Our seas are in peril: more than 70% of Europe’s fish stocks are overfished. Species are rapidly nearing extinction. Yet the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) allows European fleets to take 2 to 3 times more from our threatened oceans than what is considered sustainable.
But, it doesn’t have to be this way. Call for a strong reform of the CFP now, to ensure we have fish to eat in the future - and a fishing industry left to catch them.
“If you go on a hike and only focus on the details, such as the rocks on the path, you will miss the beautiful view every single time. Similarly, if you only look out at the view and neglect the rocks, you could twist your ankle. Successful people balance the two and are able to keep the details in perspective while staying mindful of the bigger picture.”—Alissa Finerman
When I wrote my first book, Living in Your Top 1%, I was obsessed with the details in the final stages even though I was not concerned with them when I first started writing the book. Why? One typo or unfinished chapter in the first draft of a two-year book project really doesn’t matter. However, a typo when the book is going to print is major. It’s the same detail, a simple typo, but has very different implications when considered in line with the bigger picture of publishing a book. One is a detail that can be overlooked initially and one is a detail that will detract from the project. The more important issue is how we view details in our life and keep them in perspective relative to the bigger picture.
If you go on a hike and only focus on the details, such as the rocks on the path, you will miss the beautiful view every single time. Similarly, if you only look out at the view and neglect the rocks/details, you could twist your ankle. Successful people balance the two and are able to keep the details in perspective while staying mindful of the bigger picture. We can apply this same principle to all areas of our life. Consider the following three examples:
If you’ve never missed a payment before, you most likely will be subject to a late fee and it’s not the end of the world. However, if you’ve missed the last four payments, then the detail of missing another payment may have much more serious implications. This detail is obviously critical within the bigger picture of keeping your home.
If the person serves you coffee at your local coffee spot, you can choose to overlook the incident or get your coffee elsewhere. However, if you are seriously dating this person then it’s an important detail in line with the bigger picture of creating a life together that you will hopefully want to address. The single detail of being rude/disrespectful (although never desirable) has different implications depending on the situation.
Your preference is to have an aisle seat in an exit row with more leg room but instead get stuck with a middle seat. If you’re healthy, this is undesirable but not the biggest deal. However, if you just had knee surgery and need to keep your knee extended or else you will be in extreme pain, the seat selection is an important detail. Again, a simple detail is more or less important depending on the situation.
How we view details is a dynamic process. It’s difficult to draw a conclusion from a single detail without understanding what it means within the context of the bigger picture. Some details really make a difference in your life and others take more energy to address than they’re worth. Are you you treating every “detail” like a missed mortgage payment or keeping it in perspective?
TOP 1% BOTTOM LINE: Yes, details are important but not every one is the most important. The key is to understand the bigger picture and to quickly assess how and if the details matter within that context. Knowing which details to overlook and which to focus on will depend on your values, goals, and how you want to invest your energy. As you move into the new year, take a moment and consider where in your life you could view the details differently to gain a Positively Positive perspective.
Source: https://www.positivelypositive.com/2011/12/12/it%E2%80%99s-all-in-the-details-or-is-it/
By Scott Baker
The show follows Frank Belcastro and his family as they try and become completely independent and prepare for life “off the grid.”
Here’s the news release: 
GBTV LAUNCHES ITS FIRST REALITY SHOW- INDEPENDENCE U.S.A.
This January 2012, Join the Belcastro Family as They Prepare for an Independent Life Off the Grid. The show will debut on January 18th 2012 and will air weekly on Wednesdays.
Concerned that the economy could collapse? Or that a natural disaster could wipe out our infrastructure? So is Frank, and he is doing something about it!
Believing that America has become too reliant on a crumbling foundation, Frank is preparing his family for life “off the grid,” admiring the way people lived in the 19th century. Like them, he longs to become completely independent. So he is embarking on one project at a time hoping to prepare his family for the worst, such as building a car that runs on wood in case gasoline supplies are interrupted, becoming expert hunters when grocery stores are no longer in existence, and making his own alcohol for barter when the dollar collapses.
