FOR VARIOUS IMPORTANT NEWS STORIES.
The Truth we seek
2009-0925
A Wake Up Call by David Mason.  Many of us would agree but if just half of this is true, Worry:  HERE

2009-0713
Irena Sendler - Amazing story : HERE

2009-0216
Two great examples of self destruct at their best!
As ABOVE so BELOW
By Colin Andrews

An uncanny coincidence took place this month.

Four of the super powers showed us just how powerful they are and without trying. The United
States, France, Great Britain and Russia.

What are the odds that this happened for the first time in history above our heads in space and also
below our vast seas and in the same week, perhaps the same day. Amazingly French and British
Nuclear submarines collided deep below the vast Atlantic Ocean. Two small dots in our oceans met
with potentially dreadful consequences. Oh..., and they both had Nuclear reactors as well as both
carried a number of weapons of mass destruction. You know, those things we go to war to stop
irresponsible nations from having.

Also amazingly American and Russian satellites collided high up in space. Two small dots in space met
also with the already estimated consequences for space travel for 10,000 years.

And how did all this happen? Can we sleep easier knowing it will not happen again? No one is saying
and as is I’m afraid the case, our juvenile media are either too afraid to ask or just doing what we have
become accustom to in recent years and that is making the easy entertainment bucks in Hollywood.

Satellite – BBC: http://
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7885051.stm

Subs – Yahoo News: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090216/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_sub_collision

2009-0214
Satellites collide causing unsafe space travel around, from and to Earth for 10,000 years.
Fri Feb 13, 2:41 PM EST
The crash of two satellites has generated an estimated tens of thousands of pieces of space junk that
could circle Earth and threaten other satellites for the next 10,000 years, space experts said Friday.

One expert called the collision "a catastrophic event" that he hoped would force President Barack
Obama's administration to address the long-ignored issue of debris in space.

Russian Mission Control chief Vladimir Solovyov said Tuesday's smashup of a derelict Russian military
satellite and a working U.S. Iridium commercial satellite occurred in the busiest part of near-Earth
space — some 500 miles (800 kilometers) above Earth.

"800 kilometers is a very popular orbit which is used by Earth-tracking and communications satellites,"
Solovyov told reporters Friday. "The clouds of debris pose a serious danger to them."

Solovyov said debris from the collision could stay in orbit for up to 10,000 years and even tiny
fragments threaten spacecraft because both travel at such a high orbiting speed.

James Oberg, an experienced aerospace engineer who worked on NASA's space shuttle program and is
now a space consultant, described the crash over northern Siberia as "catastrophic event." NASA said
it was the first-ever high-speed impact between two intact spacecraft — with the Iridium craft
weighing 1,235 pounds (560 kilograms) and the Russian craft nearly a ton.

"At physical contact at orbital speeds, a hypersonic shock wave bursts outwards through the
structures," Oberg said in e-mailed comments. "It literally shreds the material into confetti and
detonates any fuels."

Most fragments are concentrated near the collision course, but Maj.-Gen. Alexander Yakushin, chief of
staff of the Russian military's Space Forces, said some debris was thrown into other orbits, ranging
from 300 to 800 miles (500-1,300 kilometers) above Earth.

David Wright at the Union of Concerned Scientists' Global Security said the collision had possibly
generated tens of thousands of particles larger than 1 centimeter (half an inch), any of which could
significantly damage or even destroy a satellite.

Wright, in a posting on the group's Web site, said the two large debris clouds from Tuesday's crash
will spread over time, forming a shell around Earth. He likened the debris to "a shotgun blast that
threatens other satellites in the region."

Meanwhile, there's no global air traffic control system that tracks the position of all satellites.

The U.S. military tracks some 17,000 pieces of space debris larger than 2 to 4 inches (5 to 10
centimeters), along with some 900 active satellites. But its main job is protecting the international space
station and other manned spacecraft, and it lacks the resources to warn all satellite operators of every
possible close call.

"With the amount of spacecraft and debris in orbit, the probability of collisions is going up more
rapidly," said John Higginbotham, chief executive of Integral Systems Inc., a Lanham, Maryland-based
company that runs ground support systems for satellites.

Oberg said the limited accuracy of tracking data and computer calculations makes it impossible to
predict collisions, only their probability. He said most satellites also have little fuel to escape what most
likely would be a false alarm.

"The collision offers a literally heaven-sent opportunity for the Obama administration to take forceful,
visible and long-overdue measures to address a long-ignored issue of 'space debris,'" Oberg said.

In January 2007, China destroyed one of its own defunct satellites with a ballistic missile at an altitude
close to that of Tuesday's collision, creating thousands of pieces of debris which threatened other
spacecraft.

Both NASA and Russia's Roscosmos agencies said there was little risk to the international space
station, which orbits 230 miles (370 kilometers) above Earth, far below the collision point. An
unmanned Russian cargo ship docked smoothly Friday at the station, delivering water, food, fuel,
oxygen and other supplies as well as a new Russian space suit for space walks.

American astronauts Michael Fincke and Sandra Magnus are aboard the station along with Russian Yuri
Lonchakov. The crew size will be doubled to six members later this year.

2009-0206
“What Monsanto is trying to do is control the food chain”
Elsa Chanduví Jaña

Interview with journalist Marie-Monique Robin.

French journalist and filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, author of the book and documentary The World
According to Monsanto, an exhausting investigation into genetically-modified organisms and Monsanto,
the world´s largest transgenic seed producer, spoke with Latinamerica Press managing editor Elsa
Chanduví Jaña about the effects of these seeds and Monsanto´s ambitions to “control the world´s food
chain.” Robin participated in the seminar “Seeds of Diversity vs. Transgenics” in Lima Jan. 28-29,
which Comunicaciones Aliadas co-organized.

How would you describe Monsanto´s world vision?

What Monsanto wants to do is control the food chain with patented transgenic seeds. It’s a totalitarian
project because to control food is to control the world, it’s to control people. [Monsanto] is a
multinational that has been using dirty practices for almost a century. Many of its products are
prohibited today because they’re very toxic, such as PCBs [polychlorinated biphenyls], for example,
which used to be used in all countries as electric transformers. Monsanto hid the information it had. It
lied saying that those PCBs were not dangerous, until it was finally discovered and after a lawsuit in the
United States seven years ago it was ordered to pay US$700 million.

There are other examples, such as Agent Orange, that cocktail of herbicides used during the Vietnam
War. In this case, Monsanto paid scientists to deny the relationship between exposure to Agent Orange,
which contains dioxin, and cancer.

What is Monsanto´s strategy to control the food chain?

Its strategy has many forms. One of the most important is called “revolving doors” in the United
States. In the case of transgenics, the fundamental text, which is the basis for worldwide regulations
on transgenics, was published in 1992 by the US Food and Drug Administration [FDA], and written by
a former Monsanto lawyer who got on the FDA to write the text and later ended up as Monsanto´s vice
president. Those are revolving doors. You come from an industry, you get an important position in a
government agency, or even an international organization, you stay for a few years and then you go
back to the industry. Incredible. They can put their people in key decision-making positions. In the
FDA, or the EPA [the US Environmental Protection Agency], the top person was a lawyer for
Monsanto.

The other strategy is paying. There are two proven corruption cases. One case in Indonesia: two or
three years ago in the United States, Monsanto was found guilty of corruption for paying some 100
Indonesian government officials to introduce Bt cotton seeds. There was a corruption attempt that was
also uncovered by a parliamentary commission in Canada in which Monsanto offered US$2 million to
be able to put a growth hormone on the market.

If not, they pressure universities. In the United States, there is already an advanced privatization of the
universities, so they pressure to fire scientists who have done studies or want to that Monsanto thinks
are against its interests. The same thing happens with journalists.

How did Monsanto enter the genetically-modified organisms business?

Monsanto has been the top seed company since 2005. But 10 years ago, it had no seeds; it had just
invented transgenics. The first was Roundup Ready soy. Well, it had this invention without knowing
what to do with it. First, it thought: “Let´s sell the license to seed companies.” But then it later thought,
“No, it’s better to buy those seed companies.” So it sold its pharmaceutical division that was very
important and generated a lot of money, to finance this purchasing program. Little by little, in 10 years,
it was able to purchase more than 50 seed companies around the world, which has made Monsanto the
top seed company in the world, which is incredible because it was a big chemical and pharmaceutical
company, but nothing to do with seeds.

It´s a very well thought out strategy because every time it buys a seed company, it puts in its patented
transgenic seeds, and that means that farmers don´t have any other option. In India, it has purchased
cotton seed companies, and farmers don´t have other options because there are only patented
transgenic seeds. In the United States, there are a group of farmers that have collectively filed a lawsuit
against Monsanto alleging that it violated anti-trust laws for buying so many seed companies.
Monopolies in the United States are prohibited. Some people think that Monsanto could go through the
same thing as Microsoft did years ago, which had a monopoly and had to sell off some of its
companies because it had too much.

What are the risks that transgenics pose?
On an environmental level, the risk that has been proved is that it causes a great loss of biodiversity
because of contamination. This has been proved in Canada, where transgenic rapeseed had
contaminated everything and caused non-transgenic rapeseed to disappear, both conventional and
organic.

For human health, unfortunately there are very few studies that have been done on this because
Monsanto was able to impose, thanks to the “revolving doors,” the so-called principle of substantial
equivalence, which is the basis of all regulation on genetically-modified organisms in the world. The
principle says that a transgenic is equivalent to one conventional plant and that´s why studies are not
necessary. If it is equivalent, why bother?

That principle has no scientific basis and it is a decision of the White House to support the very rapid
development of transgenics. That principle makes it so there are very few studies that truly verify what
the consequences of transgenics on human health could be. The only well-done studies that have been
done are by independent scientists. I interviewed two of them, who, when they discovered that there
were problems with rats that had eaten transgenics, they were thrown out of their jobs. It´s always the
same story.

But if there is no problem I don´t understand why a study is not conducted by an independent team,
recognized on a global level, to do a two-year study, and that the figures can be published so that the
whole world verify. They do everything possible to impede those studies, with very dirty methods,
with defamation campaigns, tremendous pressure.

Are you against the production of all transgenic crops, even in countries with little biodiversity? Why?

Yes, of course. With those transgenics, the only thing there is in the fields are plants with pesticides,
manipulated plants, either to resist fumigations with a very toxic pesticides such as Roundup or
manipulated to make corn that contains an insecticide. What good is that? I don´t want to give my
daughters transgenic food. Why would I give them corn containing an insecticide or rapeseed oil
fumigated with toxic herbicide? Now, let them continue making studies in closed, controlled
laboratories, but not in open fields. I have nothing against scientific investigation, but it´s something else
in our fields.

What can be done to stop the advance of these transgenics?

There are many things to do, depending on the country. I know that here [in Peru] a law is being
prepared to allow transgenics to enter the country, so the consumers in cities could at least ask for
labeling on the products. That is very important for them to choose [what to buy]. Those [transgenic]
products should be boycotted as much as possible and we should eat as much organic food as we can.
It’s the only way. —Latinamerica Press.


2008-0908: For several years now, we have been hearing about a young Dutch medium with
extraordinary abilities.
Robbert van den Broeke, reminds me of a meeting I had with Uri Geller in 1989.  

2008-0724: The best of the crop.  Some of the most impressive crop circle designs this year.

2008-0723:
Dead penguins wash ashore on Brazil's beaches. Most of the more than 400 mammals found in past
two months were babes

2008-0723:
You Know The Banking System Is Unsound When....

2008-0722:
A rock which its claimed was discovered near Roswell, New Mexico, continues to be investigated
(Read my blogg ).  I am in touch with Chuck Zukoski and Debbie Ziegelmeyers who are continuing
with their research into it. Regrettably progress is being impeded by other high profile people, who
seem to want the spotlight for self exposure, rather than genuinely assist the actual leg work.  
Regrettably this is far to common in this work. Chuck and Debbie started the research in July 2007.  
Ive supplied ground and aerial data to them which I secured in England during 1996, when I researched
the crop circle design which appears on the stone. See photos below. The latest
HERE.

2008-0721:
Swallowtail Farm Log, here in Connecticut is monitoring wildlife movements and observations daily,
as a tool to enable researchers who are looking at the effects of climate change around the world.
Check this function out on the 'Farm Link'.  If you would like to act as a monitor from other parts of
the USA or other country, please drop me a line ( Contact).  You will see it will not take but minutes
of your time, to note differences in the wildlife, vegetation and general observations of that kind.  
Even an email once a month would be very helpful to over-viewing the global situation.
The stone.
The 1996 Crop Circle. Copyright: Colin Andrews 1996.