TND Guest Contributor:  Ericka Andersen |

Last week, CBS Sports caused an outrage when they refused to air a commercial by a local real estate company. The commercial featured the owner’s 4-year-old granddaughter reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by a screen shot with the company’s information.

That was the entirety of the clip, which the Windermere Real Estate office created to show on television near the anniversary of Sept. 11 this year during the Wrangler Champions Challenge rodeo.

CBS claimed the ad was “too political” and it was never shown.

Now, CBS has backtracked on their original remarks, saying the ad’s rejection had nothing to do with politics and only occurred because it was too local to air. A spokesperson said that false information was passed along initially.

But judging by the paranoia the media have about offending certain groups of people, it’s possible this is just CBS’s attempt to save face in the middle of a PR crisis.

Ultimately, whatever the real story is, CBS should have run the ad and these conflicting responses don’t help their cause.

The ad mentioned no political parties, candidates or issues. It was as simple and straightforward as they come.

Additionally, other ads have demonstrated just how popular the simple, patriotic approach is with American audiences – and those weren’t deemed “too political.”

This Budweiser commercial from the 2014 Superbowl was one of the most popular of the game. No matter what one thinks about war, it’s tough not to tear up watching a soldier welcomed home from one.

>>> A Super Bowl Commercial Guaranteed to Bring You Chills

The culture of political correctness has begun to erode our nation’s respect for the flag and caused media to fear backlash from those leading the charge.

The Pledge of Allegiance used to be commonplace in public schools and venues, but many children aren’t even required to memorize it anymore. Just this month, the American Humanist Association, a group of atheists,challenged the use of “under God” in the Pledge and others have rallied to have the recitation removed from schools altogether.

What many don’t know is that the Pledge didn’t originally include “under God.”It was added in 1954 during the Cold War, when Congress reportedly wanted to distinguish the United States from the godless Soviet Union.

Nevertheless, the flag stands for the freedoms of Atheists, Christians, Muslims & more  – even those Americans who dislike our country.

If CBS did reject this commercial for reasons of political correctness, it’s good that Winderemere Real Estate isn’t letting them get away with it.

# # # #

Ericka Andersen manages The Heritage Foundation’s social networking platforms and strategy as well as online outreach as the think tank’s manager of digital media.

This article was published at The Daily Signal and is reprinted with permission.

TND Radio Spotlight:  The Bill Meyer Show |

There is a system of consensus policy “governance” spreading its tentacles across the United States.  Few people are aware of how vast this infrastructure has become, and how it is impacting our lives.  On this segment of the Bill Meyer Show, Klamath County Commissioner Dennis Linthicum and political researcher “Mr. X” shine a light on the problems associated with the consensus “governance” model.  Click the triangle “play” button above to stream audio, or the down pointing arrow if you’d like to download an mp3 file.

Coming to a consensus and considering the input of “stake holders” sounds like a good idea, right?  The problem is that this system lends itself to abuse by special interests.  This consensus “governance” model often facilitates the translating of special interest based agendas into public policy, circumventing representative government, where citizens at least have the ability to theoretically hold elected officials accountable.

The Policy Consensus Initiative (PCI) plays a key role as the intellectual godfather of this system.  It seeks to build and support networks that provide state and local governments with “leadership and capacity to achieve more collaborative governance.”  This strategic objective is funneled through state university systems via the University Network for Collaborative Governance.

Last August, Dennis Linthicum pointed out in an op-ed that PCI freely admits to the circumvention of representative government.  In the “abbreviated version” of “A Practical Guide To Consensus,” PCI notes:

Cautionary Note: Participation is the Key to Legitimacy

Government-sponsored consensus processes are not the traditional forums in which policies are made, administered, or adjudicated in a democracy. In traditional forums, the mechanisms for determining who participates directly in the writing and administration of law are spelled out in constitutions, charters, statutes, and rules. Consensus-seeking processes are adjuncts to traditional democratic processes; they can shift the locus of public decision making.

See the problem?  Quite often, these organizations are set-up by design to be the handmaidens of special interests.

To illustrate, consider the example of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA).  Over two dozen “stake holders” have signed an agreement with certain predefined goals “on the table.”  Debate about generally minor details around the edges of a predefined policy objective are permitted through this newly created “collaborative governance” organization.  But the mission of KBRA is largely defined in advance.

