Natural News Store

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Ron Paul Questions Paul Volcker During Joint Economic Committee 02/26/2009

From Jeff Wright:

Listen carefully to Volker's responses to Congressman Paul.

If we believe Volker that there are no official (and few unofficial) discussions occurring on SupraNational currency replacements, in conjunction with his agreement with Dr. Paul about the current state of fiat currency and the world financial system, it is extremely important to note. Pay very close attention between the 5 minute point and the end. Note Volker's "constricted by gold and other arrangements" at 6:17.

Before that statement he clearly says at 5:40 (in a hugely evasive answer) they don't know where to go from here. It has been my contention for some time the reason that there is no replacement of the existing fiat currency system with another after having the current one completely implode. Simply because where would credit be obtained for the new system when virtually all previous "capital" and credit have been destroyed? That is only beginning to dawn on them.

I have believed for several years now that the way this is unwinding is not in any way the way it was anticipated by the Powers That Be (PTB). Primarily because they never accounted for the speed with which technology enabled the global growth of all forms of dollar-denominated derivative creation or their collapse. They did not even begin to realize the true scope and depth of the house of cards until it started coming apart.

That's why I have heavily discounted all discussion of the creation of the Amero and all future SupraNational currency replacements. They are now left without a portfolio to proceed under and have no idea what to do about it. Hence, every policy erupting out of the Fed, the Treasury, the WB, IMF, G-7 and global central banks are only that of delay at this point and improvised on the fly.

They care not about the long term consequence as they desperately search for an idea (of which there is none) to avoid a return to asset-based currency which, no matter how they attempt it, will devolve power not aggregate it further. And it may very well devolve completely. Good for us at the bottom, but it will be ugly.

This is why the tone and the urgency of discussions with the local and state population and political infrastructure has to change quickly towards one of more immediate urgency and local focus. The acceleration and ability to forestall the general implosion of the world economic system is becoming dimmer everyday due to the PTBs taking precisely the wrong steps at each turn. They are completely outside their box of understanding. Rome is just about to have the flames visibly erupt in the next few months to a year as the spinning plates start crashing.

The other important thing is he says that the questions Dr. Paul raises are very relevant, but admits they will not or cannot be addressed.

The states and localities must begin to take steps to protect themselves. Economic ignorance is about to visit on the population with a vengeance.

Central banks don't want their leased gold back

Have you wondered how the scam to suppress gold prices really works? Then, this is a must read...

Submitted by cpowell on Sat, 2009-02-28 04:25.


11:12p ET Friday, February 27, 2009

Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:

Tonight your secretary/treasurer had an exchange about gold leasing with a participant in the wonderful forum sponsored by Centennial Precious Metals in Denver ( Since gold leasing is at the center of the gold suppression scheme and is a bit complicated, the exchange might be worth sharing, so it's appended.

CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

* * *

Gold Leasing by Government -- A Question

"How long can the U.S. government protect the dollar's value by leasing its gold to bullion dealers who sell it, thereby holding down the gold price?"

-- Former Assistant U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul Craig Roberts in a recent essay (

I am hoping someone can provide me with an explanation of how this machination works. The government leases gold to a dealer. This means, I presume, that the dealer gets to take physical possession of the gold for a period of time and pays a fee for the privilege. What happens when that time expires? The gold must be returned to the government, and unless the price of gold has fallen, the dealer takes a bath. What am I missing?

-- Tahoma.


Tahoma, to reply to your question about gold leasing. ...

It works this way.

While central banks traditionally have said they lease gold to earn a little money on a supposedly dead asset, in 1998 Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan told Congress that this was not true. Central banks lease gold, Greenspan admitted, to suppress its price:

For years prior to 2000, gold leasing fueled what was called the gold carry trade. Investment houses leased gold from central banks, paying the central banks a tiny annual interest rate, usually well below 1 percent of the value of the gold leased, and then sold the gold into the market and invested the proceeds in government bonds, earning perhaps 5 percent annually. The huge difference in interest rates meant a virtually free stream of income for the investment houses, income paid by central banks as interest on the government bonds purchased by the investment houses, secure as long as the investment houses could be protected against sudden rises in the price of gold.

Gold-leasing governments liked this scheme because it supported government bond prices and government currencies and kept interest rates down — below where a free market would have set them. The results were the worldwide, credit-fueled boom, a vast misallocation of capital into unprofitable, unsustainable enterprises, and the worldwide bust now under way.

When the price of gold reached bottom in 1999 and turned up, threatening the investment houses that had sold leased gold even as Western central bank gold reserves began to decline markedly, the Western European central banks, under the supervision of the U.S. government, announced the Central Bank Gold Agreement:

The U.S. government was not formally a signatory to the agreement, but it was announced in Washington and has been called the Washington Agreement. So it is fairly surmised that the U.S. government helped organize the agreement and had a big interest in it -- the continuing support of the U.S. dollar and U.S. government bonds through gold price suppression. Gold price suppression was the essence of the "strong dollar policy." The Washington Agreement was a plan of dishoarding and sale of the gold reserves of the Western European central banks.

While the agreement's participants said they meant to support the gold price by limiting and co-ordinating their gold dishoarding, in fact they were arranging cash settlement of their gold loans, allowing the investment houses that were short gold to close their positions in cash rather than in gold itself. The investment houses were allowed to settle in cash because if they had been required to settle in gold, they would have had to go into the open market to get it and the gold price would have shot up very high, bankrupting the investment houses and greatly diminishing the value of all government currencies and bonds.

That is, central banks do not want their leased gold back. That is what you are missing.

Ever since the Washington Agreement in 1999 the Western central banks have been managing their controlled retreat with the gold price, letting gold rise a fairly steady 15-20 percent per year on average, stretching out their dishoarding as far as they can while trying to maintain some gold on hand for emergency intervention in the currency markets.

Barrick Gold, the biggest hedger (short) among the gold miners, confirmed all this when it announced some years ago that most of its gold loans had 15-year terms and were what the company called "evergreen" -- always allowed to be rolled over year after year so that the gold never had to be repaid as long as Barrick paid the tiny amount of cash interest due on it every year.

Barrick is short more than 9 million ounces of gold and until a few years ago was short much more than that. Who would lend so much gold indefinitely and for a mere pittance in interest? Only a central bank that meant to suppress gold as part of a scheme to keep government currencies and government bonds up and interest rates down.

Defending against Blanchard & Co.'s gold price-fixing lawsuit in U.S. District Court in New Orleans in 2003, Barrick went so far as to claim to be the agent of the central banks when it leased and sold gold and to share their sovereign immunity against lawsuit:

That is, gold is only the tail on the dog here. But it's a very strong tail.

You can find more detail about the gold price suppression scheme here:

* * *

Help keep GATA going

GATA is a civil rights and educational organization based in the United States and tax-exempt under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Its e-mail dispatches are free, and you can subscribe at


By CJ Graham
February 28, 2009

"If the American People ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered..." --Thomas Jefferson

The Illness

America has virulent cancer.

She suffers a malignant malevolent tumor, a heartless soulless abomination to her humanity; the cancer of globalism. This flawed ideology, communistic in nature, is hell bent on invading and destroying the heart, mind and soul of our beloved nation. Where freedom and hope, ingenuity and motivation now stand hobbled by corrupting influences, globalists, like ravenous locusts, conspire to leave behind desolation and devastation.

To the globally focused elite, our citizens, the unwashed masses, mere peasants, are nothing more than cattle to be bought, manipulated to toil, spend, and fund. To the Gods of Globalism, nations are a marketplace and people are the slaves; with the predictable outcome, tyranny.

There is no human dignity in being a people without a nation, freedom, or self determination. Humans cannot thrive without an identity or community. We cannot flourish without the hope of something greater for our progeny then for ourselves.

There are no human rights in being used as a unit of labor, worked into senility, plundered, ravaged and cast aside for the next replacement, one with less demands and fewer complications. The elites are the framers and benefactors of globalism. The citizens subjected to this ideology; the victims.

Americans are currently living under the illusion of ‘representation,’ by such globalists. Let me be very clear, globalists are not Americans. To embrace a loss of sovereignty, an end to nation states, and the beloved work of our Founding Fathers, is disloyal and treasonous.

You cannot be an American and live the American idea if you are espousing globalist rhetoric; these two ideologies are in direct conflict one with another.

Americans still pining for change can expect no redress from the current batch of politicians. They appear both incapable of and unwilling to think America first. How can they be expected to represent Americans justly and constitutionally when their every consideration, idea, and action is global-results oriented? They have sworn a new allegiance and answer to another power.

It would seem the globalists are willing to sacrifice a few Americans (collateral damage) for this new global realignment. After all, what are a few homeless American children and senior citizens in the grand scheme of things? The Gods of Globalism have higher ideas, you see.

Americans and their silly Constitution, which they cling to and recite religiously, are outdated and hopelessly unsophisticated to the elite who have it all figured out. It is a shame that they will be left behind in the new global order. There are always victims of change and change is always progress and progress is always good, right? Unless we all begin to understand that this is the mindset of the global elite, we will never understand how to survive them.

Like cockroaches, globalists have infiltrated every aspect of the American experience from government to education, entertainment, media, social programs, health care and finance. They have come into our collective psyche with outstretched hands, promising change and social responsibility and bringing nothing more than third world slavery, inferior products, poverty, homelessness, racial tensions, divisiveness and distrust. This strategy is being played out across the globe and the resultant chaos is clear.

Playing their hands quietly, patiently, and meticulously, the Gods of Globalism plot each step and wait for the uproar of an outraged people. When it does not come, they advance, incrementally, unobtrusively, so as not to be threatening; allowing the innocent time to become accustomed to them and to adjust their thinking and tolerance levels.

The global elites do not wish to co-exist with us; they want to dominate and control every aspect of our lives and our humanity. Little by little, while we were working, raising children, living our American dream, and paying taxes, they were laying the ground work against our sovereignty.

As of this past election cycle, it would appear, nothing has changed. One only has to witness the awestruck faces at any Obama gathering to understand that Americans are beguiled by ideas taught since grade school, ideas that destroy liberty, personal responsibility and accountability. Ideas taught that different is always better, change can never be negative, shame and guilt should replace pride and achievement, and protectionism is a negative, in a world without boundaries, cultures, traditions or religions.

The Symptoms

Americans were open hearted and generous and welcomed immigrants who wished for the American dream. Over time, the quality and purpose of immigrants changed. When our instincts warned us of danger, most ignored them and chided themselves or others for being selfish and intolerant.

When jobs became tight, resources limited, cities overcrowded, and services depleted, our ‘representatives’ continued to dilute our citizenry with illegal aliens having no regard for our nation, history or people.

(Imagine how the Native Americans felt when the white Europeans came and did the same to them! Let us not forget.)

Change was subtle and caught our citizens unaware. Rather then add to the fabric of our brilliant American tapestry, new hoards of illegals and ‘Visa overstays’ overtook our nation and our cultural identity, changing forever the complexity of our nation. Borders, not respected, were breached and are now in danger of becoming erased. Those who tried to warn America for decades were ridiculed and labeled racists, nationalists and protectionists.

As Americans now cry out for relief, our ‘representatives’ remain deaf to our pleadings. They no longer recognize us as the rightful owners of this nation. The American citizen, replaced and marginalized, is voiceless, endangered and unrepresented.

Our children, undereducated in the basics, have had their minds and survival instincts turned to mush by socialist ideologies. While other nations teach math and science, our children are taught diversity and tolerance in a utopian inspired world.

They have not been taught history, so when the wolf knocked at the door, they did not know enough to barricade it. We have left them defenseless and naïve in a dangerous world that would destroy them. Meanwhile, our babies sucked on toys laced with brain deadening lead. Our pets were killed by toxic pet foods, and our seniors died from contaminated peanut butter.

The plan for global governance has now become obvious and arrogant. Criminals are rewarded while innocents pay the price. Social engineers applaud greed and mock simplicity and tradition. Children, beset with cynicism from an onslaught of corruption and moral equivalency, question everything but believe in nothing. Our children are awash in drugs, crime, the cynical materialism of globalism, and are almost lost to us.

What do we tell our children now? Do we tell them that we are sorry we were asleep while our nation was being disassembled? Do we deny seeing our borders breached, the marches in our streets, communist flags waving above upended American flags, in the hands of hateful rhetoric spewing illegal aliens?

