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

Agenda 21 - The Depopulation Blueprint

Options
16791112

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 582 ✭✭✭RoboClam


    You both seem to have misread the question, which is..

    Would you rather your child have fluoridated or non fluoridate water ?

    It's a non issue for me, it's the same difference. I suppose I'd prefer them to have fluoridated water, because it'd be better for their teeth.


  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    jma wrote: »
    Yes, the directive clearly defines fluoridation as a "medicine". Hence, water fluoridation should actually be illegal across the whole of the EU.

    Then wtf is going on here? The 'law' says it's clearly illegal across the whole EU, except Ireland? Our gov doesn't need to abide by 'The Law?'

    Perhaps someone such as our 'law-abiding' alastair can respectfully enlighten us ...


  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    in the meantime, more on Codex, for anybody interested, this is mainly about Ractopamine
    According to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), ractopamine restricts blood vessels and quickens the heart. There are also concerns about its carcinogenic effects as well as its stressing effects on the animals given the drug. As for humans, since there is no clearance period of two weeks prior to slaughter as with other veterinary drugs to rid the meat of drug residues, consumers are being medicated with ractopamine residue when they eat the treated meat.4

    http://www.thenhf.com/articles/articles_1155/articles_1155.htm


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    alastair wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    Interesting to see that that an accusation carries so much weight with you. even where it's shown to be unwarranted.

    It's not the accusation on its own that carries the weight with me. It's the basis of the accusation and the circumstances around it.


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


    Thats mad.If China are banning it,it must be pretty damaging.
    I think its a little biased for a person to say they rather have flouride in their water than not.
    Surely you guys brush your teeth and consider your own cleanlyness to be enough to keep you healthy.
    Why not swallow you toothpaste also to get the same effect as the water...oh ye it warns against that on the pack and we must do what we have been instructed to do.

    http://snippets.com/can-i-swallow-toothpaste.htm
    Hard to find info on why we shouldnt swallow tootpaste.
    Is it really the flouride or something else that is dangrous?
    i tried the colgate site but they just have adverts for products.Dint see any health and safety advice or why's.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    RoboClam wrote: »
    I'm in the same boat as alastair on this one, I don't have kids but I would have no problem letting them drink fluoridated water. I drink several pints a day if I can (Not because I love fluoride oh so much, but because I like to keep well hydrated!).

    My stance on this topic and similar topics is that I go with the scientific consensus. The few articles and doctors speaking against it which have been linked in this thread are not enough for me to stop drinking it. As it stands, the evidence presented isn't adequate for me.

    I am totally open to changing my mind about fluoridation however. If proper studies are performed with the correct methodology which can show, without ambiguity, that fluoridation of water causes problem X through mechanism Y then I will change my stance. I won't be ashamed to put my hands up and say I was wrong. But until that happens, I'll still be drinking fluoridated water.

    You might say that this makes me a sheeple or something similar, but that's life I guess.

    That's a fair argument. But given the concerns raised, not by us here in this thread, but numerous others who are experts in the field of medicine and science, as well as investigative reporters, whether or not their concerns are sufficiently backed up by hard scientific evidence, do you REALLY think that fluoride in the water has so much benefits to your dental health? Enough to ignore the concerns and say "feck it, if the government think it's right to medicate us by fluoridating our water supply, then it must be for our own good"? Also remembering that, the fluoride in the water is specifically targeted at kids, and not so much adults.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,068 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Here's a list of stuff containing fluoride, and the amounts of it within each product

    http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/fluoride.pdf

    How anyone can actually think that it's still necessary to fluoridate the entire water supply, despite the fact that there's so many other sources of it these days is beyond me


  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    Here's a list of stuff containing fluoride, and the amounts of it within each product

    http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/fluoride.pdf

    How anyone can actually think that it's still necessary to fluoridate the entire water supply, despite the fact that there's so many other sources of it these days is beyond me



    Fukcme, it's even in Perrier, Evian, Volvic? is that right?

    Edit: ah no, I can't have read that right, damn choc-chip biscuit fluoride hungover again!


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,068 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Fukcme, it's even in Perrier, Evian, Volvic? is that right?

    Edit: ah no, I can't have read that right, damn choc-chip biscuit fluoride hungover again!

    Yeah.. afaik it's naturally occurring in mineral water.. albeit in far smaller amounts than what is added to tap water.

    The crux of the issue for me is that I'd appreciate having the choice about whether or not my home is connected to a fluoridated water supply.. I bolded the important bit, because it means that it's being added artificially as a medication.

    I know that fluoride is in other stuff, and I can choose not to consume them if I want.. why can it not be the same for mains supplied water?

    It's an outdated idea.. and anyone with a bit of sense should be able to see that. I'm sure that 50 odd years ago, when there was less produce and less trade, it was a great idea to add it to the water for everybody.. but not today

    I don't even think there's a conspiracy in the whole thing (fluoridation, not this thread).. it's just ineptitude and unwillingness to consider new methods by both politicians and the scientists with the power to push new ideas on them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    Yeah.. afaik it's naturally occurring in mineral water.. albeit in far smaller amounts than what is added to tap water.

    The crux of the issue for me is that I'd appreciate having the choice about whether or not my home is connected to a fluoridated water supply.. I bolded the important bit, because it means that it's being added artificially as a medication.

    I know that fluoride is in other stuff, and I can choose not to consume them if I want.. why can it not be the same for mains supplied water?

    It's an outdated idea.. and anyone with a bit of sense should be able to see that. I'm sure that 50 odd years ago, when there was less produce and less trade, it was a great idea to add it to the water for everybody.. but not today


    Yep, it seems like freedom of choice is some kinda outdated idea too. For me that's the crux of the matter - whether or not the stuff works to protect teeth (doesn't imo) - we should have a choice over it.

    And before anybody jumps in and says some bollox about 'oh you can buy bottled water or drill your own fecking well - it is not an option for the vast majority of people and we should not be forcefully put in that position in the first place.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    I read your pdf file jma and have been following the thread once again fair play for putting it together I find it fairly shocking to be honest, I have some questions if you dont mind...

    So we know that roughly 97% of western Europe have either banned it or dont allow it and yet here we are in a little old allegedly progressive Ireland still banging into our water supply wtf is going on. Caseyann made a point further back in the thread that her water was like hazy of late and tasted bad I would defo agree with that Ive noticed that to in my tap water.

    The US military recomended that we use fluroide in the 1960's. Do you have anything in print in relation to that I could have a look at. Do you know what reason the military gave when they recommended it?

    Where did you read about the first recorded occurance of fluroide being used was in the nazi death camps? reportedly to sterilize and calm the captives into submission that is just scary really.

    Who was the US-Soviet Liaison officer that testified about the Soviets using water in the fluroide system to make prisoners stupid, docile and sub-serviant? have you got a transcript of the testimony by any chance?

    You were saying that the first lawsuits against the atom bomb project where in relation to fluroide and not radiation whats that all about how was fluroide relevant to the project?

    I'm seeing a military theme here and I ain't liking it one bit if you can shed any light on the above it would be much appreciated:)


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Appreciate there are other factors involved but I live in Sweden which has never had fluoridated water (my tapwater has a mineral water certificate :p)and I haven't noticed a single person young or old with anything other than perfect teeth. Was back in Ireland last week and I couldn't even drink the tap water, tasted like ****.

    Fluoride on Australian news



  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    WakeUp wrote: »
    I read your pdf file jma and have been following the thread once again fair play for putting it together I find it fairly shocking to be honest, I have some questions if you dont mind...

    So we know that roughly 97% of western Europe have either banned it or dont allow it and yet here we are in a little old allegedly progressive Ireland still banging into our water supply wtf is going on. Caseyann made a point further back in the thread that her water was like hazy of late and tasted bad I would defo agree with that Ive noticed that to in my tap water.

    The US military recomended that we use fluroide in the 1960's. Do you have anything in print in relation to that I could have a look at. Do you know what reason the military gave when they recommended it?

    Where did you read about the first recorded occurance of fluroide being used was in the nazi death camps? reportedly to sterilize and calm the captives into submission that is just scary really.

    Who was the US-Soviet Liaison officer that testified about the Soviets using water in the fluroide system to make prisoners stupid, docile and sub-serviant? have you got a transcript of the testimony by any chance?

    You were saying that the first lawsuits against the atom bomb project where in relation to fluroide and not radiation whats that all about how was fluroide relevant to the project?

