New phenomenon discovered in the night sky


Posted by on April 21, 2017New phenomenon discovered in the night sky

A new phenomenon seen as a giant purple streak of light in the night sky has been recently discovered and, for lack of a better word, named Steve. Steve was discovered thanks to scientists, citizen scientists, ground-based imagers and ESA’s magnetic field Swarm mission.

Originally thought to be a ‘proton arc,’ this strange feature has captured the attention of scientists and while there is still a lot to learn about it, the electric field instrument aboard Swarm mission has measured it.

Flying through the phenomenon now known as Steve, the temperature 300 km (186 miles) above Earth’s surface jumped by 3 000 °C (5 432 °F) and the data revealed a 25 km (15 miles) wide ribbon of gas flowing westward at about 6 km/s compared to a speed of about 10 m/s at either side of the ribbon.

Speaking at the recent Swarm science meeting in Canada, Eric Donovan from the University of Calgary explained how this new finding couldn’t have happened 20 years ago when he started to study the aurora.

While the shimmering, eerie, light display of auroras might be beautiful and captivating, they are also a visual reminder that Earth is connected electrically to the Sun. A better understanding of the aurora helps to understand more about the relationship between Earth’s magnetic field and the charged atomic particles streaming from the Sun as the solar wind.

“In 1997 we had just one all-sky imager in North America to observe the aurora borealis from the ground,” Donovan said.

“Back then we would be lucky if we got one photograph a night of the aurora taken from the ground that coincides with an observation from a satellite. Now we have many more all-sky imagers and satellite missions like Swarm so we get more than 100 a night.”

And now, social media and citizen scientists also have an increasingly important role.

At a recent talk, Prof. Donovan met with members of Alberta Aurora Chasers, a Facebook group which attracts members of the general public who are interested in the night sky and includes some talented photographers.

Looking at their photographs, Donovan came across something he hadn’t seen before. The group called this strange purple streak of light in the night sky captured in their photographs a ‘proton arc’ but for a number of reasons, including the fact that proton aurora are never visible, he knew this had to be something else. However, nobody knew what it actually was so they decided to put a name to this mystery feature: they called it Steve.

New featured discovered in the night sky - Steve. Copyright: Dave Markel Photography

New featured discovered in the night sky – Steve. Copyright: Dave Markel Photography

While the Aurora Chasers combed through their photos and kept an eye out for the next appearances of Steve, Prof. Donovan and colleagues turned to data from the Swarm mission and his network of all-sky cameras.

“It turns out that Steve is actually remarkably common, but we hadn’t noticed it before. It’s thanks to ground-based observations, satellites, today’s explosion of access to data and an army of citizen scientists joining forces to document it,” Donovan said. “Swarm allows us to measure it and I’m sure will continue to help resolve some unanswered questions.”

“The ground network and the electric and magnetic field measurements made by Swarm are great tools that can be used to better understand Steve. This is a nice example of society for science,” ESA’s Swarm mission scientist, Roger Haagmans, added. “It is amazing how a beautiful natural phenomenon, seen by observant citizens, can trigger scientists’ curiosity.”

Featured image: New feature discovered in the night sky – Steve (previously known as photon arc). Copyright: Dave Markel Photography (via ESA)

https://watchers.news/2017/04/21/new-phenomenon-discovered-in-the-night-sky/

 

 

*Rare Sky Phenomenon* spotted high above Earth | Measured by SWARM @ 5400 degrees F!

Advertisements

If only Hillary could rope in Bernie Sanders: The primary nightmare she suddenly can’t avoid. Clinton’s ‘Elizabeth Warren’ fears have come to life in the form of a democratic socialist from Vermont


H.A. Goodman

Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton (Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst/Carlo Allegri/Photo montage by Salon)

Although the Clinton campaign is expected to raise $2.5 billion, some things can’t be purchased with money. Enthusiasm is a precious form of currency in American politics, and Bernie Sanders is filling arenas with thousands of people. Vermont’s senator recently drew crowds of 10,000 in Wisconsin, 2,500 people in Iowa, a “packed to capacity” venue in New Hampshire, and a “huge crowd” of 7,500 in Maine. In contrast, Michael Calderone of the Huffington Post explained how the Clinton campaign is dealing with journalists in an article titled “Clinton Campaign Frustrates Journalists Yet Again By Roping Off Media at Parade.”

The 2016 race for Democratic nominee is starting out as the political version of a Rocky movie. While the Sanders campaign is gaining an “unexpectedly strong showing” in Iowa, the juggernaut Clinton team is trying to “rope you like a cow” (as described by the Daily Beast’s executive editor) and doesn’t seem in touch with the masses. As a result, Democratic strategist Paul Begala stated that “Roping off the press is horrible” and called the tactic a “terrible optic.”

Therefore, why is Bernie Sanders down by just 8 points in New Hampshire, showing “Bernie-mentum” in Iowa, and able to raise $15 million in two months, when few people thought he had a chance of winning even three months ago? Also, why is Clinton “worried” about Bernie Sanders, even though it’s doubtful that any of her top strategists predicted such a groundswell of support for Sanders?

The answers rest in the fact that Bernie Sanders is comfortable with his political message while Hillary Clinton must defend against not only numerous scandals, but images like this one. Thousands of people aren’t driving long distances to see Sanders speak because he’s a rock star, but because they want to hear a refreshing voice in American politics. According to Maine’s Portland Press Herald, Sanders continues to electrify crowds because his political message resonates with the average American:

And although exact figures weren’t available Monday night, staff at Portland’s Cross Insurance Arena estimated that the crowd could have exceeded 8,000 in the roughly 9,000-capacity arena for an event originally planned as more of a town hall-style forum than a rally…

The crowd clearly skewed young, but included Mainers of all ages, drawn by a politician whose populist message appears to resonate with voters disenfranchised by the “mainstream” Democratic Party. Sanders hit many of the bedrock principles of progressive Democrats as he vowed to hold Wall Street more accountable, to fight for guaranteed paid maternity leave and vacation time, to push for universal health care and to invest more money in schools, but less in prisons.

He vowed to only nominate Supreme Court justices who will vote to overturn the Citizens United campaign finance decision, while praising the recent court decision effectively legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide. The former Burlington mayor and veteran member of Congress blasted free-trade agreements also unpopular with many in Maine and expressed support for a $15-an-hour minimum wage, calling the current federal minimum of $7.25 an hour “a starvation wage.”

While Sanders can blast free-trade agreements like the TPP, Hillary won’t be able to do so since the former secretary of state pushed for this agreement 45 separate times. While Sanders vows to “hold Wall Street more accountable,” Politico once referred to Clinton as “Wall Street Republicans’ dark secret.”

Essentially, the political messages of both candidates are tied to their past. Bernie Sanders championed causes like opposing the Iraq War before these ideas were popular; his image as a politician isn’t tied to “evolving” on gay marriage, for example. As a result, overflowing crowds and as much press coverage as possible is welcomed by the Sanders campaign and an integral part of his recent surge in the polls.

The Clinton campaign, on the other hand, must rewrite the past to a certain extent and extensive coverage of her activities is wrought with unintended consequences. It’s tough to campaign as a refreshing voice in politics, a candidate different from Obama or Bush, when decades in political life has been documented by the same people you end up “roping off.” This political conundrum is highlighted within a recent PBS article titled “Clinton Is ‘Worried’ About Bernie Sanders — But Should She Be?”:

“We are worried about him, sure,” Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri said Monday on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. “He will be a serious force for the campaign, and I don’t think that will diminish.”

…Clinton is feeling some pressure, or, as Sanders’ supporters like to say — feeling the Bern.

Clinton sidestepped questions about Sanders specifically in her first national television interview Tuesday night with CNN — but emphasized she has learned from the mistakes of 2008, when she appeared overconfident in the face of Obama’s rising threat and didn’t focus as much on on-the-ground organizing.

Clinton sidestepped questions in a recent CNN interview for the same reason she’ll sidestep questions in future interviews; the answers might represent a liability to winning and to her campaign. Sanders, on the other hand, will relish any interview because his answers relate to the reasons thousands fill arenas to hear him speak.

However, are these energized crowds to see Bernie Sanders simply a blip on the radar of a long, arduous election season?

Is it time to take things into perspective and realize that a behemoth of a campaign can’t possibly be challenged by grass-roots organizations like People for Bernie?

Well, the notion that Bernie Sanders in any way resembles a 2003 Howard Dean (some have downplayed the recent surge as being short-lived) ignores this yell and the fact that Dean never packed arenas, or achieved the same momentum this early in the election cycle. Killer Mike just endorsed Bernie Sanders, proclaiming the following:

It’s official I support @SenSanders! His call 4 the restoration of the voters rights act sealed the deal for me.

In addition, Cornel West on Facebook stated in 2011 that “Senator Bernie Sanders is one of the few elected officials who is fundamentally devoted to dealing with the plight of poor & working people.” As for the Latino vote, writer Cesar Vargas eloquently states that, “I am here to tell the Latino community that we need Bernie Sanders, and vice versa.” Vargas’ Huffington Post article expresses poignant reasons why Latinos and all Americans should vote for Bernie Sanders.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton_b_7761072.html

 

Ed. Note: This is going to be an interesting show to watch from the sidelines, anyone for some non-gmo popcorn, the shows about to begin?

 

 

Your Mortgage Documents Are Fake


Your Mortgage Documents Are Fake
August 21, 2013
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/12/your_mortgage_documents_are_fake/

All I can say is ‘this shouldn’t surprise anyone…’ ~BK

If you know about foreclosure fraud, the mass fabrication of mortgage documents in state courts by banks attempting to foreclose on homeowners, you may have one nagging question: Why did banks have to resort to this illegal scheme? Was it just cheaper to mock up the documents than to provide the real ones? Did banks figure they simply had enough power over regulators, politicians and the courts to get away with it? (They were probably right about that one.)

A newly unsealed lawsuit, which banks settled in 2012 for $95 million, actually offers a different reason, providing a key answer to one of the persistent riddles of the financial crisis and its aftermath. The lawsuit states that banks resorted to fake documents because they could not legally establish true ownership of the loans when trying to foreclose.

This reality, which banks did not contest but instead settled out of court, means that tens of millions of mortgages in America still lack a legitimate chain of ownership, with implications far into the future. And if Congress, supported by the Obama administration, goes back to the same housing finance system, with the same corrupt private entities who broke the nation’s private property system back in business packaging mortgages, then shame on all of us.

The 2011 lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in both North and South Carolina, by a white-collar fraud specialist named Lynn Szymoniak, on behalf of the federal government, 17 states and three cities. Twenty-eight banks, mortgage servicers and document processing companies are named in the lawsuit, including mega-banks like JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi and Bank of America.

Szymoniak, who fell into foreclosure herself in 2009, researched her own mortgage documents and found massive fraud (for example, one document claimed that Deutsche Bank, listed as the owner of her mortgage, acquired ownership in October 2008, four months after they first filed for foreclosure). She eventually examined tens of thousands of documents, enough to piece together the entire scheme.

A mortgage has two parts: the promissory note (the IOU from the borrower to the lender) and the mortgage, which creates the lien on the home in case of default. During the housing bubble, banks bought loans from originators, and then (in a process known as securitization) enacted a series of transactions that would eventually pool thousands of mortgages into bonds, sold all over the world to public pension funds, state and municipal governments and other investors. A trustee would pool the loans and sell the securities to investors, and the investors would get an annual percentage yield on their money.

In order for the securitization to work, banks purchasing the mortgages had to physically convey the promissory note and the mortgage into the trust. The note had to be endorsed (the way an individual would endorse a check), and handed over to a document custodian for the trust, with a “mortgage assignment” confirming the transfer of ownership. And this had to be done before a 90-day cutoff date, with no grace period beyond that.

Georgetown Law professor Adam Levitin spelled this out in testimony before Congress in 2010: “If mortgages were not properly transferred in the securitization process, then mortgage-backed securities would in fact not be backed by any mortgages whatsoever.”

The lawsuit alleges that these notes, as well as the mortgage assignments, were “never delivered to the mortgage-backed securities trusts,” and that the trustees lied to the SEC and investors about this. As a result, the trusts could not establish ownership of the loan when they went to foreclose, forcing the production of a stream of false documents, signed by “robo-signers,” employees using a bevy of corporate titles for companies that never employed them, to sign documents about which they had little or no knowledge.

Many documents were forged (the suit provides evidence of the signature of one robo-signer, Linda Green, written eight different ways), some were signed by “officers” of companies that went bankrupt years earlier, and dozens of assignments listed as the owner of the loan “Bogus Assignee for Intervening Assignments,” clearly a template that was never changed. One defendant in the case, Lender Processing Services, created masses of false documents on behalf of the banks, often using fake corporate officer titles and forged signatures. This was all done to establish standing to foreclose in courts, which the banks otherwise could not.

Szymoniak stated in her lawsuit that, “Defendants used fraudulent mortgage assignments to conceal that over 1400 MBS trusts, each with mortgages valued at over $1 billion, are missing critical documents,” meaning that at least $1.4 trillion in mortgage-backed securities are, in fact, non-mortgage-backed securities. Because of the strict laws governing of these kinds of securitizations, there’s no way to make the assignments after the fact. Activists have a name for this: “securitization FAIL.”

One smoking gun piece of evidence in the lawsuit concerns a mortgage assignment dated Feb. 9, 2009, after the foreclosure of the mortgage in question was completed. According to the suit, “A typewritten note on the right hand side of the document states: ‘This Assignment of Mortgage was inadvertently not recorded prior to the Final Judgment of Foreclosure… but is now being recorded to clear title.’”

This admission confirms that the mortgage assignment was not made before the closing date of the trust, invalidating ownership. The suit further argued that “the act of fabricating the assignments is evidence that the MBS Trust did not own the notes and/or the mortgage liens for some assets claimed to be in the pool.”

The federal government, states and cities joined the lawsuit under 25 counts of the federal False Claims Act and state-based versions of the law. All of them bought mortgage-backed securities from banks that never conveyed the mortgages or notes to the trusts. The plaintiffs argued that, considering that trustees and servicers had to spend lots of money forging and fabricating documents to establish ownership, they were materially harmed by the subsequent impaired value of the securities. Also, these investors (which includes the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve) paid for the transfer of mortgages to the trusts, yet they were never actually transferred.

Finally, the lawsuit argues that the federal government was harmed by “payments made on mortgage guarantees to Defendants lacking valid notes and assignments of mortgages who were not entitled to demand or receive said payments.”

Despite Szymoniak seeking a trial by jury, the government intervened in the case, and settled part of it at the beginning of 2012, extracting $95 million from the five biggest banks in the suit (Wells Fargo, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citi and GMAC/Ally Bank). Szymoniak herself was awarded $18 million. But the underlying evidence was never revealed until the case was unsealed last Thursday.

Now that it’s unsealed, Szymoniak, as the named plaintiff, can go forward and prove the case. Along with her legal team (which includes the law firm of Grant & Eisenhoffer, which has recovered more money under the False Claims Act than any firm in the country), Szymoniak can pursue discovery and go to trial against the rest of the named defendants, including HSBC, the Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank and US Bank.

The expenses of the case, previously borne by the government, now are borne by Szymoniak and her team, but the percentages of recovery funds are also higher. “I’m really glad I was part of collecting this money for the government, and I’m looking forward to going through discovery and collecting the rest of it,” Szymoniak told Salon.

It’s good that the case remains active, because the $95 million settlement was a pittance compared to the enormity of the crime. By the end of 2009, private mortgage-backed securities trusts held one-third of all residential mortgages in the U.S. That means that tens of millions of home mortgages worth trillions of dollars have no legitimate underlying owner that can establish the right to foreclose. This hasn’t stopped banks from foreclosing anyway with false documents, and they are often successful, a testament to the breakdown of law in the judicial system. But to this day, the resulting chaos in disentangling ownership harms homeowners trying to sell these properties, as well as those trying to purchase them. And it renders some properties impossible to sell.

To this day, banks foreclose on borrowers using fraudulent mortgage assignments, a legacy of failing to prosecute this conduct and instead letting banks pay a fine to settle it. This disappoints Szymoniak, who told Salon the owner of these loans is now essentially “whoever lies the most convincingly and whoever gets the benefit of doubt from the judge.” Szymoniak used her share of the settlement to start the Housing Justice Foundation, a non-profit that attempts to raise awareness of the continuing corruption of the nation’s courts and land title system.

Most of official Washington, including President Obama, wants to wind down mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and return to a system where private lenders create securitization trusts, packaging pools of loans and selling them to investors. Government would provide a limited guarantee to investors against catastrophic losses, but the private banks would make the securities, to generate more capital for home loans and expand homeownership.

That’s despite the evidence we now have that, the last time banks tried this, they ignored the law, failed to convey the mortgages and notes to the trusts, and ripped off investors trying to cover their tracks, to say nothing of how they violated the due process rights of homeowners and stole their homes with fake documents.

The very same banks that created this criminal enterprise and legal quagmire would be in control again. Why should we view this in any way as a sound public policy, instead of a ticking time bomb that could once again throw the private property system, a bulwark of capitalism and indeed civilization itself, into utter disarray? As Lynn Szymoniak puts it, “The President’s calling for private equity to return. Why would we return to this?”

Update: This story previously suggested that banks settled this lawsuit with the federal government for $1 billion. That number is actually the total for a number of whistle-blower lawsuits that were folded into a larger National Mortgage Settlement. This specific lawsuit settled for $95 million. The post above has been changed to reflect this fact.

Pesticides are making our children sick


Posted on November 23, 2012

From childhood cancers to learning disabilities and asthma, a wide range of childhood diseases and disorders linked to exposure to pesticides are on the rise. A new study from the Pesticide Action Network says that the more than 1 billion pounds of pesticides used in the United States every year may be having detrimental effects on children’s health. While the industry and regulatory bodies claim these pesticides are safe and pose no danger to human health, the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) says they’re wrong. Their research indicates these chemicals are contributing to things like autism, birth defects, early...

From childhood cancers to learning disabilities and asthma, a wide range of childhood diseases and disorders linked to exposure to pesticides are on the rise.

A new study from the Pesticide Action Network says that the more than 1 billion pounds of pesticides used in the United States every year may be having detrimental effects on children’s health. While the industry and regulatory bodies claim these pesticides are safe and pose no danger to human health, the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) says they’re wrong. Their research indicates these chemicals are contributing to things like autism, birth defects, early puberty, obesity, cancer, diabetes, and asthma. That is ” safe”, right? Dozens of studies linked pesticides with serious health concerns. And effects of pesticides on children are even more pronounced than they are in adults.

According to Kristin Schafer, coauthor of the report, one of the things that is also really clear from science is that children are just much more vulnerable to pesticide exposure. In terms of how their bodies work and defense mechanisms work, how much (pesticides) they’re taking in pound for pound, they’re eating more, drinking more, breathing more than an adult, and are much more susceptible to harms that pesticides can pose.

Opposite to that fact, the pesticide industry says these findings are simply untrue, claiming that their chemicals are harmless for everyone, that they are tested for safety and wouldn’t be used if they weren’t safe. Of course, it is common-known that those companies fund studies that “prove” their safety.

New report reveals that in addition to causing significant harm to children, pesticides have also been tied to infertility, birth defects, obesity, and cancer among adults as well. Worldwide, cancer diagnosis has been linked in over 260 studies to agrochemicals. Scientists have linked pesticides with several types of cancers, including that of the breast, prostate, brain, bone, thyroid, colon, liver, lung, and more.

Brain cancers are the second most common cancer in children. A study published in Environmental Health Perspectives has linked parental use of pesticides with an increased risk of brain cancer in children. Study included 526 one-to-one–matched case–control pairs. Brain cancer cases were diagnosed at < 10 years of age, and were identified from statewide cancer registries of four U.S. Atlantic Coast states. Study found that parental exposures may act before the child’s conception, during gestation, or after birth to increase the risk of cancer. And when the parents are exposed to the pesticides may also play a role in the different cellular changes that lead to cancer.

We recently reported about new shocking research which revealed that toxins implanted into GM food crops to kill pests are reaching the bloodstreams of women and unborn babies at nearly 100%. Most recently, scientists in Canada conducted a study on pregnant and non-pregnant women, looking for the chemicals found in pesticides related to genetically modified foods. This may create perinatal complications as abortion, prematurity, intra-uterine growth restriction and preeclampsia as well as reproductive disorders like infertility, endometriosis and gynecological cancer.

Statistics show steady increases in many childhood diseases and disorders over the past 30 years. Those highlighted here are just some of the health harms on the rise. (Credit: PANNA)

A generation in jeopary

An estimated 1.1 billion pounds of pesticides are used in the U.S. every year, with  more than 20,000 products on the market. This volume  of use is undermining the health of the next generation  and, as the science demonstrates, derailing development  of our children’s potential. The sad thing is that nearly 20 years ago, scientists at the National Research Council called for swift action to protect young and growing bodies from pesticides.

Read “A Generation in Jeopardy – How pesticides are undermining our children’s health & intelligence by Kristin S. Schafer and Emily C. Marquez with Medha Chandra, Kendra Hutchens, Margaret Reeves and Meriel Watts. Their analysis reveals the following:

• Compelling evidence now links pesticide exposures with harms to the structure and functioning of the brain and nervous system. Neurotoxic pesticides are clearly implicated as contributors to the rising rates of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism, widespread declines in IQ and other measures of cognitive function.
• Pesticide exposure contributes to a number of increasingly common health outcomes for children, including cancer, birth defects and early puberty. Evidence of links to certain childhood cancers is particularly strong.
• Emerging science suggests that pesticides may be important contributors to the current epidemic of childhood asthma, obesity and diabetes.
• Extremely low levels of pesticide exposure can cause significant health harms, particularly during pregnancy and early childhood.

Sources: Environmental Health Perspectives, Natural SocietyPesticide Action Network North America (PAANA)

Featured image: Cover of A Generation in Jeopardy – How pesticides are undermining our children’s health & intelligence report

http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2012/11/23/pesticides-are-making-our-children-sick/

Ed. note:

If I had children there would be no eating out at restaurants unless they served organic, non-GMO foods, all vegetables would be homegrown or bought fresh organic. No canned or frozen vegetables unless they’re labeled non-GMO/organic. No school lunches, fast food or pre-packaged processed fake foods. In addition it’s important to educate children as to the reasons why it’s important to eat healthy and why precautionary measures need to be followed even when children aren’t under parental supervision.

Most readers are probably aware that just saying “don’t eat this or don’t eat that” isn’t good enough, we need to treat children with the respect they deserve by addressing their sense of reason and intelligence. As a child I never respected parental instructions unless they came with a reason why I should or shouldn’t behave in a particular manner. When things were explained to me in a way I was able to understand and relate to, then I had no problem abiding by the rules. It’s really important children understand why pesticides and GMO’s should be avoided for their own health and safety, they can deal with the truth and will also be the ones who have to deal with this legacy for many decades into the future after we have passed on.

To be honest, the reason I never had children was that I didn’t want to bring children in to the world in it’s current state of affairs. If I wasn’t happy with the direction the world was headed in and foresaw calamity ahead, it didn’t seem fair to bring children into a planet in decline. Especially when I didn’t have the power to protect them from the toxicity that surrounds all of us on emotional, physical and psychic levels.

Solar storms and pineal gland – riding the power wave


July 14, 2012

Email Email According to study published in the New Scientist back in 1998, there is a direct connection between the Sun’s solar storms and human biological effects. The conduit which facilitates the charged particles from the Sun to human disturbance — is the very same conduit which steers Earth’s weather —– the magnetic field. Animals and humans have a magnetic field which surrounds them — in the very same way the magnetic field surrounds the...

According to study published in the New Scientist back in 1998, there is a direct connection between the Sun’s solar storms and human biological effects.

The conduit which facilitates the charged particles from the Sun to human disturbance — is the very same conduit which steers Earth’s weather —– the magnetic field. Animals and humans have a magnetic field which surrounds them — in the very same way the magnetic field surrounds the Earth as a protector.

From 1948 to 1997, the Institute of North Industrial Ecology Problems in Russia found that geomagnetic activity showed three seasonal peaks each of those years (March to May, in July, and in October). Every peak matched an increased incidence of anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, and suicide in the city Kirovsk.

Electromagnetic activity from the sun affects our electronic devices and human electromagnetic field. We are physically, mentally, and emotionally altered by electromagnetic charges from the sun, our body can feel sleepy but also become highly energized.

Psychological effects of CMEs (coronal mass ejections) are typically short lived and include headache, palpitations, mood swings, and feeling generally unwell. Chaotic or confused thinking, and erratic behaviors also increase. Solar storms can drive our emotions and maximize it to both good and bad side – the point here is to be aware of it.

Pineal gland in our brain is also affected by the electromagnetic activity which causes the gland to produce excess melatonin, a hormone which can cause sleepiness but it’s also known that some people have opposite side effects, usually those that are aware of the effects.

Riding the power wave – pineal gland stimulation

Our pineal glands have excess melatonin production during solar storms – electromagnetic activity. Many biological effects of melatonin are produced through activation of melatonin receptors, while others are due to its role as a pervasive and powerful antioxidant, with a particular role in the protection of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA.

Pineal gland is also referred as the third eye, and the third eye is also known as the inner eye. The third eye is a mystical and esoteric concept referring in part to the ajna (brow) chakra in certain dharmic spiritual traditions, in particular Hinduism. This concept was later adopted by Christian mystics and spiritualists as well as people from other religious faiths. It is also spoken of as the gate that leads within to inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness. Among Christian mystics, the term is used in a broad sense to indicate a non-dualistic perspective. In New Age spirituality, the third eye may symbolize a state of enlightenment or the evocation of mental images having deeply personal spiritual or psychological significance. The third eye is often associated with visions, clairvoyance (which includes the ability to observe chakras and auras), precognition, and out-of-body experiences. People who have allegedly developed the capacity to utilize their third eyes are sometimes known as seers.

For the reasons most of you know – humans tend to have their pineal glands heavily calcified – sleeping.

Fluoride (found in tap water, toothpaste, processed foods…) is just one of the things that causes calcification of pineal gland. Fluoride is magnetically attracted to the pineal gland where it forms calcium phosphate crystals more than anywhere else in the body. How to decalcify pineal gland? One excellent link is here.

Third eye should be active, vibrant and strong… the process of decalcification sometimes includes headaches and sleepiness… – the same as they say for solar storms like the one in effect now.

… enjoy the weekend.

http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2012/07/14/solar-storms-and-pineal-gland-riding-the-power-wave/

Sibel Edmonds Finally Wins


by David Swanson

Sibel Edmonds’ new book, “Classified Woman,” is like an FBI file on the FBI, only without the incompetence.

The experiences she recounts resemble K.’s trip to the castle, as told by Franz Kafka, only without the pleasantness and humanity.

I’ve read a million reviews of nonfiction books about our government that referred to them as “page-turners” and “gripping dramas,” but I had never read a book that actually fit that description until now.

The F.B.I., the Justice Department, the White House, the Congress, the courts, the media, and the nonprofit industrial complex put Sibel Edmonds through hell.  This book is her triumph over it all, and part of her contribution toward fixing the problems she uncovered and lived through.

Edmonds took a job as a translator at the FBI shortly after 9-11.  She considered it her duty.  Her goal was to prevent any more terrorist attacks.  That’s where her thinking was at the time, although it has now changed dramatically.  It’s rarely the people who sign up for a paycheck and healthcare who end up resisting or blowing a whistle.

Edmonds found at the FBI translation unit almost entirely two types of people. The first group was corrupt sociopaths, foreign spies, cheats and schemers indifferent to or working against U.S. national security.  The second group was fearful bureaucrats unwilling to make waves.  The ordinary competent person with good intentions who risks their job to “say something if you see something” is the rarest commodity.  Hence the elite category that Edmonds found herself almost alone in: whistleblowers.

Reams of documents and audio files from before 9-11 had never been translated.  Many more had never been competently or honestly translated.  One afternoon in October 2001, Edmonds was asked to translate verbatim an audio file from July 2001 that had only been translated in summary form.  She discovered that it contained a discussion of skyscraper construction, and in a section from September 12th a celebration of a successful mission.  There was also discussion of possible future attacks.  Edmonds was eager to inform the agents involved, but her supervisor Mike Feghali immediately put a halt to the project.

Two other translators, Behrooz Sarshar and Amin (no last name given), told Edmonds this was typical. They told her about an Iranian informant, a former head of SAVAK, the Iranian “intelligence” agency, who had been hired by the FBI in the early 1990s.  He had warned these two interpreters in person in April 2001 of Osama bin Laden planning attacks on U.S. cities with airplanes, and had warned that some of the plotters were already in the United States.  Sarshar and Amin had submitted a report marked VERY URGENT to Special Agent in Charge Thomas Frields, to no apparent effect.  In the end of June they’d again met with the same informant and interpreted for FBI agents meeting with him.  He’d emphatically warned that the attack would come within the next two months and urged them to tell the White House and the CIA.  But the FBI agents, when pressed on this, told their interpreters that Frields was obliged to report everything, so the White House and other agencies no doubt already knew.

One has to wonder what U.S. public opinion would make of an Iranian having tried to prevent 9-11.

Next, a French translator named Mariana informed Edmonds that in late June 2001, French intelligence had contacted the FBI with a warning of the upcoming attacks by airplanes.  The French even provided names of suspects.  The translator had been sent to France, and believed her report had made it to both FBI headquarters and the White House.

Edmonds translated other materials that involved the selling of U.S. nuclear information to foreigners and spotted a connection to a previous case involving the purchase of such information.  The FBI, under pressure from the State Department, Edmonds writes, prevented her from notifying the FBI field offices involved.  Edmonds has testified in a court deposition, naming as part of a broad criminal conspiracy Representatives Dennis Hastert, Dan Burton, Roy Blunt, Bob Livingston, Stephen Solarz, and Tom Lantos, and the following high-ranking U.S. government officials: Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and Marc Grossman.

When Edmonds was hired, she was the only fully qualified Turkish translator, and this remained the case.  In November 2001, a woman named Melek Can Dickerson (referred to as “Jan”) was hired.  She did not score well on the English proficiency test, and so was not qualified to sign off on translations, as Edmonds was.  Melek’s husband Doug Dickerson worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency under the procurement logistics division at the Pentagon dealing with Turkey and Central Asia, and for the Office of Special Plans overseeing Central Asian policy.  This couple attempted to recruit Edmonds and her husband into the American Turkish Council and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations, offering large financial benefits.  But these were organizations that the FBI was monitoring.  Edmonds reported the Dickersons’ proposal to Feghali, who dismissed it.

Then Edmonds discovered that Jan Dickerson had been forging her (Edmonds’) signature on translations, with Feghali’s approval.  Then Edmonds’ colleagues told her about Jan taking files out of other translators’ desks and carrying them out of the building.  Dickerson attempted to control the translation of all material from particular individuals.  Dennis Saccher, who was above Feghali, discovered that Jan was marking every communication from one important person as being not important for translation. Saccher attempted to address the matter but was shut down by Feghali, by another supervisor named Stephanie Bryan, and by the head of “counterintelligence” for the FBI who said that the Pentagon, White House, State Department, and Congress would not allow an investigation.

Had Edmonds understood the truth of that statement, it might have saved her years of frustration and stress, but it would have denied us the bulk of the revelations in her book.  Dickerson threatened Edmonds’ life and those of her family.  Edmonds lost her job, her reputation, her friends, and contact with most of her family members.  She watched Congress cave in to the President.  She watched the government protect the Dickersons by allowing them to flee the country.  She listened to Congressman Henry Waxman and others in 2005 and 2006 promise a full investigation if the Democrats won a majority, a promise that was immediately broken when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007.  Edmonds was smeared in the media, and her story widely ignored when media outlets got parts of it right.  The Justice Department claimed “States Secrets” and maneuvered for a cooperative judge (Reggie Walton) to have cases filed by Edmonds dismissed.  The government classified as secret all materials related to Edmonds’ case including what was already public.  The Justice Department issued a gag order to the entire Congress.

And Congress bent over and shouted “Thank you, sir, may I have another?”

As less confrontational approaches failed, Edmonds became increasingly an activist and an independent media participant and creator.  Her story and others she was familiar with were rejected and avoided by the 9-11 Commission.  She worked with angry 9-11 widows and with other whistleblowers to expose the failures of that commission.  Disgusted with whistleblower support groups that only offered to help her when she was in the news and never when she needed help most desperately, Edmonds started her own group, made up of whistleblowers, called the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.  She started her own website called Boiling Frogs Post.

When an unclassified version of a report on Edmonds’ case by the Justice Department’s Inspector General was finally released, it vindicated her.

Edmonds has received awards and recognition.  Her story has been supported (with rhetoric, not action) by Congress members and backed up by journalists.  It appears in this forthcoming film.

Coleen Rowley, another FBI whistleblower, one who was honored as a Time magazine person of the year along with two others, told me: “What I find so remarkable is Sibel’s persistence in trying every avenue and possible outlet in trying to get the truth out. When going up the chain of command in the executive branch and Inspector General internal mechanisms for investigating fraud, waste, and abuse went nowhere, she sought judicial remedy by filing lawsuits only to be improperly gagged by ‘state secrecy privilege’.  Along the way she also sought congressional assistance, testified to the 9-11 Commission, and engaged with various media and other non-governmental organizations.  It’s somewhat ironic that Sibel herself demonstrated such enormous energy and passion throughout this decade quite the opposite of the ‘boiling frog’ idiom she uses for her website as a warning to others.  If her book can inspire readers to summon even 1/100th of the determination and resolve she has modeled, there’s hope for us!”

Yet, thus far, no branch of our government has lifted its little finger to fix the problem of secrecy and the corruption it breeds, which Edmonds argues has grown far worse under President Obama.  That’s why this book should be spread far and wide, and read aloud to our misrepresentatives in Congress if necessary.  This book is a masterpiece that reveals both the details and the broader pattern of corruption and unaccountability in Washington, D.C.  Edmonds has not exposed bad apples, but a rotten barrel of toxic waste that will sooner or later infect us all — not just the whistleblowers like Sibel and the thousands of people in our government who see something and dare not say something for fear that we will not have their back.

Let’s have their back.


David Swanson’s books include “War Is A Lie.” He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for the online activist organization http://rootsaction.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/05/01/sibel-edmonds-finally-wins/

%d bloggers like this: