noworldsystem.com


Stock Up on Incandescent Light Bulbs

Stock Up on Incandescent Light Bulbs: In Fact, Buy a Lifetime Supply of Them

J. Speer-Williams
Infowars.com
March 11, 2010

Our government’s”Green Revolution” is another covert attack on our collective health and environment, largely using their mythical global warming hoax to do so.

A Compact Fluorescent Light bulb.

The new Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) bulbs are a perfect example of this kind of subterfuge. While claiming these new CFL bulbs will reduce carbon emissions,”our” Congress passed legislation stating these new light bulbs must completely replace our everyday incandescent light bulbs by 2014, without telling us of the serious dangers to health and environment, that these mandated bulbs pose.

Most of these new CFLs will make people sick, by emitting radio frequency radiation that contributes to dirty electricity, that can cause migraines, dizziness, nausea, confusion, fatigue, skin irritations, and eye strain.

But far more importantly, CFLs are loaded with deadly mercury, one of the most toxic elements on Earth. In fact, all CFL bulbs contain – at least – four to five milligrams of mercury, about 200 times the amount of mercury in a flu vaccine shot. There is enough mercury in each CFL bulb to contaminate 6,000 gallons of clean water. To break one of these CFL bulbs is to risk ruining the health of one’s entire family, or office staff, with enough released atmospheric mercury to best require the expensive, professional services of a Haz/Mat Removal Team.

Believe not the”clean-up” methods for broken CFL bulbs offered by those in the mainstream media, which tell us to open a window, then leave the area of the broken bulb for 15 minutes; then return with duct tape to pick-up the broken glass.

Then what is one to do? Put the broken glass and duct tape into a glass jar and screw on a tight lid.

What is one to do with the glass jar? Take it to a special toxic dump.

Where are such dumps? Check your local listings.

ll of the above, of course, is sheer nonsense. Want proof? Ask your dentist about the Haz/Mat teams that come into their offices to remove their old collection of dental amalgams, which dentists keep in little lead lined boxes.

All Americans will be well advised to practice a”mercury escape plan” in the case of an accidental breakage of one of these CFL bulbs: Grab your cell phone, babies, dogs, cats, and parakeets (if they aren’t already dead), and get well away from your house. Call a Haz/Mat company to completely clean your house before re-entering it. Such are the serious dangers of mercury.

And our environment? This is where mercury laden CFL bulbs do their most serious damage to everyone of us. This is the same environment that our hordes of”Greenies” are so concerned about dying from global warming. But unknown to our greenie friends, already there are hundreds of millions of disposed CFL bulbs that have contaminated personal garbage cans, fleets of garbage trucks (spreading their toxicity near and far), and garbage disposal sites, that are doing irreparable damage to our ground water, except when such garbage is burnt; then, mercury is released into the very air we all breathe. You see there are precious few toxic dump sites in the world equipped to handle mercury, the most dangerous element in the world, after radio-active materials.

With over 100 million American households, and tens of millions of other lighted facilities, all over our country, and with each of them disposing of even just one CFL bulb a month … can anyone imagine how much mercury will poison our disposal dumps, our ground water, our air, our lungs, and our entire bodies. If one did not know better, mercury is the perfect chemical/weapon for genocidal madmen: Mercury is in dental amalgams, vaccines, corn syrup light bulbs, and who knows what else.

Are our lawmakers simply without a shred of common horse sense, or are they driven by a sinister power, intent on not only destroying our environment, but our very lives.

In any case, something inhuman drove our CFL horror, and is driving the”Green Revolution,” and its off-shoots of global warming, and the entire climate change circus of death.

Bush Signs Lightbulb Ban for Global Warming

Government To Tell You What Light Bulbs You Can Use

 



Early radiation exposure raises breast cancer risk

Cancer News: Early radiation exposure raises breast cancer risk

Food Consumer
January 11, 2010

Exposure to radiotherapy or radiation-based diagnostics like computed tomography (CT scans) in early childhood increases breast cancer risk in adulthood, a new study in the Jan 2010 issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

The study involved women exposed to thymic irradiation during infancy from 1926 to 1957. Breast cancer was identified in 96 treated in an average dose of 0.71 Gy and 57 untreated women during 159,459 person-year follow-up.

Adams MJ and colleagues from University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry found women who were treated by radiation were 200 percent more likely to develop breast cancer than those who did not receive radiation.

Higher doses of radiation were linked to high risk of breast cancer.

