New Study Shows Major Molecular Differences between GMO and Non-GMO Corn

A unique new study published Monday in the scientific journal Nature has used molecular profiles to reveal major differences in composition between a GMO corn and its non-GMO parent. These findings question industry and regulatory position of “substantial equivalence” and have serious safety implications.

The new peer-reviewed study led by Dr Michael Antoniou at King’s College London describes the effects of the process of genetic engineering on the composition of a genetically modified Roundup-resistant GMO corn variety, NK603.
“Our study clearly shows that the GM transformation process results in profound compositional differences in NK603, demonstrating that this GMO corn is not substantially equivalent to its non-GMO counterpart. The marked increase in putrescine and especially cadaverine is a concern since these substances are potentially toxic, being reported as enhancers of the effects of histamine, thus heightening allergic reactions, and both have been implicated in the formation of carcinogenic nitrosamines with nitrite in meat products. Our results call for a more thorough evaluation of the safety of NK603 corn consumption on a long-term basis.” Dr. Antoniou stated.
In-depth analysis of types of proteins (“proteomics”) and small biochemical molecules (“metabolomics”) revealed major compositional differences between NK603 and its non-GMO parent. The results obtained show not only disturbances in energy utilisation and oxidative stress (damage to cells and tissues by reactive oxygen), but worryingly large increases in certain substances (polyamines).
Polyamines found to be present in increased amounts in GMO NK603 corn include putrescine and cadaverine, which can produce various toxic effects. For example, they enhance the effects of histamine, thus heightening allergic reactions, and both have been implicated in the formation of carcinogenic substances called nitrosamines.
Overall, the findings of this study disprove industry and regulatory agency claims that NK603 is ‘substantially equivalent’ to its non-GMO counterpart and suggest that a more thorough evaluation of the safety of consuming products derived from this GMO corn on a long term basis should be undertaken.
Background to study

1. The establishment of compositional ‘substantial equivalence’ is a key starting point requested by regulatory agencies for assessing the safety of a GMO crop and food. If analysis for nutrients and known toxins shows that the composition of a GMO crop is found to be in a similar range to that present in a corresponding, genetically similar non-GMO variety (often the non-GMO parent), then it is deemed to be ‘substantially equivalent’ and to require little, if any, further safety testing, especially in the USA.
2. Genetically modified (GM) corn NK603, engineered to survive being sprayed with glyphosate based weedkillers such as Roundup, was assessed as ‘substantially equivalent’ to its non-GM parent corn variety, based on a nutrient composition analysis of both crops. It was subsequently granted market approval.
3. However, the nutrient compositional analysis is relatively crude and may miss subtle yet important differences between the GMO and non-GMO food, which could have health consequences for the consumer. For example, the compositional analysis includes measurement of total protein content, yet this is less important than the profile of different types of proteins. In other words, the message is in the detail, yet this detail is currently lacking in regulatory analysis investigating the substantial equivalence of a product.
4. This gap in compositional information for the Roundup-tolerant NK603 corn was addressed in this study by analysing this GMO with the nearest non-GMO corn variety as a control. The two crops were grown under similar conditions, in the same location and season, spaced at a sufficient distance to avoid cross-contamination. One field of NK603 was sprayed once with Roundup, whilst another field of NK603 was not treated with Roundup. Samples were produced in two cultivation cycles over two growing seasons. Thus all precautions were taken to minimise environmental factors that could influence the composition of the crops. The result is a comparative analysis that specifically highlights the effect of the genetic modification (GM) transformation process.
5. Rats fed this GMO corn over 2 years presented signs of a higher incidence of liver and kidney damage (Séralini et al., Environmental Sciences Europe, 26:14) compared with controls.

Analytical methods used
Analytical methods collectively known as “omics” technologies can be used to obtain an in-depth, molecular composition profile of a biological system/substance. These technologies include transcriptomics (gene function profile), proteomics (protein type profile) and metabolomics (small biochemical metabolite profile). Unlike gross nutrient analysis, omics technologies provide highly detailed molecular composition and biological functional information with a very high degree of predictability of health or disease status.
In this study Dr Antoniou and colleagues have undertaken proteomics (protein profiling) and metabolomics (small biochemical profiling) analyses, comparing NK603 with its non-GMO counterpart in order to deepen the understanding of the effects of the GM transformation process used to generate this variety of GMO corn. In addition, NK603 cultivated either with or without being sprayed with Roundup was also investigated in order to determine the effects, if any, of this weedkiller on the biochemistry and hence composition of this GMO corn.
This broad range of analysis is designed to ascertain more deeply and precisely whether NK603 is truly ‘substantially equivalent’ to its corresponding non-GMO variety and whether this raises any health concerns.
Findings

