The Iranian people are obviously speaking. And not only in Iran, but also with protests near to me in Toronto, Canada.
I love protestors. I was happy to see the people raising awareness of the people, the Tamils, and the military in Sri Lanka. I was even pleasantly surprised when several people walked on to the Gardiner Expressway and shut down traffic. What power protestors have!
Will it just take time for Obama to step up more than just feeling remorse over what happened with the recent Iranian election? John McCain spoke to Congress recently about his dismay with the Obama Admin's stance of inaction. Of not wanting to meddle.
Elections are supposed to represent the voice of the people. But often that is not the case. Where are the groups of equal size, marching for their satisfaction with the President?
The US should begin aide of Iran by giving an ear to the Iranian people. By getting them chance for a collective international voice. The media is so restricted there right now, save images of the Ayatollah. What are the people to do?
When the people do something they have never done before, its because they want change.
change...
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Friday, June 19, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
'Not to offend anybody, but I just don't think gays should be getting married'
Yikes, touchy subject right? This issue is on the minds of millions. But this is essentially the response that Miss America first runner-up California's Carrie Prejean gave last night on the Miss America Pageant contest. Infamous online celebrity gossiper, and totally gay dude Perez Hilton asked Prejean the tough question. (I felt sorry for the girl when she got it. I mean Miss Arizona had to answer a question about how she got her childhood nickname- lame.) Hilton was obviously not excited by her answer. Though it was neck in neck all night between the top two, Miss North Carolina's Kristen Dalton (gorgeous blue gown btw) won the title. So did that question cause the title for California? And would that be 'just'?
Its funny that Prejean is from California because I tend to think of Cali as a liberal, (somewhat hedonistic), live and let live, anything goes sort of atmosphere, though of course you get all types everywhere... (I mean I don't think fiery Miss Utah was Mormon but I don't know...)
There is never going to be a time where everyone in the country supports marriage equality. There's never going to be a time where we all agree on everything. Keeping that in mind, should Perez Hilton 'hold that against' Prejean? Can a Miss America who doesn't support marriage equality accurately represent this increasingly diverse nation?
I too was brought up with a religious background that doesn't support gay lifestyle. That shouldn't be a big surprise, I dont think most people are. However, I was also brought up not to pass judgement on people. You can still like people and recognize that people are good people without agreeing with everything they do, basically. I also happen to be pretty liberal. And I think that politics and laws are not currently governed by religious morals (beautiful wicked world).... so therefore, its not just (by law/politics/etc) to have unequal marriage rights, en mon avis...
I say all that to say, thought I dont agree with Prejean 'per se' it had to be pretty difficult for her to answer Hilton as she did. And there's a lot to be said for standing your ground. I'm proud of that in her, and I'd like to be proud of Miss America.
Its funny that Prejean is from California because I tend to think of Cali as a liberal, (somewhat hedonistic), live and let live, anything goes sort of atmosphere, though of course you get all types everywhere... (I mean I don't think fiery Miss Utah was Mormon but I don't know...)
There is never going to be a time where everyone in the country supports marriage equality. There's never going to be a time where we all agree on everything. Keeping that in mind, should Perez Hilton 'hold that against' Prejean? Can a Miss America who doesn't support marriage equality accurately represent this increasingly diverse nation?
I too was brought up with a religious background that doesn't support gay lifestyle. That shouldn't be a big surprise, I dont think most people are. However, I was also brought up not to pass judgement on people. You can still like people and recognize that people are good people without agreeing with everything they do, basically. I also happen to be pretty liberal. And I think that politics and laws are not currently governed by religious morals (beautiful wicked world).... so therefore, its not just (by law/politics/etc) to have unequal marriage rights, en mon avis...
I say all that to say, thought I dont agree with Prejean 'per se' it had to be pretty difficult for her to answer Hilton as she did. And there's a lot to be said for standing your ground. I'm proud of that in her, and I'd like to be proud of Miss America.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Why Ozone kicks Oxygen's Ass: Ozone Therapy
Like it or not one day, in this crazy, beautiful, wicked world pot will be decriminalized, plus sized models will prevail, abortion will stay, gays will marry, people who don't love the constitution will stop being villianized, and alternative medicine/therapies will flourish. We've seen limitations on stem cell research be lifted, and one day, hopefully sooner than later, we will see more research and practice of Ozone therapy.
There are three key discoveries that explain why ozone helps to fight cancer. First, cancer arises because of a lack of oxygen to the cells (Warburg). Second, cancer has a viral component (Watson). Third, the growth of select tumors is inhibited by ozone (Varro). Ozone is a misunderstood disinfectant. Ozone therapy is a neglected treatment that can effectively fight cancer. Ozone is an effective immunoregulator that kills pathogens, mitigates infection, detoxifies the body, increases circulation and oxygen levels, combats fatigue. These are made possible by it's unique chemical properties, high energy state, instability, and rate of reaction.
Why use ozone, a known carcinogen which (when tropospheric) may harm the epithelial tissues in our lungs, in oxidative therapies instead of O2 exclusively? The noted and influential Dr. Erwin Payr said, "Ozone can do what oxygen cannot". Ozone is molecular oxygen with one or more extra atoms of oxygen; the more oxygen atoms to disperse, the more effective at diffusing oxygen into the body. Due to the small quantity of ozone required per treatment, (and therefore small amount produced at a time) it poses little threat to our atmosphere. Unstable ozone requires less energy than stable O2 to undergo reaction. Once ozone is infused into the blood, it quickly breaks down into oxygen, readily oxidizes blood and tissue cells, and rapidly circulates more oxygen in the blood stream than O2. Anne Schadde author of O3zone: A Homeopathic Proving says, "The intense reactivity of ozone is explained by suggesting that one of the three oxygen atoms is in an 'atomic' state. On reacting, this atom is dissociated from the O3 molecule, leaving molecular oxygen, O2. The molecular oxygen, O2, is not reactive at ambient temperature and pressures. However, the atomic oxygen, O, is far more reactive" (6). Ozone's 18 electrons have a high energy, making the molecule highly reactive and unstable. This is apparent by its short lifespan of about 40 minutes. After about 40 minutes before ozone decomposes back into oxygen molecules and atoms. In an email exchange with London-based ozone therapist Steven Salem Karim he writes, "The difference between medical Ozone and Oxygen is in the physical and chemical properties...Ozone is far more unstable and has more energy. This energy can be released in a number of ways and can effect the way it reacts with other chemicals or biochemistries. Oxygen is a very stable element and needs more energy to react with chemicals and other biochemistries. These characteristics between Ozone and Oxygen is why Ozone is way more powerful as an oxidiser. The oxidation potential between Ozone and Oxygen is that Ozone has much greater oxidation potential than Oxygen...I describe it as a super enriched oxygen" (8).
The discoveries of Otto Warburg, James D. Watson, and Joaquim Varro were integral to developing a regime for ozone to fight cancer.
Research opposing viewpoints for yourself, as I did. Cut out the middle-man and see sources with YOUR own eyes. They are truly easy to find. Check out comments on mai other blogs in this series. What works for some, doesn't work for all, and vice versa. BUT IGNORANCE WORKS FOR NONE. If you or someone you love are in need, and knowledge of this underrated treatment could help you, I'm fully justified and proud to shed more light. This is NOT the first medical care that people have villianized only to later tout as advanced.
"EDUCATION IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN IGNORANCE- dont be shamed into not knowing. Its always ethical to be well informed." - mai
TAKE NOTE: Anyone interested in any therapies mentioned in this essay must seek professional guidance before proceeding with any form of treatment. This is one part of a series of Ozone related essays, sources located at http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/51624-ozone-therapy-key-foundation pertain to whole the series.
Additional Notes of Interest:
This is why ozone is often called "supercharged" oxygen.
Some experts define ozone as a molecule having anywhere from 3 atoms of oxygen to 5, 6 or even as much as 21 atoms of oxygen. If this is the case, then that would even boost ozone's ability to effectively distribute oxygen in the body.
There is no getting around free radicals, which are charged and spinning around in lone orbit searching for another electron to pair up with. The problem with free radicals comes in when they are disproportionate in our bodies.
There are three key discoveries that explain why ozone helps to fight cancer. First, cancer arises because of a lack of oxygen to the cells (Warburg). Second, cancer has a viral component (Watson). Third, the growth of select tumors is inhibited by ozone (Varro). Ozone is a misunderstood disinfectant. Ozone therapy is a neglected treatment that can effectively fight cancer. Ozone is an effective immunoregulator that kills pathogens, mitigates infection, detoxifies the body, increases circulation and oxygen levels, combats fatigue. These are made possible by it's unique chemical properties, high energy state, instability, and rate of reaction.
Why use ozone, a known carcinogen which (when tropospheric) may harm the epithelial tissues in our lungs, in oxidative therapies instead of O2 exclusively? The noted and influential Dr. Erwin Payr said, "Ozone can do what oxygen cannot". Ozone is molecular oxygen with one or more extra atoms of oxygen; the more oxygen atoms to disperse, the more effective at diffusing oxygen into the body. Due to the small quantity of ozone required per treatment, (and therefore small amount produced at a time) it poses little threat to our atmosphere. Unstable ozone requires less energy than stable O2 to undergo reaction. Once ozone is infused into the blood, it quickly breaks down into oxygen, readily oxidizes blood and tissue cells, and rapidly circulates more oxygen in the blood stream than O2. Anne Schadde author of O3zone: A Homeopathic Proving says, "The intense reactivity of ozone is explained by suggesting that one of the three oxygen atoms is in an 'atomic' state. On reacting, this atom is dissociated from the O3 molecule, leaving molecular oxygen, O2. The molecular oxygen, O2, is not reactive at ambient temperature and pressures. However, the atomic oxygen, O, is far more reactive" (6). Ozone's 18 electrons have a high energy, making the molecule highly reactive and unstable. This is apparent by its short lifespan of about 40 minutes. After about 40 minutes before ozone decomposes back into oxygen molecules and atoms. In an email exchange with London-based ozone therapist Steven Salem Karim he writes, "The difference between medical Ozone and Oxygen is in the physical and chemical properties...Ozone is far more unstable and has more energy. This energy can be released in a number of ways and can effect the way it reacts with other chemicals or biochemistries. Oxygen is a very stable element and needs more energy to react with chemicals and other biochemistries. These characteristics between Ozone and Oxygen is why Ozone is way more powerful as an oxidiser. The oxidation potential between Ozone and Oxygen is that Ozone has much greater oxidation potential than Oxygen...I describe it as a super enriched oxygen" (8).
The discoveries of Otto Warburg, James D. Watson, and Joaquim Varro were integral to developing a regime for ozone to fight cancer.