KBRA will influence the plan to destroy four Klamath River dams, greatly impact water usage rights critical to the local ranching and agricultural economy, and even have an impact on Jackson County’s water supply via the Talent Irrigation District (TID).  But the KBRA only has 3 stakeholders representing agricultural/ranching interests, and TID doesn’t have a seat at the table, nor utility rate paying citizens currently being charged for dam destruction.   Meanwhile, an over-sized number of the remaining “stake holders” include a veritable list of who’s who among regional environmental organizations pushing an agenda informed by junk science.  We are told that we must restore coho salmon habitat in the Klamath River, but the fish is not a native species and it’s in no way threatened.  You can go to grocery stores throughout Oregon and buy coho to your heart’s content.

Presentation In Southern Oregon, August 12:

Dennis Linthicum and “Mr. X” will be presenting more information about this topic on August 12th.  If you happen to be in Southern Oregon, click here for more information.  The event is sponsored by Citizens For Transparent Government and the Medford chapter of Americans For Prosperity.

# # # #

The-Bill-Meyer-Show-logoThe Bill Meyer Show airs weekdays from 6 to 9 a.m. Pacific Time on Medford Oregon’s KMED AM 1440 and 106.7 FM.  Click here to visit the website for live streaming and an mp3 archive.  Bill Meyer is known for his understanding of a great many political and social issues, and for his fair and respectful treatment of guests and callers.  Click here to visit his active Facebook page, where Mr. Meyer welcomes comments and frequently responds to posts.

Exclusive: The American rush to judgment blaming ethnic Russian rebels and Russian President Putin for the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 continues unabated despite other possible explanations, writes Robert Parry.

TND Guest Contributor:  Robert Parry |

Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses a crowd on May 9, 2014, celebrating the 69th anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany and the 70th anniversary of the liberation of the Crimean port city of Sevastopol from the Nazis. (Russian government photo)

Russian President Vladimir Putin addresses a crowd on May 9, 2014, celebrating the 69th anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany and the 70th anniversary of the liberation of the Crimean port city of Sevastopol from the Nazis. (Russian government photo)

As nuclear-armed America hurtles into a completely avoidable crash with nuclear-armed Russia over Ukraine, you can now see the dangers of “information warfare” when facts give way to propaganda and the press fails to act as an impartial arbiter.

In this sorry affair, one of the worst offenders of journalistic principles has been the New York Times, generally regarded as America’s premier newspaper. During the Ukraine crisis, the Times has been little more than a propaganda conveyor belt delivering what the U.S. government wants out via shoddy and biased reporting from the likes of Michael R. Gordon and David Herszenhorn.

The Times reached what was arguably a new low on Sunday when it accepted as flat fact the still unproven point of how Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down. The Times dropped all attribution despite what appear to be growing – rather than diminishing – doubts about Official Washington’s narrative that Ukrainian rebels shot down the plane by using a powerful Russian-supplied Buk missile battery.

U.S. and Ukrainian government officials began pushing this narrative immediately after the plane went down on July 17 killing 298 people onboard. But the only evidence has been citations of “social media” and the snippet of an intercepted phone call containing possibly confused comments by Ukrainian rebels after the crash, suggesting that some rebels initially believed they had shot the plane down but later reversed that judgment.

A major problem with this evidence is that it assumes the rebels – or for that matter the Ukrainian armed forces – operate with precise command and control when the reality is that the soldiers on both sides are not very professional and function in even a deeper fog of war than might exist in other circumstances.

Missing Images

But an even bigger core problem for the U.S. narrative is that it is virtually inconceivable that American intelligence did not have satellite and other surveillance on eastern Ukraine at the time of the shoot-down. Yet the U.S. government has been unable (or unwilling) to supply a single piece of imagery showing the Russians supplying a Buk anti-aircraft missile battery to the rebels; the rebels transporting the missiles around eastern Ukraine; the rebels firing the fateful missile that allegedly brought down the Malaysian airliner; or the rebels then returning the missiles to Russia.

To accept Official Washington’s certainty about what it “knows” happened, you would have to believe that American spy satellites – considered the best in the world – could not detect 16-feet-tall missiles during their odyssey around Russia and eastern Ukraine. If that is indeed the case, the U.S. taxpayers should demand their billions upon billions of dollars back.