    I'm seeing a military theme here and I ain't liking it one bit if you can shed any light on the above it would be much appreciated:)

    Thanks. Please note that I haven't yet published the PDF anywhere but on this thread. I didn't make any of this up, but to be fair some things might need to be verified by another source.

    To answer your questions:

    I spoke with my father there about an hour ago. Fluoridation somehow came up, and he remembers from years ago when I was a kid, one of our neighbours was a county council man responsible for "treating" the local water supply where we lived. At least once, he said that we couldn't drink the water for a while because too much chlorine had been "accidentally" mixed in. He said back then (I don't know how it is now), you couldn't be 100% sure of exactly how much levels of chemicals were in the water at any given day, and that it wasn't always done accurately all the time. For example, you might mix in a little extra chlorine here and a little extra fluoride there if, for example, you were going on holiday or something. Now, he did say not to quote him on anything, but an interesting thought all the same.

    The part about the U.S. Military representatives recommending fluoridation to the Irish gov. in the 60s, I found here on irishcentral.com:
    http://www.irishcentral.com/story/ent/the_keane_edge/calls-growing-for-the-removal-of-a-common-poison-put-in-irish-drinking-water-98618409.html

    I haven't yet verified that from any other sources, and the only thing I could think of as to why a recommendation for something like this might come from the U.S. military, if it's true, is that they needed some human guinea pigs. It might sound far fetched but it wouldn't be the first time in history. Well, that's just speculation, I really don't know why.

    The part about the Nazis was referenced a lot, but the original report seems to have come from a German reporter who wrote about this in the book "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" (9780029046302).

    There were various sources that mentioned reports about the Soviets poisoning the water supplies in their camps. There was also mention about the Soviets liasing with the Nazis about this type of mass-medication. The USAF Major's name was George Racey Jordan, and I tried to get the newspaper articles from around 1949 - 1960 that mentions his name and the Un-American Activity hearings, but what I could find was only available for a fee.

    Fluoride was relevant to the A-bomb project because it was a chemical needed to produce weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. Most of this information came from reporters Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson, and stuff they've written about is well worth reading, IMO.

    Joel Griffiths is a medical writer in New York and Chris Bryson is an award-winning investigative reporter who's worked for BBC among others. Bryson also wrote a book on the subject, called "The Fluoride Deception" (9781583225264), which was published in 2004.

    They wrote an interesting article called "Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb", which you can read here:

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/WN-414.htm


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    my tapwater has a mineral water certificate :p

    I want one of those :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    Originally Posted by Brown Bomber viewpost.gif
    my tapwater has a mineral water certificate tongue.gif

    If ya wake up one of these days and see a tent in your backgarden, don't worry it's only me :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    jma wrote: »
    Thanks. Please note that I haven't yet published the PDF anywhere but on this thread. I didn't make any of this up, but to be fair some things might need to be verified by another source.

    To answer your questions:

    I spoke with my father there about an hour ago. Fluoridation somehow came up, and he remembers from years ago when I was a kid, one of our neighbours was a county council man responsible for "treating" the local water supply where we lived. At least once, he said that we couldn't drink the water for a while because too much chlorine had been "accidentally" mixed in. He said back then (I don't know how it is now), you couldn't be 100% sure of exactly how much levels of chemicals were in the water at any given day, and that it wasn't always done accurately all the time. For example, you might mix in a little extra chlorine here and a little extra fluoride there if, for example, you were going on holiday or something. Now, he did say not to quote him on anything, but an interesting thought all the same.

    The part about the U.S. Military representatives recommending fluoridation to the Irish gov. in the 60s, I found here on irishcentral.com:
    http://www.irishcentral.com/story/ent/the_keane_edge/calls-growing-for-the-removal-of-a-common-poison-put-in-irish-drinking-water-98618409.html

    I haven't yet verified that from any other sources, and the only thing I could think of as to why a recommendation for something like this might come from the U.S. military, if it's true, is that they needed some human guinea pigs. It might sound far fetched but it wouldn't be the first time in history. Well, that's just speculation, I really don't know why.

    The part about the Nazis was referenced a lot, but the original report seems to have come from a German reporter who wrote about this in the book "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" (9780029046302).

