Here, we will gather together some of the more interesting education news stories form around the world. With everyday stories of great success and the trials of fighting against an increasingly bureaucratic system there should be something to challenge and stretch every mind. You can also send us your suggestions for stories. |
posted May 3, 2013, 2:39 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated May 3, 2013, 2:41 AM
]
Greg Palast writes: The idea that The Euro has "failed" is dangerously naive. The euro is doing exactly what its progenitor – and the wealthy 1%-ers who adopted it – predicted and planned for it to do.
That progenitor is former University of Chicago economist Robert Mundell. The architect of "supply-side economics" is now a professor at Columbia University, but I knew him through his connection to my Chicago professor, Milton Friedman, back before Mundell's research on currencies and exchange rates had produced the blueprint for European monetary union and a common European currency. Mundell, then, was more concerned with his bathroom arrangements. Professor Mundell, who has both a Nobel Prize and an ancient villa in Tuscany, told me, incensed: "They won't even let me have a toilet. They've got rules that tell me I can't have a toilet in this room! Can you imagine?" As it happens, I can't. But I don't have an Italian villa, so I can't imagine the frustrations of bylaws governing commode placement.
But Mundell, a can-do Canadian-American, intended to do something about it: come up with a weapon that would blow away government rules and labor regulations. (He really hated the union plumbers who charged a bundle to move his throne.) "It's very hard to fire workers in Europe," he complained. His answer: the euro. The euro would really do its work when crises hit, Mundell explained. Removing a government's control over currency would prevent nasty little elected officials from using Keynesian monetary and fiscal juice to pull a nation out of recession."It puts monetary policy out of the reach of politicians," he said. "[And] without fiscal policy, the only way nations can keep jobs is by the competitive reduction of rules on business." He cited labor laws, environmental regulations and, of course, taxes. All would be flushed away by the euro. Democracy would not be allowed to interfere with the marketplace – or the plumbing.As another Nobelist, Paul Krugman, notes, the creation of the eurozone violated the basic economic rule known as "optimum currency area". This was a rule devised by Bob Mundell. That doesn't bother Mundell. For him, the euro wasn't about turning Europe into a powerful, unified economic unit. It was about Reagan and Thatcher."Ronald Reagan would not have been elected president without Mundell's influence," once wrote Jude Wanniski in the Wall Street Journal. The supply-side economics pioneered by Mundell became the theoretical template for Reaganomics – or as George Bush the Elder called it, "voodoo economics": the magical belief in free-market nostrums that also inspired the policies of Mrs Thatcher.
Read more:
Greg Palast Homesite:
Further Essential Background Reading:
Collapse of euro could pose threat to peace, says Angela Merkel
‘Eurozone breakup might end EU’ - Father of The Euro (Interview)
A short history of The Euro
CFR Applauds European Union’s “Real Subversion of Sovereignty”
What is Creative Destruction?
Hard Times for the Elusive “Father of the Euro”
Europe could be plunged into war if efforts to save the euro fail
Helmut Kohl: I acted like a dictator to bring in the euro Who is Robert Mundell?
More Essential Videos to Watch:
All Wars Are Bankers' Wars
The End of Europe: By Freedomain Radio
IMF & EU Conspired with Insider to Loot Cyprus Banks
Enough Said ... a lot of people are going to lose a lot in this system. Sadly, most of them are not going to have any idea why. (G) |
posted Apr 22, 2013, 1:12 AM by Graham William Hendrey
“Making the world’s available resources serve one hundred percent of an exploding population can only be accomplished by a boldly accelerated design revolution.”
There are few men who can justly claim to have revolutionized their discipline. R. Buckminster Fuller revolutionized many. “Bucky,” as he was known to most, was a designer, architect, poet, educator, engineer, philosopher, environmentalist, and, above all, humanitarian. Driven by the belief that humanity’s major problems were hunger and homelessness he dedicated his life to solving those problems through inexpensive and efficient design.
