­

­por Mike Adams

Natural News

Chickens in waiting to be murdered then to be sold.

After years of sweeping the issue under the rug and hoping no one would notice, the FDA has now finally admitted that chicken meat sold in the USA contains arsenic, a cancer-causing toxic chemical that’s fatal in high doses. But the real story is where this arsenic comes from: It’s added to the chicken feed on purpose!

Even worse, the FDA says its own research shows that the arsenic added to the chicken feed ends up in the chicken meat where it is consumed by humans. So for the last sixty years, American consumers who eat conventional chicken have been swallowing arsenic, a known cancer-causing chemical. (http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/loc…)

Until this new study, both the poultry industry and the FDA denied that arsenic fed to chickens ended up in their meat. The fairytale excuse story we’ve all been fed for sixty years is that “the arsenic is excreted in the chicken feces.” There’s no scientific basis for making such a claim… it’s just what the poultry industry wanted everybody to believe.

But now the evidence is so undeniable that the manufacturer of the chicken feed product known as Roxarsone has decided to pull the product off the shelves (http://www.grist.org/foodsafety/20…). And what’s the name of this manufacturer that has been putting arsenic in the chicken feed for all these years? Pfizer, of course — the very same company that makes vaccines containing chemical adjuvants that are injected into children.

Technically, the company making the Roxarsone chicken feed is a subsidiary of Pfizer, called Alpharma LLC. Even though Alpharma now has agreed to pull this toxic feed chemical off the shelves in the United States, it says it won’t necessarily remove it from feed products in other countries unless it is forced by regulators to do so. As reported by AP: “Scott Brown of Pfizer Animal Health’s Veterinary Medicine Research and Development division said the company also sells the ingredient in about a dozen other countries. He said Pfizer is reaching out to regulatory authorities in those countries and will decide whether to sell it on an individual basis.” (http://www.usatoday.com/money/indus…) s e n i c ? E a t m o r e !

But even as its arsenic-containing product is pulled off the shelves, the FDA continues its campaign of denial, claiming arsenic in chickens is at such a low level that it’s still safe to eat. This is even as the FDA says arsenic is a carcinogen, meaning it increases the risk of cancer.

The National Chicken Council agrees with the FDA. In a statement issued in response to the news that Roxarsone would be pulled from feed store shelves, it stated, “Chicken is safe to eat” even while admitting arsenic was used in many flocks grown and sold as chicken meat in the United States.

What’s astonishing about all this is that the FDA tells consumers it’s safe to eat cancer-causing arsenic but it’s dangerous to drink elderberry juice! The FDA recently conducted an armed raid in an elderberry juice manufacturer, accusing it of the “crime” of selling “unapproved drugs.” (http://www.naturalnews.com/032631_e…)

Which drugs would those be? The elderberry juice, explains the FDA. You see, the elderberry juice magically becomes a “drug” if you tell ­people how it can help support good health.

The FDA has also gone after dozens of other companies for selling natural herbal products or nutritional products that enhance and support health. Plus, it’s waging a war on raw milk which it says is dangerous. So now in America, we have a food and drug regulatory agency that says it’s okay to eat arsenic, but dangerous to drink elderberry juice or raw milk.

Eat more poison, in other words, but don’t consume any healing foods. That’s the FDA, killing off Americans one meal at a time while protecting the profits of the very companies that are poisoning us with their deadly ingredients. h, by the way, here’s another sweet little disturbing fact you probably didn’t know about hamburgers and conventional beef: Chicken litter containing arsenic is fed to cows in factory beef operations. So the arsenic that’s pooped out by the chickens gets consumed and concentrated in the tissues of cows, which is then ground into hamburger to be consumed by the clueless masses who don’t even know they’re eating second-hand chicken sh*t.

by Jonathan Benson

Natural News

Scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a group affiliated with the World Health Organization (WHO), say that mobile phones are a “possible” carcinogen that may be a cause of cancer. The findings, which support previous research on the subject, add to the growing body of evidence which suggests that the electromagnetic radiation emitted from mobile phones causes serious health problems. Also, a respected international panel of scientists says cellphones are possible cancer-causing agents, putting them in the same category as the pesticide DDT, gasoline engine exhaust and coffee.