Research opposing viewpoints for yourself, as I did. Cut out the middle-man and see sources with YOUR own eyes. They are truly easy to find. Check out comments on mai other blogs in this series. What works for some, doesn't work for all, and vice versa. BUT IGNORANCE WORKS FOR NONE. If you or someone you love are in need, and knowledge of this underrated treatment could help you, I'm fully justified and proud to shed more light. This is NOT the first medical care that people have villianized only to later tout as advanced.
"EDUCATION IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN IGNORANCE- dont be shamed into not knowing. Its always ethical to be well informed." - mai
TAKE NOTE: Anyone interested in any therapies mentioned in this essay must seek professional guidance before proceeding with any form of treatment. This is one part of a series of Ozone related essays, sources located at http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/51624-ozone-therapy-key-foundation pertain to whole the series.
Additional Notes of Interest:
This is why ozone is often called "supercharged" oxygen.
Some experts define ozone as a molecule having anywhere from 3 atoms of oxygen to 5, 6 or even as much as 21 atoms of oxygen. If this is the case, then that would even boost ozone's ability to effectively distribute oxygen in the body.
There is no getting around free radicals, which are charged and spinning around in lone orbit searching for another electron to pair up with. The problem with free radicals comes in when they are disproportionate in our bodies.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Ozone Therapy: The Key Foundation
Well since the government are lifting limitations (stem cell), and select states are growing more liberal with their medical marijuana regulations, lets keep progressing by taking a closer look at ozone therapy.
There are three key discoveries that explain why ozone helps to fight cancer. First, cancer arises because of a lack of oxygen to the cells. Second, cancer has a viral component. Third, the growth of select tumors is inhibited by ozone.
In the 1930s, Dr. Otto Warburg of Germany hypothesized that the predominate precondition for cancer is lack of oxygen to the cells. He came to this conclusion because he noticed that cancer cells had decreased respiration in comparison to healthy cells, and that the mitochondria of the cancer cells had decreased energy production (2). For this he won the Nobel Prize in 1931. Dr. Max Gerson author of A Cancer Therapy: Results of Fifty Cases and the Cure of Advanced Cancer supports Warburg by stating that "the ideal task of cancer therapy is to restore the function of oxidizing systems in the entire organism." Online author, mathematician and accountant Webster Kehr contests that "cancer cells die when exposed to oxygen..." (3). This belief means cancer cells are anaerobic or thriving in low oxygen conditions and destroyed in contact with oxygen. If cancer is predominately caused by a lack of oxygen to the cells, then oxidizing the cells should restore some sort of balance. Warburg believed that lack of oxygen was the primary cause for cancer, and though he acknowledged other factors, he believed there was little need to focus on them, because they would distract from the primary cause which was lack of oxygen. Warburg discovered that once healthy cells are in low oxygen levels they are forced to ferment. The byproducts of fermentation thus causes the mutation of the cell. This is the number one reason why ozone is thought to help fight cancer. Author of Flood Your Body with Oxygen, Ed McCabe explains that oxygen causes diseased cells to oxidize and be "burnt up in oxygen". However, healthy cells produce a protective antioxidant shield that diseased cells can not produce because they are consumed with toxins. Therefore, when the body is flooded with oxygen in ozone therapy, only the diseased cells waste away. Our bodies as well as our antibodies produce low levels of ozone (4). Compounding ozone's likelihood to fight cancer are the discoveries of Noble Prize winner Dr. James Watson and Dr. Joaquim Varro. Watson, co-discoverer of the DNA double helix, discovered that a component of cancer is viral, "among the most useful carcinogenic agents know at present are several viruses" (2). Therefore, ozone kills virus, a component of cancer is viral, and some cancers are caused by viruses such as Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) and Human papillomavirus (HPV). Varro discovered that ozone as well as oxygen and hydrogen peroxide have the ability to inhibit the growth of select cancer tumors. Studies at the University of California-Irvine have supported this discovery in finding that ozone therapy specifically helps patients with Hodgkin's Lymphoma (5).
The discoveries of Warburg, Watson, and Varro were integral to developing a regime for ozone to fight cancer. Ozone is a misunderstood disinfectant. Ozone therapy is a neglected treatment that can effectively fight cancer. Ozone is an effective immunoregulator that kills pathogens, mitigates infection, detoxifies the body, increases circulation and oxygen levels, combats fatigue. These are made possible by it's unique chemical properties, high energy state, instability, and rate of reaction.
TAKE NOTE: Anyone interested in any therapies mentioned in this essay must seek professional guidance before proceeding with any form of treatment. This is one part of a series of Ozone related essays, sources pertain to whole series.
REFERENCES
1. Rilling, Siegfried and Renate Viebahn. The Use of Ozone in Medicine. Second Revised Edition. First English Edition. Germany: Haug Publishers, 1987.
2. Altman, Nathaniel. Oxygen Healing Therapies: For Optimum Health & Vitality. Rochester: Healing Arts Press, 1998.
3. Kehr, R. Webster. "Ozone Cancer Treatments." Cancer Tutor: Alternative Cancer Treatments Information Center. 26 March 2009. .
4. McCabe, Ed. Flood Your Body with Oxygen: Therapy for Our Polluted World. 6th Edition. Florida: Energy Publications, 2003.
5. Sorge, Robert H. "Ozone Therapy." Abundalife. 2000. 29 March 2009. www.abundalife.com/ozone.asp
6. Schadde, Anne. O3zone: a Homeopathic Proving. Seattle: Alethea Book Company, 1997.
7. Oxford Journals. "Adjuvant Ozonetherapy in Advanced Head and Neck Tumors: A Comparative Study". 28 March 2009. ecam.oxfordjournals.org>.
8. Karim, Steve. "Re: Ozone Therapy." E-mail to Mai. 20 March 2003.
9. Ozone Therapy. Videotape. Author. Channeler, Trance. Vision Quest Video, 1998.
10. Null, Gary. "Ozone Therapy." Listen to Progressive Radio Network. PRN, New York. 24 March 2009.
www.progressiveradionetwork.com/listen.html.
11. McKinney, Neil. "Creating Healing for Cancer Patients." VitalLink: The professional journal of the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors 16.1 (2009): 47-50.
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
12. Edelson, Edward. The Encyclopedia of Health: The Healthy Body, The Immune System. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1989.
13. Murphy, Gerald P. et al. American Cancer Society. Informed Decisions: The complete book of cancer diagnosis, treatment, and recovery. New York: Viking, 1997.
14. Labriola, Dan. Complementary Cancer Therapies: Combining Tradition and Alternative Approaches for the Best Possible Outcome. Roseville: Prima Health Publishing, 2000.
15. "Otto Warburg." Encyclopedia of World Biography. Thomson Gale. 2004. Encyclopedia.com.
30 March 2009 www.encyclopedia.com>.
16. "Treating Cancer with Ozone, Oxygen & Hydrogen Peroxide (l)." Healing Cancer via O2, O3, & H2O2. March 20 2009".www.healingcancernaturally.com/ozone-cancer-treatment.h t m l >. 2007
17. "Ozone Therapy." Wikipedia. 28 March 2009. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_therapy>.
18. "Ozone." Wikipedia. 25 March 2009. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ozone>.
19. "Gary Null." Wikipedia. 27 March 2009. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/gary_null>.
20. Weil, Andrew. "Your Trusted Health Advisor." www.drweil.com/drw/u/id/qaa322213>.
5 January 2004
21. "Providing Alternative Comprehensive Cancer Treatment." New Hope Medical Center.
23 March 2009. www.newhopemedicalcenter.com/cancer-treatments.aspx>.
22. "Alternative Medicine Anti-Aging Medicine Carson City Ozone Therapy." The Nevada Center.
23 March 2009. www.antiagingmedicine.com/procedures_ozone.htm#ozone>.
23. "Dr. Otto Warburg-On the Origin of Cancer Cells." Ozone Therapy. 23 March 2009.
www.anti-aging-today.org/oxygen/ozone/cancer-origin-warburg.htm>. 2009
There are three key discoveries that explain why ozone helps to fight cancer. First, cancer arises because of a lack of oxygen to the cells. Second, cancer has a viral component. Third, the growth of select tumors is inhibited by ozone.
In the 1930s, Dr. Otto Warburg of Germany hypothesized that the predominate precondition for cancer is lack of oxygen to the cells. He came to this conclusion because he noticed that cancer cells had decreased respiration in comparison to healthy cells, and that the mitochondria of the cancer cells had decreased energy production (2). For this he won the Nobel Prize in 1931. Dr. Max Gerson author of A Cancer Therapy: Results of Fifty Cases and the Cure of Advanced Cancer supports Warburg by stating that "the ideal task of cancer therapy is to restore the function of oxidizing systems in the entire organism." Online author, mathematician and accountant Webster Kehr contests that "cancer cells die when exposed to oxygen..." (3). This belief means cancer cells are anaerobic or thriving in low oxygen conditions and destroyed in contact with oxygen. If cancer is predominately caused by a lack of oxygen to the cells, then oxidizing the cells should restore some sort of balance. Warburg believed that lack of oxygen was the primary cause for cancer, and though he acknowledged other factors, he believed there was little need to focus on them, because they would distract from the primary cause which was lack of oxygen. Warburg discovered that once healthy cells are in low oxygen levels they are forced to ferment. The byproducts of fermentation thus causes the mutation of the cell. This is the number one reason why ozone is thought to help fight cancer. Author of Flood Your Body with Oxygen, Ed McCabe explains that oxygen causes diseased cells to oxidize and be "burnt up in oxygen". However, healthy cells produce a protective antioxidant shield that diseased cells can not produce because they are consumed with toxins. Therefore, when the body is flooded with oxygen in ozone therapy, only the diseased cells waste away. Our bodies as well as our antibodies produce low levels of ozone (4). Compounding ozone's likelihood to fight cancer are the discoveries of Noble Prize winner Dr. James Watson and Dr. Joaquim Varro. Watson, co-discoverer of the DNA double helix, discovered that a component of cancer is viral, "among the most useful carcinogenic agents know at present are several viruses" (2). Therefore, ozone kills virus, a component of cancer is viral, and some cancers are caused by viruses such as Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) and Human papillomavirus (HPV). Varro discovered that ozone as well as oxygen and hydrogen peroxide have the ability to inhibit the growth of select cancer tumors. Studies at the University of California-Irvine have supported this discovery in finding that ozone therapy specifically helps patients with Hodgkin's Lymphoma (5).
The discoveries of Warburg, Watson, and Varro were integral to developing a regime for ozone to fight cancer. Ozone is a misunderstood disinfectant. Ozone therapy is a neglected treatment that can effectively fight cancer. Ozone is an effective immunoregulator that kills pathogens, mitigates infection, detoxifies the body, increases circulation and oxygen levels, combats fatigue. These are made possible by it's unique chemical properties, high energy state, instability, and rate of reaction.
TAKE NOTE: Anyone interested in any therapies mentioned in this essay must seek professional guidance before proceeding with any form of treatment. This is one part of a series of Ozone related essays, sources pertain to whole series.
REFERENCES
1. Rilling, Siegfried and Renate Viebahn. The Use of Ozone in Medicine. Second Revised Edition. First English Edition. Germany: Haug Publishers, 1987.
2. Altman, Nathaniel. Oxygen Healing Therapies: For Optimum Health & Vitality. Rochester: Healing Arts Press, 1998.
3. Kehr, R. Webster. "Ozone Cancer Treatments." Cancer Tutor: Alternative Cancer Treatments Information Center. 26 March 2009. .
4. McCabe, Ed. Flood Your Body with Oxygen: Therapy for Our Polluted World. 6th Edition. Florida: Energy Publications, 2003.
5. Sorge, Robert H. "Ozone Therapy." Abundalife. 2000. 29 March 2009. www.abundalife.com/ozone.asp
6. Schadde, Anne. O3zone: a Homeopathic Proving. Seattle: Alethea Book Company, 1997.
7. Oxford Journals. "Adjuvant Ozonetherapy in Advanced Head and Neck Tumors: A Comparative Study". 28 March 2009. ecam.oxfordjournals.org>.
8. Karim, Steve. "Re: Ozone Therapy." E-mail to Mai. 20 March 2003.
9. Ozone Therapy. Videotape. Author. Channeler, Trance. Vision Quest Video, 1998.
10. Null, Gary. "Ozone Therapy." Listen to Progressive Radio Network. PRN, New York. 24 March 2009.
www.progressiveradionetwork.com/listen.html.
11. McKinney, Neil. "Creating Healing for Cancer Patients." VitalLink: The professional journal of the Canadian Association of Naturopathic Doctors 16.1 (2009): 47-50.
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
12. Edelson, Edward. The Encyclopedia of Health: The Healthy Body, The Immune System. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1989.
13. Murphy, Gerald P. et al. American Cancer Society. Informed Decisions: The complete book of cancer diagnosis, treatment, and recovery. New York: Viking, 1997.
14. Labriola, Dan. Complementary Cancer Therapies: Combining Tradition and Alternative Approaches for the Best Possible Outcome. Roseville: Prima Health Publishing, 2000.
15. "Otto Warburg." Encyclopedia of World Biography. Thomson Gale. 2004. Encyclopedia.com.
30 March 2009 www.encyclopedia.com>.
16. "Treating Cancer with Ozone, Oxygen & Hydrogen Peroxide (l)." Healing Cancer via O2, O3, & H2O2. March 20 2009".www.healingcancernaturally.com/ozone-cancer-treatment.h t m l >. 2007
17. "Ozone Therapy." Wikipedia. 28 March 2009. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_therapy>.
18. "Ozone." Wikipedia. 25 March 2009. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ozone>.
19. "Gary Null." Wikipedia. 27 March 2009. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/gary_null>.
20. Weil, Andrew. "Your Trusted Health Advisor." www.drweil.com/drw/u/id/qaa322213>.
5 January 2004
21. "Providing Alternative Comprehensive Cancer Treatment." New Hope Medical Center.
23 March 2009. www.newhopemedicalcenter.com/cancer-treatments.aspx>.
22. "Alternative Medicine Anti-Aging Medicine Carson City Ozone Therapy." The Nevada Center.
23 March 2009. www.antiagingmedicine.com/procedures_ozone.htm#ozone>.
23. "Dr. Otto Warburg-On the Origin of Cancer Cells." Ozone Therapy. 23 March 2009.
www.anti-aging-today.org/oxygen/ozone/cancer-origin-warburg.htm>. 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Why the Constitution can kiss Mai ass
The constitution (or the people charged with exercising it) has failed to recognize and practice many of its statues since its inception, making it untrustworthy. I don't believe that since something is written down, I'm protected, because that hasn't been the case.
IT'S JUST A PIECE OF TEXT. It's just a set of laws (some which permit individual states to do horrible things) that a group of people (majority of whom just happen to have been notorious bigots) made up. It also allows great injustices to prevail, like how, when, and where people are allowed to engage in adult activities.
People want to denigrate the Bible because they think its fictional, irrelevant, or can't be proven. I think that the constitution is fictional, and hypocritical. People act like I can't look upon the constitution unfavorably. Telling me to leave the country because I voice disapproval of the constitution (or don’t choose to participate in the judicial system in a conventional manner) is like that "Christian" pastor going online perpetrating an ignorant atheist, then coming back to minister to his alter ego. Its hypocritical. If you put all your faith in something (other than spiritual) that's wrong, and its warping your view of life.
People worship the constitution and make it seem like I must too. People hold the constitution to be some infallible text. The constitution did not invent freedom or even grant freedom. People act as if you are going against the word of freedom if you question it. My freedom comes from my humanity, ultimately people's worship of the constitution seems to justify the idea the U.S. is better than other countries because the U.S. has the constitution. People, people, people make the constitution untrustworthy and corrupt. And there has never been a time when they haven’t.
IT'S JUST A PIECE OF TEXT. It's just a set of laws (some which permit individual states to do horrible things) that a group of people (majority of whom just happen to have been notorious bigots) made up. It also allows great injustices to prevail, like how, when, and where people are allowed to engage in adult activities.