The grandnephew of the American Transcendentalist Margaret Fuller, Bucky was born on July 12, 1895 in Milton, Massachusetts. He was twice expelled from Harvard. Later, Bucky married Anne Hewlett in 1917 and went into the construction business with her father. A decade later he witnessed the first of many business failures, when, due to economic difficulties, he was forced out of the company. Despondent over these failures and family problems, he resolved to focus his energies on a search for socially responsible answers to the major design problems of his time. Recognizing the inefficiency of the automobile, Bucky spent the late twenties designing a car that would incorporate the engineering advances of the airplane. In 1933, he presented the first prototype of the Dymaxion car. The Dymaxion car could hold twelve passengers, go 120 miles per hour and used half the gas of the standard car, utilizing aerodynamics construction and only three wheels. While demonstrating the car to investors, it crashed, taking one life. Though the crash was later determined not to be the fault of the car, he was never able to find adequate funding. As World War II ended and housing crises in America became more acute, he turned his sights to what would remain his life-long dream. Using airplane construction methods and materials, Bucky set out to create a pre-fabricated house that could be easily delivered to any location. It would be fireproof and inexpensive and constructed out of light weight materials. In 1945 however, with thousands of orders in place for his new Dymaxion House, Fuller once again ran into difficulties with investors and had to end the project. Unsure of his next step and without a job, Bucky accepted a position at a small college in North Carolina, Black Mountain College. There, with the support of an amazing group of professors and students, he began work on the project that was to make him famous and revolutionize the field of engineering. Using lightweight plastics in the simple form of a tetrahedron (a triangular pyramid) he created a small dome. As his work continued it became clear that he had made the first building that could sustain its own weight with no practical limits. The U.S. government recognized the importance of the discovery and employed him to make small domes for the army. Within a few years there were thousands of these domes around the world. Having finally received recognition for his endeavors, Buckminster Fuller spent the final fifteen years of his life traveling around the world lecturing on ways to better use the world’s resources. A favorite of the radical youth of the late 60’s and 70’s, Fuller worked to expand social activism to an international scope. Among his most famous books were NO MORE SECONDHAND GOD(1963) OPERATING MANUAL FOR THE SPACESHIP EARTH (1969), and EARTH, INC. (1973) in which he writes “In reality, the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon are nothing else than a most fantastically well-designed and space-programmed team of vehicles. All of us are, always have been, and so long as we exist, always will be–nothing else but–astronauts.”
Text Source:
ESSENTIAL RESEARCH MATERIALS:
VIDEO:
Buckminster Fuller: Prospects For Humanity
Buckminster Fuller: The Fuller World - Design Scientist (Episode 1) A Necessary Ruin: The Story of Buckminster Fuller
Buckminster Fuller - Everything I Know - session 01 (entire)
Buckminster Fuller: Dedicated Channel Archive http://www.youtube.com/user/BuckyFullerArchive
Buckminster Fuller: San Quentin Prison, 31 Jan 1959
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiDq4glLOAY
ARTICLES:
Buckminster Fuller: WIkipedia
The February 1972 Interview
The Last Interview
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT ... THE POINT IS THIS: Do Your Own Thinking: R. Buckminster Fuller
(Sorry about the poor quality of the last video)
JUST OUT OF INTEREST AND CURIOSITY:
During the period leading up to his death, his wife had been lying comatose in a Los Angeles hospital, dying of cancer. It was while visiting her there that he exclaimed, at a certain point: "She is squeezing my hand!" He then stood up, suffered a heart attack, and died an hour later, at age 87. His wife of 66 years died 36 hours later.
|
posted Mar 22, 2013, 3:47 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Mar 26, 2013, 3:55 AM
]
Almost everybody wants everything without the struggle or effort that itself is life's own reward. Such is the visible and invisible in the world around us. We live in a hyper-accelerated world where most of us have been convinced that the future is all that the matters and the past is just history. Sadly, I must disagree. There are far too many important elements buried in the past than we could ever imagine in a million years. To explain, let me introduce one simple idea.
The Second Amendment to the United States constitution states: ''A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'' It was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. I feel sad to have to explain this to you my friends but, freedom rises out of the barrel of gun.
Now, I could explain how the 2nd Amendment relates to the 1st Amendment but if that is not obvious to you then I suggest you stop reading now.
It can hardly be debated two of the most important studies of culture, society and control are Adam Smith's: The Wealth of Nations (1776) and Carroll Quigley's: Tragedy and Hope (1966). What makes these bibles of our world understanding so important is that they both agree on one point. When the access to implements of force in the people is equal to that of their Governors then the people are free.
The clarity of this situation, to the studied mind, is with out question.
If it matters to you, Adam Smith was a Scottish economist and moral philosopher and his book 'Wealth of Nations' offers one of the world's first collected descriptions of what builds nations' wealth and is today a fundamental work in classical economics. Meanwhile, Quigley was an American historian and theorist of the evolution of civilizations. He is noted for his teaching work as a professor at Georgetown University, for his academic publications, and for his research on non-government organisations.
There are many kinds of war in society: social, psychological, economic, territorial, scientific, informational, physical, and even personal. But in this article I will focus on the physical elements as they underpin all of the others. In short, all citizens should be trained in self defense and then armed, old and young, rich and poor, able and disabled whatever their belief or opinion, this is the only way that balance that can be applied within our world. Otherwise, society shall slide slowly back into a new dark age.
I shall now present my evidence to support this case:
(077)
Hitler really did take the guns from Jews before throwing them into concentration camps (Article) (078) A Little Gun History Lesson (Facts) (080)
A Brief and Bloody History of Gun Control (Stats & Info)
So, that is it, I don't really have much more to say on the issue. I advise you to only contact me or debate with me after you have studied this subject in as much depth as I have. Let's be responsible about what we have to do to keep the freedoms that have been so hard bled for around the base of our liberty tree.
Let us also not forget that even Jesus himself understood the importance of this eternal issue. In Luke 22:36 (KJV) he is quoted as saying ''But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one''. Of course there were no automatic guns in his time but a good sword could do just as much damage. One final thought, put in layman’s terms, if the good guys don't have any method how to defend themselves then the bad guys are sure to take over sooner or later. And so, sooner or later, in every society, those without guns are forced to come to those with guns in order to ask for help and support.
Anyway ... what part of 'Shall not be infringed' is hard to understand.
Respect, Graham W. Hendrey Director NSA – Slovakia
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL: Quotes from The Founding Fathers & Others: Thomas Jefferson: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined or determined to commit crimes. Such laws only make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assassins; they serve to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." (1764 Letter and speech from T. Jefferson quoting with approval an essay by Cesare Beccari)
George Washington: "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them [guns] by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [crime]. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)
Thomas Jefferson: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (T. Jefferson papers, 334, C.J. Boyd, Ed. 1950)
James Madison: "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of other countries, whose people are afraid to trust them with arms." (Federalist Paper #46)
George Mason: "To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them." (3 Elliot, Debates at 380)
Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe." (1787, Pamphlets on the Constitution of the US)
George Washington: "A free people ought to be armed." (Jan 14 1790, Boston Independent Chronicle.)
George Mason: "I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people." (Elliott, Debates, 425-426)
Richard Henry Lee: "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788)
IMPORTANT NOTE: Back in the 18th century, a "regular" army meant an army that had standard military equipment. So a "well regulated" army was simply one that was "well equipped." It does NOT refer to a professional army. The term "STANDING Army" was used in the 1700's to describe a professional army. THUS WE SEE THAT "A well regulated militia" only means a well equipped militia. It does not imply the modern meaning of "regulated," which means controlled or administered by some superior entity. Federal control over the militia comes from other parts of the Constitution, but not from the second amendment (my personal opinion).