    There were various sources that mentioned reports about the Soviets poisoning the water supplies in their camps. There was also mention about the Soviets liasing with the Nazis about this type of mass-medication. The USAF Major's name was George Racey Jordan, and I tried to get the newspaper articles from around 1949 - 1960 that mentions his name and the Un-American Activity hearings, but what I could find was only available for a fee.

    Fluoride was relevant to the A-bomb project because it was a chemical needed to produce weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. Most of this information came from reporters Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson, and stuff they've written about is well worth reading, IMO.

    Joel Griffiths is a medical writer in New York and Chris Bryson is an award-winning investigative reporter who's worked for BBC among others. Bryson also wrote a book on the subject, called "The Fluoride Deception" (9781583225264), which was published in 2004.

    They wrote an interesting article called "Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb", which you can read here:

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/WN-414.htm

    Thanks for that) I see the case when it went to the high court was the longest in the history of state and they still passed the legislation the bas@ards. Shame on our government and shame on the dental industry or anybody in a position to do something about this for not speaking up or willyfully turning a blind eye to make a few quid or whatever, they are basically poisoning us. No wonder people arent up in arms over the state of the country were all to stoned & sick from our poison on tap.


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    jma wrote: »
    I haven't yet verified that from any other sources, and the only thing I could think of as to why a recommendation for something like this might come from the U.S. military, if it's true, is that they needed some human guinea pigs. It might sound far fetched but it wouldn't be the first time in history. Well, that's just speculation, I really don't know why.

    There was also speculation that the U.S. Military wanted to spread the idea that fluoride was safe in repsonse to lawsuits resulting from the Manhattan Project, to help with litigation etc, but I need to read up on that more to become more familiar with this theory (or conspiracy theory).


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    jma wrote: »
    The part about the Nazis was referenced a lot, but the original report seems to have come from a German reporter who wrote about this in the book "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" (9780029046302).

    There were various sources that mentioned reports about the Soviets poisoning the water supplies in their camps. There was also mention about the Soviets liasing with the Nazis about this type of mass-medication. The USAF Major's name was George Racey Jordan, and I tried to get the newspaper articles from around 1949 - 1960 that mentions his name and the Un-American Activity hearings, but what I could find was only available for a fee.

    http://onespeedbikerpolitico.blogspot.com/2010/05/debunking-fluoride-use-by-nazis.html

    But keep on perpetuating the bunkum.


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    alastair wrote: »

    What's your point? We were discussing the possibility that the Nazis may have used water fluoridation in their concentration camps. And since when do you get your "facts" from a blog called "One Speed Biker Politico"? Don't they have anything about this on pubmed.gov that you could share with us?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    jma wrote: »
    What's your point? We were discussing the possibility that the Nazis may have used water fluoridation in their concentration camps. And since when do you get your "facts" from a blog called "One Speed Biker Politico"? Don't they have anything about this on pubmed.gov that you could share with us?

    Oh just have to say nearly fell off chair laughing! Thanks! :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    jma wrote: »
    What's your point? We were discussing the possibility that the Nazis may have used water fluoridation in their concentration camps. And since when do you get your "facts" from a blog called "One Speed Biker Politico"? Don't they have anything about this on pubmed.gov that you could share with us?

    My point?

    That the anti-fluoridation Nazi/Gulag talking point is not supported by any evidence, and that it isn't referenced in the book you suggested it was. In short it's bunkum, and you're propogating it (just like you are the bizarre notion that the US military played a role in the introduction of fluoridation here).



  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    alastair wrote: »
    My point?

    That the anti-fluoridation Nazi/Gulag talking point is not supported by any evidence, and that it isn't referenced in the book you suggested it was. In short it's bunkum, and you're propogating it (just like you are the bizarre notion that the US military played a role in the introduction of fluoridation here).

    Seems you're actually right about the fact that fluoride or fluoridation was not mentioned in the book "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben". However, I've skimmed the book, and I see where or how the association may have been made. It was in fact Perkins who was sent over to "take control of" the IG Farben plants, and who consequently uncovered the plot about the mass-medication. The book by Borkin obviously writes about IG Farben. This is one association. The book also mentions the chemicals manufactured by IG Farben, and how it was used as a genocidal gas - since it was found that carbon monoxide wasn't lethal enough. One of the lethal cyanide-based chemicals manufactured was Zyklon B. It also mentions Sarin, which was discovered in 1938 in Wuppertal, Germany, and Tabun, discovered in 1936 during IG Farben research on pesticides. Sarin and Soman, also discovered in Germany in 1944, were used to develop fluorinated nerve gases.