1. A total of 117 proteins and 91 small molecule biochemicals (metabolites) were found to be statistically significantly altered in NK603 corn by the GM transformation process.
2. The GM transformation process was the major contributor to variation in the protein and metabolite profiles, rather than environmental factors such as the spraying of the Roundup weedkiller or the growing season.
3. Alteration in the protein profile revealed by the proteomics analysis was reflective of an imbalance in energy utilisation and oxidative stress (damage to cells and tissues by reactive oxygen).
4. Small molecule biochemical profile differences revealed by metabolomics mostly consisted of an increase in a class of compounds known as polyamines; the levels of potentially toxic putrescine and especially cadaverine were markedly increased in the GM NK603 corn.

Conclusions

1. GM NK603 corn and its corresponding non-GMO corn variety are not substantially equivalent.
2. The GM transformation process caused alterations in both protein and metabolite composition profiles in NK603 corn.
3. The non-substantial equivalence of NK603 corn with the corresponding non-GMO corn, and the increases in potential toxic compounds (polyamines; putrescine, cadaverine) in NK603 corn, indicate that a more thorough investigation of the safety of consuming products derived from this GMO food is warranted.

Relevance to health
The GM transformation process causes a general disturbance in the GMO plant. Whether the increased levels of cadaverine and putrescine found in the NK603 corn samples can account for the signs of potential negative health effects in rats fed on this corn needs to be further analysed in long-term feeding studies on laboratory animals, using methods that specifically and more accurately quantify the amounts of these polyamines and their effects.
State-of-the-art molecular profiling ‘omics’ methods could be used to deepen our understanding of the differences between GM plants and their non-GMO counterparts. This would enable scientists to improve the pre-commercial safety testing of GM plants by highlighting the presence of increased levels of known toxins (for example, certain polyamines found at increased levels in this study) or novel toxins and potentially allergenic substances.
The paper: FULL PAPER
Authors: Mesnage R, Agapito-Tenfen S, Vilperte V, Renney G, Ward M, Séralini GE, Nodari N, Antoniou MN.
An integrated multi-omics analysis of the NK603 Roundup-tolerant GM maize reveals metabolism disturbances caused by the transformation process. Scientific Reports, 2016; 6:37855.

Read more: http://sustainablepulse.com/2016/12/19/new-study-shows-major-molecular-differences-between-gmo-and-non-gmo-corn/#.WFgqsPkrKM-

SunCell® Generates Electricity Directly from Water Freely Available in the Humidity in the Air

The SunCell® was invented and engineered to harness the clean energy source from the reaction the hydrogen atoms of water molecules to form a non-polluting product, lower-energy state hydrogen called “Hydrino” wherein the energy release of H₂O fuel is 100 times that of an equivalent amount of high-octane gasoline at an unprecedented high power density. The compact power is manifest as tens of thousands of Sun equivalents that can be directly converted to electrical output using commercial photovoltaic cells.
Applications and markets for the SunCell® extend across the global power spectrum, including thermal, stationary electrical power, motive, motive to stationary, and defense.
SunCell® power is independent from existing infrastructure:

• grid and fuels in the case of electricity, and
• fuels in the case of motive power

The SunCell® power source is a further game changer for all forms of transportation:

• automobile, freight trucks, rail, marine, aviation, and aerospace

The SunCell® uses cheap, abundant, nontoxic, commodity chemicals, with no apparent long-term supply issues that might preclude commercial, high volume manufacturing.
Being greater than ten thousand times brighter than sunlight, the corresponding reduction in the area of the photovoltaic converter gives rise to a projected cost of the SunCell® of about $50 to $100/kW compared to over ten times that for conventional power sources of electricity. The absence of fuel cost for a fully distributed and mobile-capable power source, together with low capital costs that may be amortize over a projected lifetime of at least twenty years enables the generation and delivery of electricity for essentially all applications at a fraction of the cost of conventional power source, all of which have the further liability of pollution.