The researchers concluded that “at radiation doses between those received by the breast from chest CT and cancer therapy during early childhood, breast cancer incidence rates remain elevated >50 years after exposure.”

They wrote “This implies that increased breast cancer risk will remain a lifelong concern in females treated during childhood with currently reduced radiotherapy doses and for infants receiving multiple chest CTs.”

John Gofman, Ph.D. M.D. a distinguished nuclear physician, had reported much earlier that 75 percent of women with breast cancer were exposed to either diagnostic imaging, test or radiation therapy.

Ionizing radiations including x-ray used in medical diagnostics, mammogram screenings, air port whole body scanning, and cancer treatment are recognized by the U.S. National Toxicology Program as cancer-causing agents.

Breast cancer is diagnosed in more than 170,000 women each year in the United States and the disease kills about 50,000 annually in the country.

Breast cancer symptoms include a lump or thickening that feels different from the surrounding tissue, bloody discharge from the nipple, change in size and or shape of a breast, formation of dimples on the breast skin, inverted nipple, peeling or flaking of the nipple skin and redness on the breast skin like the skin of an orange, according to mayoclinic.com

Breast cancer treatments include surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and targeted therapy.

CT Scans Will Cause 29,000 Cancers and Kill Nearly 15,000 Americans From Diagnostics Done in 2007

 



Future Airport Scanners Will See Through Bodies

Future Airport Scanners Will See Through Bodies


Total Recall: Schwarzenegger film from fantasy to reality

NoWorldSystem
January 7, 2010

In the future, BackScatter and Millimeter-Wave full-body scanners will be obsolete, they will eventually be replaced by radiography scanners that can provide a crisp image of a person’s insides.

There are 3 types of full-body scanners; the millimeter-wave (terahertz non-ionizing radiation), BackScatter (low-level ionizing x-ray) and transmission x-ray (digital radiographic) scanners.

The millimeter-wave scanners are perfect for detecting metal objects but are rather useless when it comes to detecting soft plastics, liquids and chemicals according to Tory MP Ben Wallace who worked on the machines. BackScatter scanners can detect both hard and soft materials but is just as limited in its scope as it can only see through clothing and not under folds of skin. The full-body scanner that has the potential to view all objects beyond folds of skin has to be the radiographic transmission x-ray, these machines are likely to dominate the prison-industrial-complex that is America’s transportation system.


SecurPass Digital Radiography Scanner

Radiography is very common in the medical practice, you might have used these machines if you ever had to deal with fractured bones or had a mammogram. Digital Radiography Scanners (DRS) have been used worldwide in airports, mining and correctional facilities, however this security technology is relatively new in the United States. The FDA has already approved this technology under the auspices of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) even though they have not yet been used in the U.S. for security reasons.

This technology can detect narcotics, metallic and non-metallic weapons, plastic and liquid explosive devices, chemical and biological materials and components of explosive devices inside and outside the human body. The DRS are marketed under several names such as SecureScan, ConPass and SecurPass.

Radiography and Tomography x-ray machines are very hazardous and potentially deadly as they emit deep penetrating ionizing x-rays, both BackScatter and Millimeter-Wave scanners are child’s play compared to these machines. Researchers find Computed Tomography (CT) scanners will cause 29,000 cancers and kill nearly 15,000 Americans from diagnostic tests done in 2007.

A report in the British medical journal Lancet noted that mammograms (radiography of the breast) were introduced in 1983, the incidence of ductal carcinoma (a form of breast cancer) increased by 328%, of which 200% was due to the use of mammography itself. A Lawrence Berkeley National Lab study demonstrated that breast tissue is extremely susceptible to radiation-induced cancer, ironically mammograms may initiate the very cancers that they may later identify.

Radiation damage is cumulative, each time radiation passes through our bodies, cells become damaged, when cells are unable to repair 100% of the damage then there becomes the problem of tumors and cancer. As Dr. Gofman’s research put it; There is absolutely no safe dose-level of radiation, when human cells and DNA become damaged and mutated by radiation, then there is very little that can be done.

I imagine that there is going to be a huge push for these machines, as the 2010 forecast is likely to be the year of terrorism according to Gerald Celente. The media and other tools are continuing the push for these invasive and potentially deadly machines after a report of a suicide bomber carrying explosives inside his rectum. Abdullah Asieri adopted the new tactic of “carrying explosives in his anal cavity” for the un-successful attack against Saudi prince Mohammed Bin Nayef in September 2009. Asieri was reportedly blown in half by the blast and left Nayef un-injured.

After this incident and the Flight 253 non-event, there will be even more propositions of scanners that can do virtual cavity searches, there’s already chatter on the mainstream media about the need for internal searches of travelers:

Ann Coulter: “Unless the bomb is inserted under the foreskin, and by the way, I don’t see a clear angle on the anus. That’s a pretty easy hiding place for this.”

Stephen Colbert: “Every time a young Muslim man arrives at the airport, the TSA should respectfully take him aside and give him an involuntary colonoscopy.”

Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney: “If you are an 18 to 28-year-old Muslim man then you should be strip-searched. And if we don’t do that there’s a very high probability we’re going to lose an airline.”

Franco Frattini: “if a terrorist has swallowed a capsule full of explosives and could become a human bomb,” “right to security is essential for all other freedoms.”

Will we be herded on conveyor-belts like luggage where we are x-rayed for the sake of security? Who is the real terrorist, bombarding our bodies with radiation that will likely lead to many early deaths? Unfortunately it is all to easy for the government to use terrorist attacks to crackdown on the American people, lets hope these radiography scanners never see the light of day in any airport in the United States.

Full-Body Scanners to Fry Travelers With Radiation

Full-Body Scanners Increase Cancer Risk

 



Government Uses Stimulus Money To Buy Naked Body Scanners

Government Uses Stimulus Money To Buy Naked Body Scanners

CNN
January 6, 2010

The U.S. government is using $25 million in stimulus money to buy and install full body scanners in airports this year, in an effort to ramp up security and create jobs.

The Transportation Security Administration is using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to purchase 150 of the full body scanners, according to TSA spokeswoman Sarah Horowitz.

These “backscatter” scanners, which use X-rays to provide detailed images of hidden objects in or under a person’s clothing, are manufactured by Rapiscan, a subsidiary of Hawthorn, Calif.-based OSI (OSIS). The scanners cost from $150,000 to $180,000 apiece, according to the company.

Peter Kant, vice president of global government affairs for Rapiscan, said his company received a $25 million contract from the TSA to produce the 150 backscatter scanners. The contract has helped create 25 jobs, mostly manufacturing positions in the company’s Ocean Springs, Miss. facility, as well as some engineering jobs, he said.

Horowitz would not specify how much money had been earmarked for TSA spending on scanners, but she said the agency has enough funds that would come from the stimulus program and other federal sources to buy an additional 300 scanners.

Read Full Article Here

 



Mass Resistance is Needed Against Full-Body Scanners

Mass Resistance is Needed Against Full-Body Scanners

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRoloQz6UII

 



Full-Body Scanners Increase Cancer Risk

Full-Body Scanners Increase Cancer Risk

NoWorldSystem
December 6, 2010

There are two types of scanners we will have to endure at the airport; the millimeter-wave scanner and the ‘backscatter’ X-ray scanner. Both emit ‘high-energy’ radiation and are dangerous.

Body scanners have revolutionized the practice of medicine and has saved many lives, but we must question the government’s mandate to have people endure high-energy radiation in a non-life-threatening situation. We must protest the use of full-body scanners on children and young adults as they are at greater-risk of developing brain tumors and cancer from these machines. Cancer and tumors especially in the young will likely increase as more body scanners are being installed on a nationwide scale. There is just no “safe” dose of radiation, 50% of America’s cancers are radiation-induced.

People with medical implants such as pace-makers should also avoid electromagnetic pulse generating body scanners as they can significantly alter the waveform of the pacemaker pulse.

The millimeter wave scanners emit a wavelength of ten to one millimeter called a millimeter wave, these waves are considered Extremely High Frequency (EHF), the highest radio frequency wave produced. EHF runs a range of frequencies from 30 to 300 gigahertz, they are also abbreviated mmW. These waves are also known as terahertz (THz) radiation. The force generated from terahertz waves is small but the waves can ‘unzip’ or tear apart double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the DNA that could interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.

Clothing and organic materials are translucent in most millimeter-wave bands. Perfect for detecting metal objects on subjects at airports, but not so great at picking up low-density materials such as plastic, chemicals or liquid which were some of the items used by the underwear bomber.

Full Body X-ray Scanners provide exceptionally clear views of subjects by combining data from multiple images, but increased exposure to X-rays can also cause mutation in DNA, leading to cancer. X-rays are considered ionizing (penetrating) radiation, ionizing radiation in any dose causes genetic mutations, which set all living cells exposed on the path to cancer. Cancers associated with high dose exposure include leukemia, breast, bladder, colon, liver, lung, esophagus, ovarian, multiple myeloma, prostate, nasal cavity/sinuses, pharyngeal, laryngeal, pancreatic and stomach cancers.

Whole body scans of healthy people will create more problems than they solve by exposing healthy people to radiation. The risk for radiation over-exposure may be small for a single subject, but the number subject exposed to airport body scans will increase the risk by the millions. A normal CT scan of the chest is the equivalent of about 100 chest X-rays. Some scanners are equivalent of 440 conventional X-rays. The traditional X-ray machine detects hard and soft materials by the variation in transmission through the target. The backscatter X-ray detects the radiation that reflects back from the target. Several studies have suggested that people have been unnecessarily exposed to radiation from CTs or have received excessive amounts of radiation. A person undergoing a backscatter scan receives approximately 0.005 – 0.009 millirems of radiation. 1 mrem per year is a negligible dose of radiation, and 25 mrem per year from a single source is the upper limit of safe radiation exposure. Widespread overuse of body scanners and variations in radiation caused by different machines could subject many to radiation doses that could ultimately lead to thousands of new cancer cases and deaths.

How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA

Are planned airport scanners just a scam?

Kids At Higher Risk of Brain Tumors From Cellphones

Police force claim ‘radios’ are making them ill

Full-Body Scanners to Fry Travelers With Radiation

2 Billion may suffer from Mobile Cancer by 2020: Study

14 Living Next To Cell Tower End Up Dead

 



Are planned airport scanners just a scam?

article claims EMF (radio-wave/millimetre-wave) scanners have no health risks
Are planned airport scanners just a scam?

The Independent
January 3, 2010

The explosive device smuggled in the clothing of the Detroit bomb suspect would not have been detected by body-scanners set to be introduced in British airports, an expert on the technology warned last night.

The claim severely undermines Gordon Brown’s focus on hi-tech scanners for airline passengers as part of his review into airport security after the attempted attack on Flight 253 on Christmas Day.

The Independent on Sunday has also heard authoritative claims that officials at the Department for Transport (DfT) and the Home Office have already tested the scanners and were not persuaded that they would work comprehensively against terrorist threats to aviation.

The claims triggered concern that the Prime Minister is over-playing the benefits of such scanners to give the impression he is taking tough action on terrorism.

And experts in the US said airport “pat-downs” – a method used in hundreds of airports worldwide – were ineffective and would not have stopped the suspect boarding the plane.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, allegedly concealed in his underpants a package containing nearly 3oz of the chemical powder PETN (pentaerythritol tetranitrate). He also carried a syringe containing a liquid accelerant to detonate the explosive.

Since the attack was foiled, body-scanners, using “millimetre-wave” technology and revealing a naked image of a passenger, have been touted as a solution to the problem of detecting explosive devices that are not picked up by traditional metal detectors – such as those containing liquids, chemicals or plastic explosive.

But Ben Wallace, the Conservative MP, who was formerly involved in a project by a leading British defence research firm to develop the scanners for airport use, said trials had shown that such low-density materials went undetected.

Tests by scientists in the team at Qinetiq, which Mr Wallace advised before he became an MP in 2005, showed the millimetre-wave scanners picked up shrapnel and heavy wax and metal, but plastic, chemicals and liquids were missed.

If a material is low density, such as powder, liquid or thin plastic – as well as the passenger’s clothing – the millimetre waves pass through and the object is not shown on screen. High- density material such as metal knives, guns and dense plastic such as C4 explosive reflect the millimetre waves and leave an image of the object.

Mr Wallace said: “Gordon Brown is grasping at headlines if he thinks buying a couple of scanners will make us safer. It is too little, too late. Under his leadership, he starved the defence research budget that could have funded a comprehensive solution while at the same time he has weakened our border security.

“Scanners cannot provide a comprehensive solution on their own. We must now start to ask if national security demands the use of profiling.”

Mr Wallace added that X-ray scanners were also unlikely to have detected the Christmas Day bomb.

The Government is looking at millimetre-wave scanners for widespread use in British airports as part of Mr Brown’s review. They are safer to use than X-ray scanners because they do not emit radiation and do not require passengers’ consent. Pregnant women cannot go through X-ray scanners but there are no such health risks with millimetre-wave technology.

However, a Whitehall source revealed that the DfT and the Home Office had already tested both the millimetre-wave and X-ray body-scanners as part of an ongoing assessment of airport security and anti- terror measures.

Read Full Article Here

Police force claim ‘radios’ are making them ill

Full-Body Scanners to Fry Travelers With Radiation