However, the failure of U.S. intelligence to release its satellite images of Buk missile batteries in eastern Ukraine is the “dog-not-barking” evidence that this crucial evidence to support the U.S. government’s allegations doesn’t exist. Can anyone believe that if U.S. satellite images showed the missiles crossing the border, being deployed by the rebels and then returning to Russia, that those images would not have been immediately declassified and shown to the world? In this case, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence – absence of U.S. evidence.

The U.S. government’s case also must overcome public remarks by senior U.S. military personnel at variance with the Obama administration’s claims of certainty. For instance, the Washington Post’s Craig Whitlock reported last Saturday that Air Force Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, U.S. commander of NATO forces in Europe, said last month that “We have not seen any of the [Russian] air-defense vehicles across the border yet.”

Whitlock also reported that “Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said defense officials could not point to specific evidence that an SA-11 [Buk] surface-to-air missile system had been transported from Russia into eastern Ukraine.”

There’s also the possibility that a Ukrainian government missile – either from its own Buk missile batteries fired from the ground or from a warplane in the sky – brought down the Malaysian plane. I was told by one source who had been briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts that some satellite images suggest that the missile battery was under the control of Ukrainian government troops but that the conclusion was not definitive.

Plus, there were reports from eyewitnesses in the area of the crash that at least one Ukrainian jet fighter closed on the civilian plane shortly before it went down. The Russian government also has cited radar data supposedly showing Ukrainian fighters in the vicinity.

Need for a Real Inquiry

What all this means is that a serious and impartial investigation is needed to determine who was at fault and to apportion accountability. But that inquiry is still underway with no formal conclusions.

So, in terms of journalistic professionalism, a news organization should treat the mystery of who shot down Flight 17 with doubt. Surely, no serious journalist would jump to the conclusion based on the dubious claims made by one side in a dispute while the other side is adamant in its denials, especially with the stakes so high in a tense confrontation between two nuclear powers.

But that is exactly what the Times did in describing new U.S. plans to escalate the confrontation by possibly supplying tactical intelligence to the Ukrainian army so it can more effectively wage war against eastern Ukrainian rebels.

On Sunday, the Times wrote: “At the core of the debate, said several [U.S.] officials — who, like others interviewed, spoke on the condition of anonymity because the policy deliberations are still in progress — is whether the American goal should be simply to shore up a Ukrainian government reeling from the separatist attacks, or to send a stern message to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin by aggressively helping Ukraine target the missiles Russia has provided. Those missiles have taken down at least five aircraft in the past 10 days, including Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.” [Emphasis added.]

The link provided by the Times’ online version of the story connects to an earlier Times’ story that attributed the accusations blaming Russia to U.S. “officials.” But this new story drops that attribution and simply accepts the claims as flat fact.

The danger of American “information warfare” that treats every development in the Ukraine crisis as an opportunity to blame Putin and ratchet up tensions with Russia has been apparent since the beginning of the Ukraine crisis – as has been the clear anti-Russian bias of the Times and virtually every other outlet of the mainstream U.S. news media. [See’s “Will Ukraine Be NYT’s Waterloo?”]

Since the start of the crisis last year, U.S. officials and American-funded non-governmental organizations have not only pushed a one-sided story but have been pushing a dangerous agenda, seeking to create a collision between the United States and Russia and, more personally, between President Barack Obama and President Putin.

The vehicle for this head-on collision between Russia and the United States was the internal political disagreement in Ukraine over whether elected President Viktor Yanukovych should have accepted harsh International Monetary Fund austerity demands as the price for associating with the European Union or agree to a more generous offer from Russia.

Angered last September when Putin helped Obama avert a planned U.S. bombing campaign against Syria, American neocons were at the forefront of this strategy. Their principal need was to destroy the Putin-Obama collaboration, which also was instrumental in achieving a breakthrough on the Iran nuclear dispute (while the neocons were hoping that the U.S. military might bomb Iran, too).

So, on Sept. 26, 2013, Carl Gershman, a leading neocon and longtime president of the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy, took to the op-ed page of the neocon-flagship Washington Post to urge the U.S. government to push European “free trade” agreements on Ukraine and other former Soviet states and thus counter Moscow’s efforts to maintain close relations with those countries.