Modern Leaders Quotes On Arms & Rights
Adolf Hitler: "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead." (Chancelor's Speech, 1935)
Adolf Hitler: "The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subject peoples to possess arms. So let's not have any talk about native militias." (Hitler's Secret Conversations, 1941-44, Farrar, Strauss and Young, 1953)
Mao Tse Tung: "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party." (Problems of War and Strategy, Nov 6 1938, published in "Selected Works of Mao Zedong," 1965)
Mahatma Gandhi:
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." ("Gandhi, an Autobiography," M.K. Gandhi, 446)
Diane Feinstein:
(US Senator, D-CA) "If I could have banned them all- 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' -I would have!" (Statement on TV program 69 Minutes, Feb 5 1995)
Sigmund Freud: "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." ("General Introduction to Psychoanalysis," S. Freud)
Bill Clinton: (US President, has sworn an oath to defend the US Constitution, not to violate it, criticize it, and belittle it) "When we got organized as a country, [and] wrote a fairly radical Constitution, with a radical Bill of Rights, giving radical amounts of freedom to Americans, it was assumed that Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly...When personal freedom is being abused, you have to move to limit it." (April 19 1994, on MTV)
Charles Shumer:
(US Congressman, D-NY, has sworn an oath to defend the US Constitution) "All we ask for is registration, just like we do for cars." (Press conference, 1993, exact date being sought)
[Remember ... registration leads to confiscation]
…..
The Larkin Rose Perspective: The Sin of Self Defense Transforming independent individuals into slaves requires extensive indoctrination. The way they view life, the world, and themselves must be molded into an outlook that is compatible with tyranny. They must be trained to be scared of the world, and always to be seeking some “authority” to protect and take care of them. Whenever a problem arises, they should look to their rulers for the solution rather than taking it upon themselves to fix it. One of the main problems that the peasants must be trained not to deal with themselves is violent conflict. It is imperative that they view you (and your enforcers) as the only protection against robbery, assault, and murder. In short, they must be indoctrinated in such a way that they do not even want to be able to defend themselves. The reason is simple: if the peasants feel capable and entitled to “enforce justice” themselves, they might just decide to enforce a little justice against you. And that obviously won’t do. They must be trained to give up their belief in their right to defend themselves, which is not an easy thing to do. You must attack “peasant justice” in any ways you can think of, such as: 1) “Vigilante justice can never be as just or fair as our system”; 2) “You can’t possibly protect yourselves; let us do it”; 3) “If you have a gun, you’ll only hurt yourself”; 4) “If the peasants were allowed to use force, there would be chaos”; 5) “Private protection agencies would just deteriorate into competing gangs of thugs”; and so on. Often privately-enforced justice is referred to as the people “taking the law into their own hands,” which reinforces the idea that only enforcers of “the law” should ever use force, and of course the lowly peasants can’t be allowed to do that. The point requires a lot of indoctrination because it is so contrary to the instinct every creature has to defend itself and its pack. A few samples of past attitudes show how far the U.S. empire has come in training its citizens to loathe the idea of having to defend themselves. “The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property.” [Thomas Paine] “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” [Thomas Jefferson] Even when it came to defending against foreign invasion, the founders of the United States of America abhorred the idea of a “standing army,” and preferred instead an armed (and trained) citizen “militia.” “A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.” [James Madison] “[T]o preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” [Richard Henry Lee] Even worse, a mere couple of centuries ago, even well-educated, respected individuals spoke openly about the possibility of the common folk using violence against their own rulers. “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.” [Noah Webster] “[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens.” [Alexander Hamilton] “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.” [Patrick Henry] “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” [Thomas Jefferson] Needless to say, that is an idea that you must rip out of the minds of your subjects at all costs. The common folk should not view themselves as justified even in fending off a common crook by force, much less fending off a foreign invader, or fending off you and your thugs. The revolutionary concept of a “militia,” consisting of the people in general, which stands ready to forcibly resist tyranny even from their own “government,” must be removed by any means necessary from the realm of possibilities in the minds of the peasants.
A Final Thought:
'If you haven't been under the castle, then you don't know about the vampires''
|
posted Mar 13, 2013, 8:55 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Apr 10, 2013, 3:34 AM
]
"Diet, injections, & injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, & any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible.": Bertrand Russell from his book "The Impact of Science on Society" (1953) page 50. The other day I had a client in my office and we were talking about general health issues and she told me the very tragic story about her friend's father who died, from a fast acting cancer, directly after being given a vaccination by his doctor. I will spare you the details, yet so that no unnecessary death need be in vain I would like to present you with the results of some interesting research related to this topic.
About four years ago I began to collect vaccine related research which I will in due course present to you. But first I would like to engage you with a little psychology:
Step 1: Imagine holding a tennis ball
Step 2: Imagine holding a football
Step 3: Imagine holding a basketball
Step 4: Imagine holding a beach ball or one of those large exercise balls
Step 5: Now, Imagine holding the world … I imagine that this is not possible.
This is how ideas deep inside our mind work. Some concepts are simple and easily held, while others are just too large for our minds to hold onto and so we don't even try. Along with very misunderstood sociological elements such as cognitive and confirmation bias or plausible deniability there is a tendency to too often suspend disbelief rather than face reality.
I know that I am going to be attacked through logical fallacy for writing this but there comes a time when silence on issues of importance is by far the greatest crime within society. Who can deny, that age old wisdom found in so many ancient cultures that 'We perish for lack of knowledge'. Anyway, this article is not about a belief, or an emotional status, but is an appeal to reason, and a last call.
Where there is a certain amount of truth in the principle that an adult individual who is going to dramatically change his surroundings, and enter a new environment with a wide range of differing environmental factors such as: alternative food or diet, water purity, air condition, unusual climate with changes in light and humidity, new social habits, geographical location, stress and perhaps other hygiene issues, could benefit from a vaccine. There are, so far, no long term studies of any health benefits that exist on the application of this theory to young children.
In case you are unaware of this issue we will now examine the evidence. The following links contain 3 types of information … Professional Scientific Studies, Personal Accounts and Verified Associated Press Articles. Altogether I estimate there are around 5000 pieces of evidence here to support a conclusion that vaccines are responsible for the perfect crime.
'Medical research has made such progress that there are practically no healthy people anymore': attributed to Aldous Huxley If you are ready then we shall begin: (Note: All links are external and may cease to function at an time … if this happens then please try to use an internet search engine such as Google, Yahoo or Start Page) Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries Of Official Statistics http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/ Vaccines: Poisons Injected into your blood.
Vaccination Quotes From Doctors And Scientists
WHY YOU SHOULD AVOID TAKING VACCINES What To Do if You are Forced to Take Swine Flu Shot HPV Vaccine in Ineffective & Dangerous
“Mandatory” Vaccinations – You Do Have the Choice
Vaccinated Kids Have 2-5 Times More Diseases Than Unvaccinated
Susceptible to Hepatitis B Infection Despite Vaccination
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO THE VACCINE PROBLEM:
Further Lists of Over 1000 Reports & Research:
Bertrand Russell: The Impact of Science on Society The Gerson Therapy
And that is that as they say.
So now that the evidence has been presented here are a final few thoughts.
I am not a doctor and I have not attended medical school but I am able to read, to use discernment to find a reliable source of information, and to defend my position in a logical argument. I defer judgment on what is right for each individual to that sovereign individual, as all should do but so few have learned. With this in mind, I urge you to educate yourself about the pros and cons of this issue before you take any further step in an irreversible direction.
In conclusion, I would like to advise you to beware of anyone who you do not know, and who does not know you, who will enter into your would offering you the solutions to problems that you do not even know exist. Of course, you are very welcome to include myself in this list.
Respect with consideration to the law of necessity,
Graham William Hendrey
Director
Native Speakers Academy
March 2013
Addendum Articles:
Note: Following a review of my original post i feel that one of the above links was too important not to print in full so here it is.
