Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Jim Corr, New World Order Plant?

Options
1235789

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭Yitzhak Rabin


    Dipsy wrote: »
    Not at all :p I believe some places are more powerful than others and I believe we are powerful miraculous beings and with the power of our minds we can cure ourselves.

    Thats your belief, fair enough, but there is no evidence(AFAIK) for it.
    I dont think stress helps cancer, negative emotions, destructive thoughts or behaviours.
    Neither do doctors, a positive attitude is very important when faced with the daunting task of fighting cancer.
    I dont think EMF and radiation cures cancer and I am pretty sure that chemotherapy doesnt cure cancer.
    Thats not what the evidence suggests. These treatments are proven to reduce tumor size and save peoples lives. Falling cancer mortality rates show this.
    I cant show you per se, but if you read up on the subject you will find that lots of people are sucessfully curing themselves or others of cancer whether it be with hemp oil, collodial silver, apricots, organic diets, alternative remedies, meditation etc.
    None of which actually cure cancer when tested under scientific conditions

    Liquified chlorine, Fluorosilicic acid, Aluminium sulphate, Calcium hydroxide, Sodium silicofluoride, Chlorine, Fluorine compound,

    Also Salts of:
    o arsenic
    o radium
    o aluminium
    o copper
    o lead
    o mercury
    o cadmium
    o barium
    Its all about the dosage. Of course arsenic is bad, but it is all dependant on the dosage. Table salt is lethal at certain levels, as is....well pretty much every single organic compound. Calling something posinous is useless if the dosage/concentration is not included.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭Yitzhak Rabin


    squod wrote: »
    I'm gonna have to disagree with you here yekahs. All of these studies were done in the US during the eighties. Hardly a shining light for alternative medcines. I'd have to say that these early conventional treatments ('blanket bombing' chemo and radiation) offered little more hope.

    There have been studies done from the early 1900's, 1950's, 1970's, 1980's, another one in 1998, and a review of them all in 2006.

    None, not one, zero, studies to indicate any sort of positive effect from using laetrile/B17(although it is not a vitamen, it was marketed as B17 in the 50's to cash in on a fad whereby vitamens were seen as miracle cures). All studies have shown conclusively that laetrile treatment increases the level of cyanide in the blood to near leathal levels, with some patients actually dying from cyanide poisining.

    Why are you so sure it shows tumor reducing qualities? What convinced you of this?

    Edit:Also, how does the fact that cancer treatment wasn't as effective 20-30 years ago as it is now have any bearing on the fact that all these studies unequivocally showed that laetrile doesn't reduce tumors or cure cancer, and its only side effect appears to be drastically increased cyanide levels in the blood?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    yekahs wrote: »
    There have been studies done from the early 1900's, 1950's, 1970's, 1980's, another one in 1998, and a review of them all in 2006.

    None, not one, zero, studies to indicate any sort of positive effect from using laetrile/B17(although it is not a vitamen, it was marketed as B17 in the 50's to cash in on a fad whereby vitamens were seen as miracle cures). All studies have shown conclusively that laetrile treatment increases the level of cyanide in the blood to near leathal levels, with some patients actually dying from cyanide poisining.

    Why are you so sure it shows tumor reducing qualities? What convinced you of this?

    Edit:Also, how does the fact that cancer treatment wasn't as effective 20-30 years ago as it is now have any bearing on the fact that all these studies unequivocally showed that laetrile doesn't reduce tumors or cure cancer, and its only side effect appears to be drastically increased cyanide levels in the blood?

    After many years of eating *apple seeds, *grape seeds, *pomegranates etc. If just one of my poohs had made open sea, half of Wales would have died if what your saying is true. Many seed eating birds woulda crashed from the skies etc....

    People in the past have stored almonds, apricot kernels and other seeds as winter foods. Hell, I still eat handfulls of mungbean sprouts. Any scientist that suggests people will die from eating this kind of thing have obviously graduated from the grand school of bolloxology. Whether it cures cancer, I'm no doctor. But cyanide levels. Ptffffff.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭Yitzhak Rabin


    squod wrote: »
    After many years of eating *apple seeds, *grape seeds, *pomegranates etc. If just one of my poohs had made open sea, half of Wales would have died if what your saying is true. Many seed eating birds woulda crashed from the skies etc....

    People in the past have stored almonds, apricot kernels and other seeds as winter foods. Hell, I still eat handfulls of mungbean sprouts. Any scientist that suggests people will die from eating this kind of thing have obviously graduated from the grand school of bolloxology. Whether it cures cancer, I'm no doctor. But cyanide levels.

    What I said two posts ago holds true here:
    Its all about the dosage. Of course arsenic is bad, but it is all dependant on the dosage. Table salt is lethal at certain levels, as is....well pretty much every single organic compound. Calling something posinous is useless if the dosage/concentration is not included.

    Eating seeds on a regular basis is fine and your not going to see any major side effects(you definitely won't see cancerous tumors going into remission).

    However if you increase the dosage to extremely high levels, as they do when people produce Laetrine/amygdalin as a drug, then you will see side effects, one of those being an increase of cyanide in the blood.

    Its simple, this is the chemical construction of amygdalin(C20H27NO11)200px-Laetrile.svg.png

    When the body breaks it down the single bond which holds the cyanide(C≡N) component on is broken down. When you have too much of this you get cyande poisining.

    No school of Bolloxology there, just simple chemistry.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    yekahs wrote: »
    He is NOT saving lives, have a look at my last post. There have been many studies into the effects of "B17" on cancer, and the conclusions is they DO NOT CURE CANCER! You can put your head in the sand and choose to believe it does, but the evidence says it doesn't.

    You are very wrong, if you had bothered to watch my video instead of jumping to conclusions you would see the statistics for yourself.These statistics were taken from the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer society and clinical records, they show the success rates of B17 cancer treatment against orthodox treatments....

    Advanced cancer - B17 15% Orthodox 0.1%

    Early detection - B17 80% Orthodox 15%

    Full health - B17 100% Orthodox 84%


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    You are very wrong, if you had bothered to watch my video instead of jumping to conclusions you would see the statistics for yourself.These statistics were taken from the National Cancer institute, the American Cancer society and clinical records, they show the success rates of B17 cancer treatment against orthodox treatments....

    Advanced cancer - B17 15% Orthodox 0.1%

    Early detection - B17 80% Orthodox 15%

    Full health - B17 100% Orthodox 84%

    how come the National Cancer Institute website does not show these stats... do you not find this puzzling...consider how effective it supposedly is.....


    and even worse.. the American Cancer society website... actually states studies show B12 to NOT offer any protection......

    http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_2_1x_Study_Folic_Acid_Vitamin_B6_May_Protect_Against_Breast_Cancer.asp

    your video seems to have its facts wrong


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭Yitzhak Rabin


    You are very wrong, if you had bothered to watch my video instead of jumping to conclusions you would see the statistics for yourself.These statistics were taken from the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer society and clinical records, they show the success rates of B17 cancer treatment against orthodox treatments....

    Advanced cancer - B17 15% Orthodox 0.1%

    Early detection - B17 80% Orthodox 15%

    Full health - B17 100% Orthodox 84%

    ffs, one of the studies I linked to was conducted by the NCI. They concluded that B17 had no measurable affect on cancer, and in fact 2 patients in the study died of cyanide poisining.

    As usual, your talking rubbish, and just accepting what some CT documentary tells you as fact, without checking the original source.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    robtri wrote: »
    how come the National Cancer Institute website does not show these stats... do you not find this puzzling...consider how effective it supposedly is.....


    and even worse.. the American Cancer society website... actually states studies show B12 to NOT offer any protection......

    http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_2_1x_Study_Folic_Acid_Vitamin_B6_May_Protect_Against_Breast_Cancer.asp

    your video seems to have its facts wrong

    Not quite, if the facts were wrong then they would have taken a lawsuit out against G Edward and done him for millions.The documentary was done back in the 70s so obviously the figures are from that time.I do wish some of you guys would actually watch it before trying to debunk the claims!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    Not quite, if the facts were wrong then they would have taken a lawsuit out against G Edward and done him for millions.The documentary was done back in the 70s so obviously the figures are from that time.I do wish some of you guys would actually watch it before trying to debunk the claims!

    Put up or shut up. Include a link to these alleged studies you're talking about.

    Youtube videos are not scientific evidence.

    P.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    Not quite, if the facts were wrong then they would have taken a lawsuit out against G Edward and done him for millions.The documentary was done back in the 70s so obviously the figures are from that time.I do wish some of you guys would actually watch it before trying to debunk the claims!

    and i wish you would keep up to date...
    you stated the two cancer socitites stats proved b12....

    no offence BUT THEY DONT ... look at the websites....

    its outdated Crap......


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭Yitzhak Rabin


    Not quite, if the facts were wrong then they would have taken a lawsuit out against G Edward and done him for millions.The documentary was done back in the 70s so obviously the figures are from that time.I do wish some of you guys would actually watch it before trying to debunk the claims!

    I know despite your username, your probably not interested, but this is a study conducted in 2007 reviewing all the studies thus far on laetrile and it effectiveness.

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/j46152606728636h/
    Conclusion: Therefore, the claim that laetrile has beneficial effects for cancer patients is not supported by sound clinical data.

    Included in that study is the one by Dr. Dean Burk which G Edward Griffin referred to in your documentary (although it didn't have the statistics that you mentioned in your previous post).

    I haven't watched the documentary, simply because, I haven't time to watch an hour long documentary. If you summarize the main credible evidence he puts forward I'll look into it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    yekahs wrote: »

    I haven't watched the documentary, simply because, I haven't time to watch an hour long documentary. If you summarize the main credible evidence he puts forward I'll look into it.

    It's amazing how many of these guys recommend a documentary that they can't even summarize. I mean, how dumb can you be?

    P.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    Yekahs i have been trawling through your studies there and to be honest they seem a little watery.There are no case studies, no patients named, no statistics, no links to the findings......

    Here is a study which documents real people, their treatments and the progress they are making.....

    http://www.cancure.org/chp12.pdf

    Here is a website dedicated to cancer research, have a read of them if you get the chance

    http://worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/research.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭oceanclub


    Yekahs i have been trawling through your studies there and to be honest they seem a little watery.There are no case studies, no patients named, no statistics, no links to the findings......

    Here is a study which documents real people, their treatments and the progress they are making.....

    http://www.cancure.org/chp12.pdf

    Those aren't studies. Those are anecdotes.

    P.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    oceanclub wrote: »
    Those aren't studies. Those are anecdotes.

    P.

    lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    Yekahs i have been trawling through your studies there and to be honest they seem a little watery.There are no case studies, no patients named, no statistics, no links to the findings......

    Here is a study which documents real people, their treatments and the progress they are making.....

    http://www.cancure.org/chp12.pdf

    Here is a website dedicated to cancer research, have a read of them if you get the chance

    http://worldwithoutcancer.org.uk/research.html

    are you serious....
    have you even looked at these websites...

    heres a quote from the disclaimer page... FFS a discalaimer page LOL

    "The information contained in this web-site is intended for educational purposes only. All the products mentioned in this web-site are intended solely as food and dietary supplements to enhance general health and to reinforce the body's own defence mechanisms against disease. Please be informed that by providing you with this information we do not attempt to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease."




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭Truthrevolution


    robtri wrote: »
    are you serious....
    have you even looked at these websites...

    heres a quote from the disclaimer page... FFS a discalaimer page LOL

    "The information contained in this web-site is intended for educational purposes only. All the products mentioned in this web-site are intended solely as food and dietary supplements to enhance general health and to reinforce the body's own defence mechanisms against disease. Please be informed that by providing you with this information we do not attempt to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease."


    By law they have to provide these disclaimers to cover their ***.A bit like the way all your medicine contains a "possible side effects" disclaimer.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    By law they have to provide these disclaimers to cover their ***.A bit like the way all your medicine contains a "possible side effects" disclaimer.

    what law???????


  • Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Is this discussion even about Jim Corr any more?

    This isn't a scientific discussion forum. If it doesn't get back on topic this thread will be closed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    Is this discussion even about Jim Corr any more?

    This isn't a scientific discussion forum. If it doesn't get back on topic this thread will be closed.

    Got that bit right.

    Considering last time I looked Jim was publishing the merits of B17 on his Facebook, so surely it's still in the realms of the discussion. As tight as they are on this forum tbh.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    studiorat wrote: »
    Considering last time I looked Jim was publishing the merits of B17 on his Facebook, so surely it's still in the realms of the discussion.

    No, its not.

    This isn't the "discuss anything that Jim Corr has ever mentioned" thread.

    The title is pretty specific about what we're supposed to be discussing, so lets either get back to that, or close the thread



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,408 ✭✭✭studiorat


    :rolleyes:

    Discuss if he's a disinformation agent, but not what he says.

    Gotcha.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    Well i always thought that it was Gerry Ryan that is a New World order plant , not Jim Corr .


  • Registered Users Posts: 148 ✭✭briankirby


    venkman wrote: »
    I am beginning to suspect that Jim Corr may be an agent working for the new world order. His appearance on the saturady night chat show, where he highlighted the most disprovable elements of the 9/11 conspiracy theory, as well as his other outlandish statements, just served to detract from the whole movement's credability.

    His sudden change from member of a pop band to conspiracy theorist happened too suddenly to be plausible. The band broke up in 2006 and jim started making statements in 2007. This time would have been long enough for him to undergo reprogramming for his new role in one of the CIAs eastern european torture camps. As a famous musician irish people would naturally look up to him and value his opinions.

    Jim definitely has way too much time on his hands.Wens the last time they recorded a single?
    He is a definite product of idleness


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,831 ✭✭✭Torakx


    Actually the B17 issue here is rather important to me with finding out if he is a NWO plant or just a bit enthusiastic about the "new age movement" and other things like that.
    I at first considered he may be but if its true he is closely following issues on cancer and aids like the b17 theory then i am a little less likely to think he is just political and he may just be harmless.
    In saying that is it the other way around!
    Is the b17 issue so debunked that he is using it and more to discredit the whole movement against the NWO for the sake of irish people?
    I doubt it but cant fully throw that theory out the window either.
    If i was to make a bet right now id say he had some free time after his music career and stumbled across the same rabbit hole i did 2 years ago.
    And did what i would liked to have done but just not how i would have done it with the money he had spare.

    If thats so fair play to him for making it public.Either way he is a brave man to publicly face ridicule from irish tv and radio presenters.
    I think the fact he put his past career,his name and reputation on the line for things like the b17 issue which i am skeptical about tells me he is most likely a good guy but quick to judge,much like myself :D
    We all have to remember to double check our thinking before trusting an issue and ive made that mistake myself many times.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20 noodledog


    Corr is most certainly an agent. I have questioned him myself, as have many of my friends, as to why he was making us all look foolish with his Alex Jones crap. We have offered to help but he's not moving.

    One of the guys who frequents umunu.com sent him an angry 'cease and desist this crap' sort of mail. Now while malice wasn't the intent, it sounded pretty bad. He did offer to help Corr straighten out his info and work with him to better serve the truth to the people.

    Since the mail was sent from his personal email address (he wasn't trying to hide), Corr (under the guise of his "webmaster") retaliated by sending back a picture of the guy and his girlfriend that he ripped off facebook and the statement 'who the **** are you?'. Pure intimidation tactic!

    a.) I doubt his 'webmaster' answers emails on Sunday mornings for him, or that he even has one.

    b.) Don't call people 'mentally retarded' and threaten them with the law because they're saying it like it is... Which as far as I can recall was a threat he had withdrawn by the end of their minor email war.

    He doesn't answer for his mistakes, and he largely ignores any input offered with the best of intentions. AGENT.

    Ray D'Arsey defo didn't give JimJam enough of a say about the vaccines though, and clearly isn't at all researched in the history of tamiflu or derivatives. So tbh they both were going at it like a pair of uninformed idiots! I'm sure Ray is more than happy to poison his infant child with all sorts of vaccines and shots he knows nothing about from the sound of things. If you travelled back in time 100 years you wouldn't willingly accept what they considered medical treatment back then. The standards have changed little as to what damage doctors will carelessly do, they've just changed how it's administered. Even my own sister who had work related stresses recently went to the doctor with anxiety (not depression). They gave her Lexapro. The effect of lexapro? It's a long term treatment for depression, and the happy effect it causes comes from CHEMICALS EATING THROUGH YOUR BRAIN, causing your brain to release endorphins to protect you from the searing pail.. I know this all too well because that little pill almost ruined my life (had to drop out of college) about 5 years ago. So go on, trust your GP.

    The cold hard facts are this: Secret societies do exist, and they will bring down the hammer. If you're sitting there laughing at me now that's your problem.

    As far as Jesse Ventura & co. go, check out the poster for this major flop! Anyone familiar with they signs will see it all, not to mention the actual meaning of 'Abraxus'... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraxas,_Guardian_of_the_Universe

    Thank you and goodnight!


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,537 ✭✭✭thecommander


    noodledog wrote: »
    Corr is most certainly an agent. I have questioned him myself, as have many of my friends, as to why he was making us all look foolish with his Alex Jones crap. We have offered to help but he's not moving.

    Why can't he just be a bit unstable? How can you tell the difference between that and a disinfo agent?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    To paraphrase an old saying
    Never attribute malice where stupidity will suffice.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20 noodledog


    Why can't he just be a bit unstable? How can you tell the difference between that and a disinfo agent?

    Well I suppose the terribly idiotic attempt at intimidation doesn't suffice as pretty good proof? It's textbook disinfo agent, question me and i'll silence you crap that Alex Jones & Co. come out with.

    He's an agent cut and dry, I know at least 2 people who had big (non agressive) talks with him about Alex Jones and he doesn't want to know! Could not care less and is not interested in changing his position.

    Agent.

    Would you not rather have ANYONE ELSE up there talking about it? He's making a mockery of all conspiracy theorists, and it's not the evidence he presents that's the problem, it's the presentation.

    Again, it mirrors Jone's littlebig movement in the sense that it looks perfectly rational to people who already have a little knowledge, but to people who know nothing it sounds like just another crackpot. It's designed to be this way, so it operates on the basis that detractors who know the truth (in this case me) will be silenced by those who have a little hope he's going the right direction (you). :D Just a mini example.. This is rampant behaviour with Jonesites who silence all who speak ill of god-man Alex without actually looking into it.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,609 ✭✭✭Flamed Diving


    Just out of interest, when the did CTer's begin to turn on each other? It is an interesting (even if predictable) outcome.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement