Saturday, April 14, 2007

Is Orwell Dead? Big Brother Isn't! (Part 1)


MicroChip or Radio Frequency Identification Chip (RFID)The VeriChip is a glass encapsulated Radio Frequency Identification tag that is injected into the flesh to uniquely number and identify people. The tag can be read silently and invisibly by radio waves from up to a foot or more away, right through clothing. The highly controversial device is also being marketed as a way to access secure areas, link to medical records, and serve as a payment device when associated with a credit card.

RFID Implants Found to Cause Cancer Tumors
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
by: David Gutierrez
Small electronic chips approved by the FDA for implanting beneath human skin have been linked to cancer in laboratory animals, according to a research review conducted by the Associated Press.
The radio frequency identification (RFID) chips are made by VeriChip Corp. They are designed to carry a serial number, which can be read when scanned by anyone with an RFID sensor. Medical workers can then use that number to access a patient's medical history from a web site maintained by the corporation, provided they have paid the annual access fee.
The chips, which are approximately twice the size of a grain of rice, were approved by the FDA for human implantation in 2005. But the Associated Press has revealed that as early as 1996, researchers had uncovered a link between the devices and cancer. Rodents implanted with the chips were found to develop malignant tumors beneath the skin, usually surrounding the devices. The rates were high enough -- as high as 10 percent of animals implanted, in a 1998 study -- to raise warning bells with the researchers, who reported their concern in peer-reviewed journals.
None of the studies were looking for carcinogenic effects from the RFID tags, but in each case the researchers ruled out other possible causes. Although there was no non-implanted control group in many of the studies, the evidence is strong enough to convince many researchers that more research is needed before any more human implantation takes place.
Consumer Watchdogs Demand Recall of Spychipped Credit Cards:
Consumer watchdog group CASPIAN is demanding a recall of millions of RFID-equipped contactless credit cards in light of serious security flaws reported today in the New York Times. The paper reports that a team of security researchers has found that virtually every one of these cards tested is vulnerable to unauthorized charges and puts consumers at risk for identity theft.
Wisconsin Bans Forced Human RFID Chipping - Groundbreaking Law Spotlights Opposition to VeriChip: Civil libertarians cheered yesterday upon news that Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle signed a law making it a crime to require an individual to be implanted with a microchip.
North Dakota bans forced RFID chipping: "Technology is a wonderful thing," said North Dakota state Sen. Dick Dever, one of the co-sponsors of the bill. "It creates all kinds of opportunities. It also brings with it the possibility for abuse. This bill to prevent the implantation of RFID chips in an individual against their will is to protect people from the abuse of that technology.
Japan: Schoolkids to be tagged with RFID chips - Japanese authorities decide tracking is best way to protect kids:,39042972,39186467,00.htm The rights and wrongs of RFID-chipping human beings have been debated since the tracking tags reached the technological mainstream. Now, school authorities in the Japanese city of Osaka have decided the benefits outweigh the disadvantages and will now be chipping children in one primary school. Employees get microchip implants - Company requires controversial device for certain workers: The highly controversial device is being marketed as a way to access secure areas, link to medical records and make purchases like a credit card.
Frequently Asked Questions About RFID: Note that at a June 2003 RFID conference in Chicago, Alien Technology displayed a Wal-Mart Athletic Works® running shoe with an Alien RFID tag inserted under the insole. Their stated reason for wanting to chip shoes was to keep shoe sizes together and match pairs. In our opinion, pervasive RFID chipping of shoes will become a frightening reality unless we tell companies that we will not buy products with chips!
Is RFID tracking you? By Daniel Sieberg: Radio frequency identification has been heralded as a breakthrough in tracking technology, and denounced as the next Big Brother surveillance tool. "At least 30 million people carry an RFID tag on them every day in their car keys or in their access control card to get into their office building or to buy gas or to pay a toll," wrote RFID Journal's Roberti.
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Systems: RFID systems have gained popularity, and notoriety, in recent years. A driving force behind the rapid development of RFID technology has been the rise of pervasive commerce, sometimes dubbed the quiet revolution. Pervasive commerce uses technologies such as tracking devices and smart labels embedded with transmitting sensors and intelligent readers to convey information about key areas where consumers live and work to data processing systems.
Microchipping of the Population - The Mark of the Beast Could Be the Bio-Chip Implant "VeryPay" Leading to a Cashless, Checkless Society: There are many links to explore and some good articles to read. Certainly food for thought.
Microchipping of Alzheimer's patients begins in Florida: The Delray Beach, Fla.-based company VeriChip Corp. has announced plans to implant 200 Alzheimer's patients in Palm Beach County with radio-frequency identification chips as part of a pilot study to test the new technology.The VeriMed microchip is approximately the size of a grain of rice and contains a 16-digit patient identification number, which is available to anyone who scans the device with the right technology. This number can then be entered into a database to retrieve a patient's medical information. The FDA has approved the chip for human implantation.
Police State
We are already a police state. Don't believe me? Watch a video entitled "Police State in Florida" at and see what you think.
Articles and Links: The Police State Road Map, March 2005 edition. Revised and updated. Read free on-line or download. Lots of information.
Police State USA: A police state exists when federal and state political and police mechanisms: Shut down media coverage after they steal an election; serve the central government instead of serving the citizens; enforce the policies of the central government instead of responding primarily to criminal misdeeds; and spy on and intimidate citizens. All these conditions now exist in the United States! Don't be afraid to check this site out.
Is America a Police State? By Congressman Ron Paul, 2002: Terror and fear are used to achieve complacency and obedience, especially when citizens are deluded into believing they are still a free people. The changes, they are assured, will be minimal, short-lived, and necessary, such as those that occur in times of a declared war. Thought Police - Big Brother may be watching what you read: According to a University of Illinois study of 1,020 libraries conducted during the first two months of 2002, government sources asked 85 university and public libraries -- 8.3 percent of those queried -- for information on patrons following the attacks.
FBI shuts down 20 antiwar web sites: an unprecedented act of Internet censorship: This intervention by American police to shut down antiwar web sites has been widely reported in Europe, with accounts carried in the British Guardian and Independent and by the French news agency Agence France-Presse, among others. But nothing has appeared as yet in the American mass media.