People want to denigrate the Bible because they think its fictional, irrelevant, or can't be proven. I think that the constitution is fictional, and hypocritical. People act like I can't look upon the constitution unfavorably. Telling me to leave the country because I voice disapproval of the constitution (or don’t choose to participate in the judicial system in a conventional manner) is like that "Christian" pastor going online perpetrating an ignorant atheist, then coming back to minister to his alter ego. Its hypocritical. If you put all your faith in something (other than spiritual) that's wrong, and its warping your view of life.
People worship the constitution and make it seem like I must too. People hold the constitution to be some infallible text. The constitution did not invent freedom or even grant freedom. People act as if you are going against the word of freedom if you question it. My freedom comes from my humanity, ultimately people's worship of the constitution seems to justify the idea the U.S. is better than other countries because the U.S. has the constitution. People, people, people make the constitution untrustworthy and corrupt. And there has never been a time when they haven’t.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Happy Women's History Month 365: Why I ♥ heart Sarah Palin
I've never subscribed to ANY political party. But if I were to, the Republican party would not be high up on mai list. I don't identify with their general sensibilities or views of society and economic hierarchy. However, I greatly appreciate what Sarah Palin has done (vastly inadvertent) for women in politics. Thank you Sarah.
Ronald Reagan, Strom Thurmond, George W. Bush, George Washington, the list goes on and on for men in politics with reprehensible behavior. Men in politics represent the noble, the greedy, the detestable, and the (nearly) righteous. Truly the spectrum of men in politics is wider than women. Therefore, men are seen as multi-dimensional figures. Of course some of them are bad, of course some of them are ugly, of course some of them will make mistakes, and make bad choices, and force the country into turmoil. Because even though that is part of their character's capacity, so is the other extreme for doing good.
Women in politics aren't seen the same way to the same extent. Our most notable women are Clinton, Pelosi, Chisholm, and Rice. Lesser known politicians are Maxine Waters and C. Delores Tucker. But for the most part (nothing is total of course), women in the history of politics have been respectable do-gooders. This is a nice legacy to uphold. But I am constantly defending Palin. Not because I agree with her book banning, wolf aerial hunting, victims pay for forensic rape kits, charging Alaskan tax-payers to foot the bill for her daughters to see the world, pulling strings to get her in-laws unjustly hired and fired antics. But because she is one more woman sculpting the national, political view. One more woman to crack a ceiling. One more woman to add to the face of women in politics. She has shaped an idea of what women can be in American politics, at this point, for good or bad isn't that important.
Though I'm SURE I will never subscribe to any political party in my life (save, perhaps the Nunya Party*) I have to give Palin her props, just for existing. I 'love' her ideology even less than I 'love' the Constitution (Problem with that? There isn't a dayum thing you can do about it, I'm not going anywhere, and frankly its none of your business). It's none of your business how a person votes AND if they choose to vote or abstain from voting one and all. But I defiantly hope Palin's accomplishment is not as forgotten as those of Geraldine Ferraro.
*http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/51282-nunya-party
Ronald Reagan, Strom Thurmond, George W. Bush, George Washington, the list goes on and on for men in politics with reprehensible behavior. Men in politics represent the noble, the greedy, the detestable, and the (nearly) righteous. Truly the spectrum of men in politics is wider than women. Therefore, men are seen as multi-dimensional figures. Of course some of them are bad, of course some of them are ugly, of course some of them will make mistakes, and make bad choices, and force the country into turmoil. Because even though that is part of their character's capacity, so is the other extreme for doing good.
Women in politics aren't seen the same way to the same extent. Our most notable women are Clinton, Pelosi, Chisholm, and Rice. Lesser known politicians are Maxine Waters and C. Delores Tucker. But for the most part (nothing is total of course), women in the history of politics have been respectable do-gooders. This is a nice legacy to uphold. But I am constantly defending Palin. Not because I agree with her book banning, wolf aerial hunting, victims pay for forensic rape kits, charging Alaskan tax-payers to foot the bill for her daughters to see the world, pulling strings to get her in-laws unjustly hired and fired antics. But because she is one more woman sculpting the national, political view. One more woman to crack a ceiling. One more woman to add to the face of women in politics. She has shaped an idea of what women can be in American politics, at this point, for good or bad isn't that important.
Though I'm SURE I will never subscribe to any political party in my life (save, perhaps the Nunya Party*) I have to give Palin her props, just for existing. I 'love' her ideology even less than I 'love' the Constitution (Problem with that? There isn't a dayum thing you can do about it, I'm not going anywhere, and frankly its none of your business). It's none of your business how a person votes AND if they choose to vote or abstain from voting one and all. But I defiantly hope Palin's accomplishment is not as forgotten as those of Geraldine Ferraro.
*http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/51282-nunya-party
Friday, February 20, 2009
NY Post: Power to the Protest
I am in awe every time I see the power of the people manifested in demonstrations as it has been for the past few days with the protestors of the New York Post.
Longtime political cartoonist Sean Delonas drew a picture that was published in the Post this Wednesday. Many feel this cartoon played on the racist history of Blacks being compared to primates.*
The strength, tenacity, courage, and determination of protesters is often times inspiring. How awesome that this group of people got together to make a change, and they saw results from it.
The New York Post issued an apology today to those they offended with the cartoon. The apology was a bit back-handed because they refused to apologize to those they believe initiated the opposition. They felt those with long time grievances used this cartoon as an opportunity to enact revenge on the controversial and conservative newspaper. (Though they didn't name names, the main opponent has been Rev. Al Sharpton, and I think we can infer they are talking about him.)
It is very possible that the Post and Delonas didn't intended any racial slur with the cartoon. I am willing to take them at their word that the chimp is a parody of Travis the chimp that was shot on Monday by police officers paired with a mock of the economic stimulus bill. However, there is NO WAY they didn't anticipate the implications that would be felt by comparing the author of the current stimulus bill (not only President Obama, but he IS the face of the bill) to a violent chimpanzee. In addition, they shot the chimp= they shot the author of the stimulus bill= they shot the President!!?? That's funny?
Many people want to site that President Bush was at times compared to monkeys as well. However, there is no history of whites being compared to primates in a racial defamation. If Bush had been compared to a Ritz of something with a comparative history, then (I would be outraged) a comparison could be made.
The Post shouldn't be surprised by the public backlash. I didn't even know about Travis until after I saw the bru-ha-ha over the cartoon. I'm sure many around the world will see this cartoon, know nothing of Travis, and instantly see it as a racial slur.
I am delighted the protestors got a semblance of an apology. We must stay on offensive people/media. We must never give up. Protest reminds us that there is much more that we can/must do for our communities than simply casting a ballot every 4 years.
I want to dedicate this to all the demonstrators (many of whom were college students) in 2003 that were jailed just for protesting the Iraqi War on the streets of Chicago, and to those who marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on Frankfort, KY in 1965.
POWER TO THE PEOPLE!! UHURU!! HOTEP!!
* You can see the original cartoon here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/18/national/main4809291.shtml
** You can see an altered version of the cartoon (not by Delonas) here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-camp/how-the-new-york-post-mon_b_168199.html
Longtime political cartoonist Sean Delonas drew a picture that was published in the Post this Wednesday. Many feel this cartoon played on the racist history of Blacks being compared to primates.*
The strength, tenacity, courage, and determination of protesters is often times inspiring. How awesome that this group of people got together to make a change, and they saw results from it.
The New York Post issued an apology today to those they offended with the cartoon. The apology was a bit back-handed because they refused to apologize to those they believe initiated the opposition. They felt those with long time grievances used this cartoon as an opportunity to enact revenge on the controversial and conservative newspaper. (Though they didn't name names, the main opponent has been Rev. Al Sharpton, and I think we can infer they are talking about him.)
It is very possible that the Post and Delonas didn't intended any racial slur with the cartoon. I am willing to take them at their word that the chimp is a parody of Travis the chimp that was shot on Monday by police officers paired with a mock of the economic stimulus bill. However, there is NO WAY they didn't anticipate the implications that would be felt by comparing the author of the current stimulus bill (not only President Obama, but he IS the face of the bill) to a violent chimpanzee. In addition, they shot the chimp= they shot the author of the stimulus bill= they shot the President!!?? That's funny?
Many people want to site that President Bush was at times compared to monkeys as well. However, there is no history of whites being compared to primates in a racial defamation. If Bush had been compared to a Ritz of something with a comparative history, then (I would be outraged) a comparison could be made.
The Post shouldn't be surprised by the public backlash. I didn't even know about Travis until after I saw the bru-ha-ha over the cartoon. I'm sure many around the world will see this cartoon, know nothing of Travis, and instantly see it as a racial slur.
I am delighted the protestors got a semblance of an apology. We must stay on offensive people/media. We must never give up. Protest reminds us that there is much more that we can/must do for our communities than simply casting a ballot every 4 years.
I want to dedicate this to all the demonstrators (many of whom were college students) in 2003 that were jailed just for protesting the Iraqi War on the streets of Chicago, and to those who marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on Frankfort, KY in 1965.
POWER TO THE PEOPLE!! UHURU!! HOTEP!!
* You can see the original cartoon here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/18/national/main4809291.shtml
** You can see an altered version of the cartoon (not by Delonas) here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-camp/how-the-new-york-post-mon_b_168199.html
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Obama, talk to Hamas
Hamas is the elected governing body of Palestine’s Gaza Strip. Worldwide ignorance of the Palestinian people is contributing to the rising death toll in the latest Israeli and Palestinian conflict. Americans should help civil rights reformers in the Middle East uphold civil rights standards, protect our investment in Israel, and repair President Bush’s fiasco in Palestine.
Hamas has been active since the late 1960s and has much support by the general Palestinian population. 90% of Hamas’ focus is public service. They provide community around mosques, clinics, and schools. However, Hamas has continued its refusal to recognize the state of Israel. Israel’s United Nation’s ambassador said that the goal of Israel’s military defensive is to completely destroy Hamas. Palestinians have been legally given the right to govern themselves in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Hamas hopes to obliterate Israel. This has led Israel to enforce economic sanctions on Hamas in 2006 thru 2007 and are currently pushing for an international embargo on the Gaza Strip. Essentially, Palestine and Israel are fighting for the same space.
Just as the entrepreneur president of Rwanda Paul Kagame has said that Rwanda should now be a crusher of genocide around the world, due to its 1994 background with genocide, the American government has a similar obligation in the ways of civil rights. America continues to have a tumultuous relationship with civil rights. Nonetheless, over the decades since the movement of the 1960s and 1970s America has set a precedent for civil rights in the world. Therefore, like Rwanda, it’s America’s duty to uphold those rights. American writer Stan Lee admonishes,”With great power comes great responsibility.” It would be horrible to do nothing when we have the sway to effect change simply by moderating communications. As we go into these next four years, America will be seeking to improve its garish image worldwide. Standing idly by as the Bush administration has done for eight years would be callus of us, and not a step in the right direction.