Frank does it all with determination, intelligence, and good humor. He’ll need all that and more, as he attempts to motivate a family that neither shares his fervor nor wishes to sacrifice the comforts and conveniences of 21st century life. In the series premiere- “A Hunting We Will Go”- we meet the Belcastro’s as they set out on a journey to be a self-sufficient family. Frank wants the family to be able to hunt and kill their own food but not every one is on board. Starting with making their own weapons Frank and his son Adam really learn an appreciation for the hunt but wonder if they will succeed.
By Anthony Gucciardi
How toxic is your home? 
While most people spend the majority of their time outdoors, indoor air quality may actually be more threatening to your health than outdoor air. Considering the fact that outdoor air is hit with factory pollution, harmful chemicals, and much more, it is truly shocking to know that indoor air quality can be up to five times worse than outdoor air.
It is important to begin purifying the air in your home, and you may be surprised to know that to beginning this process does not require an expensive air purifier.
Here are 4 ways to naturally purify your home that you can begin immediately:
1. Use the Right Kind of Paint (Low-VOC)
The type of paint that you use inside your house can affect the overall air quality of your home. Volatile organic compounds, known as VOCs, are actually released by paints for months after application. What exactly are VOCs? These highly toxic chemicals can include formaldehyde, which was recently classified as a carcinogen by the United States government. When using VOC-containing products, the compounds will slowly release into your home, threatening the health of you and your family.
It is important to note that varnishes and waxes may also contain VOCs. Use low-VOC or no-VOC products when it comes to household painting, varnishing, or waxing.
2. Avoid Synthetic Household Cleaners, Art, and Beauty Supplies
Synthetic household products may also be introducing harmful chemical into your home. The chemicals that produce fragrance react with ozone in the air to form formaldehyde and ultrafine particles that can collect in the lungs. This effect is not limited to household cleaner, however. Hair and nail products as well as art and hobby supplies can also increase the level of VOCs in your home.
Popular air freshening products have also been found to trigger allergies and asthma.
For a safer room freshener, dip cotton balls in a sweet-smelling extract like vanilla and stash them around the house.
3. Test Your Home for Radon
Radon is a deadly invisible and odorless gas, commonly found in the basements of older homes that have not been properly tested and protected against radon gas. With it being the leading cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers and the 2nd leading cause of lung cancer period, radon gas is not something you want in your home. Scientists have even estimated that radon causes thousands of deaths annually.
Testing your home for radon is easy, inexpensive, and is vital to ensuring that your home is free of toxins.
4. Ventilate
Proper ventilation of your home is key to removing unwanted toxins from inside your home. Oftentimes during the winter months it becomes a challenge to routinely open your windows and properly ventilate your home. As a result, toxins can accumulate inside without the possibility of being released. If you live in a climate that allows for proper window ventilation all year long, then you will be able to avoid the issue and keep your windows open for a few hours each day.
Even during the winter season, however, keeping your windows open for just a few minutes per day can make a difference. If possible, place a fan in one window to blow indoor air outside, and another facing inward to blow outside air in. This will allow for optimum circulation of the air, bringing in fresh new air and removing toxic air buildup.
Source: https://www.activistpost.com/2011/12/4-ways-to-naturally-purify-air-in-your.html
I noted last week:
New US plant designs are very near being licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission without any Fukushima modifications.
Now we know why. 
Congressman Markey wrote yesterday:
As part of his ongoing investigation into U.S. nuclear safety since the Fukushima meltdowns, today Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) … released a blockbuster new report that details how four Commissioners at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) colluded to prevent and then delay the work of the NRC Near-Term Task Force on Fukushima, the entity tasked with making recommendations for improvement to NRC regulations and processes after the Fukushima meltdowns ….
Rep. Markey’s office reviewed thousands of pages of documents, including emails, correspondence, meeting minutes and voting records, and found a concerted effort by Commissioners William Magwood, Kristine Svinicki, William Ostendorff and George Apostolakis to undermine the efforts of the Fukushima Task Force with request for endless additional study in an effort to delay the release and implementation of the task force’s final recommendations. Documents also show open hostility on the part of the four Commissioners toward efforts of NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko to fully and quickly implement the recommendations of the Task Force, despite efforts on the part of the Chairman to keep the other four NRC Commissioners fully informed regarding the Japanese emergency.
“The actions of these four Commissioners since the Fukushima nuclear disaster has caused a regulatory meltdown that has left America’s nuclear fleet and the general public at risk,” said Rep. Markey. “Instead of doing what they have been sworn to do, these four Commissioners have attempted a coup on the Chairman and have abdicated their responsibility to the American public to assure the safety of America’s nuclear industry. I call on these four Commissioners to stop the obstruction, do their jobs and quickly move to fully implement the lessons learned from the Fukushima disaster.”
A copy of the report “Regulatory Meltdown: How Four Nuclear Regulatory Commissioners Conspired to Delay and Weaken Nuclear Reactor Safety in the Wake of Fukushima” can be found HERE.
Major findings in the new report include:
- Four NRC Commissioners attempted to delay and otherwise impede the creation of the NRC Near-Term Task Force on Fukushima;
- Four NRC Commissioners conspired, with each other and with senior NRC staff, to delay the release of and alter the NRC Near-Term Task Force report on Fukushima;
- The other NRC Commissioners attempted to slow down or otherwise impede the adoption of the safety recommendations made by the NRC Near-Term Task Force on Fukushima ….
- The consideration of the Fukushima safety upgrades is not the only safety-related issue that the other NRC Commissioners have opposed.
The Hill’s energy and environment blog reported yesterday:
[The chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Gregory Jaczko] believes the commission “has taken an approach that is not as protective of public health and safety as I believe is necessary.”
***
The commission has disagreed in recent months over how to deal with the recommendations of a task force assigned to reevaluate the country’s nuclear safety regulations in light of the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan.
The report called on the commission to make sweeping improvements to NRC’s “existing patchwork of regulatory requirements and other safety initiatives.”
Jaczko called on the commission to quickly evaluate the report and implement the necessary recommendations. But the commissioners initially resisted Jaczko’s call for swift action.
Rolling Stone pointed out in April:
The NRC has long served as little more than a lap dog to the nuclear industry, unwilling to crack down on unsafe reactors. “The agency is a wholly owned subsidiary of the nuclear power industry,” says Victor Gilinsky, who served on the commission during the Three Mile Island meltdown in 1979. Even President Obama denounced the NRC during the 2008 campaign, calling it a “moribund agency that needs to be revamped and has become captive of the industries that it regulates.”
In the years ahead, nuclear experts warn, the consequences of the agency’s inaction could be dire. “The NRC has consistently put industry profits above public safety,” says Arnie Gundersen, a former nuclear executive turned whistle-blower. “Consequently, we have a dozen Fukushimas waiting to happen in America.”
I noted in April:
Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen, Duane Peterson (president of VPIRG & coordinator for the campaign to retire Vermont Yankee nuclear plant), investigative reporter Harvey Wasserman and Paul Gallay (executive director of Riverkeeper) point out in a roundtable discussion:
- The NRC won’t even begin conducting its earthquake study for Indian Point nuclear power plant in New York until after relicensing is complete in 2013, because the NRC doesn’t consider a big earthquake “a serious risk”
- Congressman Markey has said there is a cover up. Specifically, Markey alleges that the head of the NRC told everyone not to write down risks they find from an earthquake greater than 6.0 (the plant was only built to survive a 6.0 earthquake)
- The budget for the NRC comes from the nuclear power companies [just like banks fund the Federal Reserve]
- The NRC is wholly captive to industry
- The NRC has never turned down the request of a nuclear power plant to be relicensed in the United States. Relicensing is solely a paper process; there is no safety review.
- The NRC’s assumptions regarding a worst-case accident are ridiculous. For example, the NRC assumes only 1% of the fuel could meltdown, while 70% melted down at Fukushima. The NRC assumes no loss of containment, while there has been a major loss of containment in reactors 1-3 (especially 2) at Fukushima.
- “If there was a free market in energy, nuclear power would be over … immediately”. Nuclear plant owners can’t get insurance; they can only operate because the U.S. government provides insurance on the taxpayer dime. The government also granted a ridiculously low cap on liability
- If we had no subsidies for nuclear, coal or oil, we’d have a clean energy economy right now
- We have 4 reactors in California – 2 at San Onofre 2 at San Luis Obisbo – which are vulnerable to earthquakes and tsunamis.
- No state or federal agency knows who would be in charge in case of an accident at Indian Point. It’s like the Keystone Cops
The precursor to the NRC – the Atomic Energy Commission – was no better:
By any measure, Dr. John Gofman was one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century. Gofman earned his doctorate in nuclear and physical chemistry, and was also a medical doctor. He worked on the Manhattan Project, co-discovered uranium-232 and -233 and proved their fissionability, helped discover how to extract plutonium and led the team that discovered and characterized lipoproteins in the causation of heart disease.
Dr. Arthur R. Tamplin was a doctor of biophysics, who was tasked – as a group leader in the Biomedical Division at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories – with predicting the ultimate distribution within the biosphere and in humans of each radionuclide produced in the explosion of a nuclear device.
In 1963 the Atomic Energy Commission asked Gofman and Tamplin to undertake a series of long range studies on potential dangers that might arise from the “peaceful uses of the atom.” They told the truth, and the AEC launched a campaign of harassment in response.
What did they say, and why was the AEC so hostile?
Gofman and Tamplin documented that low levels of radiation can cause cancer and other diseases, and they argued that federal safety guidelines for low-level exposures should be reduced by 90 percent.
Because Obama’s top adviser and top funders are connected with the nuclear power industry, the White House has also aggressively pushed four new nuclear power plants in the U.S., even though virtually all of the current nuclear reactors in the U.S. are of the same archaic design as those at Fukushima, and this design was not chosen for safety reasons, but because it worked in Navy submarines, and produced plutonium for use in nuclear weapons. And even though the same folks who built and run Fukushima will build and operate the new U.S. facilities.
(Other U.S. agencies are captured as well. For example, the EPA and FDA are playing politics with radiation. Indeed, Forbes’ blogger Jeff McMahon and Truthout writer Mike Ludwig both note that FDA radiation standards for milk and other foods are 200 times higher than EPA standards for drinking water, and are based more on commercial than safety concerns.)
The NRC is not the only captured nuclear agency. The International Atomic Energy Agency is also just a booster for nuclear power.
I noted in May
The entire purpose of the IAEA – according to its website – is to promote nuclear power:
The IAEA is the world’s center of cooperation in the nuclear field. It was set up as the world´s “Atoms for Peace” organization in 1957 within the United Nations family. The Agency works with its Member States and multiple partners worldwide to promote safe, secure and peaceful nuclear technologies.
The Christian Science Monitor noted in March:
[Russian nuclear accident specialist Iouli Andreev, who as director of the Soviet Spetsatom clean-up agency helped in the efforts 25 years ago to clean up Chernobyl ] has also accused the IAEA of being too close with corporations. “This is only a fake organization because every organization which depends on the nuclear industry – and the IAEA depends on the nuclear industry – cannot perform properly.”
Bloomberg reported yesterday:
The [IAEA] classifies safety as one of its top three priorities, yet is spending 8.9 percent of its 352 million-euro ($469 million) regular budget this year on making plants secure from accidents. As it focuses resources on the other two priorities — technical cooperation and preventing nuclear- weapons proliferation — the IAEA is missing an opportunity to improve shortcomings in reactor safety exposed by the Fukushima disaster, said Trevor Findlay, a former Australian diplomat.
“The IAEA did not seize the opportunity of this dreadful event to advance the agency’s role in nuclear safety,” said Findlay ….
The IAEA was founded in 1957 as the global “Atoms for Peace” organization to promote “safe, secure and peaceful” nuclear technology, according to its website. A staff of 2,300 work at the IAEA’s secretariat at its headquarters.
***
Its mission statement encapsulates the same conflict as Japan’s failed nuclear-safety regime: playing the role of both promoter and regulator of atomic power, according to scientists, diplomats and analysts interviewed by Bloomberg News.
About half of the IAEA’s budget is devoted to restricting the use of nuclear material for military purposes, and the agency has spent a decade investigating Iran’s atomic program because of suspicion the country is developing weapons.
As the agency targeted weapons, the meltdowns at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant capped years of faked safety reports and fatal accidents in Japan’s atomic-power industry. The country’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency was in a conflict of interest because it was under the control of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, which had a mandate to promote nuclear power.
***
The IAEA “accepted for years the overlap between regulation and industry in Japan,” said Johannis Noeggerath, president of Switzerland’s Society of Nuclear Professionals and safety director for the country’s Leibstadt reactor. “They have a safety culture problem.”
***
Since coming to office in 2009, Amano has spent five times more money fighting terrorism and preventing proliferation than on making the world’s 450 nuclear reactors safer, UN data show.
The agency’s safety division garnered little respect in U.S. diplomatic cables that described the department as a marketing channel for countries seeking to sell atomic technology.
***
They also questioned the credentials of Tomihiro Taniguchi, the IAEA’s former head of safety who helped create the regulatory regime in Japan, which is being blamed for failings that led to the Fukushima disaster.
***
The IAEA’s nuclear-safety division had downplayed the threat from natural disasters. In 2010, the director general’s first full year in office, anti- terrorism spending rose at three times the rate of safety expenditure.
“Tsunamis, floods, hurricanes and earthquakes have affected many parts of the world and nuclear installations everywhere responded admirably,” Taniguchi said in a December 2005 speech. “The design and operational features ensured that extreme natural conditions would not jeopardize safety.”
Taniguchi was also an executive of Japan’s Nuclear Power Engineering Corp., which promotes public acceptance of the operation of atomic-power plants, before joining the IAEA.
***
The IAEA’s own mission to promote atomic power may also contradict the Convention on Nuclear Safety.
“Each contracting party shall take the appropriate steps to ensure an effective separation between the functions of the regulatory body and those of any other body or organization concerned with the promotion or utilization of nuclear energy,” says article 8.2 of the convention.
I noted in April:
Certainly the World Health Organization is a neutral voice?
One would think so. But as physician Helen Caldicott points out:
There is widespread confusion about the roles of the World Health Organisation and the International Atomic Energy Commission. Monbiot expresses surprise that a UN-affiliated body such as WHO might be under the influence of the nuclear power industry, causing its reporting on nuclear power matters to be biased. And yet that is precisely the case.
In the early days of nuclear power, WHO issued forthright statements on radiation risks, such as its 1956 warning: ”Genetic heritage is the most precious property for human beings. It determines the lives of our progeny, health and harmonious development of future generations. As experts, we affirm that the health of future generations is threatened by increasing development of the atomic industry and sources of radiation.”
After 1959, the organisation made no more statements on health and radioactivity.
What happened?
On May 28, 1959, at the 12th World Health Assembly, WHO drew up an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. A clause of this agreement says the WHO effectively grants the right of prior approval over any research it might undertake or report on to the IAEA – a group that many people, including journalists, think is a neutral watchdog, but which is, in fact, an advocate for the nuclear power industry. Its founding papers state: ”The agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity through the world.”
The WHO’s subjugation to the IAEA is widely known within the scientific radiation community, something which Monbiot chose to ignore. But it is clearly not the only matter on which he is ignorant, after his recent apparent three-day perusal of the vast body of scientific information on radiation and radioactivity. The confusion that he and other nuclear industry apologists sow about radiation risks is very similar to the way that the tobacco industry propounded misinformation and lies about the true effects of smoking.
Despite their claims, it is they, not the ”anti-nuclear movement”, who are ”misleading the world about the impacts of radiation on human health”.
Radiation expert Dr. Christopher Busby agrees:
The last thing [proponents of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy] wanted was the doctors and epidemiologists stopping their fun. The IAEA and the World Health Organisation (WHO) signed an agreement in 1959 to remove all research into the issue from the doctors of the WHO, to the atom scientists, the physicists of the IAEA: this agreement is still in force. The UN organisations do not refer to, or cite any scientific study, which shows their statements on Chernobyl to be false. There is a huge gap between the picture painted by the UN, the IAEA, the ICRP and the real world. And the real world is increasingly being studied and reports are being published in the scientific literature: but none of the authorities responsible for looking after the public take any notice of this evidence.
Indeed an agreement between IAEA and WHO states that WHO cannot research health effects of radiation or effects of nuclear accidents if IAEA does not agree and the former head of WHO admits that WHO answers to IAEA.
The International Commission on Radiological Protection is also tied to the nuclear industry. I reported in April:
The Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients wrote in 2002:
One of the original five ‘health physicists’ to set radiation safety standards was Karl Z. Morgan. Dr. Morgan served on the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), which set up most radiation standards. He also directed the Health Physics Division at Oak Ridge from 1944 until his retirement in 1972. In recent years, Dr. Morgan has publicly criticized the ICRP for failing to protect human health. In a 1994 article for the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, Dr. Morgan wrote: “The period of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons by the United States, the United Kingdom, France and the USSR is a sad page in the history of civilized man. Without question, it was the cause of hundreds of thousands of cancer deaths. Yet there was complete silence on the part of the ICRP. During these years (1960-1965), most members of the ICRP either worked directly with the nuclear weapons industry or indirectly received most of their funding for their research from this industry.”
The ICRP’s alliance with the nuclear industry includes ties to the International Congress of Radiology. In his 1999 autobiography, The Angry Genie: One Man’s Walk Through the Nuclear Age (ISBN 0-8061-3122-5 ), Dr. Morgan related his concern about the ICRP’s refusal to address the danger of excessive X-ray exposure during diagnostic procedures and dentistry. Until the passage of the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968, some X-ray equipment used in the 1950s and 1960s delivered 2 to 3 rem per X-ray. X-ray doses as low as 1.6 rem increase a woman’s chance of developing cancer, according to a 1974 study by Baruch Modan [Lancet (Feb. 23,1974), pp 277-279]. The Act did not address the cumulative effect of multiple, routine, and often unnecessary X-rays.
The IAEA and NRC knew pretty quickly that Fukushima was an extreme radiological disaster, but they kept that information from the public for months, and all nuclear agencies worldwide have downplayed the severity of Fukushima.
Indeed, governments around the world have been covering up nuclear meltdowns for 50 years.
The bottom line is that – just as the Federal Reserve banks are owned by private banks, and so the Fed serves the banks and not the people or the nation – the nuclear agencies are owned and controlled by the nuclear industry, and serve them, instead of public health or safety.
Congressman: There’s Been an “Attempted Coup” at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was originally published on Washington’s Blog
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”
Thomas Jefferson
If you and your family store up lots of food, will you be identified as “potential terrorists” by law enforcement authorities? That sounds like an insane question, but sadly it has gotten to the point where “preparing for the worst” has become a “suspicious activity“.
Today, there are millions of preppers all across the United States, and the vast majority of them just want to be left alone and do not want the government to interfere in their lives. Storing up food is a completely peaceful activity, and preppers are generally some of the most patriotic and law-abiding people that you could ever hope to meet. Unfortunately, prepping has become associated with “extremism” by many in the government, and lately we have seen some very disturbing signs that authorities are actively seeking to gather information on preppers. So are preppers now considered to be potential terrorists? 
Well, read the evidence posted in the rest of this article and decide for yourself.
The other day, U.S. Senator Rand Paul gave a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate during which he suggested that having “more than seven days of food” in your house could potentially get you branded as a “potential terrorist” by the federal government.
The following is an excerpt from that speech:
Know good and well that some day there could be a government in power that is shipping its citizens off for disagreements. There are laws on the books now that characterize who might be a terrorist.
Someone missing fingers on their hands is a suspect according to the Department of Justice. Someone who has guns, someone who has ammunition that is weatherproofed, someone who has more than seven days of food in their house can be considered a potential terrorist.
If you are suspected by these activities do you want the government to have the ability to send you to Guantanamo Bay for indefinite detention?
It is incredibly chilling to hear a defender of liberty such as Rand Paul warn of such things.
But just because a politician says something that does not always mean that it is true.
So is there any evidence that Americans that are storing up food are being watched by the federal government?
Unfortunately, there is. In fact, Oath Keepers has posted a report about one incident in which federal agents actually visited a food production facility and demanded the names of anyone that has been “purchasing bulk food”. The following come from an article about this incident that was recently written by Rand Cardwell, the president of the Tennessee chapter of the Oath Keepers….
A fellow veteran contacted me concerning a new and disturbing development. He had been utilizing a Mormon cannery near his home to purchase bulk food supplies. The man that manages the facility related to him that federal agents had visited the facility and demanded a list of individuals that had been purchasing bulk food. The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis. The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information. I contacted the manager and personally confirmed this information.
Why in the world would federal agents be so interested in Americans that are “purchasing bulk food”?
Don’t they have anything better to do?
As I have written about previously, authorities are also now using a tool developed by the CDC to conduct “door to door disaster preparedness assessments” in some areas of the United States.
The following comes from a local news report in Tennessee….
The Metro Public Health and the Tennessee Department of Health will be using a tool designed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to go door to door and check to see how disaster ready you are.
