Italian Court Rules Vaccine Caused Autism

  • Landmark ruling in an Italian court has said Valentino Bocca’s autism was provoked by the MMR jab he had at aged nine months
  • His parents have already been awarded £140,000 and could be paid an additional £800,000 in their case against the Italian government
  • The case could set a precedent for many similar civil proceedings

By Sue Reid

PUBLISHED: 17:03 EST, 15 June 2012 | UPDATED: 12:20 EST, 16 June 201

At nine months old, Valentino Bocca was as bright as a button. In a favourite family photo, taken by his father, the baby boy wriggles in his mother’s arms and laughs for the camera.

His parents look at the precious picture often these days. It is a reminder of their only son before they took him on a sunny morning to the local public health clinic for a routine childhood vaccination.

Valentino was never the same child after the jab in his arm. He developed autism and, in a landmark judgment, a judge has ruled that his devastating disability was provoked by the inoculation against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR).

The case of Valentino Bocca age nine from Rimini Italy has reignited the debate over a possible link between the MMR and autism after a judge ruled his disability was provoked by the jab
The case of Valentino Bocca age nine from Rimini Italy has reignited the debate over a possible link between the MMR and autism after a judge ruled his disability was provoked by the jab


The judgment in a provincial Italian court challenges the settled view of the majority of the medical profession — and could have profound implications in Britain and across the world.

Valentino’s parents, Antonella, 44, and Maurizio, 43, have been awarded £140,000, to be paid by Italy’s Ministry of Health and they plan a civil action against the Italian government that may get them £800,000 more.

‘But, of course, the money will never bring back the perfect and beautiful child of 15 months that we had before the doctors gave him the inoculation,’ said his mother this week at the family’s small but beautifully designed flat near Rimini in northern Italy.

‘We have a different Valentino today. We love him just as much, but our lives will never be the same again.

‘He is nine, but cannot speak, and only sings a little to himself. He cannot hold a pencil. He has a special teacher at school to help him and finds it difficult to mix with other children. What the future holds for him, or for us, we do not know.’

The story of Valentino Bocca is a tragic one. His family have agreed to reveal their identity for the first time as the outcome of their case became public last week. They spoke exclusively to the Mail because they believe other parents all over the world should learn what has happened to their son.

Autism covers a huge range of developmental disorders which affect a child’s communication, social skills, and ability to lead a normal life.

Families caring for severely autistic children say their lives are blighted. Care of sufferers and related disorders costs the British state billions of pounds a year.

The number of autism cases has soared over the past four decades — at the last count researchers found one in 64 British children have some kind of autistic condition — and there has been widespread speculation over the cause of this widespread curse on so many families. In the Eighties, only four in every 10,000 children showed any signs of autism.

Bright as a button: Valentino Bocca age nine months, before teh MMR triple jab, with his mother Antonella. Valentino has Autism which a judge has ruled to have been provoked by the MMR vaccine

Bright as a button: Valentino Bocca age nine years, before teh MMR triple jab, with his mother Antonella. Valentino has Autism which a judge has ruled to have been provoked by the MMR vaccine

Bright as a button: Valentino Bocca age nine years, left, before the MMR triple jab, with his mother Antonella, and right, aged nine years. Valentino has autism which a judge has ruled to have been provoked by the jab

Suspicion has long been directed by some parents at the MMR vaccine, a triple cocktail of the measles, mumps and rubella viruses, although the Department of Health and NHS doctors have argued forcefully that better diagnosis of autism and environmental factors are responsible for the extraordinary rise in the number of cases.

In 1998, a highly controversial article in the medical journal  The Lancet written by Dr  Andrew Wakefield made a connection between the MMR jab and autism.

His research methods were later discredited, but as a result of the article countless numbers of parents in Britain refused to let their children have the jab, and cases of measles — which is very occasionally fatal — went up significantly.

In recent years, public confidence in the MMR inoculation has returned, but the Italian court’s judgment could reopen the controversy. This week, Luca Ventaloro, the Bocca family’s lawyer who specialises in helping families with vaccine-damaged children, proclaimed that the Rimini court judgment was the ‘first public admission’ that the MMR vaccine could, in some cases, lead to a healthy child developing autism.

Crucially, it came after Antonio Barboni, a doctor of forensic medicine and appointed by the judge to independently advise the court, wrote a report saying that ‘in the absence of any other  pre-existing conditions’ it is a ‘reasonable scientific probability’ that Valentino’s autism can be ‘traced back to the administration of the MMR vaccine . . . by the health authority’.  

Dr Barboni’s findings were endorsed by two other eminent doctors who examined Valentino, investigated his medical background, and gave evidence to the court hearing. 

Valentino¿s parents, Antonella, pictured, and Maritzo, have been awarded £140,000, to be paid by Italy¿s Ministry of Health and they plan a civil action against the Italian government that may get them £800,000 moreValentino¿s parents, Antonella, pictured, and Maritzo, have been awarded £140,000, to be paid by Italy¿s Ministry of Health and they plan a civil action against the Italian government that may get them £800,000 more

 

Judge Lucio Ardigo, awarding compensation to the family, agreed. He said it was ‘conclusively established’ that Valentino had suffered from an ‘autistic disorder associated with medium cognitive delay’ and his illness, as Dr Barboni stated, was linked to receiving the jab.  

Lawyer Mr Ventaloro explained yesterday: ‘This is very significant for Britain which uses, and has used, an MMR vaccine with the same components as the one given to Valentino.

‘It is wrong for governments and their health authorities to exert strong pressure on parents to take children for the MMR jab while ignoring that this vaccine can cause autism and linked conditions.’

Claudio Simion, a leading member of the lobby group Association for Freedom of Choice in Vaccination (Comilva), adds: ‘The Rimini judgment is vitally important for children everywhere. The numbers with autism are growing. It is a terrible thing that the authorities turn a blind eye to the connection between the MMR vaccination and this illness.’

No doubt the Bocca family would agree. They turned to Comilva for advice on compensation after they were finally told that their son had autism when he was five years old.

They had travelled to a world-renowned children’s clinic in Milan, bewildered as to why their son screamed all night, refused to eat anything but bread, could not keep still or concentrate and refused to look them in the eye.  

After 14 days of tests into his genetic background to rule out a family connection for his illness,  a neurologist explained  the diagnosis.

‘We were handed a big file with Valentino’s name on it and stamped with the word ‘autism’,’ remembers his mother Antonella. ‘Up to then, we had suspicions he had autism. But the nurses, the doctors, and the specialists we had seen before said we were dreaming up fairy tales.’

Father Maurizio adds: ‘When we mentioned our suspicions  about the MMR jab and how Valentino had been an ordinary happy little boy until he had it, these medical people looked at us as if we were crazy,’

As they talk in the park near their home, with Valentino tightly holding each of their hands, Antonella and Maurizio reveal how their nightmare began.

The landmark case in Italy could set a precedent for future civil claims against the Italian government for possible links between MMR and autism
The landmark case in Italy could set a precedent for future civil claims against the Italian government for possible links between MMR and autism


The couple had been married for a year before Valentino was born in 2003. His birth was normal and they were thrilled to take their healthy baby home.

Antonella, who worked part-time in a textile factory, and Maurizio, a civil engineer, went together with Valentino for all his routine vaccination appointments.

It was on the last Friday of March, 2004, that the boy was given the MMR jab. The dark-haired toddler was already saying ‘Mama’ and ‘Dada’, walking a few steps and enchanting his two grandmothers because he would not stop chattering. His parents had delayed for a month the triple MMR jab (normally given at 13 months) because Valentino had a bout of gastro-enteritis.
Antonella told the doctor about the illness and asked if it was safe for Valentino to have the jab. The doctor said there was ‘no problem’.

‘He cried when they gave him the injection,’ remembers Maurizio. ‘We were asked to wait half an hour afterwards at the clinic to make sure he was all right. When the doctors said he was OK, we just went home.’

They drove away — not knowing their lives had changed for ever. By the evening their normally hungry son was refusing to eat very much. That night he had diarrhoea and was restless. But neither of his parents attributed this to the jab.

Maurizio continues: ‘A few days after that, Valentino stopped using his spoon to eat. We started having to put food into his mouth. It was as though he was a baby again.

‘It was as if we’d gone to the vaccination clinic with one child and had been given another to take home. Valentino was not interested in what was happening around him any more. He could not concentrate on a single thing.’

But worse was to follow. The little boy stopped sleeping at night. He would wake up and scream in pain. During the day he ran around in circles without stopping. His parents were getting exhausted and were at their wits’ end.

Maurizio explains: ‘About two weeks after the jab he began screaming every night. He woke up three or four times each night and cried. It was like something out of The Exorcist. He was obviously in pain and we could do nothing to comfort him.’

They went back to the vaccination clinic for advice.
‘We were not being over fussy but the medical staff did not seem to grasp the gravity of the situation,’ added Antonella.

The clinic just gave them some cream to put on Valentino’s skin. After six months of no improvement in his condition, they took Valentino to the casualty department of the local hospital.

For the first time Antonella mentioned that the MMR vaccine might be to blame. ‘They said it was not possible,’ she says. Bewildered, the couple still looked for answers. Valentino was still screaming at night and like a wild child during the day.

When he was nearly two-and-a-half (14 months after the jab), they went to see an expert in neuropsychiatry and told her that their son had changed after the jab.

Antonella says: ‘She did not even write down what I was saying. She downplayed the situation, although she said he was not developing normally for a child of his age. But she could not offer any explanation and said it might be temporary in such a young boy.’

Desperately, they started to do some research on the internet. It suddenly occurred to them, after reading of other parents’ experiences, that Valentino might have autism.

When this was confirmed by the Milan children’s clinic, he was put on a milk-free and gluten-free diet.

‘Within a week, Valentino was sleeping at night and not shouting out in pain,’ says Maurizio.

‘He started to look us in the eye for the first time since the jab. He began to feed himself again. Progress was slow, but at last there was some hope.’