“A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered … to be credible,” states the IARC. However, in the same train of thought, the agency ­claims that evidence is “limited” to suggest that mobile phone usage is linked to glioma or acoustic neuroma, two types of brain cancer. In 2009, IARC published a study in the Journal of Clinical Oncology that linked mobile phone usage to an 18 percent increase in brain tumor risk. And because it was observed that such tumors tended to form on the sides of brains where mobile phones were primarily used, the connection between the two is even more striking (http://www.naturalnews.com/027448_c…).

Another report issued in 2010 by the International Electromagnetic Field Cooperative (IEFC) also found a link between mobile phone usage and increased rates of brain tumors. Included in this report is a Swedish study that found a 420 percent increase in brain cancer rates among children who began using mobile and cordless phones as teenagers, as opposed to those that did not (http://www.naturalnews.com/028078_c…).

With all of this research now available and the latest announcement from IARC, one would think more people would be concerned about the risks involved with the excessive use of mobile phones and looking for less-risky alternatives or using hands-free devices  at the very least. But because the period betweenwhen a cancer patient is exposed to this radiation and when he or she develops tumors typically spans several decades, some experts claim that the link between the two is inconclusive and are content to tell the public there is really little to worry about.

­by the El Reportero’s news services

Alfonso Portillo

The UN-backed international commission against impunity in Guatemala, (Cicig) made clear its opinion that two successive court sentences in major trials exemplified the entrenched impunity that it had been set up to eradicate. One sentence absolved former president Alfonso Portillo (2000-2004) and two of his ministers, accused of having appropriated large sums of public monies. The other acquitted former presidential candidate Alejandro Giammattei, accused of having been a key figure, back when he was head of the prison service under the administration of President Oscar Berger (2004-2008) , in a network devoted to extrajudicial executions.

L o b o g a i n s m o s t as Zelaya returns and OAS readmits Honduras

Honduras is once again ensconced in the Organization of American States (OAS) and ousted former president Manuel Zelaya is now safely back in the country after returning amid slightly muted fanfare on 28 May. The big winner of a historically signifi cant week, however, is neither Zelaya nor Honduras. It is President Porfi rio Lobo. For the best part of 18 months Lobo has been trying to win international recognition for his government.

Now he has it, Honduras is likely to drift beneath the regional radar. What next?

Lobo has a golden opportunity to convene a constituent assembly to implement structural changes to the Honduran political and socioeconomic system. There is a strong suspicion that he will in fact try to stack such an assembly to pursue a far narrower agenda, with re-election top of the bill.

Mexico in denial

On 1 June Alejandro Poir�, the official spokesperson for national security, denied that the government�s security policies are increasing the level of violence in the country. Poir� was responding to criticism ­of Mexico in a report entitled, �War on Drugs�, produced by the high-profile Global Commission on Drug Policy.

Poir�s argument is that the drug-gang violence was present in Mexico long before President Felipe Calder�n Hinojosa declared �war� on the drug gangs upon taking office in December 2006. The problem for the government is that independent statistics do not bear out his case and moreover anecdotal evidence, especially from the private sector, also indicates that violence has worsened since 2006.

C a l d e r ó n a t b a y

President Felipe Calderón Hinojosa has reached that uncomfortable point in  every Mexican presidencywhen power begins to drain from the president and the focus shifts to see who will succeed him. What makes Calderón’s decline different is that he is being treated with near contempt by his fellow politicians, let alone impartial political commentators.

M e x i c o C o n c e r n o v e r A r m s S m u ggling from the USA

Mexico City, Jun 3 (Prensa Latina) Mexican customs authorities say people in passenger vehicles could be smuggling weapons into the country in small amounts, because passenger transport is less controlled than freight transport. Rodolfo Castañeda, president of the Confederation of Customs Officers’ Associations, said 740,000 vehicles cross the Mexican-U.S. border daily, and they are inspected every other day by Tax Service agents. Arsenals belonging to organized crime and gangs  are frequently discovered,including high-precision heavy and light weapons and explosives, all of them from the United States, according to offi cial reports. Latin News and Prensa Latina contributed to this report.

The Truth About the Health Care Bill

by Michael Connelly,
Ret. Constitutional Attorney

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009.

I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying.

The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for undocumented immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system..

All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government.

However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portionsof the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own.

The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, of all of your personal healthcare direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4thAmendment to the Constitution information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendm e n t s m a y p r o v i d e .

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.

However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the d u e p r o c e s s o f l a w. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law It doesn’t stop there though.

The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, ­of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea.

This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution.” If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable. For those who might doubt the nature of this threat, I suggest they consult the source, the U.S. Con