad Delegates With Openly-Rigged Platform Votes (Video)

Gates Foundation Funds Surveillance of Anti-Vaccine Groups

Green Med Info
Sayer Ji

The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation launched the Grand Challenges in Global Health (GCGH) in partnership with the National Institutes of Health in 2003 which, according to the GCGH website, is aimed at "creating new tools that can radically improve health in the developing world."  So far, 45 grants totaling $458 million were awarded for research projects involving scientists in over 30 countries.¹
But where has all the money actually gone?  Towards developing and implementing water purification and sanitation systems? Or basic nutritional support aimed at optimizing immune function? How about providing shelter and medical facilities for the homeless? Not even close.  

For example, a $100K grant was recently disbursed to Seth C. Kalichman, professor at the Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, for "Establishing an Anti-Vaccine Surveillance and Alert System," which intends to "establish an internet-based global monitoring and rapid alert system for finding, analyzing, and counteracting misinformation communication campaigns regarding vaccines to support global immunization efforts." [emphasis added]

We can only wonder what organizations might be labeled as "misinformation communication campaigns" considering the fact that Bill Gates, in a Feb. 4^th, 2011 interview on CNN with Sanjay Gupta said that "anti-vaccine groups "kill children."" Here is the full quote:

“So it's an absolute lie that has killed thousands of kids. Because the mothers who heard that lie, many of them didn't have their kids take either pertussis or measles vaccine, and their children are dead today. And so the people who go and engage in those anti-vaccine efforts -- you know, they, they kill children. It's a very sad thing, because these vaccines are important.”

It is quite possible that any dissenting voice not in support of universal vaccination campaigns may be included in this type of "surveillance and alert system" as a potentially endangering the lives of others, i.e. "killing children."  What is so ironic about the situation is that the Gates Foundation supported Polio Global Eradication Initiative may have resulted in over 47,500 cases of vaccine-induced paralysisin Indian children in 2011 alone, and which is twice as deadly as the wild-type polio it claimed to have put an end to officially on Jan. 11 2012. Who here then, is truly concerned about the health of children?
Moreover, it is exceedingly difficult to view Bill & Melinda Gates foundation's GCGH as a strictly humanitarian foundation considering many of the projects it chooses to fund. Here are a few listed on their website which have already received funding.

• Synthetic Lymph Nodes: Steven Meshnick and Carla Hand of the University of North Carolina in the U.S. will develop a bio-compatible, biodegradable polymer device that can be placed under the skin to introduce vaccines and antigens to the immune system. The device will attract immune cells and trigger their proliferation as well asact as an adjuvant at the site of injection. If successful, the device could help boost immune response to new and existing vaccines. [see our article on transhumanistic technologies].
• Needle Free Vaccination Via Nanoparticle Aerosols: Vaccine delivery systems that target specific areas of the body have the potential to be especially effective against some types of infection. For example, inhaled vaccines may better guard against respiratory diseases, such as tuberculosis, and those that commonly infect the tissues of the nose and throat, such as diphtheria. Dr. Edwards is leading a multidisciplinary team using materials science technologies combined with infectious disease, device, and toxicology expertise to reformulate tuberculosis and diphtheria vaccines into aerosol sprays that can be inhaled. The team's ultimate objective is to develop a cell-based BCG vaccine for tuberculosis and a protein antigen CRM 197 vaccine for diphtheria in the form of novel porous nanoparticle aggregate (PNAP) aerosols.
• Plant-Produced Synthetic RNA Vaccines: Alison McCormick of Touro University, California in the U.S. will test the ability of a low-cost plant-based synthetic biology method to produce a combined viral protein epitope with an antigen RNA expression system for use in an RNA malaria vaccine. Using plants for this viral transfection system could make RNA vaccine production scalable and cost effective.
• Profitable Vaccine Distribution In Emerging Markets: Lisa Ganley-Leal and Pauline Mwinzi of Epsilon Therapeutics, Inc. in the U.S. will test the hypothesis that selling vaccines through medicine shops in emerging markets can lead to profits for both vaccine developers and the small business owners. Demonstrating profitability may lead pharmaceutical companies to invest greater resources in vaccine development and distribution and develop local partnerships for profitability strategies.
• Genetically Programmed Pathogen Sense and Destroy: Saurabh Gupta and Ron Weiss of Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the U.S. proposed creating sentinel cells that can detect the presence of a pathogen, report its identity with a biological signal, and secrete molecules to destroy it.This project's Phase I research demonstrated that commensal bacteria can be engineered to detect and specifically kill the model bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In Phase II, Gupta and Weiss will engineer the human microbiota to specifically detect and destroy the gut pathogen Shigella flexneri, which is responsible for high mortality rates in children.
• Vaccine in a Salt Shaker: A New, Safe, Low-Cost Approach: Shiladitya DasSarma will lead a team at the University of Maryland, Baltimore in the U.S. to develop an inexpensive, safe, and effective oral vaccine against invasive Salmonella disease using gas-filled bacterial vesicles. The project seeks to produce a salt-encased, shelf-stable vaccine requiring no refrigeration for distribution worldwide.
• A Humanized Mouse Model to Evaluate Live Attenuated Vaccine Candidates: To develop new vaccines against some of the world's biggest killers, including HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis, scientists must be able to evaluate promising candidates. Some of the most promising potential vaccines, are made from weakened live versions of the infectious agent. As a result, they cannot be studied in human trials unless researchers can be confident that the weakened vaccines will be safe. Dr. Flavell and his colleagues are working to genetically engineer laboratory mice whose immune systems are similar enough to humans to permit testing of vaccines against diseases that disproportionately affect people in the developing world.
• Alternative Delivery of Human Milk Proteins to Infants: Qiang Chen of Arizona State University in the U.S. proposes to engineer edible plants, such as lettuce and rice, to express beneficial proteins found in human milk. The protein bodies in these plants allow for the stable, high accumulation of these human milk proteins, and the plants can either be eaten directly by infants or formulated into baby food to provide essential nutrients and antibacterial benefits.
• Non-Hormonal Female Contraceptive Targeting Egg-Specific Metalloprotease: John Herr of the University of Virginia in the U.S. will research the egg-specific membrane enzyme metalloprotease as a target for a non-hormonal female contraceptive. After determining the nature of the enzyme's catalytic pocket, a family of peptidomimetic compounds will be tested for their ability to bind to the enzyme and block its key role in egg fertilization.
• Bacillus-Fermented Natto as Edible Vaccines for the Developing World: Michael Chan of the Ohio State Research Foundation in the U.S. will develop an engineered strain of bacteria used to ferment beans in traditional Asian and African diets, to display an antigen from the Tuberculosis bacterium.  The engineered bacillus will then be used to make the traditional Asian dish natto, which can serve as a kind of oral vaccine to elicit a strong immune response. If successful, this strategy can be used to introduce a variety of disease antigens through culturally accepted foods.
• Nanotechnology-Based Contraception: David Clapham of Children's Hospital Boston in the U.S. will develop and test a nanoparticle contraceptive that releases sperm tail inhibitors in response to vaginal pH changes or exposure to prostatic fluid. If successful, the nanoparticles could be incorporated into a vaginal gel to block sperm motility required for fertilization.
• Circumcision tool For Traditional Ceremonies In Africa: Kathleen Sienko of the University of Michigan in the U.S. has developed a prototype circumcision tool for use in traditional ceremonies in Africa, and seeks to demonstrate the functionality, cultural suitability, and potential for low-cost mass production of the device. Such a tool could increase the circumcision rates leading to lower rates of HIV transmission in the region.
• Discovery of Chemosensory Molecules as Novel Contraceptives: John Ngai and Scott Laughlin of the University of California, Berkeley in the U.S. seek to identify chemical compounds in the female reproductive system that guide sperm cells to the egg. By characterizing these "odorants," synthetic versions can be produced and administered to disrupt this navigation system thus inhibiting fertilization.
• Transgenic Cow Milk Containing Human Antimicrobial Protein: Hironori Matsushima of the University of Toledo in the U.S. will test the hypothesis that adding an antimicrobial peptide to powdered milk products can confer protection against enteric diseases. Research will focus on testing the peptide for its ability to kill pathogens in stomach conditions, and on its ability to maintain integrity through the milk pasteurization and drying processes.
• Ultrasound as a Long-Term, Reversible Male Contraceptive: James Tsuruta and Paul Dayton of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill will study the ability of therapeutic ultrasound to deplete testicular sperm counts. Characterizing the most beneficial timing and dosage could lead to the development of a low-cost, non-hormonal and reversible method of contraception for men.

You will notice from the examples listed above that all of these funded projects involve the development of proprietary (read: potentially profitable) and as-of-yet unproven technologies, and which will require the transformation and/or alteration of a natural process or substance. Also, many of the grant disbursements have gone towards contraception. This appears to diverge from the GCGH's mission statement of "improving health in the developing world," insofar as it is focused on reducing population in the developed world, rather than supporting the health of those already living, in need of help.
¹ Grand Challenges In Global Health, About Us

Sayer Ji is the founder and director of GreenMedInfo.com and co-author of the bookThe Cancer Killers: The Cause Is The Cure with New York Times best-seller Dr. Ben Lerner and Dr. Charles Majors. His writings and research have been published in the Wellbeing Journal, the Journal of Gluten Sensitivity, and have been featured on Mercola.com, NaturalNews.com, Reuters.com, GaryNull.com, Infowars.com and Care2.com.

Why media neutrality over the US presidential election is fuelling lies

Journalists' failure to challenge Paul Ryan's Tampa speech showed the lack of rigour and challenge

The Guardian
Emily Bell

When Republican vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan closed his speech at the Republican National Convention in Tampa last week with the emphatic incantation "let's get this done!", the inner pentagram of the Republican party was on its feet cheering its approval.

Cut back to the CNN studio where anchor Wolf Blitzer noted how enthusiastic the delegates seemed, although he also noted there were one or two items the fact-checkers might want to come back on. He had, he said, made a list of "seven or eight points" that might be contentious, but didn't mention what they were. Cut to a panel discussion for instant reaction, cut to Ryan and family looking pleased, cut back to the studio. Still no specifics on those pesky facts.

Meanwhile Democrats and those with reasonable knowledge of US politics were furiously filling the internet with accusations that the speech was at best disingenuous, at worst deliberately misleading. What about the car plant Ryan referred to – mocking Obama for talking about it lasting 100 years, yet it was closed within a year of his becoming president – when the Bush administration had closed it? Or chiding Obama for failing to act on a fiscal report when Ryan himself had sat on the committee which blocked the adoption of its recommendations ? Or his Medicaid calculations?

Back in the CNN studio, Blitzer finally felt comfortable listing the points where Ryan had clearly created a misleading impression, noting that "emails and Twitter" had raised such questions, rather than producers and correspondents. For the viewer, it was puzzling.

A major news network that doesn't say, even as the ovation continues, "hang on a minute", is surely falling short. The reluctance of American journalists to tackle the substantive issues raised by politicians, lobbyists, pressure groups and others for fear of being seen as "biased" forms part of a culture of "neutrality" that is essentially driven by economic forces but which is presented as an ethical touchstone.

"The view from nowhere" is a phrase coined by philosopher Thomas Nagel, which was applied to American journalism by academics and commentators like Jay Rosen and James Fallows. It describes a flawed process of delivering "unbiased" reporting. The "neutral" journalist conveys two sides to an argument without forming a judgment. The theory sounds fine until you try it out: "some scientists believe in the Darwinian theory of evolution, but many other people believe that God created men and monkeys from different pieces of magic clay'. An extreme, and absurd example perhaps, but one which illustrates the fundamental bankruptcy of "the view from nowhere".

The culture that favours "neutrality" over "truthiness" was illustrated by Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin's now infamous assertion that "legitimate rape" carries almost no risk of pregnancy, when his interviewer Charles Jaco allowed it to slip by unchallenged. Again, this local interview rapidly found an international audience through the hyper-connected web of consumers and commentators, making the journalistic failure to tackle this at source even more egregious.

The existence of a "fact-checking movement" which runs parallel to, but is not part of, the press shows how disjointed the process of informing the public has become. So much so that a former public editor of the New York Times attracted some ridicule earlier this year when he asked if it was the job of journalists to be "truth vigilantes".; given the prevailing conditions, however, one can see why he was asking the question even it if was phrased in a rather unfortunate way.

Every one of the 15,000 editors, correspondents, producers, gofers and commentators who packed into the convention last week should be asking themselves the same question. If the job of journalism is to strengthen democracy, and if you can't move in downtown Tampa for accredited press, why did Ryan and his team of speechwriters produce something so wilfully misleading? The ugly truth is, they did it because they could.

Congress Investigates WH Taxpayer-Funded Payoffs to MSNBC’s Olbermann, Maddow

Stimulus funds allegedly directed at Obama’s worthless “green job” ads created zero jobs

InfoWars

Melissa Melton

Still unsure where all of the president’s $831 billion dollars in stimulus went?

So are a lot of Americans, including a House committee currently demanding records on half a million dollars in phony MSNBC ad buys the White House procured to promote job opportunities that did not exist.

The House Committee on Education and the Workforce wants to know what, if anything, came of the over 100 “green jobs” initiative commercials purchased through the 2009 contract that ran exclusively on Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC programs. According to the Washington Times:

“Spending reports showed that no jobs were created through the contract. The Washington Times first reported on the contract earlier this month, quoting one taxpayer watchdog who questioned not only the lack of jobs but why the commercials aired only on MSNBC, considered the most liberal of the major cable news outlets.”

If the assertions of this inquiry prove correct, it is, like the Solyndra scandal and others, further evidence that stimulus money was used not to stimulate the economy as promised, but to sell the public on the perception that the President has been effective in tackling the financial quagmire that continues to unravel society and destroy jobs — all while subsidizing his allies with lucrative deals, or in this case, ad revenue.

MSNBC’s leftist agenda is no secret; it’s “Lean Forward” branding, which launched circa 2010, mimics the president’s “Forward” campaign slogan, and the channel has been caught in the past demonizing anyone who would dare criticize Obama. As political talk show hosts, neither Maddow nor Olbermann have ever really challenged the Obama Administration’s agenda, leading to the obvious conclusion this contract was little more than a presidential media payoff for public influence.

This tired White House tactic of using the mainstream media to promote hollow promises to the people is sadly nothing new. Infowars has previously reported on a 2005 Government Accountability Office investigation which concluded the Bush Administration’s influential journalist payoffs and fake news planting were an illegal “covert propaganda” push. In the case of Armstrong Williams, it was revealed that the Bush Administration had funneled more than $240,000 to the commentator in return for glowing reports on No Child Left Behind. Obama took a lesson from Bush in his attempt to gain favorability through fooling the public into thinking there were actual employment opportunities in place of meaningless propaganda.

As the bought-and-paid-for dinosaur mainstream media continues to die a slow and agonizing death, its ability to influence anyone is quickly slipping away. Market viewership for the “big 3″ networks continues to decline, and CNN recently felt the sting of the worst ratings the channel had received in over two decades.

Politicians Lie–and Reporters Can't Report That

FAIR

Peter Hart

There's an interesting Politico story (8/22/12) about Andrea Seabrook, who until recently was a Capitol Hill reporter for NPR. She's moved on to a new independent reporting project, but it's what she said about her previous gig that's most revealing:

"I realized that there is a part of covering Congress, if you're doing daily coverage, that is actually sort of colluding with the politicians themselves because so much of what I was doing was actually recording and playing what they say or repeating what they say," Seabrook told Politico. "And I feel like the real story of Congress right now is very much removed from any of that, from the sort of theater of the policy debate in Congress, and it has become such a complete theater that none of it is real…. I feel like I am, as a reporter in the Capitol, lied to every day, all day. There is so little genuine discussion going on with the reporters…. To me, as a reporter, everything is spin."

She says her new Web-based project will try to "decipher Washington's Byzantine language and procedure, sweeping away what doesn't matter so listeners can focus on what does."

Seabrook seems pretty clear that the problem isn't the media: "I think the problem is the Congress itself. And we're all in the same positions, scrambling to figure out how the hell to cover these assholes."

So if a reporter is covering politicians who are lying to her every single day, what is preventing that reporter from saying as much? Why just repeat the lies?

The crystal clear implication here is that, for whatever reason, an NPR journalist doesn't feel comfortable challenging lies and spin.  It's a pretty important admission, and one thatNPR listeners–and management–should think about.

Labor Department spends stimulus funds for ads during Olbermann, Maddow shows

Washington Times
Jim McElhatton

Contract shows no new jobs were created

The Labor Department paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal stimulus funds to a public relations firm to run more than 100 commercials touting the Obama administration’s “green training” job efforts on two MSNBC cable shows, records show.

The commercials ran on MSNBC on shows hosted by Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann in 2009, but the contract didn’t report any jobs created, according to records reviewed recently by The Washington Times.

Spending reports under the federal Recovery Act show $495,000 paid to McNeely Pigott & Fox Public Relations LLC, which the Labor Department hired to raise awareness “among employers and influencers about the [Job Corps] program’s existing and new training initiatives in high growth and environmentally friendly career areas” as well as spreading the word to prospective Job Corps enrollees.

The firm ultimately negotiated ad buys for “two approved spots” airing 14 times per week for two months on “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” and “The Rachel Maddow Show,” according to a project report, which listed the number zero under a section of the report asking how many jobs had been created through the stimulus contract.

David Williams, president of the nonprofit watchdog Taxpayers Protection Alliance, called the contract “questionable” because it created no jobs and because of the placement of the ads on shows viewed as friendly to the administration’s policies.

“Hiring a PR firm does not create jobs, and this was obviously meant for selling a particular political agenda,” Mr. Williams said. “The placement really reeks of a political ad rather than a job ad, and taxpayers see through this.

“Taxpayers would be a lot happier at the end of the day to see a completed road rather than a bunch of ads on cable television,” he said.

The public relations firm did not respond to inquiries from The Times about who directed the ads to appear on MSNBC, but Labor Department officials defended the expenditures, saying the decision to place the ads on the network — now NBC News — had nothing to do with politics.

In a joint email statement to The Times from two Labor Department spokesmen, David Roberts and Michael Volpe, officials said the money was used for outreach efforts to raise awareness among potential employers about the Job Corps’ green training in career areas, including automotive, advanced manufacturing and solar-panel installation.

Mr. Roberts and Mr. Volpe also said Labor Department research showed that advertisements would reach the target demographic of business owners and managers interested in hiring “green-trained” employees through a programming list that initially also included shows hosted by CNN’s Larry King and public television’s Jim Lehrer as well as the two MSNBC programs where the ads eventually appeared.

Public television was eliminated because advertising rates were too high, Labor officials said, and Larry King was dropped because MSNBC held the potential to reach more viewers, officials said. Officials gave no indication whether their research indicated if Fox News, ESPN or other cable outlets were considered for the Job Corps ads.

The Labor Department said that as measured in “gross impressions per spot,” the two MSNBC shows — Mr. Olbermann is no longer with the network — were twice as effective compared with running ads on Mr. King’s show, which also is no longer on the air.

Mr. Obama signed the $829 billion stimulus into law in February 2009 with the promise it would sustain 3.5 million jobs. But at its peak it likely was responsible for far fewer, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office.

The president has since said the economy was in a deeper slump than he had predicted coming into office, and the White House says the stimulus’s combination of spending and tax cuts helped bolster state and local governments and keep the downturn from becoming a depression.

Republicans, though, argue that the price tag was too large and say much of the spending went to fund Mr. Obama’s political agenda, such as green energy programs, rather than to shovel-ready roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects.

Keep the Ball Rolling: It's Time to Stop Mainstream Media Lies

Global Research
Michel Chossudovsky

Dear Global Research Readers,

Mainstream media fiction has reached new heights.

Public opinion is duped into endorsing the repeal of civil liberties in the name of "national security" as well as the conduct of "humanitarian wars" with a view to promoting "democracy" and achieving a lasting "World peace".

Without media disinformation and war propaganda, which offensively pervade the global news chain, the legitimacy of the US-NATO military agenda would collapse like a deck of cards.

Despite relentless efforts of the independent alternative media to convey unbiased analysis and honest news reporting, the outright lies and fabrications of the mainstream media continue to thrive.

For almost eleven years, Global Research, together with partner alternative media organizations, has sought Truth in Media with a view to eventually "disarming" the corporate media's disinformation crusade.

To reverse the tide, we call upon our readers to participate in an important endeavor.

Global Research has more than 50,000 "unique visitors" on the globalresearch.ca website and 30,055 subscribers to our Newsletter.

Our objective is to recruit one thousand committed "volunteers" among our 30,000 Newsletter subscribers to support the distribution of Global Research articles.

Do not send us money. Under Plan A below, we call upon our readers to donate 5 minutes a day to Global Research.

If, however, you are pressed for time in the course of a busy day, scroll down to Plan B.

PLAN A: Donate 5 minutes a day to Global Research


Step Number One

Establish an email list of some fifty friends and family, or use your existing email list.

Forward the daily Global Research Newsletter and/or your favorite Global Research articles to this list on a daily basis, with a personal message to your friends.

Make sure that the title and url hyperlink address of the article appear together with the entire text of the article.

In your personal message to your friends, kindly ask them to forward the article to their own family and friends email list as well as post the article on their Facebook and Twitter profiles.

Encourage your friends in your personal note to subscribe to our Newsletter as well as become a Member of Global Research.

"Keep the Ball Rolling"

Ask your friends through their email lists to ask their friends to contact their friends, and so on.

If this procedure is carried out effectively, Global Research articles will reach thousands of additional readers, contributing thereby to challenging the mainstream media consensus.

Five minutes a day. Let us know how you are proceeding. Send your feedback on your endeavors to media@globalresearch.ca.

Step Number Two

Use the various instruments of online posting and social media creatively to "spread the word".

Click the "like" and "share" buttons on our articles' pages for starters. In addition to Facebook and Twitter, there are also many other avenues.

Post one or more Global Research articles on internet discussion groups and forums.

Post your opinion on mainstream media comments sections (e.g. BBC, CNN, Washington Post), with the title and hyperlink to the original Global Research article. This is an effective way of expressing your viewpoint, challenging mainstream news reports as well as promoting Global Research articles.

Cross-post Global Research articles on blog sites, alternative media sites, etc. Send/submit the article to the consideration of internet news and blog sites.

Send Global Research articles to local news media (both online and print), including community newspapers, local news outlets, student news on university and college campuses, etc.

Five minutes a day. Let us know how you are proceeding. Send your feedback on your endeavors to media@globalresearch.ca.
Thanks for your support and endorsement.


PLAN B: Consider Making a Donation and/or becoming a Global Research Member
Global Research operates on a shoestring budget. We are fortunate to count among our regular contributors a number of prominent and committed writers, researchers, professionals and academics as well as several promising young authors. All our authors, many of whom are busy full-time professionals, as well as the editors and CRG directors, are volunteers.

Commitment to truth and honest reporting is the driving force. A lot of work has gone into writing, researching and editing, with a view to reaching a broad readership.

In an era of media distortion, our emphasis has been on the "unspoken truth". To maintain our independence, we do not seek foundation funding and elite philanthropic sponsorship, which invariably contribute to setting limits on the scope and focus of media reporting.

We therefore largely rely on contributions from our readers.

Please consider making a donation and/or becoming a Global Research Member. Any amount large or small will contribute to the broad objective of Truth in Media.

Also, please forward this message to your family and friends and "keep the ball rolling".

Tax Receipts for deductible charitable contributions

We are now in a position through our fiscal sponsorship program, to provide tax receipts for deductible charitable contributions by US residents for donations to Global Research in excess 

of $400.00

If you are a US resident and wish to make a tax deductible donation of $400 or more, contact us at crg.online@yahoo.com (please indicate "US Donation" in the subject line) and we will send you the details.

We are much indebted for your support.

For peace, social justice and truth,

Michel Chossudovsky

August 16, 2012