But, sadly, it was too late to find a complete cure for Valentino. At nine years old, he will never lead a normal life, and may need care for the rest of his days.

However, the Rimini court judgment has brought his parents some comfort because, for the first time, it supports their long-held belief that the MMR jab caused their son’s autism. 

In the UK, this much-debated  link has never been established in the courts. In 2010, a boy called Robert Fletcher received £90,000,  for severe brain damage provoked  by the MMR jab, under the Government’s Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. But he did not have autism.

In the U.S., nearly 5,000 families blame the MMR jab for causing their children’s autism — despite continuing protests from the medical and scientific world that there is little evidence.

Dr Andrew Wakefield first reported a link between MMR and autism in 1998 but his evidence has since been discredited
Dr Andrew Wakefield first reported a link between MMR and autism in 1998 but his evidence has since been discredited

 

In 2008, a girl called Hannah Poling was awarded $1.5 million damages by the U.S. government when a court ruled that receiving nine vaccines in one day (including the MMR) had caused her autistic condition.

But the court said that Hannah had an underlying cell disorder, mitochondria, which had been aggravated by the vaccinations and manifested itself as autism.

The Italian judgment has important implications for Britain for a number of reasons.

First, the jab given to Valentino — called MMR II — contains the same active measles, mumps and rubella viruses in the same quantities as MMR VaxPro, one of only two approved MMR vaccines in the UK which is used on hundreds of thousands of children every year. (Prior to the introduction of MMR VaxPro in 2006, MMR II had been used in the UK since 1988).

This match of ingredients is confirmed in the Department of Health Green Book — a guide for doctors on inoculation against infectious disease — and by detailed data on MMR vaccines released by the European Medicines’ Agency.

Second, in the UK, like Italy, the MMR jab is not compulsory.

However, the judge in Valentino’s case said that because the Italian government’s medical authorities so strongly recommend child vaccination against measles, mumps and rubella, the state should take responsibility for the devastating damage to Valentino.

The judge’s view has since been endorsed by Italy’s High Court of Law (the equivalent of our Supreme Court) which ruled that the Italian government must pay compensation to children damaged by any jabs given under the Ministry of Health auspices — even if they are not compulsory ones.   

Today, Antonella and Maurizio believe this is only fair for families. ‘The medical authorities were really pushing us to take Valentino for his childhood jabs,’ recalls Antonella.

‘We were sent endless appointment letters from the clinic. They started arriving when he was three months old.There was huge pressure. The letters made us, and other parents, feel obliged to have the MMR jab in order protect our beloved child from a dreadful illness.’

Little did they know that, soon after that jab, their son would suddenly develop a devastating condition from which he would never recover. The consensus of medical opinion in Britain remains that autism symptoms emerge suddenly and inexplicably around the age at which MMR is administered — making it inevitable that some cases will arise just after the jab.

Most doctors continue to argue that this is merely coincidence and that no convincing mechanism to explain a link has been set out.

The Department of Health has insisted: ‘MMR remains the best protection against measles, mumps and rubella. It is recognised by the World Health Organisation as having an outstanding safety record and there is a wealth of evidence showing children who receive the MMR vaccine are no more at risk of autism than those who don’t.’

However, the Italian judgment clearly suggests this important debate is far from over.

Italian Court Rules Vaccine Causes Autism

The Emperor’s New Clothes

by Hans Christian Andersen

Many years ago there lived an emperor who loved beautiful new clothes so much that he spent all his money on being finely dressed. His only interest was in going to the theater or in riding about in his carriage where he could show off his new clothes. He had a different costume for every hour of the day. Indeed, where it was said of other kings that they were at court, it could only be said of him that he was in his dressing room!

One day two swindlers came to the emperor’s city. They said that they were weavers, claiming that they knew how to make the finest cloth imaginable. Not only were the colors and the patterns extraordinarily beautiful, but in addition, this material had the amazing property that it was to be invisible to anyone who was incompetent or stupid.

“It would be wonderful to have clothes made from that cloth,” thought the emperor. “Then I would know which of my men are unfit for their positions, and I’d also be able to tell clever people from stupid ones.” So he immediately gave the two swindlers a great sum of money to weave their cloth for him.

They set up their looms and pretended to go to work, although there was nothing at all on the looms. They asked for the finest silk and the purest gold, all of which they hid away, continuing to work on the empty looms, often late into the night.

“I would really like to know how they are coming with the cloth!” thought the emperor, but he was a bit uneasy when he recalled that anyone who was unfit for his position or stupid would not be able to see the material. Of course, he himself had nothing to fear, but still he decided to send someone else to see how the work was progressing.

“I’ll send my honest old minister to the weavers,” thought the emperor. He’s the best one to see how the material is coming. He is very sensible, and no one is more worthy of his position than he.

So the good old minister went into the hall where the two swindlers sat working at their empty looms. “Goodness!” thought the old minister, opening his eyes wide. “I cannot see a thing!” But he did not say so.

The two swindlers invited him to step closer, asking him if it wasn’t a beautiful design and if the colors weren’t magnificent. They pointed to the empty loom, and the poor old minister opened his eyes wider and wider. He still could see nothing, for nothing was there. “Gracious” he thought. “Is it possible that I am stupid? I have never thought so. Am I unfit for my position? No one must know this. No, it will never do for me to say that I was unable to see the material.”

“You aren’t saying anything!” said one of the weavers.

“Oh, it is magnificent! The very best!” said the old minister, peering through his glasses. “This pattern and these colors! Yes, I’ll tell the emperor that I am very satisfied with it!”

“That makes us happy!” said the two weavers, and they called the colors and the unusual pattern by name. The old minister listened closely so that he would be able say the same things when he reported back to the emperor, and that is exactly what he did.

The swindlers now asked for more money, more silk, and more gold, all of which they hid away. Then they continued to weave away as before on the empty looms.

The emperor sent other officials as well to observe the weavers’ progress. They too were startled when they saw nothing, and they too reported back to him how wonderful the material was, advising him to have it made into clothes that he could wear in a grand procession. The entire city was alive in praise of the cloth. “Magnifique! Nysseligt! Excellent!” they said, in all languages. The emperor awarded the swindlers with medals of honor, bestowing on each of them the title Lord Weaver.

The swindlers stayed up the entire night before the procession was to take place, burning more than sixteen candles. Everyone could see that they were in a great rush to finish the emperor’s new clothes. They pretended to take the material from the looms. They cut in the air with large scissors. They sewed with needles but without any thread. Finally they announced, “Behold! The clothes are finished!”

The emperor came to them with his most distinguished cavaliers. The two swindlers raised their arms as though they were holding something and said, “Just look at these trousers! Here is the jacket! This is the cloak!” and so forth. “They are as light as spider webs! You might think that you didn’t have a thing on, but that is the good thing about them.”

“Yes,” said the cavaliers, but they couldn’t see a thing, for nothing was there.

“Would his imperial majesty, if it please his grace, kindly remove his clothes.” said the swindlers. “Then we will fit you with the new ones, here in front of the large mirror.”

The emperor took off all his clothes, and the swindlers pretended to dress him, piece by piece, with the new ones that were to be fitted. They took hold of his waist and pretended to tie something about him. It was the train. Then the emperor turned and looked into the mirror.

“Goodness, they suit you well! What a wonderful fit!” they all said. “What a pattern! What colors! Such luxurious clothes!”

“The canopy to be carried above your majesty awaits outside,” said the grandmaster of ceremonies.

“Yes, I am ready!” said the emperor. “Don’t they fit well?” He turned once again toward the mirror, because it had to appear as though he were admiring himself in all his glory.

The chamberlains who were to carry the train held their hands just above the floor as if they were picking up the train. As they walked they pretended to hold the train high, for they could not let anyone notice that they could see nothing.

The emperor walked beneath the beautiful canopy in the procession, and all the people in the street and in their windows said, “Goodness, the emperor’s new clothes are incomparable! What a beautiful train on his jacket. What a perfect fit!” No one wanted it to be noticed that he could see nothing, for then it would be said that he was unfit for his position or that he was stupid. None of the emperor’s clothes had ever before received such praise.

“But he doesn’t have anything on!” said a small child.000

“Good Lord, let us hear the voice of an innocent child!” said the father, and whispered to another what the child had said.

“A small child said that he doesn’t have anything on!”

Finally everyone was saying, “He doesn’t have anything on!”

The emperor shuddered, for he knew that they were right, but he thought, “The procession must go on!” He carried himself even more proudly, and the chamberlains walked along behind carrying the train that wasn’t there.

 https://www.facebook.com/WhatIsNormalcyInAnAbnormalSociety?ref=hl

Pyrrhic Victory

https://www.facebook.com/WhatIsNormalcyInAnAbnormalSociety?ref=hl

In the wake of historical gun control legislation being pushed by Obama and his regime through Executive Orders, the question needs to be asked, “Is the possible benefit of these “laws” worth what is being lost?” Some may say, that saving a few innocent lives would be worth losing certain freedoms; that it would be worth eroding liberty. Some would be willing to give up certain rights for safety. Are you willing to give up your rights? Are you willing to trust government to be our benelovent savior? If government control, if gun control, was the answer and if it did prevent any future murders, and that is a big IF, would it be worth the cost of losing our inalienable right to liberty? I would answer with a resounding NO. I think we must learn to judge all these matters not only by what are the potential gains, but also what are the potential losses. As Nietzsche wrote, “The value of a thing sometimes lies not in what one attains with it, but in what one pays for it- what it costs.”

 pizap_com10_11179766571149231360514829406

This is what is known as a pyrrhic victory. It is a victory or a goal achieved but at too great a cost to the victor. Some may be crying out for safety, some may be crying out for security and protection, and they might get it. If they end up in chains, or they end up “safe” behind guarded walls, is this outcome worth the safety? “I’d rather live free with some peril, than be a protected slave of government.” –Duffy

-J.P.Crawford

https://www.facebook.com/WhatIsNormalcyInAnAbnormalSociety?ref=hl

Human DNA From Aborted Fetuses Are In Vaccines

Most people will find it hard to believe that human DNA is contained in up to 23 different vaccines due to the fact a lot of the viruses are grown on aborted fetal tissue. As a result of the viruses being grown on aborted fetal tissue it is nearly impossible to separate residue from the fetuses completely from the vaccines. This adds a whole new element to the vaccination debate for those who are pro life. I don’t think many people would knowingly inject aborted fetal tissue into their children. Would you?

