The alarm clock went off at 7AM and Ustane and I stirred from our sleep that was too deep and too short. We both had nightmares. Ustane’s was an awful one about children having their limbs cut off. It really disturbed her. After hearing Brian Gerrish first thing we wondered if her dream was prophetic. My nightmare was something I’d rather not reveal right now, but it has fortunately proven not to be prophetic; I‘ll let you know if it is.
Brian Gerrish
Child-Stealing by the State
http://www.cpexposed.com/
Here’s my review of Brian’s speech at the AV2 Conference: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2009/06/alternative-view-ii-part-5.html . A lot has happened in Brian’s life since he addressed AV2 in June. His newspaper, The UK Column (http://www.ukcolumn.org/) has been served an injunction to stop it reporting on what is going on in secret family courts. This is very disturbing new information for all of us, and gives me a real chill because I very nearly had my child made a ward-of-the-state myself in 2005; I only escaped this fate by suing my own mother and agreeing to live in the same house as my ex-partner; it was a harrowing period of my life. The state is using clandestine actions to bully, threaten and frame parents. They falsify evidence, like medical records and assessments and this is getting so bad that they can remove the children of almost anyone they choose at will. Why is the state doing this? To break up families and raise the next generation of citizens under their own direct control. Children in this country, not some tin-pot dictatorship, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, can be snatched from loving and competent parents and imprisoned in state communal homes where nobody can visit them. There they are being sexually abused and subjected to medical experiments without parental consent. If they die while in “care” they have their organs snatched for the Transplant Service. Maybe this is where Ustane’s dream comes from; it is also very synchronous when you consider the news story I mentioned from Australia and Kevin Annett‘s work in Canada; these projects are nothing new. Parents who try to investigate and get their kids back are stonewalled. There was actually a news story a few weeks ago about a 17 year old girl with a newborn baby who has gone on the run to escape Social Services. They say she is “not bright enough to be a mother”. This is par-for-the-course in actions like these because they basically said the same thing about me in 2005! If I’d known then what I know now I’d have gone on the run too. Social Services are a law unto themselves who are not accountable to the elected representatives who employ them. Any councillors who try to investigate them have their careers threatened by “scrutiny committees”; and you can get a politician to run naked through Sainsburys with a cucumber up their arse by threatening their career!
Brian states that he believes that the suicide hotspots in South Wales and other places are not just statistical blips; they are not, to use that cliché cop-out, a coincidence. One anomaly is that most of the victims are teenage girls and they carry out the tragic act by hanging themselves. This does not match the normal habits of their age-group; most teenage girls take drug or medication overdoses.
One motive for this crime by the state is money. At a lower level the state can buy cooperation by rewarding lawyers, doctors and social workers with cash bonuses for their work. I’ve always thought that at a higher level there’s a far more long-term strategic agenda in play, and Brian agrees. The real motive for what he talks about is the creation of a new kind of society; in other words a New World Order. These various organizations involved are controlled by a central organizing cadre made up of elite psychological manipulation think-tanks like Common Purpose and the Tavistock Institute. I’ve written a lot about this myself as you’ll see if you browse around HPANWO. Local authority figures who have been targeted for this kind of treatment often display psychopathic behaviour and these are exactly the kind of people the Elite want ruling us. It’s in line with what is written in the Communist Manifesto and Frankfurt School about breaking down family bonds and replacing them with the state as a father/mother-figure. I have a lot of admiration for Brian, the way he is researching and exposing these evils. What’s more I sense that he is becoming more and more aware of the “bigger picture” that I said in my last conference report that he hadn’t yet grasped. Brian delivers the hard-hitting facts-of-life, but he is not a doom-and-gloom merchant like Alan Watt and some other people I could mention. He remains optimistic and truly believes that if we expose this agenda we can get out of this cess-pit and build a brighter future. He recommends a book called Forced Adoption by Ian Josephs (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Forced-Adoption-2nd-Ed-Josephs/dp/140926971X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258731056&sr=1-1)
Norman Baker MPThe Strange Death of David Kelly
http://www.normanbaker.org.uk/
The sudden and mysterious death of the government weapons inspector Dr David Kelly happened not far from where I live. In fact the first I heard about it was from the ambulance service crews at my hospital. I know Dave Bartlett, the paramedic who actually attended the scene and I’ve personally commended him for speaking out about his own suspicions in the media. You can see him speaking on this programme: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3255138464276514819&ei=WrgGS_rlKJPQ-AaYw9CHCg&q=dr+david+kelly+conspiracy# . Like Cynthia McKinney, Norman Baker is another member of that rare breed of politician who is not scared to ruffle feathers and rattle cages. Since he was elected to Parliament by the people of Lewes, Sussex in 1997 he has developed a reputation for being a very persistent interrogator. In fact he won awards for it like Zurich-Spectator Inquisitor of the Year. He is behind the recent expose that caused the MP’s expenses scandal; which is commendable from his point of view, although through no fault of his, the media exploited it as a diversion from the EU Elections. In 2006 he stepped down from the Liberal Democrats Shadow Cabinet to concentrate full time on the David Kelly affair. I wonder if he was asking himself if he should jump before he was pushed! It’s impossible to understand the David Kelly Affair without seeing it in the context of the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Norman calls it a “disgrace to democracy”. For instance Tony Blair said that he only knew that the invasion would definitely take place 3 months before it happened when “C” at MI6 has admitted that the decision to invade was made by President Bush much earlier and that the WMD and terrorism excuse was fitted in around that decision retrospectively. This was the motivation behind the creation of the “dodgy” and “sexed-up” dossiers. Blair then went on to make announcements in Parliament that Iraq had the capability to wipe out Britain with nuclear missiles in 5 minutes; the ever-obliging tabloid media backed him up with pictures of stopwatches and mushroom clouds. It’s beyond satire that Blair is now a Middle East peace envoy! The shark is well and truly in charge of the swimming pool!The affair ended with Lord Hutton’s enquiry in which the government came up smelling of roses and the BBC were demonized. This caused wildcat strikes at the Corporation resulting in the permanent resignations of many of its senior staff. Norman describes it as looking like the Prague Spring. Nobody in government resigned or was indicted in any way. Lord Hutton, a member of the Inner Temple legal secret society who was very speedily appointed to office (Norman says the selection process took place on an airline flight!), and his successors have never questioned the pathology reports on David Kelly and it was only later that Dave Bartlett’s testimony was brought to bear and question marks began appearing over whether Kelly really did commit suicide. Norman went on to write a book on the subject that was for sale on the conference stalls (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Strange-Death-David-Kelly/dp/1842752170/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258736944&sr=1-1) Dr David Kelly was one of the Iraq weapons inspectors sent into the country to assess Saddam Hussein’s nuclear, biological and chemical warfare capability; which is one of the greatest paradoxes in politics because everyone involved knew damn well that Iraq didn’t have one. It would be laughable in happier circumstances! What happened was that Blair and Jeff Hoon, his Defence Secretary, decided to use Kelly as a pawn in their conflict with the BBC. They conspired to leak his name to the press. The official explanation is that when Kelly was grilled by a Parliamentary investigation committee he couldn’t take the heat so he went out into a forest near his home and took his own life. Those like Norman who question this explanation do so for the following reasons: On the day of his death he saw many of his friends in his home, the close-knit village of Southmoor, Oxfordshire. They describe him as being in good spirits and don’t recall sensing anything wrong with his mood. Kelly was actually a fairly tough and resilient man; he’d have to be in his job. He had been a weapons inspector for many years and had faced down dictators and generals with electric batons and flaying knifes tucked into their belts. He wasn’t the kind of person who’d be intimidated by, if you’ll excuse me, a bunch of poofs in suits. He also had strong personal motivations to live; his wife was ill and his daughter was about to get married. There are forensic anomalies too: the knife he supposedly used to slash his own wrists was very blunt; too blunt to have caused the incision; and the incision itself severed the ulna artery, not the more usual radial artery. This could not have caused him to bleed to death. This was backed up by Dave Bartlett’s testimony when he said that there was not much blood at the scene. Dave has been a paramedic even longer than I have been a Porter and has seen many slashers in his time; he’d immediately be alerted if he knew something was wrong. If Kelly really wanted to end it all there are more effective ways of doing it: shooting oneself, jumping in front of a train etc. Also his system contained less than half the lethal dose of coproximol from the tablets he was supposed to have downed. There was no coroners inquest, which is unheard of. The Oxfordshire coroner didn’t even handle the death; he was replaced by, wait for it... Lord Hutton himself! It reminds me of the confusion and distortion following the Kennedy Assassination where the Dallas and US Navy coroners’ reports were contradictory and kept getting lost etc. Norman compares it with the death of Dianna. Strange how history keeps repeating itself. Norman can only conclude that Dr Kelly was murdered. So who killed him and why? Norman said: “There is no obvious motive for the government to have been behind it”. This was because it caused so much grief for them; the enquiry etc, public scandal. But here Norman assumes that the government weren’t willing to trade in a greater evil for a lesser one. We don’t know what the consequences would have been if Kelly had been left alive. I’ve a feeling that there is another factor involved; and we know that the Iraq invasion had to happen, at any cost. No number of hoops were too many to jump through. What if Kelly had something on the government that might have stopped the war? Government’s take risks; sometimes their gambles pay off, as in the moon landings and 9/11, but at other times they do cock-up, as in the Iran-Contra Scandal and Watergate etc. I was a bit exasperated that Norman didn’t actually tell us who he thinks did it but referred us to his book for more details. This ensured him a few extra sales I’m sure! We are naïve if we think for a second that governments don’t commit murder for political reasons. They all have done so, throughout all history. If they don’t nowadays then it’s the first time ever! Many years ago I read a book called The Nemesis File by Paul Bruce. The author used to be in the SAS and in the late 1960’s he joined a secret execution squad in Northern Ireland. Bruce tells us exactly where he and his accomplices buried the bodies and challenges the government to dig them up and charge him with murder! This book was banned soon after I bought my copy, but it now back in a new edition: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nemesis-File-Story-Execution-Squad/dp/185782167X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258738728&sr=1-1 . Experience tells us it pays to never underestimate the government’s ability to deceive. In fact I have doubts over the resignation of Charles Kennedy as leader of Norman’s party, the Liberal Democrats. He just called a press conference one day to announce before the nation that he was an alcoholic and that he was quitting. This was without the usual scoop by The Sun with a headline like “LIBERAL BOOZE-O-CRAT” or "THIRD PARTY ANIMAL" including a front page photo of him reeling home from a pub or something. I think he was told to quit by “Men in Grey Suits” and this supposed drink problem was a made-up excuse. Maybe he was making his party too popular, to the point where they might actually be elected, so they put in Menzies Campbell to knock them back down to size. I think Norman was being a bit too cagy over “who-dunnit” during his speech, but despite that I’ve still got a lot of respect for him. Let’s hope the truth comes out one day and Dr David Kelly’s face the justice that they deserve.
Trevor GunnVaccination- The Evidence and Alternative Ways of Looking at Health.
http://www.informedparent.com/
I want to see this man debate Ben Goldacre! I want to see a “useful idiot” finally put in his place! See: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2009/03/bad-science-by-ben-goldacre_25.html . In fact as I say in the linked article, it’s strange how Goldy always picks on the most famous but least credible members of the alternative health movement. Why doesn’t he mention people like Trevor, but targets lightweights like Gillian McKeith.
Trevor used to be a biochemist, but then became interested in homeopathy; today he treats people using this method and is exploring the most basic and fundamental theories of modern medicine and asking if they stand up to scrutiny, or are just held up by a scaffolding of dogma. Despite the claims of people like Goldy there is no evidence that vaccinations contributed to the conquest of the diseases that used to plaque humanity. Trials are actually biased in many ways. They ignore graphs that show how many illnesses like smallpox, diphtheria and others were already in sharp decline long before their respective vaccine was introduced. Even worse, vaccines were harmful; well this is no surprise to me and I’ve written a lot on this subject; eg, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2009/11/jabbers.html . A Dr Kalokerina was the first to notice that Australian children who’d had the whooping cough vaccine often fell ill; some died. Malnourished kids were worst effected. He described it as “genocide”. But despite all this, conventional medical scientists still insist that vaccines are safe. (At the time of writing the GMTV doctor Dr Hillary Jones has been on telling the public that there’s nothing to fear from the H1N1 jab and that everyone should have it done.) Why can’t we be more sure? As I said in my writings about Goldy, surely science should be able to clear this controversy up one way or then other. But Trevor thinks that there are political and sociological reasons why the public perception that vaccinations work is vital; it’s not just about money and Big Pharma’s profit. Questions about vaccines could start a “domino effect” that could bring down the entire medical paradigm and progress tower. This paradigm originates from Louis Pasteur who was the victor in a battle that took place in the mid 19th Century between two proto-medical schools of thought. Pasteur won; hense he is famous. There's a statue of him in Paris and dozens of universities, hospitals and other scientific institutions are named after him. In 1995 the World Health Organization proclaimed that it would be a "Year of Pasteur" because it was the centenery of his death. He also gave his name to the process called "Pasteurization", boiling milk as soon as it comes out of the cow to kill all the "nasty germs" in it. Unfortunately this also destroys 90% of its nutrients too. What's wrong with just just bottling milk and refrigerating it instead? After all we're not forced to boil eggs as soon as they are laid are we? But Pasteur's "Germ Theory" stuck in the end. It stated that illness is caused by exposure to harmful foreign microbes that are not normally present in the body; hense the need to boil the milk. The man Pasteur vanquished is Antoine Bechamps, a name you'll never hear in education and he has nowhere named after him. His view was very different. Bechamps said that that our bodies are not “invaded” by malevolent alien microbes; these microbes are present in our bodies anyway, but they're not usually harmful. It is that something in our environment, either external or internal, changes that makes these existing microbes become pathogenic. This theory was abandoned after Pasteur's elevation to scientific sainthood, but Trevor thinks that it needs to be dusted off and reexamined. There are more microbes in our body than cells. Our bodies are not pure in their sterile form, but are in fact ecosystems. People put in a completely sterile environment often become very ill due to autoimmune reactions. All patients on antibiotics get stomach ache because the carpet-bombing effect of the drug kills our symbiotic gut bacteria. I suffered from autoimmune eczema myself during my 6 years as a Theatre Porter when I served in the ultra-clean operating theatres at my hospital. One of the reasons for Pasteur prevailing over Bechamps was that Pasteur's theory appealed to our need to find a cop-out so that we wouldn’t have to deal with the social concerns of the time. The Industrial Revolution was spreading across Europe and people were pouring into rapidly expanding cities. They lived in uncomfortable, overcrowded housing in sqalid, crime-ridden slum districts; they drank dirty water, ate bad food, were overworked and subjected to humiliation and violence. As a result they became ill. Pasteur allowed people to ignore all that and say: “It’s OK, there’s nothing wrong with our society and we don‘t need to improve it, it’s just that these poor people are the victims of attacks by hostile germs.” The cholera phenomenon was a good example. Medics constantly pat themselves on the back when you mention cholera and congratulate themselves for saving people from it. In fact the man who saved people from cholera was not a doctor, he was a civil engineer called Joseph Bazalgette. He invented the London sewage system that gave the people clean water and allowed them to dispose of their toilet matter hygienically; his system was so effective that it’s still in use in London today and has become the model for sewers in virtually every city in the world. We need a renaissance for Bechamps. We need to go back to basics and reinvestigate the entire Pasteur-Bechamps controversy and if that means scratching 160 years of laboratory labour then so be it. This could break the impasse and solve the mysteries about how our immune systems work. For instance, there’s this confusion over how antibody levels in the bloodstream are not always proportional to our level of immunity. We mustn’t tolerate media distortion over the effectiveness and safety of vaccines. The same goes for inexcusable jading in scientific trials. For instance in one experiment the control group of supposedly non-vaccinated subjects were made up of people who had in fact had the vaccine but had not had a good antibody response! The body count of vaccination is a Holocaust! Trevor has a holistic view of medicine. The different organs and systems of the body should not be treated as independent “modules”, but should instead be seen as parts of a whole, in which the function of each part effects the others; this is like the “Holographic Principle” that David Icke talks about. Symptoms like bacterial infections are actually an effect, not a cause of disease. If you suppress symptoms like diarrhoea, vomiting or fever with drugs this can be harmful because those symptoms are reactions that can protect the body from damage. This is like telling somebody not to weep when they’re sad, and psychologists all agree that this is very harmful. I enjoyed Trevor’s lecture enormously. Like I said, he is a less well-known critic of the medical establishment, so why don’t its gatekeepers engage him? It’s probably because they simply can’t. So they just ignore him and write books about how bad Trevor’s more famous pale imitators are in the hope that the public will simply read that and be put off investigating anything else that contradicts the prevailing paradigm. It’s an old trick.
(Go back to Part 1: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2009/11/alternative-view-3-part-1.html
Go on to Part 3: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2009/11/alternative-view-3-part-3.html)
(Latest HPANWO Voice story: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2009/11/ufo-disclosure-immient.html)