The door to door assessment will take place from 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Thursday and from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Friday. It will be in 30 neighborhoods in Davidson County that have been randomly selected to be the target of a door to door assessment.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want anyone coming to my door to “assess” how “prepared” I am.
This is all very, very disturbing.
Lately, the federal government seems absolutely obsessed with the distribution of food.
As author Brandon Turbeville noted recently, “the U.S. government has publicly raided organic food shops, raw milk distributors, and the Amish with guns drawn” in recent years.
Aren’t there bigger threats to national security than the Amish?
Unfortunately, we now live in a “Big Brother” police state where just about anything can be considered a “suspicious activity”.
In fact, according to the FBI a bulk purchase of “meals ready to eat” is now considered to be “suspicious activity” that should be reported to them.
When the “war on terror” started a decade ago, we were told that we needed to fight the terrorists “over there” so that they would not come over here.
Well, now we are being told that the United States itself is part of the “battleground” and that the “terrorists” might just be our neighbors.
We are being told that if we “see something” that we should “say something” to the government.
In essence, the federal government wants us all to “inform” on one another.
Now that most of the big name terrorists have been removed from the picture, the Obama administration and the mainstream media are really hyping the idea that “homegrown terrorism” is a grave danger.
Just check out these headlines from the past few days….
ABC News: “White House Unveils New Strategy to Fight Homegrown Terrorism”
USA Today: “White House unveils new strategy to combat homegrown terror”
CNN: “Measuring the homegrown terrorist threat to U.S. military”
The entire focus of the “war on terror” has shifted. According to FBI Director Robert Mueller, “homegrown terrorists” represent as big a threat to American national security as al-Qaeda does at this point.
America is rapidly changing, and not for the better. All of this paranoia is going to rip this country apart.
In addition, have you noticed how they have taken the word “Islamic” out of their description of the terrorists and have replaced it with words like “extremist” and “extremism”?
Well, the truth is that just about anyone can be considered an “extremist” in one sense or another.
In fact, a recent Salon article asked this question: “Are Evangelicals A National Security Threat?”
These days, if you support an “alternative” political candidate there is a good chance that you will be labeled as an extremist.
During the 2008 election, one law enforcement report identified supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as potential terrorists.
Today, if you have a religious or political ideology that differs from the “orthodoxy” of the federal government then you are probably considered to be an “extremist”.
Beliefs that were once considered normal are now considered to be “dangerous” and “radical”.
For example, one unclassified Department of Homeland Security report published a couple of years ago entitled “Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment“ claimed that a belief in Bible prophecy “could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition and weapons.”
During a Congressional hearing earlier this year, U.S. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee warned that “Christian militants” might try to “bring down the country” and that such groups need to be investigated.
Back on February 20, 2009, the State of Missouri issued a report entitled “MIAC Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement“. That report warned that the following types of people may be potential terrorists….
*anti-abortion activists
*those that are against illegal immigration
*those that consider “the New World Order” to be a threat
*those that have a negative view of the United Nations
As I have written about previously, a very revealing document obtained by Oath Keepers shows that the FBI is actually instructing store owners to report many new forms of “suspicious activity” to them.
So what does the FBI consider “suspicious activity” to include? According to the document, the FBI now considers “suspicious activity” to include the following….
*paying with cash
*missing a hand or fingers
*”strange odors”
*making “extreme religious statements”
*”radical theology”
*purchasing weatherproofed ammunition or match containers
*purchasing meals ready to eat
*purchasing night vision devices, night flashlights or gas masks
All of this is completely and totally ridiculous.
Law enforcement authorities should quit worrying about preppers. The vast majority of us that are preparing for the hard times that are coming truly love this country, are completely and totally non-violent, and just want to be left alone.
There are real threats to national security out there, but the federal government refuses to address them. For example, our border with Mexico is wide open and it has been documented that terror groups are working in northern Mexico and have been coming across the border on a regular basis.
But instead of securing the border, the Obama administration is granting “backdoor amnesty” to illegal aliens instead.
In addition, law enforcement authorities should look into the massive breach of national security that the “Fast and Furious” scandal represents. With the full knowledge of the Department of Justice, ATF agents facilitated the sale of thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels and dropped all surveillance on those weapons once they crossed the border. Those guns will be used to kill people (including Americans) for many years to come.
In fact, there is so much corruption and so many “potential terrorists” in Washington D.C. that it should be more than enough to keep law enforcement officials busy for a very long time.
So leave preppers alone.
Preppers are not a threat. They are not going to hurt anyone. They just want to store up food and prepare for the difficult times that are coming.
So what do all of you think about preppers?
Source: https://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/preppers-are-now-considered-to-be-potential-terrorists
As was the plan all along, the so-called “War on Terror” has officially devolved into a war on the American people
This was clearly illustrated by the recent traitorous passage of the egregious National Defense Authorization Act by the US Congress. But in order to fully implement the ultimate goal of total control and tyranny, the federal government is now actively collecting the names of individuals that are preparing for the future by buying and storing emergency food supplies. 
Oath Keepers, an association of active servicemen devoted to upholding their oath of guarding the republic and protecting individual liberty, has reported that federal agents recently paid a visit to a Latter Day Saints food storage cannery in Tennessee. Though they had no reason to be there, these agents allegedly interrogated the facility’s manager and demanded to see a list of customers that had purchased, and were storing, food there.
Oath Keepers Tennessee Chapter President Rand Cardwell confirmed the incident, according to reports, as he is in close contact with a fellow veteran who happens to store his own food at the facility in question. According to the man’s account, agents entered the facility and began demanding payment records and personal information for everyone connected with the operation.
“The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis,” Cardwell is quoted as saying, concerning the incident. “The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information.”
This unprovoked act of intimidation is highly concerning, but it is also somewhat contradictory. On the one hand, the federal government has been instilling fear into the American public for years, and has even made announcements urging the public to be prepared. But on the other hand, this same government is now pursuing those who are heeding these precautions as if they are terrorists.
Oath Keepers suggests the government might be trying to gather intelligence on food-storing Americans in order to later come and confiscate that food, or worse — after all, freedom-loving patriots who are preparing for social upheaval are a threat to the power structure that seeks to tighten the noose of tyranny around the neck of society.
Source: https://peopleforfreedom.com/
A Tale of Forgiveness
A wise woman and her young disciple were walking down the street. Suddenly, out of nowhere, an angry man in a carriage drove haphazardly by the two, insensitively pushing the woman out of his way. She landed in a ditch filled with muddy water. The woman yelled after the man in the carriage, “May you have everything you want!” The disciple, surprised by the wise woman’s response, said: “I’m confused. Why did you say that to a man with such horrible behavior?” The woman replied, “Because a happy man wouldn’t have thoughtlessly pushed a woman into a ditch.” 
Do you agree with this woman’s response?
In my book The Bounce Back Book, I offer many tips for embracing forgiveness and liberating yourself from anger and bitterness—even in the most challenging situations.
Here are a few quickie strategies to free you from your resentments starting today!
Say a Prayer
Whenever angry feelings about a person who’s harmed you enter your mind, tell yourself: “We are all good, loving souls who occasionally get lost.” Pray for this person to find their way back to a happier place—in the same way the woman in this story prayed for her offender.
Focus on Gratitude
Resist seeking happiness from the outside in. Instead, focus on gratitude exercises to bring happiness from the inside out. If you allow your mood to be at the mercy of unpredictable events and unreliable people, your happiness will be forever on a chaotic roller coaster ride! Happiness must always be an inside joy! When you are tempted to focus on all the ways the world has done you wrong, instead count your blessings by making a list of the five aspects of your life that you appreciate. It is good practice to purposefully end your day this way to keep focused.
Look for the Lesson
Many Buddhists consider huge difficulties to be a sign you’re an old soul—the bigger your misfortunes, the closer you are to enlightenment. Whether you believe this or not, it’s certainly cheery to reframe all your life’s bad events as tests of your character. If you feel particularly tested right now, ask yourself what the heck you’re being tested for! Patience? Compassion? Resilience? Forgiveness? Open-mindedness? What strengths must you develop further? Now consciously go out there and develop them!
Stay Centered
Recognize that when you respond with hate to hate, anger to anger, bitterness to bitterness, you are ironically becoming part of the problem. Choose to resist becoming like your offender and instead put in the conscious effort to remain a loving, soulful, happy person. In fact, don’t just tell your offender “May you have everything want.” Use this for a mantra to tell yourself—and re-focus all that energy of resentment into the energy to move forward to get what you want.
Source: https://
sending...