In a recent study by the Journal of Immunotoxicology entitled Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review, the report even goes so far as to say that this can be linked to the spike in rates of autism. The basic reason  the Journal points out the immune system is tricked into associating harmful viruses with human DNA. Then the immune system starts attacking human tissue in your own body. The scientist Helen Ratajczak who did the study and wrote the report says,

“Because it’s human DNA and recipients are humans, there’s homologous recombinaltion tiniker. That DNA is incorporated into the host DNA. Now it’s changed, altered self and body kills it. Where is this most expressed? The neurons of the brain. Now you have body killing the brain cells and it’s an ongoing inflammation. It doesn’t stop, it continues through the life of that individual.”

Ratajczak was asked why she did a study on such a controversial topic. She responded by saying,

“for years while working in the pharmaceutical industry, she was restricted as to what she was allowed to publish. “I’m retired now,” she told CBS News. “I can write what I want.”

The question arises, has my child received vaccines contaminated with aborted fetal tissue? Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute reports,

“Almost 92% of our children have been given vaccines made using aborted fetal cell lines, which are contaminated with aborted fetal cell DNA and a retrovirus. This has happened without our knowledge or consent!”

Which vaccines have been found to contain aborted fetal tissue?

AbortedFetalTissueVaccines

The question is now that you know this will you try to avoid vaccines that are potentially contaminated by aborted fetal tissue? Or do you think vaccines are so important to the health of your children that you are willing to take the risk?

Here are a couple links if you are interested in further research on the topic.

Evidence shows parallel between abortion and aborted fetal chickenpox vaccine (Photos)http://www.examiner.com/article/autism-evidence-shows-parallel-with-aborted-fetal-chickenpox-vaccine

One of the Most Inexcusable Vaccine Revelations of All… http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/07/10/this-shocking-fact-is-never-disclosed-on-any-vaccine-informed-consent-form.aspx

VaccinesAbortedFetuses

 

THE DRONE AGE

Throughout history man has placed labels on significant periods in time. We have had a stone age, a bronze age, and an iron age. The list goes on. Our current age will become known as the drone age. Drones are one of the most horrifying inventions of our time. I cannot think of many things that pose more of a threat to our freedoms and liberties than the drone. I have been saying for a while that the greatest threat to our freedoms and liberties isn’t a foreign threat but a domestic one. Not only are drones used to assassinate American citizens, unconstitutionally attack countries and are responsible for massive amounts of collateral damage, but, they are now being deployed in our skies over America.

00

Drones, undoubtedly, have saved hundreds, maybe even thousands of American lives, but, at what cost? One issue is how many “enemy combatants” have we even killed with them? How about civilians? Well, for one, there really is no way to be certain. Who are we fighting? What do they look like? They look like civilians. They are guerrillas. Meant to blend in and disappear. The estimates of drone casualties are wild and varying. There have been 362 drone strikes from 2004 and January 2013 in Pakistan. 310 of those during Obamas presidency (so much for campaigning on peace right?) The total reported deaths are between 2629 and 3461. Total reported civilian deaths are between 475 and 891.[1] So, if we take the best case scenario (3461 deaths, the high estimate) and (475 civilian deaths, the lowest estimate) that means nearly 14% of drone deaths are innocents. This is the low range estimate. In fact an estimated 176 children were killed in Pakistan by drones. This is just Pakistan. This excludes Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Yemen etc…

There is also the constitutional issue. Why are we even in any of these countries!? Did we declare war? Of course not! We just send our drones into countries that “harbor terrorists” and spy on them and bomb them. Not only does this violate or constitution but do these countries not have rights? What if China started flying drones over the U.S. and spying on us?

These drones have also been used to assassinate American citizens. Anwar al-Aulaqi was an American citizen who was born to Yemeni immigrants. After 9/11 he went to Yemen reportedly to escape a “climate of fear and intimidation.” After leaving the United States he was investigated and had alleged ties to terrorists he was put on an “imminent threat” list. In July 2010 Aulaqi’s father contacted the Center for Constitutional Rights and the ACLU and filed a lawsuit to remove him from the threat list.[2] This was the statement from the ACLU: “The United States is not at war in Yemen, and the government doesn’t have a blank check to kill terrorism suspects wherever they are in the world. Among the arguments we’ll be making is that, outside actual war zones, the authority to use lethal force is narrowly circumscribed, and preserving the rule of law depends on keeping this authority narrow.”[3] September the next year Aulaqi was dead. Killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator Drone in Yemen.Yes, Aulaqi may have been a terrorist and had alleged ties to terrorists but, it was never proven. An American citizen was given no rights and was assassinated without any of the rights guaranteed to him by the constitution.

0

The next issue is the domestic issue the deployment of drones over American skies. With the passing of the FAA Reauthorization Act it allows for drones to be deployed in U.S. skies. By 2020 an expected 30,000 drones will be flying over the U.S. These drones may be operated by the federal government, the police, or even private entities and corporations. Some of these drones are the size of passenger planes, some as small as hummingbirds.[4]

In an unclassified U.S. Air Force document (the link is below with the sources) discusses how Air Force drones may keep video and other data for 90 days without a warrant. After the 90 day period it will then be determined if the material can be kept. The document allows for the surveillance of un-specified people, in other words, a group of protestors.[5]

Furthermore, these drones have the potential to be armed. Do I think Obama is going to arm drones and start a reign of terror and begin blasting American cities? No. But what is to say that someone who will won’t inherit this power and do just that? This is unlikely as well, but still possible.

With the deployment of drones over America I think it is safe to say the police state is truly here. We, as Americans, cannot stand for this this. Can we ever expect to have privacy and not be tracked? We can be tracked and listened to through our cellphones, our televisions, computers, cars, and now drones. Can we trust the government with these responsibilities? Of course not! Ask yourself if you are free. While you’re asking yourself remember that there may very well be a drone watching your every move within the next couple years. How has this happened in America of all places? Drones are for your safety though; just think how many criminals will be caught by utilizing drones. Just like gun bans. These things are done with the label of safety but are we really safer?
“Those that can give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -Ben Franklin

Sources:
1. thebureauinvestigates.com
2. http://www.ccrjustice.org/targetedkillings
3. Mark Wilson (August 5, 2010). “CIA on the verge of lawsuit”. Seer Press News
4. http://lewrockwell.com/orig11/wolf-n8.1.1.html
5. http://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/drones1.pdf

 

THE BLIND HEN

THE BLIND HEN

“A hen who had lost her sight, and was accustomed to scratching up the earth in search of food although blind, still continued to scratch away most diligently. Of what use was it to the industrious fool? Another sharpsighted hen who spared her tender feet never moved from her side and enjoyed, without scratching, the fruit of the other’s labor. For as often as the blind hen scratched up a barley corn, her watchful companion devoured it.” -FABLES, GOTTHOLD LESSING

This short story is analagous of the relationship between any central bank and the people of that country. In the case of America, it happens to be the insidious parasite: the Federal Reserve. The common individual is completely unaware of how the central banks operate. In short, the government issues bonds and then the Federal Reserve buys these bonds by printing paper “money” which only cost them the amount it takes to print the Federal Reserve Notes. Then they charge interest on top of the “money” they just created. -JP

“People who will not turn a shovel full of dirt on the project (Muscle Shoals Dam) nor contribute a pound of material, will collect more money from the United States than will the People who supply all the material and do all the work. This is the terrible thing about interest …But here is the point: If the Nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money broker collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%. Whereas the currency, the honest sort provided by the Constitution pays nobody but those who contribute in some useful way.  It is absurd to say our Country can issue bonds and cannot issue currency. Both are promises to pay, but one fattens the usurer and the other helps the People. If the currency issued by the People were no good, then the bonds would be no good, either. It is a terrible situation when the Government, to insure the National Wealth, must go in debt and submit to ruinous interest charges at the hands of men who control the fictitious value of gold. Interest is the invention of Satan.” — THOMAS A. EDISON

https://www.facebook.com/WhatIsNormalcyInAnAbnormalSociety?ref=hl542289_502692473103258_1822860153_n

Seattle Gun BuyBack Get’s JACKED! Turns Into a Damn Gun Show! LOL

Police officers in Seattle, Washington held their first gun buyback program in 20 years this weekend, underneath interstate 5,  and soon found that private gun collectors were working the large crowd as little makeshift gun shows began dotting the parking lot and sidewalks. Some even had “cash for guns” signs prominently displayed.Gun Buyback Goes Bad

Police stood in awe as gun enthusiasts and collectors waved wads of cash for the guns being held by those standing in line for the buyback program.

People that had arrived to trade in their weapons for $100 or $200 BuyBack gift cards($100 for handguns, shotguns and rifles, and $200 for assault weapons) soon realized that gun collectors were there and paying top dollar for collectible firearms. So, as the line for the chump cards got longer and longer people began to jump ship and head over to the dealers.

John Diaz, Seattles Police Chief,  wasn’t pleased with the turn of events stating “I’d prefer they wouldn’t sell them,” but admitted it’s perfectly legal for private individuals to buy and sell guns, FOR NOW. Mayor Mike McGinn said at a news conference the private transactions are a loophole that needs to be closed. “There’s no background checks, and some (guns) could be exchanged on the streets that shouldn’t be in circulation.”

But Schuyler Taylor, a previous gun retailer attending the event in hopes of buying weapons, asked “Why not offer them cash versus a gift card? I’m still taking the guns off the streets; they’re just going in my safe.”

People were reportedly, at one point, jumping out of vehicles  whilst sitting in traffic – making on the spot deals with the gun dealers.

But the BuyBack wasn’t a bust. On the contrary – their $80,000 supply of gift cards didn’t last but 2 hours, and by 11:00 am they began attempting to issue IOU’s at which point the entire crowd responded by turning and marching toward the gun dealers, forcing the police officers to pack it up for the day.

On one last note of hilarity, the Seattle Police department claims that they will check the buyback guns to see if any were previously stolen and, if so, try to return them to the rightful owners! LOL. Brilliant!

In 1992, Seattle police collected more than 1,200 guns in a four-day buyback program.

Now the only question is, when will the Seattle Police department stage the next gun show?

Source: http://dcxposed.com/2013/01/27/seattle-gun-buyback-gets-jacked-turns-into-a-damn-gun-show-lol/

Obama’s New Appointments Prove that He Will Continue to Lick Wall Street’s Boots In His Second Term

Puts Fox In Charge of the Henhouse … Again

The party line is that Obama’s new pick for SEC boss – Mary Jo White – will be tough on Wall Street.

For example, the Wall Street Journal writes:

Obama Taps Ex-Prosecutor Mary Jo White, Portending Increased Policing of Wall Street

In reality, this is putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.

White used to represent Morgan Stanley, and blocked an insider investigation into Morgan Stanley boss John Mack.

Obama Wall Street

The truth is that all of Obama’s appointments have been in bed with the big banks … and none of them have “gotten tough” on Wall Street once they were appointed:

In other words, Obama – like Bush – has let Wall Street get away with crime because he has appointed government officials who are in bed with Wall Street.

The SEC has been shredding documents around the clock to cover up Wall Street fraud.  Senior SEC employees spent up to 8 hours a day surfing porn sites instead of cracking down on financial crimes (the same thing happens at Treasury and other government agencies.)

Nothing will change under Mary Jo White.

While some die-hard Obama supporters hoped that things would change in his second term, or that Obama was naively believing the advice of bad advisers, former IMF chief economist Simon Johnson noted in 2009 that Obama knows exactly what he’s doing:

Many people assume that Obama doesn’t understand that his economic team – Summers, Geithner, Bernanke, Gensler and the boys – are preserving the status quo, and failing to make the fundamental reforms needed to stabilize the economy.

They assume that the economy is a mysterious subject for experts, and that Obama innocently thinks his team is doing good for the American people.

But professor of economics and former chief IMF economist Simon Johnson isn’t buying it.

As Johnson and James Kwak write today in the Washington Post:

During the reign of Louis XIV, when the common people complained of some oppressive government policy, they would say, “If only the king knew . . . .” Occasionally people will make similar statements about Barack Obama, blaming the policies they don’t like on his lieutenants.

But Barack Obama, like Louis XIV before him, knows exactly what is going on.

Indeed, Obama was bought and paid for many years ago, and he has pimped out the American people ever since.

Source: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/01/obamas-appointments-prove-that-he-will-continue-to-lick-wall-streets-boots-in-his-second-term.html

Jury Nullification

by J.P.Crawford

Source: https://www.facebook.com/WhatIsNormalcyInAnAbnormalSociety?ref=hl

Did you know that a jury has the power to change laws through jury nullification? The people have a very important and powerful position in the American legal system. A jury has the discretion to acquit a defendant, regardless of their guilt, if they think that “law” is unjust and/or they do not think the defendant is deserving of punishment.

Jury nullification is an essential tool to thwart and possibly overturn bad “laws” that have been written and come into existence by the influence of lobbyist who represent corrupt corporations.”Behind every bad law is a trail of money that leads to lobbyists that represent powerful corporations. Corporations use the legal system literally to outlaw their competition through the enforcement of regulations, taxes, and fees that smaller businesses can’t afford.”[1]
Many victimless “crimes” were created because of the influence of corporations in which justice was not the motive. Corporations have one goal and that is profit. Jury nullification is key in guarding against these powerful entities. For example, there are countless men and women who have had there lives destroyed because of frivolous marijuana possession charges in which there was absolutely no victim. Many prisons today are privately owned and the corporations that own these prisons use there money to influence legislation. Of course these groups want stricter laws and longer jail terms as that increases their profits, all of which comes from the American taxpayer.
 Jury Nullification
Remember, if you have the chance to participate in the legal system as a member of a jury you can acquit a defendant if you think the “law” is unjust. Not only will you be protecting one of your peers from injustice, but you will also be saving American taxpayers from unecessary incarcerations. Furthermore, jury nullification can lead to a precedence in law. A precedence in law is: “a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.”[2]Jury nullification is a major weapon that the people can wield, it has, to a large degree, been concealed by those in the legal system. It is a guard against corrupt laws, against a system that is constantly bombarded by lobbyist, by money, power and greed.”Jury nullification of law,” as it is sometimes called, is a traditional right that was rigorously defended by America’s Founding Fathers. Those great men, Patriots all, intended the jury to serve as a final safeguard – a test that laws must pass before gaining sufficient popular authority for enforcement. Thus the Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power – representatives, senate, executive, judges – and finally juries. Each enactment of law must pass all these hurdles before it gains the authority to punish those who may choose to violate it.”[3]
The legal system must be based on justice and the protection of the lives, the liberty, the property, and the happiness of the people who gave that system it’s power, and it’s legitimacy. The judicial branch of the government, like every branch of government, derived it’s power {jurisdiction} from the consent of the people. They were given this power for one purpose and that was for the protection of the rights previously mentioned. Outside of that role they were not granted any power, their jurisdiction is solely within those parameters.
“If a juror accepts as the law that which the judge states, then that juror has accepted the exercise of absolute authority of a government employee and has surrendered a power and right that once was the citizen’s safeguard of liberty.”[4]
The Jury Declared John Peter Zenger “Not Guilty” and Gave America Freedom of the Press

 

It is November of 1734. A printer named John Peter Zenger has been arrested for seditious libel against the Royal Governor of the Colony of New York. He criticized the government and provided evidence to the public of the Governor’s corruption. The English politicians were furious! The Colony of New York forbade any publication without prior government approval. The colonists had not yet established the freedom of the press. Zenger, unintimidated by corrupt government officials, defied this censorship and published articles that were strongly critical of government corruption. Soon, he was arrested for it.

When brought to trial in August of 1735, Zenger admitted that he published the articles, but he argued that the truth of the facts stated justified their publication. The judge instructed the jury that truth is not a justification for libel. Rather, the judge argued, truth makes the libel more vicious because public unrest is more likely to follow claims that are true, rather than false claims of the corruption of the government. And since the defendant admitted to the fact of the publication, only a question of law remained. So the judge said the issue of law was for him alone to determine and so he instructed the jury to find the defendant guilty. (Sound familiar?)

It took only ten minutes for the jury to disregard the judge’s instructions and the law that denied Mr. Zenger’s God-given right to free speech and they found him “Not guilty”! They deemed him not guilty of any criminal act, and in so doing charged the law with guilt instead! As a result of that jury’s decision, the freedom of the press became firmly established in the colonies. That’s the power of the jury! It was the jury that gave America the freedom of the press.

The jury is our government’s final check in the system of checks and balances. The jury is the people’s last safeguard against unjust laws and arbitrary statutes that serve the interests of the lawmakers and not the people. It was through the veto power of the jury, handing down a “Not guilty” verdict in defiance of unlawful law, that slavery was overturned in state after state before the Civil War, the Salem witch trials were stopped, anti-strike laws were overturned, and Prohibition was brought to an end. The government cannot deprive anyone of life or liberty with man-crafted, God-usurping, artificial laws without the consent of the jury. And the jury may be the last line of non-violent defense of the victims of the Abortion Holocaust in America.

More quotes on jury nullification:

“The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact.” — Oliver Wendell Holmes, United States Supreme Court Justice

“The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the facts in controversy.” — John Jay, 1st Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

“The pages of history shine on instances of the jury’s exercise of its prerogative to disregard instructions of the judge.” — U.S. vs. Dougherty, 1972

“It would be an absurdity for jurors to be required to accept the judge’s view of the law, against their own opinion, judgment, and conscience.” — John Adams

Source: https://www.facebook.com/WhatIsNormalcyInAnAbnormalSociety?ref=hl

Making Sense of Sandy Hook Shooting Conspiracy Theories

 By Independence Declaration January 20, 2013

Many have been asking about the context of a recent post I made  which said, “Question everything…….don’t come to conclusions without conclusive evidence.” Here is my explanation:

The context of my quote is this day and age where we have so much information at our fingertips. As a result I am very skeptical of everything the mainstream media puts out but this does not mean I am not to be skeptical of everything coming out of alternative media. I think it’s good to question the inconsistencies of Sandy Hook but I’ll admit I have not come to many conclusions. Why because they are my interpretations of anomalies.There are other interpretations that are just as valid when it comes to a lot of anomalies in the Sandy Hook narrative.

For example: We saw a gun in xlargethe trunk that was most likely not used yet they reported it was used. Do we conclude therefore that the whole story is false and these are all actors? Or do we conclude that maybe they lied about this part of the story to strengthen their argument against assault weapons? Which is more plausible. I say #2 but I can’t conclude with 100% certainty this is the case. A father laughed before he went up to the microphone are they all actors? A daughter wearing the same or similar dress, perhaps it was her sister…maybe it was her. You can’t be conclusive….sisters look alike.

I am just saying let’s be careful here. There are a range of interpretations. Anywhere from sloppy reporting, to lies within an actual event, all the way to they were all actors. You may find one view is more convincing than another but all I am saying is hold up a little till we know for certain. For all we know is disinfo agents could be putting out these inconsistencies to get us to bite on them so that we will discredit the main message.

Instead of tightly controlled information for propaganda in this day and age. They have had to change their tactic because there is sooo much information out there. That tactic could be disinformation. Learn to think critically. Don’t be a sheep and follow the opinions of others no matter who it is. Let’s not get diverted from our goal and that is to fight to preserve our liberty.