Read more: http://brilliantlightpower.com/suncell

EM Drive is an “impossible” spacecraft engine that generates thrust from the quantum vacuum, using no moving parts and producing no exhaust

Mike Adams-

I’m a fan of physicist Richard Feynman, and one of his most memorable quotes explains that “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts.”
Indeed, the “experts” of science are so often wrong that it makes their arrogance laughable, and today we have yet another example of an emerging, unexplained technology that’s sending physicists back to the drawing board to rewrite the supposed “laws” of how the universe works.
The technology in question is called the EM Drive, and it’s an “impossible” spacecraft propulsion device that produces real thrust while emitting nothing (i.e. no exhaust) and having no moving parts. “The EM Drive (Electro Magnetic Drive) uses electromagnetic microwave cavities to directly convert electrical energy to thrust without the need to expel any propellant,” explains Hacked.com. “[Harold G. White, a scientist] proposes that the EM Drive’s thrust is due to virtual particles in the quantum vacuum that behave like propellant ions in magneto-hydrodynamical propulsion systems, extracting ‘fuel’ from the very fabric of space-time and eliminating the need to carry propellant.”
Invented by engineering pioneer Roger Shawyer nearly 15 years ago, the EM Drive has long been ridiculed by “mainstream” scientists in much the same way that cold fusion (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) have also been widely ridiculed by hot fusion academics.
Yet Shawyer may have the last laugh after all. Martin Tajmar, the Director of Institute and Head of Space Systems at the Dresden University of Technology in Germany, has just reproduced the thrust measurements of the seemingly “impossible” thrust device, conducting his experiment in a vacuum that mimics the environment of space. He presented his findings at the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics’ Propulsion and Energy Forum and Exposition in 2015. You can see his EM Drive talk listed in the event brochure at this link.

EMDrive appears to violate the laws of known physics… but it also appears to work

“Our measurements reveal thrusts as expected from previous claims after carefully studying thermal and electromagnetic interferences,” says the science paper. Tests were also conducted in a high vacuum: “We used this setup to test an EMDrive for the first time in high vacuum down to 4×10 -6 mbar observing similar thrusts (although at somewhat lower power levels) ruling out any air influence in this configuration.”

As the document explains, numerous experiments have already apparently confirmed the thrust operation of this “impossible” engine that appears to violate the known laws of physics:
Some years ago, Shawyer claimed to have invented yet another type of propellantless propulsion system called EMDrive that only uses onboard electrical power similar to the photon rocket, but with orders of magnitude more thrust and without the need of another satellite. If true, this could certainly revolutionize space travel.
It must be noted that Shawyers analysis and claims are highly controversial (e.g. Ref. 9) as this would obviously violate the conservation of momentum (pushing against itself) following his theory. Aside from the theoretical concept, most interesting are the experimental claims that have been published to date. Shawyer tested the
EMDrive on a balance in the upwards and downwards direction observing weight changes (=thrusts) close to his theoretical predictions using precise Q factor measurements with 16 mN using 850 W of microwave power – <b>close to 5600 times larger than expected from pure classical radiation thrust</b>. He claimed to have done checks for thermal and electromagnetic influence. Later testing was done on a torsion balance using air bearings where he observed rotation of the complete apparatus with all electronics and power supplies on-board.
Independent tests were carried out in China by Yang et al10-12 who tested the EMDrive on a force-feedback thrust stand and achieved up to 720 mN of thrust with 1000 W microwave power with even higher Q factors compared to Shawyer. Most recently, Brady et al tested the concept on a torsion balance at NASA with a (micro)N resolution obtaining thrusts of 50 (micro)N using only 20 W of RF power. The microwave electronics were mounted on the balance and power was fed using liquid metal contacts. Strong magnets were used for eddy current damping of the balance and a laser interferometer for monitoring the balance movement. Testing was quite limited (only a few test runs performed, no thruster direction reversal) and interaction with the magnetic damping during operation of the thruster was observed – however below the EMDrive thrust values. A null measurement was performed using a resistor
instead of the EMDrive.

UK media begins to report on the EM Drive

I’ve been watching this story for over a year, waiting for another laboratory confirmation of the thrust values. To my surprise, the UK media has begun to pick up on this development, too.
“The drive is capable of producing thrust several thousand times greater than a standard photon rocket and could get to Mars within 70 days or Pluto within 18 months,” reports the Telegraph. “A trip to Alpha Centauri, which would take tens of thousands of years to reach right now, could be reached in just 100 years.”
The Telegraph goes on to say:
Shawyer also claims that he is just a few months away from publishing new results confirming that his drive works in a peer reviewed journal.
However scientists still have no idea how it actually works. Nasa suggested that it could have something to do with the technology manipulating subatomic particles which constantly pop in and out of existence in empty space.
Prof Tajmer presented his findings to the 2015 American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics’ Propulsion and Energy Forum and Exposition this week.

Known science blown away by a breakthrough that no one understands

One of the reasons I love to cover this sort of news is because it reinforces the all-important idea that arrogant scientists aren’t fooling Mother Nature. It’s nice to see arrogant scientists humbled from time to time by new, emerging phenomena they can’t explain.
Richard Feynman understood this. He was brilliant but humble, always fascinated by the mysteries of nature. Feynman fully realized that even his own vast knowledge of physics was little more than a spec of dust compared to the realm of knowledge and yet to be explored.
Today, far too many scientists have abandoned the very idea that anything new might yet be discovered. They think they know everything already… that “science” has reached a plateau of absolute truth from which zero divergence is tolerated. But that isn’t science… it’s dogma. Real science is the practice of intentionally pursuing new knowledge even when you realize that new discoveries might render your existing “scientific” beliefs obsolete.
“New science,” as it’s often described, enters the realm of quantum physics and even the influence of the observer (intention) on outcomes in the apparent physical universe. As the research document shown above explains, “Nasa suggested that it could have something to do with the technology manipulating subatomic particles which constantly pop in and out of existence in empty space.”
Such ideas frighten conventional, old-school scientists who are terrified of real discoveries because they might threaten their sacred dogma. The idea that a device which emits nothing might produce enormous thrust that could revolutionize space travel just isn’t a concept most scientists are willing to entertain… even if it might arguably be one of human civilization’s most important inventions ever. (The implications for colonization of other worlds are staggering… this could be the technology that takes humanity from a vulnerable, single-planet species to a galactic civilization.)
For that reason alone, the EM Drive will be viciously attacked by old-school physicists and stodgy, cognitively constipated scientists. The idea that their faith-based scientific beliefs might be overwritten by new expansions in human understanding simply infuriates them. So they lash out and attack the pioneers to tear them down, suppressing the advancement of science while simultaneously protecting their “intellectual territory” and industry influence.

Why future spaceships will look more like Death Stars than X-Wing Fighters

By the way, if the EM Drive proves workable, all those sci-fi films that depict spaceships producing visible, fiery thrust will suddenly be outmoded. In the future of space travel with EM Drives, there are no visible engines. Even better, a spaceship need not have any predetermined thrust orientation, since EM Drives could be built on internal gimbals deep inside the ship and pointed in any direction to produce thrust in that direction. You don’t need to mount them on the perimeter of the ship, in other words. They can be internal. This also means spaceships do not have to “turn” to alter their direction of thrust. It also means communications gear on the outside of such craft can be permanently oriented toward Earth, making communications far easier to maintain.
As a scientist myself, I can also tell you this means such ships will be built as spherical machines in order to mount the EM Drive engines in the center of mass (for all sorts of obvious reasons involving the laws of physics). Thus, future spaceships will look more like mini Death Stars than X-Wing fighters. There is no air in space. “Wings” are not necessary. Essentially, every spaceship you’ve seen in Star Wars, Star Trek and Battlestar Galactica is completely wrong.

Additional sources for this story include:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/
https://hacked.com/scientists-confirm-impossible-em-drive-propulsion/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3177449/Nasa-s-impossible-fuel-free-thrusters-work-German-scientists-confirm-viability-super-fast-space-travel-slash-journey-moon-4-HOURS.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/11769030/Impossible-rocket-drive-works-and-could-get-to-Moon-in-four-hours.html
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.1940
http://www.naturalnews.com/files/EM-drive-thrust.pdf

The First Sustainable Urban Agrihood in the U.S. Could Serve As A Model for Urban Development

Could fresh, healthy, affordable food be the future of urban neighborhood development?
In Detroit, Michigan, “the first sustainable urban agrihood” in the U.S. centers around an edible garden, with easily accessible, affordable produce offered to neighborhood residents and the community.
Each year, this urban farm provides fresh, free produce to 2,000 households within two square miles of the farm. They also supply food to local markets, restaurants, and food pantries.
The concept of agrihoods isn’t new —the Urban Land Institute estimated that about 200 agrihoods had been or were under construction across the U.S. — but this agrihood is unique because it’s the first truly urban agrihood. It plans to operate in a sustainable way, and is more accessible than most other agrihoods.
Agrihoods, also called agritopias or community-supported development, are an exciting concept because they create a remarkable improvement to the dominant food system.
They help tackle food insecurity and other community problems. They make it easy for people in low-income communities to get fresh, healthy food. And they give people a connection with the food they eat, the earth, and each other.

All about the first sustainable urban agrihood

The first sustainable urban agrihood, which recently debuted in Detroit, is the project of the Michigan Urban Farming Initiative — an all-volunteer nonprofit, which seeks to empower urban communities using sustainable agriculture.
The three-acre development has vacant land, along with occupied and abandoned homes centered around a two-acre urban garden, with more than 300 organic vegetable varieties, like lettuce, kale, and carrots, as well as a 200-tree fruit orchard, with apples, pears, plums, and cherries, a children’s sensory garden, and more.
The nonprofit is also working on other projects that go beyond farming, including:

• Turning a long-vacant building into a community resource center, which will offer educational programs, event and meeting space for the neighborhood, a nonprofit incubator, and two commercial kitchens
• Developing a healthy food cafe, and  
• Restoring a home into student intern housing and an off-grid shipping container.

Other projects to make the place more sustainable include:

• Installing solar panels,
• Converting a basement into a water harvesting cistern that will automatically irrigate the garden
• A public composting toilet, and
• A retention pond made from the foundation of a blighted home to supply the farm with water. 
•  
• Read more: https://foodrevolution.org/blog/food-politics/first-sustainable-urban-agrihood/?utm_campaign=frn16&utm_medium=email&utm_source=email-automated&utm_content=2331&utm_term=existing-email-list&email=subzerohc%40yahoo.com&firstname=John&lastname=Zahos

The Electoral College is the very definition of inclusiveness and diversity

Never try to teach a pigeon to play chess, people say. It wastes your time, annoys the pigeon, and you end up with pigeon crap all over your playing board. By the same token, never try to teach a liberal how a representational Republic works. It wastes your time, annoys the liberal, and you end up with liberals making a mess of your country.
So the following article isn’t meant to educate liberals… that’s impossible. They’re beyond the realm of logic and rationality. Rather, it’s intended to help intelligent people understand why the Electoral College is the very definition of “inclusiveness” and “diversity” in a representational Republic. No wonder the political left hates it so much…

America is not a democracy; it’s a Republic

Listening to leftists whine about why they lost the election is worse than hearing a broken record of Michael Bolton’s top 10 all-time greatest hits. “Hillary won the popular vote!” they scream with feigned righteousness, apparently oblivious to the fact that they live in a representational Republic, not a democracy.
In a democracy — also known as “mob rule” — the majority wins every vote. A democracy, the saying goes, is when two foxes and a hen vote on what’s for dinner. In a pure democracy, a delusional mob can vote to take away the fundamental human rights of minority voters. For example, a liberal majority could vote to criminalize Christianity, and as long as they have the majority vote, they think it’s “democratic” to outlaw whatever views, speech or religious beliefs they don’t like. But in a representational Republic, certain individual rights are guaranteed by law and cannot be taken away by the mob. For example, the right to speak freely and the individual right to own and deploy firearms are both rights that are guaranteed to individuals, regardless of the popular delusions of the manipulated mob.
Another important property of a representational Republic is the Electoral College. It guarantees that, to win the presidential election, a candidate must garner broad support across the many diverse geographic regions and cultures of the United States of America. Winning the Electoral College requires far more than just pandering to the populous delusional mobs of Los Angeles and New York City… it demands that a presidential candidate achieve a high level of diversity and inclusiveness across the nation’s many varied regions.

Without the Electoral College, city-dwelling leftists could just copulate their way to an uninformed majority

Without the Electoral College, the Presidential race would be little more than a popularity contest in California, New York and Texas, with nearly all the rest of the country forgotten. That would obviously be a violation of inclusiveness, diversity and tolerance, wouldn’t it? Under such as “popular vote” system, presidents would win elections by promising ever-increasing handouts to the cities while stripping rights, freedoms and economic prosperity from all the rural Americans who grow the food, work the oil fields and home school their children.
By demanding a dismantling of the Electoral College, what liberals are saying is, “We are intolerant, narrow-minded bigots who seek to rule over everyone else.” They want the only votes that count to be their own votes, and they seek to nullify the votes of rural America. In effect, the liberal approach to winning elections is to simply make more babies and out-populate the rural voters who tend to be far more self-reliant, adaptable and capable than typical city populations. An America run via popular vote instead of the Electoral College might as well just be called Idiocracy.
Technically speaking, the Electoral College means that the votes of city people count less than the votes of rural people, and that’s exactly the way it was intended to be. The reason for this? America’s Founding Fathers fully realized that many people who live in cities tend to be out of touch with reality, living in delusional bubbles built on fantasy rather than the real world. If you let city people run the entire country, they will turn it into a communist, dystopian, totalitarian hell zone (or as they call it, a “gun free zone” with record murders every weekend). Think Venezuela, North Korea or Communist China. That’s where left-leaning city people always tend to push society for the simple reason that they always demand stronger government to control the thoughts and behaviors of the population.

The Electoral College gives extra weight to rural voters by design: It’s called “diversity”

The only way to keep a nation on a path of sustainability that grows organically out of diverse cultures and geographic regions, the Founding Fathers knew, was to give rural voters extra electoral weight to out-leverage the delusional city dwellers who live in protected bubbles (cultural bubbles, economic bubbles, food bubbles, media bubbles, etc.). This is why rural states each get a minimum of three electoral votes, even when their populations are too small to achieve sufficient mathematical proportionality for such votes. In essence, what the Constitution says, quite correctly, is that the masses of delusional city dwellers tend to be far too monolithic and narrow-minded to be trusted with the Republic.
As you’ll notice with California’s insanely idiotic government as it exists today, this observation is grounded in genuine common sense. Guess which state has a $1 trillion shortfall in its pension funds? If you guessed Collapsifornia, you get a gold star. Any person who thinks California’s economic structure for widespread handouts, entitlements and funding for illegal aliens is “sustainable” can’t do basic math.
This is why the path to victory for the presidential race is based on achieving 270 electoral votes, not achieving a raw majority of votes from all the incredibly delusional, brainwashed sheeple of Los Angeles and other populous cities where people can simply fornicate their way to ballot box majorities.

If the Presidency were won based on the popular vote, Donald Trump would have strategically campaigned in California and New York

To the amusement of all intelligent Americans, the delusional left continues to insist that Hillary Clinton “won” the election because she got more raw votes than did Donald Trump. As is obvious to any intelligent person, this is solely because Donald Trump campaigned in lower-population states that offered larger electoral rewards. In other words, Trump campaigned to win, and he followed the rules as they are set out in the U.S. Constitution.
Now that he won the electoral map, delusional cybully leftists want to change the rules of the election after the fact. They ridiculously want to claim the election should have been decided by the “popular vote.” But if Donald Trump had been playing by those rules in the first place, he would have won the popular vote and probably lost the electoral vote. Had that happened, the leftists would be screaming about how we have to honor the Electoral College, you see.
This gets to the core of leftist delusional thinking: Liberals have no rational and consistent foundation for their thinking. They do not operate on any consistent set of rules, ethics or values. They simply invoke or discard whatever rules fit their current agenda, and when they lose by the rules that are in place, they scream and whine and threaten Electoral voters with death threats to try to force them to change their votes. If the rules don’t work for them, they demand the rules be changed. And if you disagree with their demands to change the rules, they call you a racist and a bigot.
This is why the most radical liberals have no legitimate place in a free society. The failed philosophy of liberalism only pushes societies toward totalitarianism and communism. (This is why leftists in the media love Fidel Castro but hate Ted Cruz.) To keep a society free, liberalism must be defeated at every election. It is the single greatest threat to any free society, and we can only thank our Founding Fathers for so thoroughly understanding this dynamic that they encoded into the Constitution a way for intelligent, rugged individuals across America’s heartland to effectively veto the political delusions of clueless liberals who live in artificial concrete jungles called “Los Angeles” which means, hilariously, the city “of angels.”

Hillary Clinton didn’t “win” the popular vote for the simple reason that there was no such contest held

In retrospect, Hillary Clinton didn’t “win the popular vote.” There was no contest held for the popular vote. You can’t “win” something if no such contest ever existed in the first place. The contest was for the support of the vast diversity of American voters whose will is reflected in the Electoral College (at least it should be, if the intolerant left wasn’t death-threating Electoral College voters to change their votes). Donald Trump clearly won that contest fair and square.
There is no debating this point, yet the intolerant crybullies on the left remain in such a state of denial that they still can’t fathom how their masses of city-dwelling sheeple were out-voted by informed rural Americans who actually work for a living rather than existing as economic parasites that feed off a government scheme of trading handouts for votes.
It’s beyond mere delusion, by the way: Many people on the left are so disconnected from reality that their “Trump Derangement Syndrome” can best be described as a mental illness. These bubble-dwellers still think they can overthrow the country by screaming, looting, protesting and making childish demands. They act like five-year-old children, pouting and slapping their palms on the table while screaming for mommy to give them what they want.
And for far too long, these leftist crybullies always got what they demanded by acting like little children. The legitimate election of Donald Trump may be their first event they’ve ever experienced where they didn’t get their way. That’s why they can’t grasp what happened… they’ve been raised as delicate snowflakes by liberal parents who cater to their every whim, thereby psychologically crippling them for life by making sure they were ill-prepared for the real world of adults.

Three important messages for the delusional snowflakes

So let me be blunt to all the snowflakes in the hopes that they will grow up and, perhaps for the first time, learn to face the world as adults. My message is in three parts:
Part 1) You LOST the election fair and square. Deal with it. Act like adults for once and stop whining about everything that doesn’t go your way.
Part 2) You are going to KEEP LOSING elections if you keep acting like little crybabies. It’s amazing that you just chose Nancy Pelosi to stay in power and run the losing democratic party, which is already retreating to the fringes of society. It just proves you are still so delusional about reality that you think you can keep invoking the same losing strategies over and over again… while hoping that somehow a different outcome will magically appear. Keep it up, and you’ll lose about 15 more Senate seats in 2018, which will give Trump a super majority in the Senate. Soon, Republicans might even have enough nationwide political power to hold a Constitutional Convention and alter the U.S. Constitution with new protections for religious expression, individual firearms rights, term limits and mandatory balanced budgets.
Part 3) If you try to stage a mass uprising coup to try to take over the country and install your communist leaders in Washington, there are a few hundred thousand U.S. Marines and other armed services soldiers who will defend the Republic using kinetic engagement. If you leftists really think you can overpower the US Marines, D.C. police and all the armed Second Amendment patriots across America, you’re only displaying yet more delusional thinking.

Leftists are the most intolerant, bigoted, narrow-minded people of all

Truth be told, it’s the leftists who are the bigots in America. They demonstrate extreme intolerance for all people and ideas that don’t obediently conform to their delusional demands. Just look at the way they’re acting after this election loss, demanding theatrical recounts, ridiculously blaming the Russians for the Trump win (without a shred of evidence to back it up) and even stating they will all refuse to pay federal taxes now because Hillary Clinton didn’t win. (Funny. Leftists still think income taxes fund the government. This just shows how incredibly stupid they really are.)
If you want to find an intolerant, bigoted, narrow-minded racist, just search out your local Black Lives Matter community organizer. Or find a white college professor who hates white people. Or heck, just look toward the White House and recognize the bigoted race baiter who currently resides there as America’s first (and last) “black President.”
If you want to pinpoint where diversity has been scrubbed out of existence, just visit any college campus where Milo Yiannopoulos has been banned (or maliciously attacked). Check out the campus “safe spaces” at Mizzou, where crybully leftists demand uniformity of thought under the absurd label of “inclusiveness.” The hypocrisy is so thick, you can get stuck it in up to your knees just walking across campus…

Leftists are incapable of seeing how they embody all the horrible traits they condemn in others

The most astonishing characteristic of the left, you see, is that they are incapable of realizing how they exhibit every attribute they claim to despise.
Leftists claim to despise “intolerance,” so they become intolerant of those who aren’t like them.
They claim to despise a “lack of diversity,” so they demand everyone act just like they do.
They claim to be “compassionate” and operate based on “inclusiveness,” so they attack their political opponents with extreme hatred, violence and death threats.
They claim to exercise “free speech” during their own violent protests where they burn the American flag, but they can’t tolerate the free speech of someone peacefully displaying a Confederate flag.
Leftists, it turns out, are self-loathing, delusional creatures suffocating in their own mental illness. Deep down, they realize that they embody all the traits they hate, so at some level of their warped psyche, they truly seek self-destruction in order to terminate their own self-hatred. (This is only reinforced in white liberals who are taught self-loathing propaganda by colleges and universities that teach them “whiteness” is, by definition, a state of racism.)

This is why leftists stupidly think they might succeed in a communist uprising on January 20

Finally, the upshot of all this is that self-loathing, delusional leftists are more than willing to sacrifice their lives in a mass uprising that they think might achieve their goal of taking over the nation’s capitol on January 20, 2017. You must understand that leftists don’t think rationally. They do not realize their odds of success through such an uprising are near zero. Thus, they are just stupid enough to try it anyway, and they truly don’t mind dying in the process, since they hate themselves anyway.
This is why all Americans must be on what I call a “Second Amendment alert” for January 20, 2017. That’s the day the globalists, working in collusion with the radical left, are planning a series of false flags, assassination attempts and a popular uprising in Washington D.C.
All true Americans need to be ready to defend your Republic on January 20. Do not initiate violence of any kind, but be ready to support law enforcement in their response against radical, irrational, suicidal leftists who decide to throw themselves at the Capitol building like mindless zombies.
Be ready for anything that day. There is nothing the radical left won’t try, including bombing government buildings, inciting violence while posing as Trump supporters, staging false “crisis actor” events for CNN’s cameras, deploying chemical weapons, dirty bombs and so on. The left has reached the point of complete madness, and that makes them temporarily very dangerous to public safety.
You may be called upon to help support the efforts of law enforcement, the National Guard and possibly even the U.S. Marines to stop a mad leftist coup attempt in our nation’s capitol. This is the right time, brothers and sisters, to support all the “Bikers for Trump” who are going to be at the event, ready to do what is necessary to defend the Republic and defend the integrity of this election.
And by the way, once Trump makes it into office, I hope the very first thing he does is initiate mass arrests of violent leftists and charges them all with treason. It’s time to restore some basic law and order in this country. We can start on January 20 under a new President Trump.

read more: http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-06-electoral-college-very-definition-of-inclusiveness-and-diversity.html

Monsanto war crimes exposed via white phosphorus, a chemical that burned civilians to the bone

Monsanto has some sketchy ties with the US government regarding the manufacturing of deadly white phosphorus. It is possible that the Pentagon and chemical giant are in bed together. Monsanto is known for it’s ugly lawsuits against indigent farmers over genetically modified seeds. The company is also infamous for many alleged crimes against humanity, including spreading billions of pounds of materials known to cause cancer around the world. The effects of Monsanto’s extremely foolish behavior will be felt for centuries. There are still lawsuits being generated against Monsanto for polychlornated biphenyls contaminating our waterways and wetlands, although the substance was banned in the late 70’s.
There is a new report that shows just how deeply involved Monsanto is with manufacturing deadly white phosphorus. The government is protecting Monsanto because they love using their substance in the battlefield. White phosphorus has been used against civilian populations in conflicts including Fallujah and Gaza. The substance spontaneously ignites at 30 degrees Celsius, with the intended purpose of illuminating enemy positions and creating a smoke screen to cover the movement of troops. White phosphorus can also be used to firebomb enemy positions.
When a human comes in contact with white phosphorus, it ignites. Once it’s activated, it will burn until it runs out of fuel or oxygen. The substance sticks to clothes and skin often causing fatal chemical burns. Witnesses who have seen the substance in action say that it burns to the bone with no way to stop it’s progression until it burns out by itself.
For a long time, Monsanto was the only US company manufacturing white phosphorus. This earned them special attention from the Pentagon. The Pentagon’s pragmatists have noted that special techniques and skills are required to manufacture white phosphorus, and that Monsanto is the only known producer. The government’s support of this domestic capability is critical. Monsanto gets approval for many insane new chemicals because of the work they perform for the US government. Monsanto is much more of a chemical company then they are a seed company.
The use of white phosphorus in civilian areas is definitely a war crime. It has been documented that US forces have used the substance in Iraq and Mosul. Monsanto’s continuous role as a purveyor of deadly military chemicals is responsible for war crimes around the world. In 2009, the US State Department confirmed that white phosphorus weapons were sent to Israel for use in Gaza.
Sources:
NaturalBlaze.com
News.AntiWar.com
TheFreeThoughtProject.com