Reports: Voluminous Research Proves Vaccines are Deadly
Vaccines and Immunization References and Research Citations Vaccines Have Been Linked to Leukemias and Lymphomas: Bichel, “Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis Developing into Hodgkin’s Disease”, Acta Med Scand, 1976, Vol 199, p523-525. Stewart, AM, et al, “Aetiology of Childhood Leukaemia”, Lancet, 16 Oct, 1965, 2:789-790. [Listed under Vaccine Adverse Reactions.] Glathe, H et al, “Evidence of Tumorigenic Activity of Candidate Cell Substrate in Vaccine Production by the Use of Anti-Lymphocyte Serum”, Development Biol Std, 1977, 34:145-148. Bolognesi, DP, “Potential Leukemia Virus Subunit Vaccines: Discussion”, Can Research, Feb 1976, 36(2 pt 2):655-656. Colon, VF, et al, “Vaccinia Necrosum as a Clue to Lymphatic Lymphoma”, Geriatrics, Dec 1968, 23:81-82. Park-Dincsoy, H et al, “Lymphoid Depletion in a case of Vaccinia Gangrenosa”, Laval Med, Jan 1968, 39:24-26. Hugoson, G et al, “The Occurrence of Bovine Leukosis Following the Introduction of Babesiosis Vaccination”, Bibl Haemat, 1968, 30:157-161. Hartstock, , “”Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis: Hyperplasia of Lymphoid Tissue That Simulates Malignant Lymphomas”, Apr 1968, Cancer, 21(4):632-649. Allerberger, F, “An Outbreak of Suppurative Lymphadenitis Connected with BCG Vaccination in Austria- 1990/1991,” Am Rev Respir Disorder, Aug 1991, 144(2) 469. Omokoku B, Castells S, “Post-DPT inoculation cervical lymphadenitis in children.” N Y State J Med 1981 Oct;81(11):1667-1668. Vaccines and Chromosome Changes Leading to Mutations: Knuutila, S et al, “An Increased Frequency of Chromosomal Changes and SCE’s in Cultured Lymphocytes of 12 Subjects Vaccinated Against Smallpox,” Hum Genet, 1978 Feb 23; 41(1):89-96. Cherkeziia, SE, et al, “Disorders in the Murine Chromosome Apparatus Induced By Immunization with a Complex of Anti-viral Vaccines,” Vopr Virusol, 1979 Sept Oct, (5):547-550. [Note: SCE means sister chromatid exchange and is an indication that genetic mutations are occurring, which could possibly lead to cancer-causing mutations. Vaccines and Auto-immunity Citations: Romanov, V A, et al, "Role of Auto-immune Processes in the Pathogenesis of Post-Vaccinal Lesions of the Nervous System", Oct 1977, Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol, 10:80-83. Grachev, V P, et al, "Formation of Auto-antibodies in Laboratory Animals After Inoculation of Viruses With Different Virulence. I. Results of Studies ..., July 1973, Acta Virol (Praha), 17:319-326. Movsesiants, AA, et al, "Experimental Study of the Ability of Different Strains of Vaccinia Virus to Induce Auto-Antibody Formation", Vopr Virusol, May-Jun 1975; (3):297-302. Negina, IuP, "Comparative Study of Auto-antibody Formation Following Immunization With Different Types of Typhoid Vaccines", Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol, May 1980; (5):69-72. Vaccinations and Diabetes Citations: Sinaniotis, et al, "Diabetes Mellitus after Mumps Vaccination", Arc Dis Child, 1975, 50:749.66 Polster, H, "Diabetes insipidus after Smallpox vaccination", Z Aerztl Fortbild (Jena), 1 Apr 1966, 60:429-432. Patan, "Postvaccinal Severe Diabetes Mellitus", Ter Arkh, Jul 1968, 40:117-118. Classen, JB, MD, "The Timing of Immunization Affects The Development of Diabetes in Rodents", Autoimmunity, 1996, 24:137-145. Classen JB, "The diabetes epidemic and the hepatitis B vaccines," N Z Med J, 109(1030):366 1996 Sep 27. [letter] Classen JB, “Childhood immunisation and diabetes mellitus,” N Z Med J, 109(1022):195 1996 May 24 [letter] Poutasi K, ” Immunisation and diabetes,” N Z Med J 1996 Jul 26;109(1026):283. [letter; comment] Other Articles Linking Diabetes to Vaccines: Dokheel, T M, “An Epidemic of Childhood Diabetes in the United States? Evidence from ….”, Diabetes Care, 1993, 16:1606-1611. Parent ME, et al, “Bacille Calmette-Guerin vaccination and incidence of IDDM in Montreal, Canada,” Diabetes Care 1997 May; 20(5):767-772. House DV, Winter WE, “Autoimmune diabetes. The role of auto-antibody markers in the prediction and prevention of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus,” Clin Lab Med 1997 Sep; 17(3):499-545. Zeigler, M et al , “[Autoantibodies in type 1 diabetes mellitus]” Z Arztl Fortbild (Jena). 1994 Aug; 88(7-8):561-5 Vaccines and Nervous System Changes: Bondarev, VN et al, “The Changes of the Nervous System in Children After Vaccination”, Pediatria, Jun 1969; 48:20-24. Ehrengut W, “Central nervous sequelae of vaccinations,” Lancet 1986 May 31;1(8492):1275-1276. Provvidenza, G et al, [On a Case of Benign Acute Cerebellar Ataxia in Childhood], Arch Ital Sci Med Trop, 43:189-194, Apr 1962. Katsilambros, L, “[The Phenomenom of Apathy in Man and Animals After the Injection of Viruses in Very High Doses. Clinical Data]“, Rev Med Moyen Orient, 20:539-546, Nov – Dec 1963. Vaccinations and Autism Citations: Eggers, C, “Autistic Syndrome (Kanner) And Vaccinations against Smallpox”, Klin Paediatr, Mar 1976, 188(2):172-180. Kiln MR, “Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine.” Lancet 1998 May 2;351(9112):1358. Selway, “MMR vaccination and autism 1998. Medical practitioners need to give more than reassurance.” BMJ 1998 Jun 13;316(7147):1824. Nicoll A, Elliman D, Ross E, “MMR vaccination and autism 1998,” MJ 1998 Mar 7;316(7133):715-716. Lindley K J, Milla PJ, “Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine.”Lancet 1998 Mar 21;351(9106):907-908. Bedford H, et al, “Autism, inflammatory bowel disease, and MMR vaccine.” Lancet 1998 Mar 21;351(9106):907. Vijendra K. Singh, Sheren X. Lin, and Victor C. Yang, “Serological Association of Measles Virus and Human Herpesvirus-6 with Brain Autoantibodies in Autism,” Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology, Oct 1998, Vol. 89, No. 1, p 105-108. ["None of the autistic children in the study had measles in the past, but all had the MMR" stated David Whalgren. Vaccines and Demyelination Citations: Herroelen, L et al, "Central-Nervous-System Demyelination After Immunization with Recombinant Hepatitis B Vaccine", Lancet, Nov 9, 1991, 338(8776):1174-1175. Kaplanski G, Retornaz F, Durand J, Soubeyrand J, "Central nervous system demyelination after vaccination against hepatitis B and HLA haplotype." J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1995 Jun; 58(6):758-759. Matyszak MK, Perry VH, "Demyelination in the central nervous system following a delayed-type hypersensitivity response to bacillus Calmette-Guerin." Neuroscience 1995 Feb;64(4):967-977. Tornatore CS, Richert JR, "CNS demyelination associated with diploid cell rabies vaccine." Lancet 1990 Jun 2;335(8701):1346-1347. Adams, JM et al, "Neuromyelitis Optica: Severe Demyelination Occurring Years After Primary Smallpox Vaccinations", Rev Roum Neurol, 1973, 10:227-231. In 1988, Dietrich used MRI to show that developmentally delayed children had alterations in their myelin. Coulter described that central nervous system damage can be exhibited as abnormal behavior of the child. In 1935, Thomas Rivers, experimental allergic encephalitis (EAE) can be the result of a viral or bacterial infection of the nervous system. "The fact of the matter is that it is a matter of record that it was known that vaccination produced encephalitis since 1926." The authors stated, "In regions in which there is no organized vaccination of the population, general paralysis is rare. ... It is impossible to deny a connection between vaccinations