Federally Funded Boffins Want To Scrap The Internet: Researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time. Make no mistake, the internet, one of the greatest outposts of free speech ever created is under constant attack by powerful people who cannot operate within a society where information flows freely and unhindered.
Harper's Magazine: We Now Live in a Fascist State: It is not every day that the editor of a respected national magazine publishes an essay claiming that America is not on the road to becoming, but ALREADY IS, a fascist state.... or words to that affect.
Russia is a Police State - Protesters turn on Putin:,,2057413,00.html 2,000 demonstrators defy Kremlin to march in Moscow's streets as opposition leader Garry Kasparov is arrested.


Fascist America in 10 easy steps:,,2064157,00.html From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history shows there are certain steps that any would-be dictator must take to destroy constitutional freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush and his administration seem to be taking them all.
Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1, 2008 3rd Infantry’s 1st BCT trains for a new dwell-time mission. Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active Army
By Gina Cavallaro - Staff writerPosted : Monday Sep 8, 2008 6:15:06 EDT
The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.
Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.
Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.
They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.
Rocco Galati on Canada's tendency towards a Police State Agenda in anti Terrorism laws: If anyone has any doubts about our Western democracies by now have got a tendency towards becoming police states, read this transcript from a talk by constitutional lawyer Galati, and you will see that the new "anti-terrorist" laws have already enacted a tendency towards removal of our basic rights to oppose government policy. The extent to which they are used and abused remains to be seen, but as this one lawyer asserts, the new laws seem have an aim to silence a lot of effective dissent.
LA officers fired 240 "nonlethal" rounds at children, babies and beating up the media: Police began forcing everyone out of the park. "They were pushing children, elderly, mothers with their babies and beating up on the media," Sanbrano said. Police Chief William J. Bratton on Wednesday promised an investigation into the conduct of police who dispersed an immigration rally, after videos captured officers using force with reporters and firing rubber bullets into crowds.
Reporter Arrested on Orders of Giuliani Press Secretary Charged with Criminal Trespass Despite Protest of CNN Staff and Official Event Press Credentials at GOP Debate in New Hampshire:
Freelance reporter Matt Lepacek, reporting for, was arrested for asking a question to one of Giuliani's staff members in a press conference. The press secretary identified the New York based reporter as having previously asked Giuliani about his prior knowledge of WTC building collapses and ordered New Hampshire state police to arrest him.
Bush administration pushes for expansion and deepening of police state: “American fascism is something different now. It’s not just private, elite control over the legal system, nor private evasion of the rule of law. It’s a crisis-induced transition from a society with a deeply compromised legal system to a society where force and surveillance completely supplant the system.”

Here's a short article worth reading: NSA 'spy room' at AT&T exposed
Agency can spy on email and web use with impunity
Iain Thomson,, 13 Jun 2007
Documents obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) claim to show that US telco AT&T allowed the National Security Agency (NSA) to set up a 'secret room' in its offices to monitor internet traffic. The documents were handed over as part of an EFF legal case against AT&T for alleged violation of user privacy. The US government has asked the courts to dismiss the case, claiming that the lawsuit could expose state secrets. "The district court rejected the government's attempt to sweep this case under the rug," said EFF senior staff attorney Kurt Opsahl. "This country has a long tradition of open court proceedings, and we are pleased that, as we present our case to the Court of Appeals, the millions of affected AT&T customers will be able to see our arguments and evidence and judge for themselves." The room, described as secret and secure, houses surveillance equipment used to spy on AT&T customers. Investigations could include web use, email and voice communications. "This is critical evidence supporting our claim that AT&T is cooperating with the NSA in the illegal dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans," said EFF legal director Cindy Cohn. "This surveillance is under debate in Congress and across the nation, as well as in the courts. "The public has a right to see these important documents, the declarations from our witnesses and our legal arguments, and we are very pleased to release them."
Blair Calls For Chinese Style Net Controls In the UK: Blair complained that the media was too "feral" (i.e. not tamed by the government) and referring to online journalism stated: "In fact, the new forms can be even more pernicious, less balanced, more intent on the latest conspiracy theory multiplied by five."
Huge majority say civil liberty curbs a 'price worth paying' to fight terror: Research finds most support compulsory ID cards, with phone tapping, curfews and tagging for suspects:,,1997283,00.html The survey found seven in every 10 people think compulsory identity cards for all adults would be "a price worth paying" to reduce the threat of terrorism. Eight in 10 say the authorities should be able to tap the phones of people suspected of involvement in terrorism, open their mail and impose electronic tagging or home curfews. The findings come from the annual British Social Attitudes survey, based on interviews with a sample of 3,000 adults by the National Centre for Social Research.
Stop the Big Brother State:

Law & Justice
Justice Dept. moves to thwart Congress's CIA inquiries
By Richard B. Schmitt, Los Angeles Times December 15, 2007 WASHINGTON - The Justice Department yesterday moved to consolidate control over the investigation into the destruction of CIA interrogation tapes, saying that neither it nor the intelligence agency would cooperate with congressional inquiries into the matter.
The moves angered members of Congress, who said the department was obstructing legitimate legislative oversight. Justice and CIA officials said in correspondence with congressional leaders that turning over information at this point could make the inquiry vulnerable to political pressures.
The decision to withhold evidence effectively puts the congressional inquiries on hold and also points up the seriousness of the week-old investigation, which is being conducted jointly by the Justice Department and the CIA inspector general. Officials for the first time raised the possibility that the investigation could result in criminal charges.
"While we make no prediction at this early stage about where our inquiry might lead, the possibilities include criminal law enforcement action, as well as civil and administrative remedies," said Assistant Attorney General Kenneth L. Wainstein and John L. Helgerson, the CIA inspector, in a letter to House Intelligence Committee leaders.
Calling on the committee to "defer" its investigation, Wainstein and Helgerson said "actions responsive to your requests would present significant risks to our preliminary investigation."
They said they were concerned about the committee interviewing personnel from the CIA inspector general office because the Justice Department had determined that "they are potential witnesses in the matter under our inquiry."
Representative Silvestre Reyes, Democrat of Texas, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, and Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the committee's top Republican, said they were "stunned that the Justice Department would move to block our investigation."
"It's clear that there's more to this story than we have been told," Reyes and Hoekstra said in a statement. "The executive branch can't be trusted to oversee itself."
On Thursday, Reyes and Hoekstra sent a letter to CIA Director Michael V. Hayden asking for relevant records including "all cables referring or related to the making, retention or destruction of videotapes of detainees." The letter gave the CIA until yesterday evening to comply.
A CIA spokesman said the agency intends to cooperate with Congress. "Director Hayden has said the agency will cooperate fully with both the preliminary inquiry conducted by the Department of Justice and CIA's inspector general, and to the Congress," CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said. "That has been and certainly will be the case."
But a senior US intelligence official said the CIA would not ignore the instructions from the Department of Justice and might have to delay delivery of documents and witnesses to congressional investigators until the Justice inquiry is completed.
"If the Department of Justice says, 'We want to see these documents before anybody else sees them,' CIA will comply," said the senior US intelligence official.
The Justice Department had no comment yesterday beyond releasing letters on the investigation. The department also informed the Senate Judiciary Committee that it would not answer questions about the probe from that panel."The department has a long-standing policy of declining to provide nonpublic information about pending matters," Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said in a letter to Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, and Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, the chairman and ranking member, respectively, of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
U.S. Judges Kill the Ninth Amendment by Fred E. Foldvary, Senior Editor: In the United States, the heart and soul of the U.S. Constitution has been the Ninth Amendment. As reported by the Associated Press, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed on March 14, 2007 that the Ninth Amendment to the United States is now null and void, and that the federal government of the United States of America has no moral legitimacy.
Broader Privilege Claimed In Firings - White House Says Hill Can't Pursue Contempt Cases: Bush administration officials unveiled a bold new assertion of executive authority yesterday in the dispute over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, saying that the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges initiated by Congress against White House officials once the president has invoked executive privilege.
Federal Judge OKs Law Signed by Bush Even Though the House Never Voted on It. We Need a Real Judiciary Again: the Constitution is pretty clear on how a bill becomes a law, and that's not it. If a teenager wrote a paper advocating this process in civics class, he or she would receive a failing grade. Nevertheless, Bush's lawyers are fervently trying to defend this fatuity instead of simply admitting for once that the president messed up. Hey, when you've gone through the trouble of putting jurists like Judge Bates on the bench, why not?

Why the Supreme Court MattersSubmitted by BuzzFlash on Wed, 09/17/2008 - 12:02pm. by Bethany Cunningham Gabbert, J.D.,
In their frenzy to make this about change, experience, and character, the media, the bloggers, and the undecideds are ignoring the 9-member elephant in the room.
Did you see the guy at the RNC holding up the "Thank You, Mr. Bush" sign with the picture of John Roberts and Sam Alito? This is what's really at stake here. The average Supreme Court Justice serves for 20+ years. Consider that even the most successful president/vice president duo ends its reach at 16 years (a feat that hasn't been accomplished in the last 50 years), and that the president leaves a legacy, not a treatise worth of legal precedent.
The next president will likely get to appoint 2-3 Justices. In recent years, many decisions have been 5-4 decisions. Two of the justices who are most likely to retire, John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsberg are the two staunchest defenders of civil liberties on the bench. They are old. They are tired. They have been hanging on for a Democratic president because when they go, the tenor of the court will change. A two-judge conservative majority would be huge. A three-judge majority would be catastrophic and would take us back nearly a century to when civil liberties were narrowly interpreted.
Many of the freedoms we take for granted came out of so-called "Liberal courts." When John McCain says he'll appoint justices who "won't legislate from the bench," it's pretty clear that he hasn't read many Supreme Court opinions. In every single case, the court is called upon to INTERPRET the law. If the answer was easy, the case wouldn't be before them. What John McCain means is that he'll appoint justices who share his party's views and won't veer off into unwelcome territory. What he's truly doing is giving a code-word gift to the conservative interests who oppose abortion rights, and who want to see a very narrow interpretation of the first 10 amendments (with the exception of the second, which they'd like to find Justices with hubble telescope capable vision to interpret).
I think many disillusioned souls are considering sitting this one out -- waiting till 2012. Or giving John McCain his "due" because they admire him as a person, or because they think it's time to have our first woman vice president. And there are many people who when told allowing John McCain to become president will change the face of the Supreme Court, say "Who Cares?" Roe v. Wade is passé to many people. Abortion isn't the driving issue for moderate Americans, and many aren't concerned about abortion being criminalized again, even if comes with no exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother (Palin favors this type of absolute ban).
I have news for all those people. Roe v. Wade is the tip of the iceberg. If you hand the future of the Supreme Court to John McCain, you're risking far more than a single decision. You're risking your ability to speak out & protest against your government & corporations. You're risking your rights against corporations, and you're risking an expansion of corporate power. You're risking the overturning of anti-trust and fair-trade decisions. Larger & larger mergers. Fewer rights for consumers. You risk the line between church and state blurring.
You risk the rights of defendants. Many criminal law decisions are decided by the 5-4 margin. Wiretapping. The Patriot Act. Being held without being charged. Access to a lawyer. Sufficiency of the evidence. Fair trial. Racial profiling. These are the issues that the court deals with every day. They might get 1-2 abortion cases a year, but dozens of criminal law decisions are handed down that affect your daily rights. Not so sure? Hundreds of protesters were arrested at the RNC. Doctors, lawyers, and straight A students were in their mix. Do you want their rights protected? Do you want judges who look at each case individually and weigh mitigating evidence or do you want judges who hand down morality?
For all the GOP talk about "fair and impartial justice," that's the real goal here -- judges who hand down their brand of morality. When you make your choice for president, choose very carefully. You're affecting the rights of millions for the next three decades. Do you want to hand control of our courts over to the extreme right? When it's just you and your conscience alone with your ballot remember this: Schools were desegregated by "liberal courts" and Miranda Rights were passed out. Your right to privacy and your freedom of speech were broadened by "liberal" courts. Innocent men were freed from death row by liberal courts, and thanks to liberal courts, there are no children in our factories and no spanking in our schools. You are free from sexual harassment thanks to liberal courts and you have rights against unfair housing practices. Thanks to liberal courts, your right to protest abortion, war, climate change, and the president has been upheld. The rights of your state have been protected. Do you really want to risk all that? Do you really want to watch the 2012 convention and see the "Thank You" signs for Scalia, Jr. and Thomas, Jr. waving goodbye to our civil liberties?

[under construction]

Friday, April 13, 2007

Who Killed JFK? (Part 1)

Jacqueline Kennedy Reportedly Believed Lyndon B. Johnson Behind JFK's Assassination

Published August 08, 2011
Jacqueline Kennedy-Onassis believed Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson was behind the assassination of her husband, according to tapes recorded by the former first lady just months after President John F. Kennedy's death, the Daily Mail reports.
The tapes, which are set to be released by ABC News, reportedly reveal that Kennedy-Onassis believed then-vice president Johnson, along with businessmen in the South, planned the Nov. 22, 1963, assassination of her husband in Dallas, Texas.
"The tabloid reports about the content of the tapes are totally erroneous," an ABC News spokesperson said in a statement to "ABC News isn't releasing any content from those tapes until mid-September at which point it will be clear how off base these reports are. The actual content of the tapes provide unique and important insight into our recent past from one of the most fascinating and influential First Ladies in American history."
Kennedy-Onassis thought gunman Lee Harvey Oswald -- long believed to be a lone assassin -- was part of a larger conspiracy involving Johnson, according to the Daily Mail.
The tapes, which were recorded with historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr., also reveal that Kennedy-Onassis had an affair with actor William Holden in retaliation to her husband's reported indiscretions, the Daily Mail reports.
The tapes, which were sealed in a vault at the Kennedy Library in Boston, were supposed to be released 50 years after Kennedy-Onassis' 1994 death. But her daughter, Caroline Kennedy, reportedly agreed to their early release in exchange for ABC dropping its drama series about the family. It is not yet known when the tapes will air.
Secret Government
President John F. Kennedy apparently resisted the invisible government, and it probably cost him his life. In a speech shortly before his death he claimed that,
“There is a de facto “secret government” operating nationally and internationally and involved in the highest circles of the U.S. Government, exercising an impact over domestic policies and economics ranging between extreme influence to, at times, outright control. This extreme influence to outright control naturally includes the Presidency. The de facto “secret government,” much of whose intellectual- and financial- muscle are to be found in the New York office of the CFR, the great tax-free foundations, and certain international firms and corporations.”
Ten days later he was dead.

The news and truth are not the same thing. - Walter Lippmann

"The people will believe what the media tells them they believe."- George Orwell

"Television is altering the meaning of "being informed" by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation... Disinformation does not mean false information. It means misleading information - misplaced, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information - information that creates the illusion of knowing something, but which in fact leads one away from knowing." - Neil Postman

Who Killed JFK? by Carl Oglesby Although he has become a legend, John Fitzgerald Kennedy was hardly the most popular president in history when he was gunned down in November, 1963. In the previous six months alone, the Secret Service had reviewed over 400 threats to his life. Three of these were serious enough to entail changes in his security routine. He was loathed by anti-Castro exiles, other rightwingers, the Mafia and even some of his own government agencies. In attempting to figure out who murdered him, it is important to understand who hated him, and why.

The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt by Erik Hedegaard: He was the ultimate keeper of secrets, lurking in the shadows of American history. He toppled banana republics, planned the Bay of Pigs invasion and led the Watergate break-in. Now he would reveal what he'd always kept hidden: who killed JFK?

CTKA - Citizens for Truth about the Kennedy Assassination: Articles, Actions, Interviews, Reviews, Resources and other stuff.

Welcome to History Matters. In the wake of the end of the Cold War and the passage of the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act, the U.S. Government has declassified an enormous number of formerly-secret documents. Among the most stunning are those pertaining to the 1963 assassination of President Kennedy and its subsequent investigations. The new records contain stark indications of conspiracy, and a great wealth of material concerning the hows and whys of the ensuing coverup. These documents also include startling "new" facts about 1960s foreign policy regarding Vietnam, Cuba, and the other frontlines of the war against Communism.

Denis Morisseyye's Kennedy Assassination Page: Dave has great articles and research resources on the John F. Kennedy assassination and Jim Garrison's conspiracy investigation in New Orleans.

JFK Assassination Links: Lots of great sites to check out. For example, "The Kennedy Assassination Home Page" is described as such: A well-designed site in support of the "official version," including articles debunking numerous conspiracy theories that richly deserve to be debunked and "Political Science SeminarL The JFK Assassination" states this is the Web site for Kenneth Rahn's University of Rhode Island course on the assassination, including a comprehensive selection of reading materials on various sides of the issue. And there are many more links.

JFK Lancer - Publications & Productions is a historical research company specializing in the administration and assassination of President John F. Kennedy. JFK Lancer Productions & Publications works with the largest, most active group of President John F. Kennedy historical researchers and at the past conferences have had many of the most respected of the researchers from around the world speak on the assassination and on President Kennedy's policies.

Kennedy assassination theories: A number of theories exist with regard to the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy. Such theories began to be generated soon after his death and continue to be proposed today. Many of these theories propose a criminal conspiracy involving parties such as the CIA, the KGB, the Mafia, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, Vice President Lydon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Fidel Castro, Cuban exile groups opposed to the Castro government, and the military and/or government interests of the United States.

L. Fletcher Prouty - Fearless Truth Teller, or Crackpot? One of the truly interesting individuals associated with the Kennedy assassination, the late L. Fletcher Prouty was an Air Force officer who served in the Pentagon. He was therefore an "insider" who supposedly knows the "real scoop" about the Cold War, Vietnam, covert operations, and the Kennedy assassination. But did he really? Or was he a story teller whose stories don't survive scrutiny?

The Konformist: Links, Classified Ads, Articles, and more. The Konformist will more than likely contain stuff that will shock and offend you. They also, incidentally, have absolutely no socially redeeming value whatsoever. Enter at your own risk.

Mary Ferrell Foundation - preserving the legacy: We are a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving the legacy of Mary Ferrell, a devoted archivist and researcher of the JFK assassination.

John F. Kennedy and the Monolithic and Ruthless Conspiracy: As people throughout the nation and the world struggled to make sense of the senseless act of the slaughter of a man who had the brains and guts to solve America's problems, and to articulate their feelings about President Kennedy's life and legacy, many recalled these words from his inaugural address which had now acquired new meaning: "All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days, nor in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of this administration. Nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin."

John F. Kennedy Assassinated November 22, 1963

Highly credible evidence and independent research show that elements of the CIA and other organized, institutional forces were involved in the killing of JFK.
The major media’s refusal to research or report evidence contradicting the official lone-gunman story is indicative of an even larger, structural conspiracy of denial and cover-up.

One of most widely studied, controversial events in US history, the JFK assassination was a true turning point. The voluminous research on this subject can be a bit overwhelming. While “JFK-nuts” may get caught up in some very arcane tidbits of evidence, there are some simple facts that entirely discredit the offical governmental story of what happened.
Kennedy had concrete plans to disengage from Vietnam and to limit the powers of the CIA. The prospect of such reforms made him a dangerous enemy to many forces within the government and military industrial complex.
The JFK assassination can be seen as coup-d’etat and a warning to all citizens and politicians who would dare to challenge the status quo. The fact that powerful forces within the government were able pull off such a crime and pass off such a flimsy cover story says a lot about the state of our “democracy.”
Even more significantly, the complicity of the American media and their refusal to question or pursue the truth show that we do not have a free press or any significant oversight by the people over the government.
The idea that institutional forces—government agencies, politicians, business interests—could explode the head of a popular young president in broad daylight, and get away with it, says a lot about the reach of their power and the scope of the conspiracy.
JFK is sort of a psychological crossroads. As with many of the topics on TruthMove, you can often see a clear divide between the people who are willing to consider that JFK was killed by establishment forces and those who refuse to or simply cannot consider that possibility.
Many mainstream left-wingers (Chomsky, Ramsey Clark, etc.) have never been willing to take this leap. Perhaps this is because the implications are so stark and the “conspiratorial” position challenges many well-conditioned attitudes about the benevolence of our government and other humans in general. It truly does strike at an illusion of American idealism that many people have absorbed deep into their consciousness.
In many ways the JFK assassination is a sociological and psychological milestone. While evidence—film, audio, testimony, documentation—clearly points to the involvement of US intelligence, the “official story” of lone gunman Oswald has perservered in the media and “mainstream reality” as the “truth.”

EvidenceOswald had contacts with the CIA and FBI before the assassination. He was seen by witnesses with Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, and Guy Banister—all with proven intelligence connections. There is compelling evidence that Oswald himself was a government agent. For example Oswald had top secret security clearance while in the Marines and was stationed at a top secret base in Japan.

According to the official “magic bullet theory,” a single bullet pierced Kennedy’s back, moved upward to exit through his neck, then proceeded to pierce Governor Connally’s back who was sitting in the front seat. This same bullet is then supposed to have shattered Connally’s fifth rib, caused compound fractures in his wrist, and hit him in the left knee area. The Warren Commission also claims that an almost pristine bullet found on the President’s stretcher was this “magic bullet.” This convoluted theory was necessary to limit the number of bullets to 3, which was the maximum Oswald’s rifle could fire in the specified time interval.

J. Edgar Hoover: “The thing I am concerned about, and so is Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin.” see (original document)
Many witnesses, reporters, and others connected to the Kennedy assassination have turned up dead under mysterious circumstances (take a look at this).
In sworn testimony, witnesses claim that they observed someone other than Oswald, claiming to be Oswald, “calling attention to himself with odd behavior-trying to defect to Cuba in Mexico City, firing at another person’s target at a firing range, test-driving a used car at dangerous speeds, asking a potential employer if the building had a good view of downtown Dallas, even threatening to kill President Kennedy.”
It seems clear that Oswald was part of a “fake defector” double agent program in which the US was planting spies and assets into communist countries and organizations. His association with the “Fair Play for Cuba Committee,” visits to the Soviet Union, and other communist “links” appear to be the calculated groundwork to establish him as the radical left wing assassin. Oswald was smoothly readmitted to the US after offering US military secrets to the Soviet Union (he was likely trying to plant himself as a double agent).
Israeli Orders: Kill JFK ! (Itzhak Rabin In Dallas 22Nov63)

The Problem: JFK would not allow Israel to have the nuclear bomb and plutonium from materials created at Dimona. To make sure of it, he demanded 6 months inspections of the facility by the USA. JFK was angry with France for having built the Dimona facility in the first place and he supported Algeria in their Revolutionary War for Independence.His foreign policy absolutely enraged Ben-Gurion as well as French nationalists. The Ben-Gurion government, already under pressure from the Lavon Affair and JFK , collapsed on the 16th of June 1963. The JFK assassination was the most successful crime of the century.

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Vitamins, Genetic Food, Health

Boycott Kellogg's For Using Genetically Modified Sugar in its Cereal Products
Wednesday, April 29, 2009 by: David Gutierrez
(NaturalNews) The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has called for a boycott of the Kellogg Company, also known as Kellogg's, after the company refused to sign a pledge refusing to use genetically modified sugar in its cereal products.
Sugar from genetically modified sugar beets hit the U.S. market for the first time this year, making the beets the first genetically engineered crop to enter the U.S. food stream since the widespread introduction of modified corn and soy in the 1990s. The sugar has been modified by the Monsanto Corporation to be resistant to the company's signature herbicide, Roundup.
"These GE sugar beets do not provide any environmental, nutritional or food quality benefits whatsoever," the OCA said. "They are created by Monsanto to withstand massive doses of herbicides and keep farmers on a never ending pesticide treadmill that is bad news for rural communities, the environment and consumers. The bottom line is that there are numerous options to GE sugar beets."
More than 73 food producers and retailers have signed a pledge not to use genetically modified sugar in their products. When asked by the OCA to make such a pledge, however, Kellogg's said it had no intention of doing so. While the company will make sure not to use modified sugar in any of its European products -- the European Union has not approved sugar from the beets for human consumption -- Kellogg's insists that U.S. consumers do not care if their food is genetically modified.
"However, poll after poll have demonstrated that Americans want GE foods labeled and restricted," the OCA said.
The OCA said that it decided to launch a Kellogg's boycott only after the company refused to heed more than 15,000 letters asking the company not to use the modified beet sugar. In addition, the company clearly has the logistical ability to avoid genetically modified sugar, since it is already doing so for its European products.
Take care of your body. It's the only place you have to live. - Jim Rohn

Nutricide - Criminalizing Natural Health, Vitamins, and Herbs:

Codex Alimentarius - The Sinister Truth Behind Operation Cure-All. (From an original article by Ruth James): Instead of focusing on food safety, Codex is using its power to promote worldwide restrictions on vitamins and food supplements, severely limiting their availability and dosages. It appears our government (as well as al others) is being manipulated one way or another to serve the goals of the UN, the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization. Food control equals people control -- and population control. Is this beginning to sound like world government and one-world order? Could this be the real goal behind Codex Alimentarius?

A new breed of genetically modified crops could provide cheap drugs and vaccines for the developing world. There's only one problem, writes Guardian environment correspondent David Adam, what if they get into the food chain? Conventional drug manufacturers have shown little interest in pharming technology. With a few exceptions, the big companies do not smell big profits in the vulnerable people or regions of the world that would benefit most. Monsanto, the agrochemical giant behind many GM food crops, closed down its pharming efforts in 2003.
Watch Video
The World According to Monsanto - A documentary that Americans won't ever see. - 109 min
The Mystery in Your Milk by Jane Akre & Steve Wilson: The report that Monsanto and Fox TV didn't want you to see. Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, a respected reporting team at WTTV, a Fox Network Station in Tampa, Florida, were fired from their jobs after refusing to broadcast what they knew and documented to be false and distorted information about Monsanto's bovine growth hormone (BGH) -- a genetically engineered product that has been linked to the proliferation of breast, prostate, and colon cancer cells in humans.

Drug giants accused of ignoring fake medicines that kill millions by Saeed Shah: The world's major drug companies have been accused of turning a blind eye to the multibillion-dollar trade in fake medicine that has resulted in an explosion of child malaria deaths in developing countries. Governments have not tackled the problem and pharmaceutical companies are burying the issue, afraid that any publicity given to their medicines being faked will lead to a fall in the sale of the genuine product, according to a documentary.

Well-funded criminals attack NewsTarget, health freedom groups with covert disruption campaigns: Top health freedom consumer advocacy groups in the United States are being clandestinely targeted by organized disruption campaigns and "black PR" efforts. The apparent purpose of these campaigns is to discredit, disrupt and censor their natural health and health freedom political and educational efforts.

FDA attempting to regulate supplements, herbs and juices as "drugs": This move by the FDA is designed to once and for all destroy the 1994 DSHEA law that has made supplements "legal" while eliminating nutritional supplements and natural medicine from the United States, ensuring monopoly profits and control by drug companies and the FDA. It is the latest action item by the FDA / Big Pharma conspiracy that will not stop until health freedom has been abolished, drug companies rule the nation, and every citizen is diagnosied with a fictitious disease and drugged up on monopoly-priced pharmaceuticals.
Which Vitamin Will Improve Your Life Expectancy the Most?Dr. Mercola September 29 2007
Vitamin D supplements may lower your risk of dying from any cause, according to a new European study.
Researchers from the European Institute of Oncology in Milan, Italy, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon, France, reviewed 18 trials of more than 57,000 people.
The trials involved doses of vitamin D ranging from 300 international units (IUs) to 2,000 IUs. The average dose was 528 IUs.After a period of six years, the data showed that people who took vitamin D supplements had a 7 percent lower risk of death compared to people who did not take the supplements.
Further, according to the nine trials that collected blood samples, people who took vitamin D supplements had a 1.4- to 5.2-fold higher level of vitamin D in their blood than those who did not.
Because vitamin D can reduce the proliferation of cells, which occurs in cancer, the researchers believe their finding could lead to new drugs to fight cancer and other illnesses.
Vitamin D also helps your body to uptake calcium for bone health.
The researchers recommend taking between 400 IUs and 600 IUs of vitamin D daily. Your skin can also produce its own vitamin D by getting moderate sun exposure each day.
Archives of Internal Medicine September 10, 2007;167:1730-1737 September 10, 2007
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
Vitamin D is much more important to your health than you may think. As this new study found, it appears to reduce your risk of death from all causes. What many people hear, though, is simply that vitamin D can prevent rickets and is good for your bones. But it has so much more impact than that.Diseases that vitamin D is known to positively influence include:
Heart Disease
Diabetes and Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Multiple Sclerosis
You may have also read the ground breaking study I posted in August that found 600,000 cases of cancer could be prevented EVERY year just by increasing your levels of vitamin D.Even beyond cancer, the researchers pointed out that increasing levels of vitamin D3 could prevent diseases that claim nearly 1 million lives throughout the world each year!The Best Way to Get Vitamin DThis is an important study as it is one of the first ones that seems to confirm a benefit on mortality with supplements rather than sun exposure. I still firmly believe, though, that the best way to raise your vitamin D level is NOT with supplements, but by exposure to sunshine on your bare skin. However, getting sun exposure is not always practical, especially if you live in the Chicago area like I do. During the winter, or during other times of the year when sun exposure is not a possibility for you, then supplementation is an option.If you decide to supplement your diet with vitamin D, there are two crucial things to know:
It IS possible to overdose on oral vitamin D supplements (there’s very little risk of overdosing on vitamin D from the sun, however), so you need to have your blood levels of vitamin D measured regularly.
Only vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), the type of vitamin D found naturally in foods like eggs, organ meats, animal fat, cod liver oil, and fish, is appropriate for supplementation. Do NOT use the highly inferior vitamin D2.
What’s an Optimal Vitamin D Level?The OPTIMAL value of vitamin D that you’re looking for is 45-52 ng/ml (115-128 nmol/l).You can find out what your levels are by asking your doctor for a blood test called a 25(OH)D, also called 25-hydroxyvitamin D. (Please note, there are two types of vitamin D tests, and this one is the one you want.)Again, if you are taking vitamin D supplements, you should have your levels tested regularly to make sure you don’t overdose.The topic of vitamin D, and its immense beneficial impact on health, is something that’s interested me for years, and there’s so much information that I want to share with you that I wrote a book on the topic called Dark Deception.Dark Deception explores the topic of vitamin D in detail, and exposes why the conventional wisdom on the subject, which encourages you to stay out of the sun, is dead wrong.Related Links:
The Secret Benefits of Vitamin D
BEWARE of Most Prescription Vitamin D Supplements!
More Evidence Vitamin D Beats the Flu
FDA proposes approval process for genetically modified animals
The regulations would treat genetically engineered creatures like drugs. Critics suggest environmental concerns aren't being given proper weight. By Karen Kaplan and Thomas H. Maugh II, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
September 19, 2008,0,4097901.story
The Food and Drug Administration on Thursday opened the way for a bevy of genetically engineered salmon, cows and other animals to leap from the laboratory to the marketplace, unveiling an approval process that would treat the modified creatures like drugs.
The guidelines for the first time make explicit the regulatory hoops companies would have to jump through to sell engineered salmon that grow twice as fast as wild fish; pigs with high levels of healthy omega-3 fatty acids in their meat; or goats that produce beneficial proteins, such as insulin, in their milk."It's about time the federal government has acknowledged that these animals are on its doorstep and need to be regulated to ensure their safety," said Greg Jaffe, biotechnology director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington.
Many experts, however, say the proposed regulations may not go far enough to protect the public. In particular, they argue that the approval process would be highly secretive to guard the commercial interests of the companies involved, and that the new rules do not place sufficient weight on the potential environmental effect of what many consider to be Frankenstein animals.
Animals can't be treated exactly like drugs, said Jaydee Hanson, a policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety in Washington. "Drugs don't go out and breed with each other. When a drug gets loose, you figure you can control it. When a bull gets loose, it would be harder to corral."
The animals are genetically modified for a variety of purposes.
Some are designed to be more disease-resistant, such as the cow that is not susceptible to mad cow disease. Others are more nutritious or grow faster, enhancing profits.
Researchers are considering modified animals as sources of organs for human transplants. Another idea involves so-called biopharm animals, which would be used to produce drugs such as insulin."There are very compelling and real benefits for humans and animals" from genetic engineering, said William Flynn of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine. "But we must show that they are safe before they enter the marketplace."The new regulations do not cover cloned animals, most pets or research animals. The FDA has already determined that clones -- genetic replicas -- are safe. Pets and research animals are unlikely to enter the food chain.
Only one genetically engineered animal is now being sold in the United States, the glow-in-the-dark zebra fish for aquariums. The FDA approved it because it is not eaten and its need for warm water effectively precludes its escape into the wild. The first product likely to be sold under the new rules is a genetically engineered Atlantic salmon produced by Aqua Bounty Technologies Inc. of Waltham, Mass. Inserted genes from two other fish allow it to reach full size in 18 months rather than the normal 30. Aqua Bounty, along with other biotechnology companies, has been pushing the FDA to establish guidelines and hopes to win approval next year.
Technically, it is not the modified animals but the added DNA segments that are considered drugs. Realistically, however, the only way to regulate the property-changing DNA is to regulate the animal, said Eric Flamm, a policy advisor at the agency.
That regulation will require demonstration that the modified animal itself is healthy and that a food or drug produced from it is safe for human use. The new rules do not envision feeding the products to humans in the equivalent of clinical trials for drugs.
Once an animal product has been approved, its labeling may or may not reflect its origin, the FDA said. If the composition of meat or other food has been changed, such as by increasing its content of omega-3 fats, that will be put on its label. But if the animal simply grows faster or is more environmentally friendly without changes in composition, no mention of its genetically engineered origin is considered necessary. The lack of labeling concerns consumer advocacy groups. Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives at Consumers Union, called it "incomprehensible."
"Consumers have the right to know if the ham, bacon or pork chops they are buying . . . have been engineered with mouse genes," she said.
Of Mice, Men and In-Between Scientists Debate Blending Of Human, Animal Forms
By Rick Weiss, Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, November 20, 2004; Page A01
In Minnesota, pigs are being born with human blood in their veins.
In Nevada, there are sheep whose livers and hearts are largely human.
In California, mice peer from their cages with human brain cells firing inside their skulls.
These are not outcasts from "The Island of Dr. Moreau," the 1896 novel by H.G. Wells in which a rogue doctor develops creatures that are part animal and part human. They are real creations of real scientists, stretching the boundaries of stem cell research.
Biologists call these hybrid animals chimeras, after the mythical Greek creature with a lion's head, a goat's body and a serpent's tail. They are the products of experiments in which human stem cells were added to developing animal fetuses.
Chimeras are allowing scientists to watch, for the first time, how nascent human cells and organs mature and interact -- not in the cold isolation of laboratory dishes but inside the bodies of living creatures. Some are already revealing deep secrets of human biology and pointing the way toward new medical treatments.
But with no federal guidelines in place, an awkward question hovers above the work: How human must a chimera be before more stringent research rules should kick in?
The National Academy of Sciences, which advises the federal government, has been studying the issue and hopes to make recommendations by February. Yet the range of opinions it has received so far suggests that reaching consensus may be difficult.
During one recent meeting, scientists disagreed on such basic issues as whether it would be unethical for a human embryo to begin its development in an animal's womb, and whether a mouse would be better or worse off with a brain made of human neurons.
"This is an area where we really need to come to a reasonable consensus," said James Battey, chairman of the National Institutes of Health's Stem Cell Task Force. "We need to establish some kind of guidelines as to what the scientific community ought to do and ought not to do."
Beyond Twins and Moms Chimeras (ki-MER-ahs) -- meaning mixtures of two or more individuals in a single body -- are not inherently unnatural. Most twins carry at least a few cells from the sibling with whom they shared a womb, and most mothers carry in their blood at least a few cells from each child they have born.
Recipients of organ transplants are also chimeras, as are the many people whose defective heart valves have been replaced with those from pigs or cows. And scientists for years have added human genes to bacteria and even to farm animals -- feats of genetic engineering that allow those critters to make human proteins such as insulin for use as medicines.
"Chimeras are not as strange and alien as at first blush they seem," said Henry Greely, a law professor and ethicist at Stanford University who has reviewed proposals to create human-mouse chimeras there.
But chimerism becomes a more sensitive topic when it involves growing entire human organs inside animals. And it becomes especially sensitive when it deals in brain cells, the building blocks of the organ credited with making humans human.
In experiments like those, Greely told the academy last month, "there is a nontrivial risk of conferring some significant aspects of humanity" on the animal.
Greely and his colleagues did not conclude that such experiments should never be done. Indeed, he and many other philosophers have been wrestling with the question of why so many people believe it is wrong to breach the species barrier.
Does the repugnance reflect an understanding of an important natural law? Or is it just another cultural bias, like the once widespread rejection of interracial marriage?
Many turn to the Bible's repeated invocation that animals should multiply "after their kind" as evidence that such experiments are wrong. Others, however, have concluded that the core problem is not necessarily the creation of chimeras but rather the way they are likely to be treated.
Imagine, said Robert Streiffer, a professor of philosophy and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin, a human-chimpanzee chimera endowed with speech and an enhanced potential to learn -- what some have called a "humanzee."
"There's a knee-jerk reaction that enhancing the moral status of an animal is bad," Streiffer said. "But if you did it, and you gave it the protections it deserves, how could the animal complain?"
Unfortunately, said Harvard political philosopher Michael J. Sandel, speaking last fall at a meeting of the President's Council on Bioethics, such protections are unlikely.
"Chances are we would make them perform menial jobs or dangerous jobs," Sandel said. "That would be an objection."
A Research Breakthrough The potential power of chimeras as research tools became clear about a decade ago in a series of dramatic experiments by Evan Balaban, now at McGill University in Montreal. Balaban took small sections of brain from developing quails and transplanted them into the developing brains of chickens.
The resulting chickens exhibited vocal trills and head bobs unique to quails, proving that the transplanted parts of the brain contained the neural circuitry for quail calls. It also offered astonishing proof that complex behaviors could be transferred across species.
No one has proposed similar experiments between, say, humans and apes. But the discovery of human embryonic stem cells in 1998 allowed researchers to envision related experiments that might reveal a lot about how embryos grow.
The cells, found in 5-day-old human embryos, multiply prolifically and -- unlike adult cells -- have the potential to turn into any of the body's 200 or so cell types.
Scientists hope to cultivate them in laboratory dishes and grow replacement tissues for patients. But with those applications years away, the cells are gaining in popularity for basic research.
The most radical experiment, still not conducted, would be to inject human stem cells into an animal embryo and then transfer that chimeric embryo into an animal's womb. Scientists suspect the proliferating human cells would spread throughout the animal embryo as it matured into a fetus and integrate themselves into every organ.
Such "humanized" animals could have countless uses. They would almost certainly provide better ways to test a new drug's efficacy and toxicity, for example, than the ordinary mice typically used today.
But few scientists are eager to do that experiment. The risk, they say, is that some human cells will find their way to the developing testes or ovaries, where they might grow into human sperm and eggs. If two such chimeras -- say, mice -- were to mate, a human embryo might form, trapped in a mouse.
Not everyone agrees that this would be a terrible result.
"What would be so dreadful?" asked Ann McLaren, a renowned developmental biologist at the University of Cambridge in England. After all, she said, no human embryo could develop successfully in a mouse womb. It would simply die, she told the academy. No harm done.
But others disagree -- if only out of fear of a public backlash.
"Certainly you'd get a negative response from people to have a human embryo trying to grow in the wrong place," said Cynthia B. Cohen, a senior research fellow at Georgetown University's Kennedy Institute of Ethics and a member of Canada's Stem Cell Oversight Committee, which supported a ban on such experiments there.
How Human? But what about experiments in which scientists add human stem cells not to an animal embryo but to an animal fetus, which has already made its eggs and sperm? Then the only question is how human a creature one dares to make.
In one ongoing set of experiments, Jeffrey L. Platt at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., has created human-pig chimeras by adding human-blood-forming stem cells to pig fetuses. The resulting pigs have both pig and human blood in their vessels. And it's not just pig blood cells being swept along with human blood cells; some of the cells themselves have merged, creating hybrids.
It is important to have learned that human and pig cells can fuse, Platt said, because he and others have been considering transplanting modified pig organs into people and have been wondering if that might pose a risk of pig viruses getting into patient's cells. Now scientists know the risk is real, he said, because the viruses may gain access when the two cells fuse.
In other experiments led by Esmail Zanjani, chairman of animal biotechnology at the University of Nevada at Reno, scientists have been adding human stem cells to sheep fetuses. The team now has sheep whose livers are up to 80 percent human -- and make all the compounds human livers make.
Zanjani's goal is to make the humanized livers available to people who need transplants. The sheep portions will be rejected by the immune system, he predicted, while the human part will take root.
"I don't see why anyone would raise objections to our work," Zanjani said in an interview.
Immunity Advantages Perhaps the most ambitious efforts to make use of chimeras come from Irving Weissman, director of Stanford University's Institute of Cancer/Stem Cell Biology and Medicine. Weissman helped make the first mouse with a nearly complete human immune system -- an animal that has proved invaluable for tests of new drugs against the AIDS virus, which does not infect conventional mice.
More recently his team injected human neural stem cells into mouse fetuses, creating mice whose brains are about 1 percent human. By dissecting the mice at various stages, the researchers were able to see how the added brain cells moved about as they multiplied and made connections with mouse cells.
Already, he said, they have learned things they "never would have learned had there been a bioethical ban."
Now he wants to add human brain stem cells that have the defects that cause Parkinson's disease, Lou Gehrig's disease and other brain ailments -- and study how those cells make connections.
Scientists suspect that these diseases, though they manifest themselves in adulthood, begin when something goes wrong early in development. If those errors can be found, researchers would have a much better chance of designing useful drugs, Weissman said. And those drugs could be tested in the chimeras in ways not possible in patients.
Now Weissman says he is thinking about making chimeric mice whose brains are 100 percent human. He proposes keeping tabs on the mice as they develop. If the brains look as if they are taking on a distinctly human architecture -- a development that could hint at a glimmer of humanness -- they could be killed, he said. If they look as if they are organizing themselves in a mouse brain architecture, they could be used for research.
So far this is just a "thought experiment," Weissman said, but he asked the university's ethics group for an opinion anyway.
"Everyone said the mice would be useful," he said. "But no one was sure if it should be done."