Unfortunately, the American government has contributed to much of the civil unrest in the Mideast by strengthening tyrants resources to oppress. While the CIA was supplying millions of dollars to the Afghanis in the 1980s to help defend against the Russians, that same regime was torturing, maiming, and deforming the limbs of many of its own people, while forming the Taliban. The same is true of trade with Saudi Arabia to obtain oil. Neither nations regularly and consistently acknowledge the civil rights of all its citizens. America has financially supported fundamental, extremist, supremacist groups for decades just to get oil under ideal conditions.
In order to improve the impression of Americans worldwide, we must separate ourselves from the Bush administration’s policies. Many christian Americas believe that biblically the land belongs to the Israelis. Many feel this is why President Bush, in his right-wing fundamentalist christian glory, has done so little maintenance in this region. Some, such as statesman Zbigniew Brzezinski, hold Bush responsible for this turmoil. On the MSNBC show Morning Joe Z. Brzezinski said, “What have we done to bring about peace between Israel and the Palestinians? And look at the last 8 years, we have relied on force, we have stopped being the mediators, we have become very partial, and we have essentially observed the situation as it deteriorates… The problem is that this conflict has lasted for years, and the United States have been largely passive. So the right question is not what do we do when things breaks down, the right question is what do we do to avoid a break down. By being engaged seriously in the peace process, and for the last 8 years we haven’t been and that is why we have the mess like we have right now on our hands.” Anchor Joe Scarborough said,”You can’t blame what is happening in Israel right now on the Bush administration.” To which Z. Brzezinski proclaims,”Yes you can!… In the last 8 years we had a policy in witch we have proclaimed an interest in peace. Condi Rice has traveled 16 times in 21 months to the region proclaiming ‘you must do this, you must do that’ but the United States never exerted itself. So the issue that Obama faces…is are we going to be sitting there issuing condemnations whether its at the Hamas or Israel or anybody else or are we going to be seriously engaged in the peace making process? That is the question.” Barack Obama must renounce Bush’s passive, do-nothing tactics and take effective action to restore diplomacy in Israel. Bill Clinton worked to pacify relations with Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat before the turn of the century. That work was all but negated as President Bush did nothing to keep any truce. A stark contrast to former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter who hoped to leave as part of their legacy “Peace in the Middle East”.
In America, Obama would come under much scrutiny if he met with the Hamas without any preconditions. In all likelihood, his 80% public approval would plummet. Nonetheless, this is exactly what is needed. It’s this reason, among others, that President-Elect Obama has hesitation to meet with Hamas leaders to potentially work this situation out and cease the senseless killings. General Colin Powell, former president Jimmy Carter, and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC all feel the Hamas would be better dealt with than ignored and are seen as radical for it. Carter has been openly ridiculed for meeting with the Hamas. However, his reputation can withstand these attacks, Obama’s could not. This is why Americans need to support and expedite this meeting. If we don’t, the death toll will continue to rise, more families will be found dead, with the bodies of their babies swaddled in their arms, an attempt at protection all in vain.
There is worry over Barack Obama’s silence. Though he is not in position to act before his inauguration, how will he deal with the conflict in the Gaza Strip? Currently France has proposed a truce which is backed by Egypt, the United States, and other nations. During the campaign season Sarah Palin accused him of having the inclination to sit down and talk with Hamas without preconditions. How could the President of the United States ignore the input of the Palestinian people’s elected official? Especially, when the United States recommended the manner by which Hamas was elected. A democratic election voted on by the people. We are virtually at a standstill. Hamas won’t accept a truce unless it states an end to the Israeli embargo of Gaza. Israel says that will not happen, and is pushing for an international embargo. Under these circumstances, no preconditions can be formulated. Unfortunately, instead of being grateful to Carter for meeting with Hamas, Obama condemned his actions and attempts to distance himself from Carter who has been trying to help the Mideast since his presidency. Astutely, Carter wants to keep doors and communication open because he’s not afraid to be a diplomatic moderator.
Since December 27, 2008, nearly 700 Palestinians have been killed, nearly 100 Israelis, and thousands injured. Rachel Maddow questioned if conflict in this region can be avoided at all. Israel is our major ally in the Mideast. It is very unpopular for anyone to speak ill of Israel or sympathetic of its aggressors. In a chat room someone categorized enemies of Israel as “all the uncivilized countries”. Unfortunately, many don’t see any problem with this. Though it doesn’t compare to the vast censorship of some middle eastern countries such as Iran, United Arab Emigrants, and Saudi Arabia where citizens have been imprisoned for blogging, and others must access proxy internet servers to bypass stringent government filters, America has its own version of vast censorship. We have a biased media with its own level of elitist supremacy that often serves to give us a one-sided view of many world events. The general public need to examine both positions and not simply side with our political allies. If we were to truly do this, I believe the general consensus would not be that one state is righteous and one is evil, but we would recognize a need for diplomacy and open communication. This is why it’s not going to do any good, especially not for Israel if the president of the United States refuses to meet with the Hamas. It’s time for a change of mindset. Meeting with Hamas is the answer.
I pledge to struggle for civil rights in the Middle East by making more Americans aware, and supplying balanced information on personal blogs and podcasts. While researching, I found how complex it is to find objective information. This can make information very difficult to decipher. Americans must begin to change their mindset so we don’t see foreign peoples as a political agenda of allied states and non-allied states, as our government appears to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