The ultimate goal, according to Gershman, was isolating and possibly toppling Putin in Russia with Ukraine the key piece on this global chessboard. “Ukraine is the biggest prize,” Gershmanwrote. “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.”

To give the United States more leverage inside Ukraine, Gershman’s NED paid for scores of projects, including training “activists” and supporting “journalists.” Rather than let the Ukrainian political process sort out this disagreement, U.S. officials, such as neocon Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and neocon Sen. John McCain, also intervened to encourage increasingly disruptive demonstrations seeking to overthrow Yanukovych when he opted for the Russian deal over the EU-IMF offer.

Though much of the ensuing violence was instigated by neo-Nazi militias that had moved to the front of the anti-Yanukovych protests, the U.S. government and its complicit news media blamed every act of violence on Yanukovych and the police, including a still mysterious sniper attack that left both protesters and police dead.

On Feb. 21, Yanukovych denied ordering any shootings and tried to stem the violence by signing an agreement brokered by three European nations to reduce his powers and hold early elections so he could be voted out of office. He also complied with a demand from Vice President Joe Biden to pull back Ukrainian police. Then, the trap sprang shut.

Neo-Nazi militias overran government buildings and forced Yanukovych and his officials to flee for their lives. The State Department quickly endorsed the coup regime – hastily formed by the remnants of the parliament – as “legitimate.” Besides passing bills offensive to ethnic Russians in the east, one of the parliament’s top priorities was to enact the IMF austerity plan.

White Hats/Black Hats

Though the major U.S. news media was aware of these facts – and indeed you could sometimes detect the reality by reading between the lines of dispatches from the field – the overriding U.S. narrative was that the coup-makers were the “white hats” and Yanukovych along with Putin were the “black hats.” Across the U.S. media, Putin was mocked for riding on a horse shirtless and other indiscretions. For the U.S. media, it was all lots of fun, as was the idea of reprising the Cold War with Moscow.

When the people of Crimea – many of whom were ethnic Russians – voted overwhelmingly to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia, the U.S. media declared the move a Russian “invasion” although the Russian troops were already in Ukraine as part of an agreement with previous Ukrainian governments.

Every development that could be hyped was hyped. There was virtually no nuance in the news reporting, a lack of professionalism led by the New York Times. Yet, the solution to the crisis was always relatively obvious: a federalized system that would allow the ethnic Russians in the east a measure of self-governance and permit Ukraine to have cordial economic relations with both the EU and Russia.

But replacement President Petro Poroshenko – elected when a secession fight was already underway in the east – refused to negotiate with the ethnic Russian rebels who had rejected the ouster of Yanukovych. Sensing enough political support inside the U.S. government, Poroshenko opted for a military solution.

It was in that context of a massive Ukrainian government assault on the east that Russia stepped up its military assistance to the beleaguered rebels, including the apparent provision of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles to fend off Kiev’s air superiority. The rebels did succeed in shooting down some Ukrainian warplanes flying at altitudes far below the 33,000 feet of the Malaysia Airlines plane.

For a plane at that height to be shot down required a more powerful system, like the Buk anti-aircraft batteries or an air-to-air missile fired by a fighter jet. Which brings us to the mystery of what happened on the afternoon of July 17 and why it is so important to let a serious investigation evaluate all the available evidence and not to have a rush to judgment.

But the idea of doing an investigation first and drawing conclusions second is a concept that, apparently, neither the U.S. government nor the New York Times accepts. They would prefer to start with the conclusion and then make a serious investigation irrelevant, one more casualty of information warfare.

# # # #

About Robert Parry:

Robert-Parry-120x120We founded in 1995 as the first investigative news magazine on the Internet. The site was meant to be a home for important, well-reported stories and a challenge to the inept but dominant mainstream news media of the day. As one of the reporters who helped expose the Iran-Contra scandal for the Associated Press in the mid-1980s, I was distressed by the silliness and propaganda that had come to pervade American journalism. I feared, too, that the decline of the U.S. press corps foreshadowed disasters that would come when journalists failed to alert the public about impending dangers — Robert Parry.

# # # #

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.  To support’s important work developing well-reported stories click here to visit their donation page. TND full (1)

Follow All Of’s Exclusive Articles:


Subscribe To Receive All TND’s Exclusive Articles In Your RSS Feed:


New York Knicks fire Woodson after missing playoffs (via AFP)

The New York Knicks on Monday fired head coach Mike Woodson after the team missed the NBA playoffs, team president Phil Jackson said. The Knicks went 109-79 in three seasons under Woodson, twice making the playoffs before slumping to 37-45 this season…

     A lie told often enough becomes truth  – Vladmir Lenin

TND Guest Contributor:  Dave Kranzler | housing-and-fiscal-cliff
When you look at the quote – and the source of that quote – it’s amazing how similar the political, banking and media machinery in this country has assimilated the characteristics of the old Russia that we were taught to despise in the 1970’s U.S. educational system.  I guess time is a flat circle.  Everything ever done in this world will be done again, over and over.
The big lie being told to the public right now is that the housing market is in a miraculous recovery,  that inventories are extremely tight and that now is the best time to “invest” in a new home.   Of course, if that were true, why are homebuilder insiders unloading their company shares in epic quantities?
January home sales in Southern California were their slowest in three years:  LINK   The “bad weather” lies do not work there because SoCal was warmer than normal in January.  How about the truth:  the housing market is back in its bear market trend.

The narrative that has been carefully spun around the housing fairy tale is full of lies.  Sure, the way the National Association of Realtors reports inventory makes it appear as if listings are low right now. Look around your area and make note of the number of “coming soon” signs you see.  They’re all over Denver.  A couple homes in my immediate area have been “coming soon” since before Christmas.  Did you know that a “coming soon” home is actually on the market but not officially listed in the MLS.  That “coming soon” home is thus not counted in the NAR’s inventory.  But it’s for sale.

And the big banks have been withholding a large portion of homes they have foreclosed on over the past 4 years.  They can do this because the Fed’s QE has injected $2.5 trillion in cash onto their balance sheets.  The homes will soon hit the market, as foreclosures are spiking up again.  If you scan through enough homebuilder 10-Q’s, you’ll see that homebuilder inventories have seriously ballooned over the last year. inventory is significantly higher than propaganda is reporting.  And if you read my series of articles on the housing market over the past 3-4 months, you’ll see the real data showing sales falling at an accelerating rate month the month and that prices are quickly dropping.

We saw even more evidence that the housing market is starting to fall apart today.  Housing starts – which in and of itself is a dubious indicator of housing market vitality – once again spiked lower and was well below the expectations of Wall Street’s “brain trust” aka snake oil salesmen.  And the weekly index of mortgage purchase application took another big tumble this week, falling to 19 year lows and down 17% year over year.  Mortgages, by the way, are the life blood of home sales. If applications to purchase homes are plummeting, so is true demand.
As I outline in this article published this morning, the housing market is in big trouble:  Look out below!
If you are thinking about buying a home because you think the time is right, wait for 6 months.  Not only will you have a huge selection of choices but prices will be significantly lower.  If you want to sell your house because you understand the nature of the big lie being told, get it listed now and price it to move.
Housing: From The Trenches In Arizona
“I live in ground zero of the real estate bubble in Arizona and my wife is a real estate agent. She works with a flipper and none of their properties are moving, not even getting offers. With winter snowbirds here this is the strongest time of the year for real estate and nothing is moving. Her investors have been dumping their prices and are starting to panic. “Just get rid of it” is becoming the mantra. The MLS listings have been increasing every month for three months and sales are declining. I think its about to shit the bed again.”  – from a comment posted on today’s earlier post.

# # # #
About Dave Kranzler

I spent many years working in various analytic jobs and trading on Wall Street. For nine of those years, I traded junk bonds for Bankers Trust. I have an MBA from the University of Chicago, with a concentration in accounting and finance. My goal is to help people understand and analyze what is really going on in our financial system and economy. You can follow my work and contact me via my blog, “The Golden Truth” and Seeking Alpha.

As a co-founder and principal of Golden Returns Capital, LLC Mr. Kranzler co-manages the Precious Metals Opportunity Fund, a metals and mining stock investment fund.

TND full (1)

Follow All Of’s Exclusive Articles:


Subscribe To Receive All TND’s Exclusive Articles In Your RSS Feed:


TND Exclusive: By Eric Dubin | fukushima_01

Three days ago, The News Doctors published a story that drew some skepticism within social media.  Unfortunately, the story is not an internet conspiracy theory.  Upon further investigation, this appears to be the sort of story that needs to go through multiple rounds of “distribution” and time before the mainstream media pays attention – if ever.

Over a year ago, eight crew members that served on the USS Ronald Reagan during a Fukushima rescue effort called “Operation Tomadachi” filed a lawsuit against Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO).  As time passed, additional plaintiffs joined the lawsuit.  By April, 2013, twenty-six plaintiffs were named in the case — “Cooper et al v. Tokyo Electric Power Company, Inc. et. al., case number 3:2013cv00773, filed with the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.  Today, 51 plaintiffs are now named.  According to a recent interview with Charles A. Bonner, one of the attorneys representing plaintiffs, the number will soon rise.  As the plaintiff pool grows, perhaps the mainstream media will no longer be able to ignore the story.

It’s not for the media to judge the merits of the plaintiffs’ case.  That’s the responsibility of our judicial system.  But what is disturbing is the near total lack of mainstream media coverage this story has generated.

The Helen Caldicott Foundation and The New York Academy of Medicine hosted a 2 day symposium last March on “The Medical and Ecological Consequences of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident.”  Well known anti-nuclear activist Dr. Helen Caldicott moderated a press conference as part of the symposium, where US Navy Quartermasters (retired) Maurice Enis and Jaime Plym detailed their radiation exposure and subsequent health damage while serving “Operation Tomadachi” on the USS Ronald Reagan.  The symposium noted, “over 150 participants in the mission are reported to have since developed tumors, tremors, internal bleeding, hair loss and other health problems they attribute to radiation exposure.”  Excerpts of the press conference with Enis and Plym can be seen in the YouTube video below.  Video of the entire symposium is now online, accessible at the link above or via this direct link.

Writing for the respected Courthouse News Service, Elizabeth Warmerdam quoted sections of the plaintiffs’ complaint:

“TEPCO pursued a policy to cause rescuers, including the plaintiffs, to rush into an unsafe area which was too close to the FNPP [Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant] that had been damaged. Relying upon the misrepresentations regarding health and safety made by TEPCO … the U.S. Navy was lulled into a false sense of security.” “Defendant TEPCO and the government of Japan, conspired and acted in concert, among other things, to create an illusory impression that the extent of the radiation that had leaked from the site of the FNPP was at levels that would not pose a threat to the plaintiffs…”

Click here to read Elizabeth Warmerdam’s entire report.

On December 10th, activist news service “Nuclear Hotseat” released its 129th Podcast.  Just over 23 minutes into the program, Producer, Libbe Halevy conducts a highly informative interview with Charles A. Bonner, one of the attorney’s representing plaintiffs against TEPCO and Japan.  Click here to listen to the interview and to see Halevy’s other stories discussed in show #129.

The fact that this interview has been “live” for a week but has received little exposure is yet another example of the mainstream media basically ignoring this story.  Looking at the ranking for the Nuclear Hotseat website at about 5 AM EST, December 17th, it had a ranking of 4,923,047 out of global web sites, a tiny reach but up an astounding 18,075,284 points.  Credit where credit is due, Al Jazeera’s American audience blog picked-up on Halevy’s interview and is probably one of the main factors behind the sudden leap in Nuclear Hotseat’s website rank.  Click here to read Al Jazeera’s story.  Hopefully, with The News Doctors coverage and with the syndication of our blog partners and individuals sharing this story further, Halevy’s informative interview will receive more attention.

In sum, this story is not an internet conspiracy theory.  The court filing is available, as a public document.  The News Doctors is in no position to be able to judge the veracity of the plaintiffs’ case.  Again, that’s a determination for our judicial system.  But one thing is for sure:  the mainstream media has for the most part, ignored this story.


TND full (1)

Follow All Of’s Exclusive Articles:


Subscribe To Receive All TND’s Exclusive Articles In Your RSS Feed:


France adopts bill to penalise prostitutes’ clients (via AFP)

French lawmakers on Wednesday approved a controversial bill that will make the clients of prostitutes liable for fines starting at 1,500 euros ($2,000). The draft anti-prostitution law was approved by the lower-house National Assembly with 268 deputies…

TND Guest Contributor:  Grant Bosse | New Hampshire Watchdog | ben100

Inspired by Julian Simon, I’m searching for someone willing to lose a bet in defense of the increasingly disastrous Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Here’s the bet:

By Jan. 1, 2015, the number of Americans with health insurance prior to Oct. 1 who lose their current coverage due to employers or insurance companies discontinuing coverage will exceed the number of Americans without health insurance prior to Oct. 1 who purchase coverage through the exchanges set up under the Affordable Care Act.

The core rationale of the health care law known as Obamacare was that expanding coverage to uninsured Americans would fundamentally improve the overall American health care system. There were also plenty of promises of bringing down premium costs, but no one seriously believed those. President Obama also promised repeatedly that anyone happy with their current plan or doctor could keep it. That’s simply not true, and never had any chance of being true.

Read more at New Hampshire Watchdog.

drugsTND Guest Contributor: Jon Rappoport /

People want to believe medical science gives us, at any given moment, the best of all possible worlds.

And of course, the best of all possible worlds must have its enemies: the quacks who sell unproven snake oil.

So let’s look at some facts.

As I’ve been documenting in my last several articles, the medical cartel has been engaged in massive criminal fraud, presenting their drugs as safe and effective across the board—when, in fact, these drugs have been killing and maiming huge numbers of people, like clockwork.

I’ve cited the review, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”, by Dr. Barbara Starfied (Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000), in which Starfield reveals the American medical system kills 225,000 people per year—106,000 as a direct result of pharmaceutical drugs.

I’ve now found another study, published in the same Journal, two years earlier: April 15, 1998; “Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients.” It, too, is mind-boggling.

The authors, led by Jason Lazarou, culled 39 previous studies on patients in hospitals. These patients, who received drugs in hospitals, or were admitted to hospitals because they were suffering from the drugs doctors had given them, met the following fate:

Every year, in the US, between 76,000 and 137,000 hospitalized patients die as a direct result of the drugs.

Beyond that, every year 2.2 MILLION hospitalized patients experience serious adverse reactions to the drugs.

The authors write: “…Our study on ADRs [Adverse Drug Reactions], which excludes medication errors, had a different objective: to show that there are a large number of ADRs even when the drugs are properly prescribed and and administered.”

So this study had nothing to do with doctor errors, nurse errors, or improper combining of drugs. And it only counted people killed who were admitted to hospitals. It didn’t begin to tally all the people taking pharmaceuticals outside hospitals who died as consequence of the drugs.

I found the link to this study at the Dr. Rath Health Foundation, in the middle of a very interesting article by Dr. Aleksandra Niedzwiecki: “Commentary on the Safety of Vitamins.”

Here are two key quotes from her article:

“In 2010, not one single person [in the US] died as a result of taking vitamins (Bronstein, et al, (2011) Clinical Toxical, 49 (10), 910-941).”

“In 2004, the deaths of 3 people [in the US] were attributed to the intake of vitamins. Of these, 2 persons were said to have died as a result of megadoses of vitamins D and E, and one person as a result of an overdose of iron and fluoride. Data from: ‘Toxic Exposure Surveillance System 2004, Annual Report, Am. Assoc. of Poison Control Centers.’”

Summing up:

No deaths from vitamins (2011), and three deaths (2004) from vitamins (plus fluoride!).

106,000 deaths every year from pharmaceutical drugs (Starfield).

Between 76,000 and 137,000 deaths from pharmaceutical drugs every year in hospitalized patients (Lazerou).

The FDA and its “quack-buster” allies go after vitamins, demean “unproven remedies,” and generally take every possible opportunity to warn people about “alternatives,” on the basis that they aren’t scientifically supported.

Meanwhile, the very drugs these mobsters are promoting—and in the case of the FDA, CERTIFYING AS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE—are killing and maiming people at a staggering rate.

The masses are treated to non-stop PR on the glories of the US medical system.

In the Wikipedia entry, “US military casualties of war,” the grand total of all military deaths in the history of this country, starting with the Revolutionary War, is 1,312,612.

In any given 10 years of modern medical treatment? 2,250,000 deaths.

Consider how much suppression is necessary to keep the latter number under wraps.

# # # #

About Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at

The Matrix Revealed

TND full (1)

Follow All Of’s Exclusive Articles:


Subscribe To Receive All TND’s Exclusive Articles In Your RSS Feed: