HOUR ONE: BURTON GOLDBERG WELLNESS DOCUMENTARY MOVIES DVDs

Burton Goldberg DVD Bks ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE Guru

HOUR TWO: ALAN WATT - Cutting Through the Matrix N.W.O. Exposure

ALAN WATT Cutting Through The Matrix

TOP NEWS STORIES for TUESDAY JULY 3rd 2007:

Bush Wages Orwellian War on Words and Wins, on Iraq and Loses

Bush Wages Orwellian War on Words and Wins, on Iraq and Loses

Len Hart

Bush defines things in ways that ensure he wins. When the media picks up a Bush-word, Bush no longer has to prove anything. It was not so long ago that Bush dared define “victory” as a time when “insurgents would no longer threaten Iraq’s “democracy”. Think about it. If “insurgents” win they are no longer “insurgents”. Worse -- Iraq doesn’t have a Democracy that might be threatened. And, as I vividly recall, there were absolutely no “insurgents” in Iraq prior to the US attack, invasion and illegal occupation.

But it was not the word “victory” that Bush was defining. It was “insurgency” --a word used improperly by Bush to mean “terrorism”. A loaded word, “insurgency” connotes “illegitimacy”, illegality, immorality. “Insurgency” implies an opposition to legitimate authority.

As long as the media buys into this improper use of the word, nothing will ever be done about the illegitimate regime of George W. Bush. Bush need prove nothing. Fox is on his side. As long as the word “insurgent” is used to describe this resistance, Bush is forever bogged down in Iraq. Perhaps he will one day be confined to the permanent bases he plans to build there for the benefit of his corporate sponsors –Exxon-Mobil et al.

Bushco uses this word deliberately. We must conclude that Bush wishes to be bogged down in Iraq; at least until the oil fields are secure for the co-conspirators at Dick Cheney’s meeting of the Energy Task Force. On the other hand, if the insurgency has proven to be unbeatable, it is because our presence in Iraq is immoral.

It is convenient for oil barons that victory is unattainable. Because victory is unattainble, an Orwellian "perpetual war" is set up and self-justifying. Just as Orwell had described it. If the US military had left prior to Paul Bremer’s “de-baathification” order, Dick Cheney’s oil partners in America and, more importantly, his oil buddies inside the present administration, would have gotten rid of the Bush regime themselves in a “Palace Revolution”.

It is clear, however, that Bush was not on a mission from God. He was on a mission from Halliburton, Unocal and Exxon-Mobil. (I apologize to those oil crooks whom I may have inadvertently left out. Send me a polite note and I will be happy to include you in my updated List of Oil Rogues and Robber Barons in my next post.)

Wars are no longer fought between the armies of nations against those of other nations. Wars today are waged by the hired guns of corporate and imperial oppression against people themselves conveniently called “terrorists” or “insurgents”. It all sounds like a cheap movie plot. I cannot pretend that the aims and goals of every guerrilla band are legitimate. I can say that the imperial aims of George W. Bush and his corporate co-sponsors are most certainly not. Put another way: the attack and invasion of Iraq was a crime --punishable by death under US Codes. It is, likewise, a violation of every recognized and established principle of International Law.

“Insurgents’ in Iraq are called “al Qaeda”. How convenient for Bush who could have called them Tasmanian Devils had he wanted to. The kiss up media would have gone along with it. How the political debate would change if Bush chose to call them “Huggy Bears” or “Snuggle Bunnies”!

Al Qaeda, since 911 was used recklessly to denote anything Bush found undesirable. What if the media tired of Bush's stupid vocabulary and, of its own volition, began calling whomever it is that we are slaughtering and murdering in Iraq what they truly are -- "victims of US oppression", "targets of Blackwater operatives", "human sacrifices to US imperialism"! The world might change if the media decided to tell the truth. Just once!

The term al Qaeda as it is used bears little resemblance to “the Base” of what had been called “Afghan Freedom Fighters”. They were sponsored, if not created, by the CIA against the Soviet Union which was, at that time, at war with Afghanistan. This “base” or al Qaeda became the catch all for wild, radical Islam when Bushies fell out of love with them. Lately, the term is used recklessly to strike at the legitimacy of anything not liked by Herr Bush.

There is no reason to believe that anything more than a small percentage of incidences in Iraq have anything whatsoever to do with al Qaeda, if any. There are no reasons to believe that any of the so-called “insurgent” attacks in Iraq have anything whatsoever to do with al Qaeda. The mere word of Bush bureaucrats is not evidence and, lately, worth nothing. They are mere assertions from known liars, sociopaths, fascists, torturers --cut throats in suits! Certainly, Bushies have not made a convincing case.

We pay a high price for this reckless disregard for the English language. We have already absorbed "...every expense" —some $460 billion last time I checked. And we have thrown at Iraq every high tech gewgaw, every combination of torture, firepower, and chemical weaponry and still our efforts seem impotent and embarrassingly unbecoming. We are, as we are reminded, the "...world's last remaining superpower". Such breathtaking hubris! One is embarrassed to call himself "American".

There is, in fact, no combination of high tech weaponry, robots, armor, and other horrific sci fi visions of death and automated destruction that can overcome an enraged populace determined to throw out on his sorry ass a dictator, a would be conqueror of unbridled ambition and inversely less talent —all hat, no cattle!

Slap on the Wrist for Corporate Sponsors of Terrorism by Garry Leech

Less than two weeks after 9/11, President George W. Bush and Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill held a joint press conference to announce that the war on terror would not only target terrorist groups, but also those who fund terrorism.

Bush declared, “If you do business with terrorists, if you support or sponsor them, you will not do business with the United States of America.”

O’Neill followed Bush to the podium and announced, “We will succeed in starving the terrorists of funding and shutting down the institutions that support or facilitate terrorism.”

And yet, despite these grandiose declarations, Cincinnati-based Chiquita Brands International evidently will not be shut down and will continue to do business in the United States despite pleading guilty last week to providing more than $1.7 million in funding over seven years to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), a right-wing group on the US State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations.

In 1777, William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, put it this way in his famous speech to Parliament:

You can not conciliate America by your present measures. You can not subdue her by your present or by any measures. What, then, can you do? You cannot conquer; you cannot gain; but you can address; you can lull the fears and anxieties of the moment into an ignorance of the danger that should produce them. But, my lords, the time demands the language of truth. In a just and necessary war, to maintain the rights or honor of my country, I would strip the shirt from my back to support it.

But in such a war as this, unjust in its principle, impracticable in its means, and ruinous in its consequences, I would not contribute a single effort nor a single shilling. I do not call for vengeance on the heads of those who have been guilty; I only recommend to them to make their retreat. Let them walk off; and let them make haste, or they may be assured that speedy and condign punishment will overtake them.

And, from his same speech to Parliament:

The desperate state of our arms abroad is in part known. No man thinks more highly of them than I do. I love and honor the English troops. I know their virtues and their valor. I know they can achieve any thing except impossibilities; and I know that the conquest of English America is an impossibility.

You can not, I venture to say it, you can not conquer America. Your armies in the last war effected every thing that could be effected; and what was it? It cost a numerous army, under the command of a most able general [Lord Amherst], now a noble lord in this House, a long and laborious campaign, to expel five thousand Frenchmen from French America.

My lords, you can not conquer America. What is your present situation there? We do not know the worst; but we know that in three campaigns we have done nothing and suffered much. ...

He was obliged to relinquish his attempt, and with great delay and danger to adopt a new and distant plan of operations. We shall soon know, and in any event have reason to lament, what may have happened since. ...

As to conquest, therefore, my lords, I repeat, it is impossible. You may swell every expense and every effort still more extravagantly; pile and accumulate every assistance you can buy or borrow; traffic and barter with every little pitiful German prince that sells and sends his subjects to the shambles of a foreign prince; your efforts are for ever vain and impotent...

If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms—never—never—never.

It must be pointed out that the Mother Country, England, had more right to be in America than America has right to be in Iraq. Our occupation of Iraq continues to be an act of naked aggression, a war crime for which this King George must one day pay in the court of international opinion and the Hague.

America is wrong to be in Iraq. It is morally wrong and wrong headed. It is impractical, profligate and counter productive. It is a capital crime. It is lost!

Notes: William Pitt, Earl of Chatham was born in 1708, died in 1778; entered Parliament in 1735; attacked the Government in 1755, and removed from office; Secretary of State in 1756–1757; again Secretary of State in the Coalition Ministry of 1757–1761, when he adopted vigorous measures in the Seven Years’ War; Prime Minister in 1766; resigned on account of ill health in 1768; made his last appearance in Parliament in 1778.

http://existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2007/07/bush-wages-orwellian-war-on-words-and.html

'Iran meddling in Iraq'

03/07/2007 16:06 - (SA)

Washington - Washington echoed a US military general's accusation on Monday that Iranian forces were stirring turmoil in Iraq by using the Lebanese Shi'ite militant group Hezbollah, and said Tehran was probably in the know.

US State Department spokesperson Sean McCormack reiterated comments by Brigadier General Kevin Bergner, who earlier told reporters that the Quds Force, a unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and Hezbollah were jointly operating camps near Tehran in which they trained Iraqi fighters before sending them back to Iraq to wage attacks.

McCormack confirmed that the United States had gleaned new information about the Quds Force and its relationship with Hezbollah, and told a news conference that the Iranian unit was funnelling support to Shi'ite fighters in Iraq through Hezbollah.

"It would be surprising if the Iranian leadership or Iranian senior officials weren't at least, at the very least, witting of the activities of this group in Iraq," McCormack said.

Tehran and Washington have not had official diplomatic ties for decades, albeit some lower level contacts, and McCormack said the US ambassador to Iraq has no planned meeting with his Iranian counterparts on the matter.

'Cease and desist'

"If we do have another meeting with them, you can be certain that this will be a topic of discussion," McCormack said.

"And the message will be clear: that the Iranian government needs to cease and desist these kinds of activities."

Bergner said US forces captured a high-ranking Hezbollah militant in Iraq's southern city of Basra on March 20 who "was directed by senior Lebanese Hezbollah leadership to go to Iran and work with the Quds Force to train Iraqi extremists", in 2005.

Bergner also said the US military believed that "senior leadership in Iran" was aware of the activities of the Quds Force.

US accusations 'ridiculous'

The general said one such group carried out the January 20 attack in the Shi'ite shrine city of Karbala, and that "senior leadership leading the Quds Force knew of and supported planning for the eventual Karbala attack that killed five coalition soldiers".

Previously, US commanders had accused Tehran of financing and arming the militants accused of carrying out the killings, but this was the first time they have accused Iranian officers of prior knowledge of the attack.

Iran dismissed the US accusations as "ridiculous".

Berezovsky charged with coup plot over Guardian interview

Luke Harding in Moscow

Tuesday July 3, 2007

The Guardian

Russia has charged the exiled tycoon and Kremlin critic Boris Berezovsky with conspiring to seize power on the basis of an interview he gave to the Guardian in April calling for a violent revolution in Russia.

Mr Berezovsky's lawyer, Andrei Borovkov, said that the London-based former oligarch faced new charges of attempting to stage a coup against Vladimir Putin. The Federal Security Service (FSB), Russia's domestic security agency, charged him yesterday on the basis of an interview he gave to the Guardian on April 13. In it, the tycoon claimed he was plotting the violent overthrow of President Putin from his base in Britain. In comments which appeared deliberately calculated to infuriate the Kremlin, Mr Berezovsky said he was bankrolling people close to the president who were conspiring to mount a palace coup.

"We need to use force to change this regime," he said. "It isn't possible to change this regime through democratic means. There can be no change without force, pressure." Asked if he was in effect fomenting a revolution, he said: "You are absolutely correct." In Moscow, the Kremlin angrily renewed its demand for Mr Berezovsky's extradition, claiming that he had breached the terms of his asylum status in the UK and should be handed over to Russia to stand trial. The FSB is known to have studied recordings of the Berezovsky interview after they were posted on the Guardian Unlimited website. As well as the Guardian interview, the new case against Mr Berezovsky includes an interview with the radio station Echo Moskvi in January 2006, in which he said he was "working" to overthrow the Kremlin.

In London, Scotland Yard's counterterrorism command has begun its own investigation to see whether the businessman has committed any offence, and to establish whether there are any grounds to revoke his refugee status.

In a separate case, Mr Berezovsky went on trial in absentia in Moscow yesterday over alleged money laundering and embezzlement. He is accused of stealing £4.12m from the Russian state airline Aeroflot. The case was adjourned until July 12 after Mr Berezovsky's legal team said they were boycotting the proceedings, which Mr Berezovsky has dismissed as politically motivated and a "farce".

There is no doubt that the latest charges are designed to bolster the Kremlin's attempts to persuade Britain that Mr Berezovsky should be extradited. According to the Russian news agency RIA Novosti, prosecutors renewed their demand for his extradition on April 17.

Mr Berezovsky was granted asylum in 2003. Britain's refusal to hand him over has bedevilled UK-Russian relations, with Mr Putin regarding Britain's failure to cooperate as a personal snub.

Montreal mum's egg donation makes waves

TENILLE BONOGUORE

Globe and Mail Update

July 3, 2007 at 11:54 AM EDT

A Montreal woman's decision to freeze her own eggs so her young daughter can have a chance at motherhood is making waves at an international fertility conference in France.

Melanie Boivin could feasibly become the grandmother of her own child if her seven-year-old daughter, Flavie – who has a medical condition likely to make her infertile – one day chooses to use Ms. Boivin's donated eggs.

The donation, and the ethical quandary it sparked, is headline news across Britain, with newspapers fascinated by the girl who could one day give birth to her own sibling.

As reported by The Globe and Mail in April, Flavie has Turner's syndrome, a condition that strikes one in 2,500 girls and means the girls has only one full, functioning X chromosome, rather than two. Women with Turner's syndrome are often underdeveloped and have malfunctioning ovaries.

Ms. Boivin was pregnant herself when the family learned of Flavie's condition, and the Montreal lawyer told The Globe that she “couldn't bear” that Flavie may miss out on that.

Her research led her to the McGill Reproductive Centre in Montreal, where doctors were announcing their success at freezing eggs.

Such a case had never been heard of before, said Professor Seang Lin Tan, who treated Ms. Boivin at the McGill University Health Centre. Doctors have traditionally been more concerned that mothers would coerce daughters to give them their eggs, but this case, he said, “is motherly love."

Dr. Tan presented details of the case to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Lyon, France, on Monday.

He said that Ms. Boivin's donation of 21 eggs received ethical approval and that Flavie would also need ethical approval to use the eggs.

“It's up to the daughter and her future partner to decide whether to use the eggs or not. She doesn't have to, and they may decide to donate the eggs to another couple and then have somebody else give eggs to them,” Dr. Tan told British newspaper The Guardian.

“When the ethics committee asked me, I said, first and foremost, ethical considerations change with time. The soonest the daughter will contemplate using the eggs will be 20 years from now. Who knows what the ethical attitudes will be even 10 years from now?”

Breakthrough in fertility treatment produces first baby, researchers say

· New hope for women who cannot have standard IVF

· Eggs matured outside the body before being stored

Ian Sample in Lyon

Tuesday July 3, 2007

The Guardian

A technician retrieving embryos from storage. Photograph: John McLean/Science Photo Library

The first baby born from a pioneering fertility treatment was announced by doctors yesterday, raising hopes for thousands of women who are unable to have conventional IVF for medical reasons. The mother was infertile because of abnormalities in her ovaries caused by a syndrome that affects the fertility of up to one in five women in Britain.

A team of doctors led by Hananel Holzer at the McGill Reproductive Centre in Montreal extracted eggs from the woman which had not gone through the usual maturation process in the body and so would normally be unsuitable for IVF. The eggs were matured in a dish by exposing them to hormones, before being frozen and stored.

One of the eggs was later thawed out, fertilised and implanted into the woman, who gave birth to a girl last year. Three other women are pregnant having received similar treatment, Dr Holzer told the annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Lyon yesterday.

Many women with severe versions of polycystic ovarian syndrome cannot be given standard fertility treatment because the high doses of hormones used to stimulate egg production can trigger a potentially life-threatening reaction.

Twenty women with polycystic ovaries volunteered to have their eggs frozen as part of a research programme into egg storage. The eggs were frozen for no more than a few months. The average age of the women was 30. Of 215 eggs that were frozen, 148 survived and 96 were successfully fertilised after being thawed out. Three embryos were implanted into each woman.

"Until now, it was not known whether eggs collected from unstimulated ovaries, matured in vitro and then [frozen] could survive thawing, be fertilised successfully and result in a viable pregnancy after embryo transfer," said Dr Holzer. "We have demonstrated for the first time that it is possible to do this and so far we have achieved four successful pregnancies, one of which has resulted in a live birth."

The doctors said the success rate had increased throughout the study, with three pregnancies being achieved in the last five patients.

The treatment could benefit women with a variety of medical conditions that make them unsuitable for conventional fertility treatment, including some breast cancers. Many women diagnosed with cancer receive chemotherapy which risks leaving them infertile, but the urgency of their therapy means they cannot delay to have four to six weeks of hormonal injections that can be used to produce mature eggs that could be stored for later use. The new technique suggests that eggs could be taken from these women immediately and matured in the lab before being frozen.

Welcoming the advance, Laurence Shaw, deputy medical director at the Bridge Fertility Centre in London, said: "When women with polycystic ovarian syndrome are stimulated with hormones, there is a very high chance of them becoming over-stimulated. Their ovaries recruit and mature follicles, which swell up and absorb fluid from the body. This can stop the woman producing urine and later cause kidney failure. There is no real treatment for it."

UPLOAD 43 Pages of TOP NEWS HIGHLIGHTED BY Dr Bill ... Read... Analyze...Investigate...ACT!