The CFR’s CIA Controls Evergreen Air – Interview with Clay Douglas
All Chemtrail Videos, Chemtrail News, Featured, Featured Videos Saturday, May 21st, 2011
PDF Anthony J Hilder and Gary Richard Arnold interview Clay Douglas, The Free American, about chemtrails, Evergreen Air, the Federal Reserve, and more.
Posted by Anthony J. Hilder
on May 21 2011. Filed under All Chemtrail Videos, Chemtrail News, Featured, Featured Videos.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Loading ...
This is what we have flying over Georgia as well and we have Lockheed-Martin at Dobbins AFB and Warner-Robbins AFB as well. Then I see them coming from the west also where Maxwell AFB is located in Alabama. Maybe they’re all coming from Arizona. They are bombing us with spray day and night now. I have to wear a mask outside all of the time. Asthma, Cancer, GERD, Alzheimers, Kidney Diseases are through the roof. These planes, I believe, are not flown by pilots but guided by satelllite and spraying is remote-controlled. My opinion. I am obsessed as I can’t get a job so now I take pictures and make videos to wake up those who will look up.
You do not have to be fearful. Please checkout the banner add on the right from the BodyElectrician.com.
I have used this program to remove heavy metals and chemical from my body. This program really works.
You no longer have to be afraid anymore!
[...] The Chemtrail Song: A Plane Trail of Deadly DeceptionThe CFR’s CIA Controls Evergreen Air – Interview with Clay DouglasMichael Murphy Discusses Chemtrails-Geoengineering on Coast to Coast AMRadiation & Chemtrails [...]
Dear Mssrs. Webre & Carnicom:
Thank you very, very much for this most informative and clearly stated analysis of the issues re ‘chem-trails’ aka ‘death-dumps.’ I see no difference between the intentions of those who perpetrate the criminal behavior of fluoridating our drinking water, and, those who dump the instant aerosols.
I offer the following informatin in support of why I believe these actions constitue a clear and present danger to humanity, and must be stopped.
(E-mails previously sent to Mr. Michael Murphy and Mr. George Noory.)
Dear Michael & George:
Thank you for your excellent presentation last night (5/18/11) on Coast. Right on, Right on…
On behalf of FAN, and without trying to be redundant to you, I wish to bring to your attention TWO main points: The reduction of government waste; and, the highly toxic Aluminum Flouride/Chem Trail Alzheimer/Nazi NWO Connections.
FIRST. To my US Representative Campbell (Orange County CA) Please support the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ proposal to downgrade it’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) division of Oral Health (DOH) from a “division” to a “branch” in the Fiscal Year 2012 Labor-HHS appropriations process.
The United States is currently in the midst of a budget crisis, and this downgrade should be part of the solution to reduce government spending, and in the Oral Health division’s case, reduce government waste.
The DOH’s primary focus is the aggressive promotion of water fluoridation. This is a task already accomplished by the American Dental Association, Delta Dental, and the PEW Charitable Trust, along with many other public health organizations. Why waste tax dollars on a job that is already being done by private non-profit organizations.
The DOH supports and actively promotes mandatory fluoridation on a statewide basis, regardless of whether citizens and municipalities in these states agree with the practice of fluoridation. Shouldn’t we leave it to individual states and communities to decide whether they want fluoridated drinking water?
While the CDC’s DOH is supposed to oversee the safety of the fluoridation program in the U.S., they have instead ignored the growing evidence showing fluoride’s long-term threat to the public health, particularly to infants and citizens with kidney disease. Just this January, the Department of Health and Human Services acknowledged the role of water fluoridation in causing dental fluorosis in 41% of American adolescents (age 12-15), and yet the DOH continues to promote the expansion of the practice, with the goal of having more than 75% of public water supplies fluoridated by 2011.
It’s hard to see how the DOH can objectively judge the fluoridation program’s safety and efficacy, when they spend so much money and time promoting the practice rather than regulating it?
Its time we cut the waste in the CDC, and downgrade their Oral Health Division to a branch. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
SECOND. On behalf of the Fluoride Action Network in its’ ongoing opposition to (Aluminum) Fluoride in drinking water, I am submitting this additional information for your review and consideration.
Although the recent decision by the EPA to reduce the amount of fluoride to .7 ppm in public drinking water supplies is pointed in the right direction, we adamantly oppose any amount of fluoride in public drinking water supplies.
In light of recent confirmed findings, “chem-trails” contain, in part, Aluminum. The Aluminum Fluoride association is of particular importance as it relates to Alzheimer disease, as more fully described below.
—– Original Message —–
From: mark langdon
To: mark langdon
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 6:23 PM
Subject: FAN OPPOSITION LETTERs
Dear San Diego Mayor Sanders and Councilors,
First, let me thank you for postponing the vote re fluoridation of San Diego water, from Dec 22 to mid-January. At least 1.4 million San Diegans had a better Christmas not having to worry about drinking this stuff. Hopefully, you will remove this worry permanently.
“THE FLUORIDE/ALUMINUM ASSOCIATION IS OF PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE AS IT RELATES TO ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE. ALUMINUM BY ITSELF IS NOT READILY ABSORBED BY THE BODY. HOWEVER, IN THE PRESENCE OF FLUORIDE IONS, THE FLUORIDE IONS COMBINE WITH THE ALUMINUM TO FORM ALUMINUM FLUORIDE, WHICH IS ABSORBED BY THE BODY. IN THE BODY, THE ALUMINUM EVENTUALLY COMBINES WITH OXYGEN TO FORM ALUMINUM OXIDE OR ALUMINA (53). ALUMINA IS THE COMPOUND OF ALUMINUM THAT IS FOUND IN THE BRAINS OF ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE.” RONSIVALLI, LJ, “ADDENDA TO FLUORIDATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES.” (NOTE: I DON’T THINK THINGS CAN BE CLEARER THAN THIS.)
EXCERPTED FROM JIM MARR’S LATEST BOOK ENTITLED THE TRILLION DOLLAR CONSPIRACY, AT PAGE 100: “CHARLES ELIOT PERKINS, PROMINENT U.S. INDUSTRIAL CHEMIST, WAS SENT BY THE US GOVERNMENT TO HELP RECONSTRUCT THE IG FARBEN CHEMICAL PLANTS IN GERMANY AT THE END OF THE WAR. IN 1954, HE WROTE A LETTER TO THE LEE FOUNDATION NUTRITIONAL RESEARCH, STATING THAT HE HAD LEARNED THAT THE NAZI REGIME HAD USED SODIUM FLUORIDE AS A MEANS OF ‘MASS CONTROL.’ ‘I WANT TO MAKE THIS VERY DEFINITE AND VERY POSITIVE,’ PERKINS WROTE. ‘THE REAL REASON BEHIND WATER FLUORIDATION IS NOT TO BENEFIT CHILDREN’S TEETH…THE REAL PURPOSE BEHIND WATER FLUORIDATION IS TO REDUCE THE RESISTANCE OF THE MASSES TO DOMINATION AND CONTROL AND LOSS OF LIBERTY. REPEATED DOSES OF INFINITESIMAL AMOUNTS OF FLUORINE WILL IN TIME GRADUALLY REDUCE THE INDIVIDUAL’S POWER TO RESIST DOMINATION BY SLOWLY POISONING AND NARCOTIZING THIS AREA OF BRAIN TISSUE, AND MAKE HIM SUBMISSIVE TO THE WILL OF THOSE WHO WISH TO GOVERN HIM…I SAY THIS WITH ALL THE EARNESTNESS AND SINCERITY OF A SCIENTIST WHO HAS SPENT NEARLY 20 YEARS RESEARCH INTO THE CHEMISTRY, BIOCHEMISTRY, PHYSIOLOGY AND PATHOLOGY OF FLUORINE. …ANY PERSON WHO DRINKS ARTIFICIALLY FLUORIDATED WATER FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR OR MORE WILL NEVER AGAIN BE THE SAME PERSON, MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY.’” (NOTE: I DON’T THINK THINGS CAN BE CLEARER THAN THIS.)
Whatever you decide, at the very least you should be able in good conscience to assure the citizens of San Diego that you exercised due diligence in this matter by looking carefully at BOTH sides of the debate. Hitherto, I suspect you have only heard the public relations spin of the promoters. For far too long this issue has been captured by the dental lobby. Dentists, like everyone else have a right to their point of view but you should be very wary of their claims of safety. Their expertise is on teeth and they should not be making pronouncements on what fluoride may do, or not do, to the rest of the body.
I urge you to listen carefully to opponents of fluoridation who have carefully studied the scientific literature on this matter. It will only take you 28 minutes to listen and watch 15 prominent scientists explaining why they are opposed to fluoridation by accessing the video “Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation” available online: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7547385139152764985&hl=en#
If you want more information on these arguments read some or all of the recently published book, “The Case Against Fluoride” by Connett, Beck and Micklem (Chelsea Green, October 2010) or visit the Fluoride Action Network Website: http://www.FluorideAction.org
Meanwhile, in recent days there have been a number of developments that you should take into account before you force this measure on your citizens.
1) IQ study. Yet another (the 24th !) study has appeared indicating an association between exposure to moderate levels of fluoride and lowered IQ in children. This study will appear in Environmental Health Perspectives (the journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Studies, which is part of the US Department of Health and Human Services)
2) Canada. Following the vote to remove fluoride from Waterloo, Ontario on October 25, we now hear that the Council of Calgary, Alberta has ended fluoridation there: http://www2.fluoridealert.org/Alert/Canada/Alberta/Calgary-Alderman-rallies-support-to-remove-fluoride-from-Calgary-tap-water
3) New York City. Councilor Peter Vallone, Jr is introducing a bill to remove fluoridation from New York City: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/12/28/2010-12-28_city_pol_wants_remove_fluoride_from_new_yorks_drinking_water_citing_safety_conce.html
4) New Hampshire. Bills have been introduced in the NH legislature that will require that a) the science of fluoridation be re-investigated and b) a warning be placed in the water bills of customers receiving fluoridated water that they should not use fluoridated tap water to make up baby formula: http://fluoridealert.org/infant.warning.html
5) News reports indicate that more and more citizens are mobilizing to get fluoridation out of their communities in many states including North Carolina, Virginia, Maine, Mississippi, Vermont, and Texas, as well as in other countries like Australia, New Zealand and Malaysia.
You can follow these and other events by checking the latest news on the website of the Fluoride Action Network ( http://www2.fluoridealert.org/ ).
If you take note of these developments I hope you agree that this is not the time to plunge yourselves into a practice which is being rebuked across the country and across the world.
Very truly,
Mark D. Langdon, J.D.
MARK_LANGDON@MSN.COM
To HHS and Honorable Secretary Sebelius:
In response to your request for comments on the recent change in your recommended level of fluoride added to community drinking water, I respectfully submit the following points supporting the stance that a reduction in fluoride levels is not sufficient, and that the United States should follow the approach of western Europe and end water fluoridation completely:
1. Fluoride is not a nutrient, nor is it essential for healthy teeth. No study has ever revealed a diseased state resulting from lack of fluoride, including dental caries. (1,2) No American is, or ever was, “fluoride deficient.”
2. Using the water supply to mass medicate the population is unethical. The public water supply should not be used as a drug-delivery system without regard for an individual’s age, weight, health status, or knowledge of how fluoride will interact with other drugs they are taking. No informed consent is requested or given, and no medical follow-up is offered.
3. The benefit and safety of ingested fluoride has never been proved by accepted medical standards. The HHS has failed to inform the public that there is not a single randomized controlled trial (the gold standard of medical research) that demonstrates the effectiveness of water fluoridation.
4. HHS has also failed to inform the public that the Food and Drug Administration has never studied, or approved, the safety of fluoride supplements and continues to classify all fluoride supplements as “unapproved new drugs.”
5. Lastly, HHS has failed to inform the public that tooth decay rates have declined at the same general rate in all western, industrialized countries, irrespective of water fluoridation status.
6. Any benefits of fluoride are primarily topical, not systemic. The CDC has acknowledged this for over a decade.
7. The Iowa Fluoride Study, funded by HHS, has reported little, if any, relationship between individual fluoride intake and caries experience. According to the study (the largest of its kind): “achieving a caries-free status may have relatively little to do with fluoride intake, while fluorosis is clearly more dependent on fluoride intake.”
8. Americans will still be over-exposed to fluoride at 0.7 ppm. According to EPA’s recent documents “it is likely that most children, even those that live in fluoridated communities, can be over-exposed to fluoride at least occasionally.
9. At present, nearly 41% of American adolescents aged 12-15 have some form of dental fluorosis, an outwardly visible sign of fluoride toxicity.
10. Reducing the fluoride levels to 0.7 ppm will not remedy this problem as national statistics clearly show that dental fluorosis remains significantly elevated at 0.7 ppm.
11. Drinking water is just one source of ingested fluoride; others include foods, beverages, dental products and supplements, pesticides and pharmaceuticals. For communities that practice artificial water fluoridation, this is the easiest source of fluoride to remove.
12. Infants will not be protected. Infants fed formula made with fluoridated tap water-at the reduced level of 0.7 ppm-will still receive up to 175 times more fluoride than a breast-fed infant. In their supporting documents, EPA has not calculated the risks to the bottle-fed infant. In fact, infants from birth to six months of age were completely excluded from any consideration by EPA, despite HHS’s own admission that “The period of possible risk for fluorosis in the permanent teeth.extends from about birth through 8 years of age.”
12. As the most susceptible subpopulation, the potential for long-term, irreparable damage to developing infants must be seriously considered, and should extend beyond just their teeth.
13. African-American children and low-income children will not be protected. HHS’s reference (p. 2386) to the study by Sohn et al., failed to mention that African-American and low-income children were found to consume significantly more total fluids and plain water, and thus receive more fluoride from drinking water, than white or higher-income children. African-Americans have been shown to have an increased risk of developing dental fluorosis, and are at higher risk for suffering from the more severe forms of this condition.
14. Despite receiving high intakes of fluoride, low-income and minority children living in fluoridated communities continue to suffer from rampant and severe dental decay, undermining the common premise that fluoridation will prevent these problems. Additionally, low-income children have a greater risk for suffering from all forms of fluoride toxicity, as poor diet exacerbates the detrimental effects of fluoride. This is clearly, therefore, an environmental justice issue.
15. HHS has failed to consider fluoride’s impact on the brain. Over 100 animal studies have observed fluoride-induced brain damage.
16. 24 human studies have reported lowered IQ in children exposed to various levels of fluoride.
17. At least 6 other studies have found non-IQ neurological effects such as impaired visuo-spatial organization.
18. One study of 500 children in China observed reduced IQ at a water fluoride level of 1.9 ppm (27, 28) and another reported a reduction in IQ at even lower (mean=1.3 ppm) water fluoride levels.
19. HHS’s new recommendation of 0.7 ppm offers no adequate margin of safety to protect all of our children, including those with iodine deficiencies from experiencing similar neurological damage.
20. HHS has failed to consider fluoride as an endocrine disruptor. The 2006 NRC report states that fluoride is an endocrine disruptor, and even at low levels can be detrimental to the thyroid gland. Pre- and post-natal babies, people with kidney disease, and above-average water drinkers (including diabetics and lactating women) are especially susceptible to the endocrine disrupting effects of fluoride in drinking water.
21. HHS has failed to consider or investigate current rates of skeletal fluorosis in the U.S. According to EPA’s supporting document, there is a general lack of information on the prevalence of stage II skeletal fluorosis in the U.S. Yet, many of the symptoms of stage II skeletal fluorosis (e.g. sporadic pain, stiffness of the joints) are identical to arthritis, which affects at least 46 million Americans. People with renal insufficiency are known to be at an elevated risk for developing skeletal fluorosis, as crippling stage III skeletal fluorosis with renal deficiency has been documented in the U.S. at water fluoride levels as low as 1.7 ppm. Since skeletal fluorosis in kidney patients has been detected in small case studies, it is likely that systematic studies would detect skeletal fluorosis at even lower fluoride levels.
22. HHS has failed to consider fluoride as a potential carcinogen. Bassin et al. (42) reported a significantly elevated risk of osteosarcoma in boys living in fluoridated communities, and thus fluoride may be a carcinogen. Chester Douglass, who has serious conflicts-of-interest concerning fluoride research, has stated that a subsequent study will refute these findings (43), but no publication has appeared in the five years since he made this claim. As EPA has still not completed carcinogenicity testing for fluoride, HHS should not support the addition of a potential carcinogen to our drinking water.
23. HHS has failed to confirm the safety of silicofluorides. Despite being used in more than 90% of artificial water fluoridation schemes, no chronic toxicity testing of silicofluorides has ever been completed: “No short-term or subchronic exposure, chronic exposure, cytotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, teratology, carcinogenicity, or initiation/promotion studies were available” for the toxicological summary for silicofluorides, as prepared for the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
24. However, recent epidemiological research has found an association between the use of silicofluoride-treated community water and increased blood lead concentrations in children – a link that is consistent with recent laboratory findings.
25. HHS has failed to inform the American public that the fluoridating agent used in drinking water is a hazardous waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry, and can be laced with arsenic and radionuclides, which are known carcinogens. HHS should not support the addition of a non-tested substance to our drinking water.
Most of the arguments listed above are covered in far more detail in the recently published book “The Case Against Fluoride” by Connett, Beck and Micklem (Chelsea Green, 2010).
We urge director Sebelius to appoint a group of experts from HHS, who have not been involved in promoting fluoridation, to provide a fully documented scientific response to the arguments and evidence presented in this book. Were Director Sebelius to do this we strongly believe that neither she nor these experts will want to see the practice of water fluoridation continue. The practice is unnecessary, unethical and hitherto the benefits have been wildly exaggerated and the risks minimized. A scientific response to this book from a HHS team would allow the public to judge the cases both for and against fluoridation on their scientific and ethical merits.
See references at http://fluoridealert.org/fan-comments.html
Very truly,
Mark D. Langdon, J.D.
Mark_Langdon@msn.com
Great post Mark, very informative..
Thank you SO much for helping everyone! Please wear a mask or bandana while riding your motorcycle. I can see it is effecting your health ~ <3
haha, for a easiest smile you should use enamel teeth whitening house kits.
The following time I learn a blog, I hope that it doesnt disappoint me as a lot as this one. I imply, I do know it was my choice to learn, but I really thought youd have one thing attention-grabbing to say. All I hear is a bunch of whining about something that you possibly can fix if you werent too busy searching for attention.
Thanks for the something totally new you have discovered in your writing. One thing I want to comment on is that FSBO connections are built after a while. By presenting yourself to owners the first weekend their FSBO is usually announced, prior to a masses start off calling on Friday, you develop a good connection. By mailing them resources, educational products, free records, and forms, you become the ally. By taking a personal affinity for them along with their situation, you make a solid connection that, most of the time, pays off when the owners opt with an adviser they know in addition to trust — preferably you.
Found tart cherry juice concentrate from my nurse for my gout pain. I started getting some a few day back and my joints feel great. I even got free shipping. Found some excellent videos about tart cherry juice
Oh my goodness! an amazing article dude. Thanks Nonetheless I am experiencing problem with ur rss . Don’t know why Unable to subscribe to it. Is there anybody getting similar rss downside? Anybody who is aware of kindly respond. Thnkx
Discover tart cherry juice concentrate from my doctor for my arthritis pain. I started drinking a few day back and my joints feel great. I even got free shipping from Fruit Advantage