    It was decided that all these lethal nerve agents, codenamed "N-Stoff", that were being researched and produced by the Nazis should be tested on the "prisoners" since tests on rats and mice would not be "effective" or "conclusive" enough.

    Interstingly, Hitler ordered the deadly nerve agents not to be used in biological warfare as he was afraid that the enemy had equivalent nerve gasses in higher quantities to retaliate with. However, the intelligence he received about the enemy possesing equivalent nerve agents turned out to be false.

    So, to be fair, no, as you pointed out, that book doesn't mention water fluoridation. However, this doesn't mean that mass-"medication" (or mass-poisoning) through water supplies didn't happen. There is still the testimony of Major Jordan, and the reports from Perkins.

    Another interesting thing to note is that the Americans "snatched" up the German scientists after the war before the Soviets got the chance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    Mr Boyhan, who is also a councillor in Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council, called for an independent inquiry to be set up to establish the facts. He said a lot of information had been received by the Laffoy Commission before its investigation was closed down and the records of many of the institutions involved were still “surprisingly intact”.
    “Bodily integrity is a fundamental right of every citizen, it is not unreasonable to want to know what happened,” he said.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0821/1224277318309.html

    Surely 'bodily integrity' applies to fluoride (and Chlorine, etc) too ...


  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    jma wrote: »

    From the link above:
    Swine flu vaccine safety probed over link to rare sleep disorder.

    The safety of a swine flu vaccine is to be investigated by European drugs regulators after it was linked to a rare condition that causes people to fall asleep suddenly.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7967815/Swine-flu-vaccine-safety-probed-over-link-to-rare-sleep-disorder.html

    The first of many "rare condition's" that will emerge from this scam.
    Narcolepsy fears may halt swine flu vaccine: Finland
    HELSINKI — Finland's National Institute for Health and Wefare recommended Tuesday halting the use of the Pandemrix swine flu vaccine until a probe into a possible link to narcolepsy among children is concluded.
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j4dMnPCtoOZq0rmG93E-kVdGKd9A


    EDIT:
    HEALTH professionals shunned the swine flu injection at the height of the pandemic because of fears of its side-effects, a study at a Queensland hospital shows.
    The study result has shocked health experts who say staff at the major regional Queensland hospital were at the frontline of the pandemic and may have put themselves and patients at grave risk.
    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-hospital-staff-were-concerned-about-swine-flu-vaccine-side-effects/story-e6freoof-1225902469810

    From Korea:
    Side effects of flu vaccine warned of
    A lawmaker Friday warned of the side effects of the swine flu vaccine, saying more than 2,000 suspected cases have been reported to health authorities.

    According to the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a total of 2,593 side-effect cases were reported here, Rep. Shim Jae-cheol of the ruling Grand National Party said.

    The cases included light symptoms such as fevers, headaches and allergic responses as well as 10 deaths, he said.
    http://www.koreaherald.com/national/Detail.jsp?newsMLId=20100827000668

    These fukkers just don't give up...
    New Flu Shot Will Protect Against Seasonal & Swine Flu
    Flu shots already available in Arizona
    PHOENIX - The World Health Organization says the H1N1 virus has run its course, and is now behaving like the seasonal flu.

    Even though it's only August, doctors in Arizona are already preparing to fight this year's flu. This year's shot will be the only shot you need.

    It will protect against several strains of the seasonal flu, including H1N1 or the swine flu.

    Even though the pandemic may be over, the Arizona Health Department says people shouldn't let their guard down and still get vaccinated.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    This possible side effect of a flu jab is part of the grand 'depopulation' conspiracy? It's going to take a while at this rate.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭jma


    alastair wrote: »
    This possible side effect of a flu jab is part of the grand 'depopulation' conspiracy? It's going to take a while at this rate.

    Not sure if it's part of a depopulation conspiracy, but you'd be surprised at all the conspiracies that are going on around the world.

    Last night I watched a documentary - CIA Secret Experiments by the National Geographic Channel.
    http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/cia-secret-experiments-3313/Overview

    It was sickening to see what these degenerates did during the cold war and before - all in the name of "national security".


Advertisement