August 14th, 2014
Please feel free to draw your own conclusions....however, if you actually 'feel' that this letter is intended to provide vets with free gun locks, then....you may be part of the problem.
August 14th, 2014
By Nina Massey
One Youtube user believes he has finally found proof of the mystical man on the moon.
He claims to have made the incredible spot of an alien figure lurking in a deep crater from images on Google Moon.
Wowforreel's video - which has been viewed more than two million times in less than a month - shows what he says could be creature walking along the surface .
The strange shape can also be seen on Google Moon at 27°34’26.35″N 19°36’4.75″W.
Wowforreel said he started investigating the shadow after receiving an online tip from another web user named Jasenko.
He told UFO Sighting Daily : "An irregularly shaped dark spot he noticed on Google Moon looks like it could be a cast shadow from a massive standing object, or figure,’
"At first I thought maybe it was something drawn into the picture but after going to Google Moon, whatever it is or isn't…uh, is there."
'It is really there, not faked and I have no clue what it is. I found nothing else like it in any of the other craters," he added.
August 12th, 2014
"What makes the appointment both unique and disturbing to some observers is the fact that Laubenthal is a foreign national with no sworn allegiance to the U.S. Constitution.
The appointment could raise the specter of a divided loyalty for Laubenthal between his command responsibilities and his native country....Achtung!"
By STEVE ELWART
In an unprecedented move, a German officer has been appointed to a key command post over the U.S. Army in Europe.
German Brig. Gen. Markus Laubenthal, 51, became chief of staff last week, the first non-American officer to hold that position, the Army said.
According to Germany’s defense ministry, Laubenthal will serve as “the right-hand man” to Lt. Gen. Donald Campbell Jr., who commands more than 37,000 U.S. Army Europe, USAREUR, personnel from headquarters in the central German city of Wiesbaden.
Prior to assuming his post at USAREUR, Laubenthal, a general officer from the German Armed Forces, the Bundeswehr, was the commander of Panzerbrigade 12, the 12th Armored Brigade, in Amberg, Germany. He also was the chief of staff for International Security Assistance Force Regional Command North in Afghanistan and the assistant chief of staff for operations for NATO’s Kosovo force.
Laubenthal’s appointment comes at a time when relations between the U.S. and Germany are decidedly strained. Recent revelations of U.S. spying and the tapping of German government phones, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s, have put the two nations at odds with each other. The new appointment may be meant to repair relations.
“This is a bold and major step forward in USAREUR’s commitment to operating in a multinational environment with our German allies,” Campbell said of Laubenthal’s appointment. “U.S. and German senior military leaders have been serving together in NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan for years. Sustaining the shared capability from this experience will benefit both U.S. and German armies.”
A German army spokesman called the move “a clear sign for a good German-American cooperation.”
If there has ever been a need for an increased spirit of cooperation, it is now. Besides NSA spying on German nationals, in July, German authorities expelled the CIA’s station chief in Berlin after the discovery of two suspected spies allegedly working for the U.S. from inside the German government.
While it means Germany is taking a more active part in its own defense, what makes the appointment both unique and disturbing to some observers is the fact that Laubenthal is a foreign national with no sworn allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. The appointment could raise the specter of a divided loyalty for Laubenthal between his command responsibilities and his native country.
To be sure, there is precedent for soldiers of different countries joining forces in a single military unit.....
August 12th, 2014
CDC could implement indefinite quarantine, says doctor
by PAUL JOSEPH WATSON
Former FDA official Scott Gottlieb, M.D. warns that under current CDC procedures, healthy Americans who show no symptoms of the virus could be detained indefinitely if Ebola hits the United States.
In an article for Forbes entitled If Ebola Arrives In The U.S., Stopping It May Rely On Controversial Tools, Gottlieb, former Director of Medical Policy Development for the Food and Drug Administration, asserts that Ebola is likely to arrive in the U.S. and that if it does the CDC will invoke powers to “hold a healthy person against his will.”
“Given the deadly nature of the Ebola virus, and the popular worry it’s likely to engender, one can expect the CDC and health authorities to pull out all the stops. The response could include invocation of the CDC’s evolving quarantine authorities,” writes Gottlieb, noting the CDC’s “sweeping authority to hold and isolate Americans in a public health emergency.”
The doctor points to CDC provisions which we first highlighted last month which allow for the forcible quarantine of “well persons” as well as those who “do not show symptoms” of the virus.
“The set of regulations also included a new “provisional quarantine” rule that would have allowed CDC to detain people involuntarily for up to three days, with no mechanism for appeal,” writes Gottlieb, adding, “You don’t have to be sick to be detained.”
The doctor cautions that if Ebola hits during flu season, the delay in testing blood samples could lead to some Americans being detained against their will for weeks.
Gottlieb also points an executive order passed by Obama on July 31st which allows for the detention of Americans who merely display signs of any “respiratory illness.”
Raising concerns that the feds may be “assuming too much jurisdiction to detain people involuntarily,” Gottlieb is calling for a debate about “troubling” measures which could lead to “spooky scenarios where people could be detained for long periods, merely on a suspicion they might have been exposed to some pathogen. And forced to submit to certain medical interventions to gain their freedom.”
While Gottlieb sees “mass detentions” as being unlikely in the event of an Ebola outbreak, the regulations in place could lead to such a scenario if an equally deadly but more contagious pathogen like SARS hits the U.S.
Given his prominent position, the doctor’s concern about CDC quarantine measures which could lead to the forcible detention of healthy Americans is interesting given that some in the mainstream media dismissed our coverage of this very issue as a ‘conspiracy theory’ less than two weeks ago.
MOST POPULAR AT INFOWARS
- Cop: ‘If Obama Doesn’t Follow the Constitution, We Don’t Have To’
- Some Call For National Guard as Riots Rock Ferguson, Missouri
- Cops Kill Bargain Shopper Who Picked Up BB Gun Inside Walmart
August 12th, 2014
Until then, many experts felt it would be unethical to offer African Ebola patients drugs that had never been given to people, let alone tested for safety. (Related: "Promising Ebola Drugs Stuck in Lab Limbo as Outbreak Rages in Africa.")
The mere idea evoked memories of pharma giant Pfizer's disastrous clinical trial of a new antibiotic, trovafloxacin (Trovan), during a 1996 meningitis outbreak in northern Nigeria, or the plot of John le Carré's novel, The Constant Gardener, in which Kenyans are used as guinea pigs to test what turns out to be an unsafe tuberculosis drug.
But when news broke that two infected Americans had been given a therapy that had previously been tested only in primates and, further, that they were holding their own, the flip side of the ethical coin was revealed.
Suddenly the question was no longer "How could one use untested drugs in Africa?'' but "Why Americans and not Africans?" Why was the therapy flown to Liberia for Brantly and Writebol not also offered to Sheik Umar Khan, who had died a few days earlier in Sierra Leone, where he was his country's only virologist and leading Ebola expert?
Questions like these will shape discussions during a World Health Organization (WHO) meeting on the ethics of using experimental Ebola drugs in the current outbreak. The meeting, held today by teleconference, involves ethicists, the affected countries, and representatives of civil society.
Treatments Scarce, Untested
Nothing is easy about the issues, starting with the fact that supplies of the various experimental therapies and vaccines are so limited that recommending their use would be largely symbolic for the next few months at least.
"I think that one of the main showstoppers in all of this—again, I can't speak for every product—is the paucity of availability of any product at all," says Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
There is only enough ZMapp—the product the Americans took—to treat a handful of people, Fauci says. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, which recently conducted an assessment of the various experimental products in the pipeline, says it could take three to four months to produce another small batch of the therapy.
The remaining doses of ZMapp have been distributed, LeafBio, the company commercializing the product, said in a brief statement posted to its website Monday afternoon. It indicated remaining doses had been provided to Spain for treatment of an infected missionary and to an unnamed West African country for two medical doctors. By Monday evening, the statement was removed from the website.
Sarepta Therapeutics, which shelved an Ebola drug it was developing when it lost U.S. government support for the work, has indicated it would be willing to allow use of its remaining supply—enough to treat a few dozen people, CEO Chris Garabedian told the financial news publicationBarron's.
Tekmira Pharmaceuticals, the only company to have done some preliminary safety testing of an Ebola therapy in people, says it would allow its drug to be used by infected individuals. In early July the U.S. Food and Drug Administration placed the drug on a clinical hold because of safety concerns about giving it in high doses, but last week revised its status to allow for compassionate use. Tekmira will not say how much of the product it has or how long it takes to make.
Even therapies and vaccines that have been tried on infected primates have been used only in small numbers of animals. Is it ethical to offer these? Is it safe?
After all, not all drugs that are safe in primates turn out to be safe in people. In 2006, for instance, six healthy volunteers were given an experimental drug called TGN1412, a synthetic antibody under development for leukemia and arthritis. All six nearly died.
"Is there a threshold of what they should have demonstrated in animal models? In nonhuman primates? Is there a threshold also on toxicity?" asks Marie-Paule Kieny, the WHO's assistant director general for health systems and innovation.
On the other side of the deliberation scale is the crushing need for therapies, not just to treat the ill but also to gain their trust. As is often seen in Ebola outbreaks, hostility and suspicion have plagued efforts to halt the spread of the disease.
People who fear they may be sick resist efforts by medical teams to isolate them. And communities often hide the sick, leading to more infections. With no cure and a high death rate, rumors fly that the medical teams are spreading the illness or killing people for their organs.
Aid workers believe that if effective therapies were available, the resistance problem would eventually evaporate. (Related: "Ebola's Deadly Spread in Africa Driven by Public Health Failures, Cultural Beliefs.")
Who Gets Scarce Drugs?
But what would the impact be if affected communities learn that a very small number of people are being offered treatments, but most are not? Would that make medical teams from groups such as Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) more welcome in these villages? Would it endanger the aid workers?
If the few doses available are going to be used, one ethicist suggests they should be given to health care workers, who have made up an alarming proportion of the Ebola cases in this outbreak. (Related: "Q&A: American Virus Expert in Africa's Ebola Zone: 'This is Like War.'")
"If we have a limited amount of medication to use, it makes sense to use it first on those who are in there trying to treat everyone who has this disease. Because if we allow the people who are treating it to be wiped out, there's no one left to treat it," says Kevin Donovan, director of the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University Medical Center. Donovan is not a member of the WHO panel.
He and others suggest that if the experimental treatments are deployed, they should be used in a way that helps scientists determine what actually works against Ebola and why, so that the world is better armed for the next outbreak.
Says Donovan: "This is why I think the rush to say, 'We just have to throw whatever's available at people,' and not do it in a careful way to find out if it really is effective and if it really will be safe, is misplaced goodwill. And it's supported by this great anxiety that the infection epidemic causes."
Given the conditions on the ground, using Ebola drugs in a clinical trial-type approach would be challenging—but not impossible, says Frederick Hayden, an expert on antiviral drugs at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, and a consultant to the WHO.
Still, Hayden is talking about several months down the road. "Because obviously there are a lot of things that have to get put into place. It's not just having the [drug]. You have to have the protocol, the ethics review, the regulatory piece in place, the import licence. These things all have to fall into place."