How will we explain to our children that we have indebted them to the Communist Chinese and Saudi Arabians and that their new masters detest our Constitution and our way of life?

How will we explain that we didn’t bother to learn that the Federal Reserve is not a government entity, but a globalist banking institution, robbing them of their national treasure without accountability?

Will our children ever know national pride and the blessings of liberty? Will they embrace the satisfaction of belonging to a people, culture, tradition and idea? Will they have the stability of owning their own soil to grow food, build a home, and raise a family? Will they understand what it is to love something enough to fight and die for it? Will they know that being an American is an honor and a gift that carries with it an implicit obligation to pass it to our future generations intact?

Are our children already destined to be born into servitude to bankers, power brokers and the global elite?

For our children, I am ashamed for every politician, corrupt and filthy drunk with power, that was ever re-elected and never held accountable for his misdeeds.

Having been the richly rewarded benefactors of our ancestor’s deep patriotism and their willingness to guard, with their lives, the treasure of being an American citizen, will we be the generation that left nothing for our children but poverty and enslavement?

The Cure

National Pride is the only cure for what besets the soul of our nation.

America is at a cross roads. One path leads to renewed freedom, sovereignty and prosperity; the other to domination, poverty, tyranny and destruction.

One thing stands in the way of the Gods of Globalism realizing their dream;

A True Hearted American Patriot.

Do not underestimate that power.

It is intrinsic in the American psyche to admire and embrace our nation, heritage and rule of law. Our pride in this beautiful American experience is the hope of future generations.

We are citizens of the greatest nation in the world. We are neither customers nor slaves. We are Americans. We must stand and light the way to freedom, beginning with our own. For if we truly care about the people of the world, what better can we do for them, than to do for our own, and lead by example?

Globalists loathe national pride. It is the proverbial stake in the vampire’s heart.
People cannot be forever oppressed. They will long for freedom and identity. They want to protect their homes, families and nation. It is an undeniable human instinct, a message of self determination.

This is why the Gods of Globalism hate the patriot, and why we must be proud to be one. The more globalists mock and ridicule, the more we must push forth, for they are showing their fear and fearful entities make mistakes.

They are not invulnerable. They do not have truth and faith and love of nation on their side, thus they cannot win.

There are American patriots currently serving in our government. Call on them now to step forward, not meekly, but forcefully, loudly, and publicly decry the blasphemy of globalism now occurring in DC and our state and local government. They must speak out and raise the understanding of our population to alert and educate them. They are obligated by their oath to do so.

Great American minds built the manufacturing base, from which this nation once prospered. They must speak out. Business is not a corrupt institution. The people entering business are corrupt. The globalists have overtaken the system and are bent on destroying it. Stand up against them and stand for the American worker.

The American people need a benefactor, one with power, money and prestige. They need CEOs with integrity, honor, decency and patriotism to come forward and chastise the globalists for being the greedy sell outs they have exposed themselves to be. It must come from within their own ranks to be effective.

Those of honor in the media know the travesty the profession has become. Cast off the shackles of political correctness and the corporate media monster and tell the American people the truth. Rally your journalistic integrity and do the research yourself instead of reading the talking points that are put before you. You will feel much more proud when you look in the mirror and will be amazed at how well you will sleep at night. Do not worry about being called the ‘lunatic fringe’, in time you will take great pride in the label and the American people will recognize the truth when they hear it.

Educators must stand up for truth and not allow children to be indoctrinated with the socialist globalist view of the world. You know the truth and have the most solemn responsibility to enrich our youngest citizens with the facts they need to survive in a dangerous world.

The point of no return is within viewing distance. Globalists are licking their chops. The wolf is at the door. But perhaps they have underestimated the human spirit and the conviction to be free. Perhaps the wolf now regrets his posturing and arrogance.

Globalists can scoff at the simple idea of patriotism. They can mock and laugh at our tattered belongings, but unlike restless globalists, we can sleep at night knowing we love our nation without reservation.

I am deeply grateful for the work of heroes, long into this battle, those armed with the truth, courage and great stores of knowledge. Someday, the people of this nation will recognize that we owe a great debt of gratitude to people like Devvy Kidd, Frosty Wooldridge, Michael Cutler, Chuck Baldwin, Ron Paul, Andrew Wallace, Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck and the publishers of NewsWithViews and other like-minded publications, who worked diligently to spread truth, never gaining personal benefit, and often ridiculed by Americans, too comfortable and well fed, to listen carefully.

Though I am a late comer in this battle to save our Republic, I am so much better for the work of those who have come before and paved the way. I am filled with regret for every article I did not publish, every call I did not make, every stranger I did not tell, every opportunity I missed by error or complacency.

Cancer is not always fatal. Many times, survivors come back from the brink, better for having survived and endured, renewed enough to appreciate the blessings bestowed upon them. America has virulent cancer but national pride is the cure.

© 2009 CJ Graham - All Rights Reserved

"CJ" Graham is a Veteran and the proud wife of a retired USAF Veteran. She is a dedicated mother, activist, conservative, independent, who's allegiance is to her country and not to a particular political party. She is a firm believer in the power of the Citizen of the United States of America to whom she writes with a empowering and encouraging spirit. She knows that the Citizen of the USA can make a difference through peaceful, focused, knowledge empowered, activism working within the system and with media and legislators to effect change. As an author, she writes from the heart but backs up her work with facts.


Military Joining The American Resistance To Protect The Constitution

...where I have to choose between obeying orders or supporting the Constitution and the American people.

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” ~ Winston Churchill

Conviction is worthless unless converted into conduct.~ Thomas Carlyle

I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ~ James Madison

The right to revolt has sources deep in our history. - Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

Do you know what started the first American Revolution???

Friday, February 27, 2009

John Bolton at CPAC: The Benefits of Nuking Chicago

—Photo illustration by Steve Aquino.

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton believes the security of the United States is at dire risk under the Obama administration. And before a gathering of conservatives in Washington on Thursday morning,  he suggested, as something of a joke, that President Barack Obama might learn a needed lesson if Chicago were destroyed by a nuclear bomb.

Appearing at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the nation's largest annual conference of conservative activists, Bolton, one of the hardest hardliners of the George W. Bush administration, spoke at length about Obama's naiveté and how various nations – Russia, North Korea, Iran – will be exploiting the new president. The most dramatic moment of his speech may have been when he cracked a joke about the nuking of Obama's hometown.

"The fact is on foreign policy I don't think President Obama thinks it's a priority," said Bolton. "He said during the campaign he thought Iran was a tiny threat. Tiny, tiny depending on how many nuclear weapons they are ultimately able to deliver on target. Its, uh, its tiny compared to the Soviet Union, but is the loss of one American city" – here Bolton changes his tone subtly to prepare for the joke – "pick one at random – Chicago – is that a tiny threat?"
Bolton wasn't the only one who thought this was funny. The room erupted in laughter and applause. Was this conservative catharsis, with rightwingers delightfully imagining the destruction of a city that represents Obama? Or perhaps they were venting vengeance with their laughter. (Bolton is no stranger to inflammatory remarks. He once infamously quipped, "There are 38 floors to the UN building in New York. If you lost 10 of them, it wouldn't make a bit of difference.")

At CPAC, the Right's most fevered beliefs about Obama live on, with speakers portraying him as a radical liberal who wants to compromise American values, hand hard-earned taxpayer dollars to the shifty poor, and, as Bolton repeatedly pointed out, weaken America's defense.

Bolton was introduced by Thomas Kilgannon, the head of Freedom Alliance, an organization founded by Oliver North. Kilgannon described the United Nations, an organization that Bolton despises, as a place "where anti-Americanism is outdone only by anti-Semitism" and "where American tax dollars are wasted [and] dictators are exalted."

Bolton received a standing ovation and got off to a fast start, declaring that "President Obama is the most radical president we have ever elected in this country." In Bolton's world, Obama's radicalism is matched only by his lack of backbone. The new president, he warned, simply doesn't have what it takes to go head to head with the world's baddest bad actors. And Obama's pusillanimous posture, Bolton predicted, will result in American becomes a "weaker and less safe nation."

One man that Bolton feels has plenty of backbone is the Russian prime minister, Vladimir Putin, who Bolton believes can sense Obama's weakness and is already finding ways to test it. In Bolton's view, the problem isn't merely that Obama isn't man enough to take on Putin; it's that Obama desires the United States to become a second-class nation. "The administration wants to return to an arms control relation with Russia that will put us in a greatly weakened position," Bolton maintained.

Russia isn't the only threat that Obama will fail to confront, Bolton said. North Korea, he claimed, is testing a missile that can hit Alaska and "possibly" Hawaii. With "further development," he added, that missile could someday be used to attack the continental United States. And North Korea is small potatoes compared to Iran. "We have lost the race with Iran on the nuclear front," said Bolton. "They now have complete mastery over the nuclear fuel cycle. And while in the long-term, the preferred outcome would be to change the regime in Tehran and get rid of the Islamic revolution of 1979, we don't have time to do that before they get nuclear weapons capability." Bolton expressed disappointment that the Bush administration did not use force against Iran. Judging from the enthusiastic crowd reaction, there are plenty of conservatives who think that Bush's foreign policy failing was not preemptively attacking enough Middle Eastern countries.

Bolton concluded by saying, "I think it's clear that our national security is at risk in this administration." He received a standing ovation. In a brief Q&A session, he was asked if the American people will "revolt" because of Obama's policies. This question about armed revolution was curious, given President Obama's popularity rating is above 60 percent.

The speaker who proceeded Bolton, Republican Congressman Paul Ryan, highlighted the conflict that runs throughout CPAC. Ryan's proposals for domestic policy were exactly what one would expect. Supply side theories, good! Government spending, bad! Tax cuts, good! European-style economics, bad! He  ended by saying, "With CPAC's leadership, we can revitalize this movement." And that's the problem. This year's CPAC is supposed to begin conservatism's comeback. But can rebirth be achieved when the ideas being spouted by Bolton, Ryan, and others are the same as the ones pushed for the last eight years? But at least this much can be said about Bolton: even as he fades into obscurity, he's not going soft.

AstraZeneca Suppressed Information about Seroquel Link to Diabetes, Told Sales Reps to Lie

Friday, February 27, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Drug maker AstraZeneca, seller of the Seroquel antipsychotic drug, suppressed clinical studies showing its drug significantly increased the risk of diabetes, say internal e-mails. As Bloomberg is reporting today (, employee emails that were unsealed as part of a lawsuit reveal AstraZeneca deliberately hid at least three studies that established a significant link between its Seroquel drug and the onset of diabetes in patients. This fact was blatantly admitted in a 1999 e-mail sent by an AstraZeneca official.

The Wall Street Journal is also reporting today that "AstraZeneca instructed its U.S. sales representatives to tell doctors that its powerful psychiatric drug, Seroquel, didn't cause diabetes even though a company physician had at one point stated years earlier that such a link was probable in some individuals." (

Today, AstraZeneca remains in spin control, once again apparently lying about its past behavior by saying, "None of the documents can obscure the fact that AstraZeneca acted responsibly and appropriately as it developed and marketed Seroquel." (spokesperson Tony Jewell, reported in

AstraZeneca currently faces over 9,000 lawsuits over Seroquel, involving more than 15,000 people who say the company lied about the diabetes risks of taking the drug. It is well known in the natural health industry that antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs disrupt blood sugar metabolism and promote diabetes, but drug companies and the FDA have seemingly conspired to prevent the public from learning this fact (the FDA routinely approves drugs like Seroquel by trusting the clinical trial data provided by the very same company selling the drug!).

Why Big Pharma's "science" is pure junk

What AstraZeneca did with suppressing some clinical trials while highlighting others is called "cherry picking" the study data. It's a red flag that scientific fraud is underway, and no self-respecting scientist would ever support any conclusion derived from clinical trials that were selected in this manner.

Cherry picking the science is a routine practice at drug companies: They might commission ten (or so) studies on their drug, compile the results, then throw out all the studies showing their drug to be dangerous or deadly. The rest of the studies -- which magically show the drug to be safe and effective -- are then forwarded to the FDA for "review." The FDA, which conducts no scientific studies on its own, completely trusts the drug trials funded by the drug company, so it declares the drug to be "safe and effective" and gives it the stamp of approval for nationwide consumption.

This is how drugs get approved in America today. It is laughingly called the "gold standard of evidence-based medicine" by drug pushers and FDA bureaucrats. Anyone familiar with this process, however, realizes the whole drug approval system is based on scientific fraud and has nothing whatsoever to do with rigorous science or consumer safety (but it has everything to do with profits).

How many patients have been harmed by antipsychotic drugs?

There's no telling exactly how many patients have become diabetic or obese thanks to Big Pharma's dangerous drugs. The drug companies, of course, refuse to admit their drugs have caused even a single case of diabetes, and the FDA -- always in bed with Big Pharma -- continues to defend the scientific fraud demonstrated here by AstraZeneca.

In a reasonable world, all of AstraZeneca's drugs should be immediately pulled off the market for further review, and the company should be banned from selling drugs in the United States for a minimum of three years. But the FDA does nothing. Scientific fraud is no concern at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration... it's business as usual!

Can you imagine the outcry if a vitamin were found to cause diabetes? The FDA would go crazy over the story and probably try to ban the vitamin. Or what if an herb were discovered to cause diabetes and the herb manufacturer knew it but lied about it? The FDA would ban it and outlaw its importation into the United States.

Have you noticed all the outcry over Peanut Corp. and the fact that it knew its peanut butter was contaminated but sold it anyway? Practically the whole country went nuts over the peanut story, accusing the company of endangering the safety of consumers (which it clearly did). Many tens of millions of products were recalled and people lost their jobs. But get this: When Big Pharma knowingly sells a dangerous product and gets caught, nothing happens! Nobody loses their jobs. No products are recalled. The FDA remains utterly silent. Nobody gets prosecuted. No investigations. Just complete silence.

Why is selling dangerous peanut butter a crime but selling dangerous pharmaceuticals is openly tolerated by virtually everyone? What's wrong with this picture?

Truth is, it's just another day in the corrupt pharmaceutical industry. Business as usual for Big Pharma and the FDA.

Do something about it!

If you're tired of seeing these criminal behaviors by drug companies and the FDA, sign my Health Revolution Petition ( which demands real changes that would end the corruption and criminal behavior in the pharmaceutical industry and at the FDA. With over 8,000 signatures already, this petition is gaining strength. It needs your support to help reform our health care system and end the fraud and corruption that dominates the pharmaceutical industry today.

Below, you'll find some shocking quotes about antipsychotic drugs and diabetes. This is must-read information. You will be absolutely astonished by these quotes...

Authors' Quotes on Diabetes and Antipsychotics

Below, you'll find selected quotes from noted authors on the subject of Diabetes and Antipsychotic. Feel free to quote these in your own work provided you give proper credit to both the original author quoted here and this NaturalNews page.

Additionally, some of the new antipsychotics cause rapid and intense weight gain, leading to high rates of diabetes. Two massive government studies released in 2006 on the real-world efficacy (as opposed to that reported in clinical trials) of both antidepressants and antipsychotics showed that most patients do not get better taking the drugs. Only about a third of patients taking antidepressants, for example, improved dramatically after a first trial.11 For antipsychotics, the story was even worse.
- Comfortably Numb: How Psychiatry Is Medicating a Nation by Charles Barber
- Available on

In the case of Zyprexa and other newer antipsychotics, long-term use revealed that many patients were at higher risk of developing elevated blood sugar, diabetes, pancreatitis, elevated cholesterol, and considerable weight gain. Some patients gained over 60 pounds a year, and several died from these complications. In his clinical and forensic practice Peter Breggin has evaluated several cases of rapid death caused by acute Zyprexa-induced diabetes and pancreatitis.
In 2004, the FDA mandated that newer antipsychotics carry a warning about the risk of hyperglycemia and diabetes.
- Your Drug May Be Your Problem: How and Why to Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs by Peter R. Breggin and David Cohen
- Available on

For example, two side effects of antipsychotics which have received much attention include significant weight gain and the hugely increased risk (4 to 6 times) for developing diabetes. Yet, a nationwide survey of 300 psychiatrists chosen at random found only half (51%) had any knowledge that taking antipsychotics can cause their patients to develop diabetes. Only a little over half (59%) were aware that these drugs cause weight gain.
- America Fooled: The Truth About Antidepressants, Antipsychotics and How We've Been Deceived by Dr. Timothy Scott
- Available on

Other second-generation drugs that came on the scene after clozapine -- including Risperdal, Zyprexa, and Seroquel -- bypass the already mentioned side effects but pose a whole new dilemma: weight gain and metabolic changes linked to an increased risk of high cholesterol and diabetes. Beyond the known side effects, there is question about the relative effectiveness of these drugs. According to a 2006 study published in the Archives of General Psychology, there was no reported clinical advantage to the more expensive and highly touted second-generation antipsychotics when compared with the first.
- The Food-Mood Connection: Nutrition-based and Environmental Approaches to Mental Health and Physical Wellbeing by Gary Null and Amy McDonald
- Available on

Antipsychotic drugs may cause diabetes, but the FDA still allows their sale. Some prescription drugs are so dangerous that even health-related industry groups feel compelled to speak out against the drugs in order to protect the health of patients. In this case, a joint report by the American diabetes Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, and the North American Association for the study of Obesity complained that an entire class of antipsychotic drugs increases the risk of diabetes. Take the drugs for your head, and lose your pancreas.
- Natural Health Solutions by Mike Adams
- Available on

Although confirmatory research is still needed, a body of evidence from published peer-reviewed epidemiology research suggests that Risperdal is not associated with an increased risk of diabetes when compared to untreated patients or patients treated with conventional antipsychotics. Evidence also suggests that Risperdal is associated with a lower risk of diabetes than some other studied atypical antipsychotics. In other words, the DHCP letter sent to physicians and the package inserts that come with their drug have very contradictory statements.
- America Fooled: The Truth About Antidepressants, Antipsychotics and How We've Been Deceived by Dr. Timothy Scott
- Available on

In addition, the risk of side effects like diabetes and lipid elevations is greater for older patients using these powerful drugs. The FDA recently warned that the use of atypical antipsychotic medication doubles the risk of death in the elderly. In some cases Alzheimer's patients can experience symptoms of aggression, hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thoughts, and bizarre behavior, all of which may be treatable with antipsychotic medications. However, antipsychotic medications should only be used for Alzheimer's patients who are psychotic.
- Before You Take that Pill: Why the Drug Industry May Be Bad for Your Health by J. Douglas Bremner
- Available on

If possible, try to address the antipsychotic agents first because they pose severe risks including tardive dyskinesia and potentially lethal neuroleptic malignant syndrome, diabetes, and pancreatitis. However, if the antipsychotic exposure has lasted for several years, it may take many months to withdraw, and therefore it becomes more practical to start with another drug that's easier to stop. But keep in mind that your risk of getting tardive dyskinesia from antipsychotic drugs is high and that the risk increases over time, so it's a good idea to withdraw from these drugs as soon as possible.
- Your Drug May Be Your Problem: How and Why to Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs by Peter R. Breggin and David Cohen
- Available on

On June 15,2005, the company settled a multicase product-liability suit for 690 million dollars involving life-threatening diabetes associated with its relatively new antipsychotic drug Zyprexa. Because the drug is directly toxic to the insulin-producing cells, some patients are dying in hours from the acute or sudden onset of diabetes and pancreatitis. Other patients endure a more gradually developing and chronic insulin-dependent diabetes.
- Before You Take that Pill: Why the Drug Industry May Be Bad for Your Health by J. Douglas Bremner
- Available on

The American diabetes Association estimates that diabetes is costing about $132 billion a year. To put this cost in perspective: all the cancers together in United States cost about $171 billion a year. We have a major epidemic, and we are only making the problem worse. There are many secondary causes to this pandemic. Some doctors are a little concerned, as increasing numbers of children are given antipsychotic drugs for anxiety and conditions like autism. This is because these drugs can promote weight gain and therefore elevate the risk of diabetes.
- There Is a Cure for Diabetes: The Tree of Life 21-Day+ Program by Gabriel Cousens
- Available on

These medications have not, however, been without their own problems: They can interfere with glucose metabolism, increasing the tendency to develop adult-onset (type 2) diabetes and in rare cases ketoacidosis;19 they also increase lipids and cause weight gain, all of which can increase the risk of heart disease. Use of olanzepine, Clozaril, risperidal, and the atypical antipsychotics has been associated with an increase in diabetes but less so with risperidal. There are conflicting results for quetiapine.
- Before You Take that Pill: Why the Drug Industry May Be Bad for Your Health by J. Douglas Bremner
- Available on

The atypicals can cause substantial weight gain, disruptions in blood sugar control, and even diabetes. Nutrients depleted: Chlorpromazine, fluphenazine, and thiorizadine deplete CoQ10, melatonin, and vitamin B2; haloperidol depletes CoQ10. Although there's not as much information on depletions with the newer atypical medicines, their mode of action and side-effect profiles are similar enough to expect that they will deplete the same nutrients as the older, typical antipsychotics.
Needed supplements: CoQ10: 30-100 mg daily.
- Supplement Your Prescription: What Your Doctor Doesn't Know About Nutrition by Hyla Cass, M.D.
- Available on

More than 90 percent of those prescriptions (all of them off label) were for the atypical antipsychotics, newer versions of the drugs that may cause serious side effects, such as rapid weight gain, diabetes, and a movement disorder known as tardive dyskinesia. Among boys ages six to twelve, more than half of antidepressant prescriptions written are intended to treat so-called conduct disorders, like hyperactivity and attention deficit, behavior that might have been written off a generation ago as "boys will be boys," but that now is labeled as a disease and treated with a drug.
- Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine Is Making Us Sicker and Poorer by Shannon Brownlee
- Available on

Also, adverse responses to medications can bring on secondary diabetes. For example, Skarfors et al. (1991) announced that certain drus prescribed to treat hypertension (beta blocking agents, thiazides, or hydralazine) decreased insulin sensitivity. According to information released from Oregon Health Sciences University (Portland), antipsychotic medications (clozapine, olanzapine, or quetiapine) increased the occurrence of diabetes (Muench et al. 2001).
- Disease Prevention and Treatment by The Life Extension Editorial Staff
- Available on

Any sign of diabetes or pancreatitis while taking the newer antipsychotic drugs requires the immediate withdrawal of the drugs. A new heart arrhythmia or other heart problem while taking almost any psychiatric drug, including stimulants, can be life threatening and requires immediate intervention. A seizure, serious rash, headache, gastrointestinal problem, liver disorder, joint or muscle pain, abnormal bleeding, or treatment-resistant infection while taking almost any psychiatric drug is another signal for an immediate evaluation and may require cessation of the medication.
- What If Medicine Disappeared? by Gerald E. Markle and Frances B. McCrea
- Available on

Obesity is now considered the main risk factor for most chronic diseases, including heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. Some common antipsychotic drugs such as olanzapine (Zyprexa) can bring about a weight gain of 30 pounds in a short period of time. These drugs boost dopamine, the hormone that causes food cravings. This class of drugs also decreases levels of leptin, a protein that suppresses appetite. In other words, those who take antidepressants may develop an unnaturally strong appetite that they cannot control by eating more.
- Cancer Is Not A Disease - It's A Survival Mechanism by Andreas Moritz
- Available on

Sources for this story include:

Wall Street Journal:

Tim Geithner's dad, Barack Obama's mom and the CIA

Cinie has uncovered a lovely bit of conspiratology. I'm not sure what it all means; maybe nothing, or maybe much. Ponder:

Did you know that Turbo Tax Timothy Geithner, tax cheat (TTTG, tc) is the son of Peter Geithner, former Ford Foundation head of the Indonesian region’s microfinance program, which formerly employed one S. Ann Soetoro, Program Director, and Mother of the Obamessiah? Betcha didn’t.
No, Cinie, I didn't. Here's what I did know. Forgive the self-quotation, but these key paragraphs should help newcomers get up to speed on an important, but neglected, aspect of history:
Ann spent most of her time in Indonesia, where she was married to an executive with the American Mobil corporation. The CIA had, of course, played a key role in Indonesia's history. At least one Agency veteran of the time has said that "the CIA took it upon themselves to make, not just to enact, policy in this area." (Also see here and here.)

To make a long and very gruesome story far too short: Back in the 1960s, two oil companies linked with the Rockefeller dynasty -- Stanvac and Caltex -- felt that their investments in Indonesia were threatened by President Sukarno, who was considered soft on Communism. Stanvac, for our purposes, is simply another name for Mobil.

To protect American business interests, the CIA engineered a coup in Indonesia in the 1965-67 period, which led to one of the most appalling episodes of mass murder in history. Over 500,000 people died in the resultant bloodbath, which ended with the installation of a CIA puppet named Suharto.

Lolo Soetero, Barack Obama's stepfather, was the key liaison between Mobil/Stanvac and the Suharto regime.

These events may now seem "long ago and far away" to many modern Democratic voters. But the situation was quite different in 1967, when Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro. An active leftist -- which Ann Dunham supposedly was -- with an interest in international affairs would have known all about the bloodbath. It was in the newspapers. Any true student radical would have refused to eat lunch with a Suharto/Mobil functionary.

And yet she married the man.
How does the Ford Foundation fit in? Well, if you fire up Google -- or better still, head into a university library -- you'll see plenty of evidence that the CIA and the FF were likethis during the period when Timmy's dad and Barry's mom took such a keen interest in Indonesia. Given the wealth of available material, I hate to cite Wikipedia -- but if you want a quick summary, you can do worse than to run your eyeballs over the following:
The former Binghamton University professor of sociology, James Petras, and other critics accuse the Foundation of being a front organization for the CIA. Petras names the exchange of high-ranking personnel between the CIA and the Foundation, Ford Foundation's big donations to the CIA-backed Congress for Cultural Freedom, the former Foundation president Richard Bissell's relationship with DCI Allen Dulles and involvement with the Marshall Plan during the 1950s, among other things. According to Petras, the Ford Foundation funds "anti-leftist human rights groups which focus on attacking human rights violations of U.S. adversaries".

Another American academic, Joan Roelofs, in Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism (State University of New York Press, 2003) argues that Ford and similar foundations play a key role in co-opting opposition movements: "While dissent from ruling class ideas is labeled 'extremism' and is isolated, individual dissenters may be welcomed and transformed. Indeed, ruling class hegemony is more durable if it is not rigid and narrow, but is able dynamically to incorporate emergent trends." She reports that John J. McCloy, while chairman of the Foundation's board of trustees from 1958 to 1965, "...thought of the Foundation as a quasi-extension of the U.S. government. It was his habit, for instance, to drop by the National Security Council (NSC) in Washington every couple of months and casually ask whether there were any overseas projects the NSC would like to see funded." Roelofs also charges that the Ford Foundation financed counter-insurgency programs in Indonesia and other countries.
Now, instead of bitching about the inclusion of a quote from Wikipedia, why don't you do something useful -- like, y'know, double-checking the information? While you're at it, consider looking into the very interesting backgrounds of John J. McCloy and Richard Bissell...

If you want a much more extensive history of the Ford Foundation, the CIA and the ghastly Indonesian coup, read David Ransom's piece here. Bottom line:
But it is the foreign-investment plan that is the payoff of Ford's twenty-year strategy in Indonesia and the pot of gold that the Ford modernizers -- both American and Indonesian -- are paid to protect. The nineteenth-century Colonial Dutch strategy built an agricultural export economy. The Americans are interested primarily in resources, mainly mineral.
But the real prize is oil...
Isn't it always...?

You may also want to visit here, where you'll learn why many left-leaning journals rarely discuss the relationship between the FF and the CIA. The Ford Foundation has tossed a fair chunk of money at the left-wing media. That loot may explain why the old left media (Z magazine, The Nation, and so forth) tended to avoid CIA stories.

Let's get back to Cinie's piece. She quotes from a resume for Timmy's dad.
Peter F. Geithner is an advisor to the Asia Center at Harvard University and a consultant to the Asia Pacific Philanthropy Consortium, Rockefeller Foundation, Sasakawa Peace Foundation, and other organizations...
The last-mentioned Foundation is not without interest. Homework assignment: Look up Roichi Sasakawa and his links to fascism, the Yakuza and Reverend Moon.
Prior to joining The Ford Foundation, Mr. Geithner served with the U.S. Agency for International Development in Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Washington, D.C.
AID...? The very mention of those initials is enough to make any old spook-watcher break into fits of Heath-Ledger-as-the-Joker laughter: Ha. Ha. HA. Heh. Heh. Ha ha ha. Ha.

Did Papa Giethner know the Mother of the Blessed One during their time together in Indonesia? Did little Barry and little Timmy play together? This has yet to be established, although the likelihood seems high, considering the natures of Lolo's job, her job, and Peter's job. Still, you may want to heed these words from Cinie...
Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Dunham met her second husband, Lolo Sotoero, at the East West Center on the University of Hawaii Campus. Ann Dunham had met her son’s father, Barack Obama, Sr., on the same campus years earlier, that time in a Russian language class. She seems to have had a thing for men who work for oil companies, too, since ObaOne worked for Shell and Lolo worked for Mobil.
By the way, Cinie links to this earlier post on Cannonfire (referenced above), of which I'm rather proud: Spies, lies, Barry and his mom. That piece probably would have received a great deal of attention in lefty circles if Barack Obama were a white Republican. But he's neither, which means that the evidence I present will never be considered sufficient, and the questions I raise will always be ignored.

Nevertheless, if you have a bold streak and an open mind, check it out. And if you know what Barry and his mom were getting up to in Pakistan, please share the information with the rest of the class.

The Religious Wars of the Middle East In America Thanks to Zionist Infiltration of our Nation

By Elaine Nichols

The ignorance in the comments section of the below article is astounding. While I share the concerns of Muslims in this nation, I am torn about this event, because in America, we should all be Americans first and not blacks, whites, muslims, jews, christians, democrats, republicans, etc... because it is this divide that allows the people of this nation to be manipulated, especially where religion is concerned as religious wars and racism have been proven over thousands of years to be the cause of unrest among nations and their people.

One must understand that this nation is being controlled by a very stealthy group of Zionist international banking despots who follow Leo Strauss and his neo fascist philosophy of deception and division that uses religion, party politics, race, etc., as a vehicle to create fear or a boogeyman such as Islamic terrorism/Islamic fascism/etc. This along with the use of the Hegelian Dialectic, the people of this nation are kept in fear,  running in circles attacking eachother always in defense of their own ideologies instead of attacking the true "bad guys" who are making the laws within our own government that is destroying our Republic and the sovereignty that it once provided us.

Their old boogeyman was the cold war, so when the cold war was over, they needed to create another boogyman, and in order to do so, they engineered a "New Pearl Harbor" false flag attack on 9/11/2001, and then created a "commission' to cover it up, just as they did with the death of JFK.

They knew that this kind of attack and the fear it created was the ONLY way that Americans would approve of a military attack where ever this so called boogeyman happened to be hiding..he must be found and killed. The never ending war on terror was born, which has now morphed into imprisoning our own citizens who are accused of being "domestic" terrorists, especially dissenters and journalists who tell the truth.

It's time that we all wake up and see this so called "war on terror" for what is really is...A WAR ON LIBERTY!!

We should be AMERICANS, one and all, coming to the defense of our nation and our Constitution that provides us with the right to be free!! Free to speak out against injustice, free to practice ones chosen religion without persecution, free to own, farm and defend your private property, free to use real commodity backed money instead of enslaved with a private banks fiat currency backed by debt, free to not be taxed on your labor, etc.

Instead, the infighting in this nation is tearing us apart, and distracting us from the real threat. So, if the people of this nation want to truly defend something...let it be our right to be free... as a nation of AMERICANS! Educate yourselves on who the true enemy is and redirect your energy to the cause of liberty and all it provides.

If you want to understand what I've explained watch:

The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear.

A BBC documentary film series, written and produced by Adam Curtis. and

Google Spider Goats:

You can


House leader e-mails alert about Muslim event to Jewish lobbyists

By Breanne Gilpatrick, Times/Herald Tallahassee Bureau
In Print: Thursday, February 26, 2009

TALLAHASSEE — The leader of state House Republicans is sounding the alarm about a group of activists who want to host Florida Muslim Capitol Day.

"By now, I can't imagine you haven't heard about this upcoming lobbying day for Muslims in Tallahassee," Rep. Adam Hasner of Delray Beach wrote in an e-mail forwarded to more than a dozen Tallahassee lobbyists who are Jewish.

"Do you all intend to be part of an information campaign in opposition to it?" he asked in the e-mail.

Hasner, the House majority leader, would not say to whom he had sent the e-mail originally and speculated that the Muslim group United Voices for America will try to "push back" against a resolution he proposed during the January special session calling for solidarity with Israel.

Not so, said the group's founder, Tampa resident Ahmed Bedier. He said the group, like many others during the legislative session that starts Tuesday, plans to talk to state lawmakers about education, health care and the economy during the March 10 visit.

In a follow up e-mail to the Herald/Times, Hasner, who is Jewish, suggested Bedier was tied to the terrorist group Hamas because he once led the Tampa office of the Council of American-Islamic Relations. Bedier called the criticism ridiculous and nonsense, saying that CAIR advocates for equal rights for Muslims.

"This has nothing to do with me," Bedier said. "This is about Floridians who happen to be Muslim coming up to engage their politicians."

In his e-mail, Hasner pushed for a meeting of a "Jewish caucus," which doesn't yet exist, to determine a response to the Muslim lobbying effort.

Other Jewish lawmakers said they hadn't heard of Florida Muslim Capitol Day; some said they're not sure it's a problem.

"I certainly don't see why you'd need to have a meeting of the Jewish caucus just because Muslims are coming to Tallahassee," said Rep. Jim Waldman, D-Coconut Creek.

"They have as much right to represent themselves as anyone else."

Breanne Gilpatrick can be reached at

MUST WATCH! Google Spider Goats (documentary)


Where Does Our Money Come From? WAKE UP AMERICA

Google Spider Goats (documentary)

http://video. google. com/videoplay?docid=-6397669727183502193&ei=9iemScewKJPCqAOKx9CODQ&q=google+spider+goats&hl=en

--click to add as a friend~

"As The Arabs See The Jews" by King Abdullah

His Majesty King Abdullah

The American Magazine November, 1947


February 26, 2009 "Information Clearing House" - - This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the state of Israel) is because of longstanding religious or ethnic hatred. He notes that Jews and Muslims enjoyed a long history of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East, and that Jews have historically suffered far more at the hands of Christian Europe. Pointing to the tragedy of the holocaust that Jews suffered during World War II, the monarch asks why America and Europe are refusing to accept more than a token handful of Jewish immigrants and refugees. It is unfair, he argues, to make Palestine, which is innocent of anti-Semitism, pay for the crimes of Europe. King Abdullah also asks how Jews can claim a historic right to Palestine, when Arabs have been the overwhelming majority there for nearly 1300 uninterrupted years? The essay ends on an ominous note, warning of dire consequences if a peaceful solution cannot be found to protect the rights of the indigenous Arabs of Palestine.

"As The Arabs See The Jews"

His Majesty King Abdullah

The American Magazine November, 1947

I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.

So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.

We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.

There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.

The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.

Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.

Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.

Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.

We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.

Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?

Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.

No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.

Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.

I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land." Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their "historic claim." I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!

If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.

Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.

It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: "Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."

Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.

In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.

This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!

Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.

Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!

I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish "historic connection" with Palestine. Most are more valid.

In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.

If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country "Arab", what does?

The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.

May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.

The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim." The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.

We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.

Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.

And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. "We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East. "Won’t you please take care of them for us?"

We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?

We are a generous people: we are proud that "Arab hospitality" is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.

But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.

I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.

And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!

I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.

Perhaps you have been informed that "the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine."

This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.

The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!

You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.

Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: "My Jewish advisors tell me so." He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.

The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.

Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.

The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.

The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.

One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.

If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.

But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!

No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.

Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.

In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.

The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.

Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.

We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?

The sorry story of the so-called "Balfour Declaration," which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.

We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a "national home" for an entirely foreign people.

Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.

I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.

In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.

But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.

In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.

But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!

It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.

I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.

I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.

Quite aside from official American support for the "National Home" of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.

The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.

The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.

It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the "refugee ships" that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.

We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.

I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.

I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.

What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?

Our answer is the same.

And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?

Ours will be the same.