and the encephalitis (brain damage) which follows it." Vaccines have been linked to seizures, convulsions and epilepsy. Vaccinations and Seizures: Hirtz DG, Nelson KB, Ellenberg J H, "Seizures following childhood immunizations", Pediatr 1983 Jan; 102(1):14-18. Cherry JD, Holtzman AE, Shields WD, Buch D, Nielsen, "Pertussis immunization and characteristics related to first seizures in infants and children,"J Pediatr 1993 Jun;122(6):900-903. Coplan J, "Seizures following immunizations," J Pediatr 1983 Sep;103(3):496. Barkin RM, Jabhour JT, Samuelson J S, "Immunizations, seizures, and subsequent evaluation," JAMA 1987 Jul 10;258(2):201. Griffin MR, et al, "Risk of seizures after measles-mumps-rubella immunization," Pediatrics 1991 Nov;88(5):881-885. Griffin MR, et al, "Risk of seizures and encephalopathy after immunization with the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine," JAMA 1990 Mar 23-30;263(12):1641-1645. Cizewska S, Huber Z, Sluzewski W, "[Prophylactic inoculations and seizure activity in the EEG],” Neurol Neurochir Pol 1981 Sep-Dec;15(5-6):553-557. [Article in Polish] Huttenlocher PR, Hapke RJ, “A follow-up study of intractable seizures in childhood.” Ann Neurol 1990 Nov; 28(5):699-705. Blumberg DA, “Severe reactions associated with diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine: detailed study of children with seizures, hypotonic-hypo-responsive episodes, high fevers, and persistent crying.”Pediatrics 1993 Jun; 91(6):1158-1165. Vaccinations and Convulsions Citations: Prensky AL, et al, “History of convulsions and use of pertussis vaccine,” J Pediatr 1985 Aug; 107(2):244-255. Baraff LJ, “Infants and children with convulsions and hypotonic-hypo-responsive episodes following diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis immunization: follow-up evaluation,” Pediatrics 1988 Jun; 81(6):789-794. Jacobson V, “Relationship of pertussis immunization to the onset of epilepsy, febrile convulsions and central nervous system infections: a retrospective epidemiologic study,” Tokai J Exp Clin Med 1988;13 Suppl: 137-142. Cupic V,et al, “[Role of DTP vaccine in the convulsive syndromes in children],” Lijec Vjesn 1978 Jun; 100(6):345-348. [Article in Serbo-Croatian (Roman)] Pokrovskaia NIa, “[Convulsive syndrome in DPT vaccination (a clinico-experimental study)],” Pediatriia 1983 May;(5):37-39. [Article in Russian] Vaccinations and Epilepsy Citations: Ballerini, Ricci, B, et al, “On Neurological Complications of Vaccination, With Special Reference to Epileptic Syndromes,” Riv Neurol, Jul-Aug 1973, 43:254-258. Wolf SM, Forsythe A, “Epilepsy and mental retardation following febrile seizures in childhood,” Acta Paediatr Scand 1989 Mar;78(2):291-295. ________________________________________ Vaccines and Brain Swelling: Iwasa, S et al, “Swelling of the Brain in Mice Caused by Pertussis … Quantitative Determination and the Responsibility of the Vaccine”, Jpn J Med Sci Biol, 1985 , 38(2):53-65. Mathur R, Kumari S, “Bulging fontanel following triple vaccine.” Indian Pediatr 1981 Jun;18(6):417-418. Barry W, Lenney W, Hatcher G, “Bulging fontanelles in infants without meningitis.” Arch Dis Child 1989 Apr;64(4):635-636. Shendurnikar N, “Bulging fontanel following DPT” Indian Pediatr 1986 Nov;23(11):960. Gross TP, Milstien JB, Kuritsky JN, “Bulging fontanelle after immunization with diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine and diphtheria-tetanus vaccine.” J Pediatr 1989 Mar;114(3):423-425. Jacob J, Mannino F, “Increased intracranial pressure after diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis immunization.” Am J Dis Child 1979 Feb;133(2):217-218. Dugmore, WN, “Bilateral Oedema at the Posterior Pole. Hypersensitivity Reaction to Alavac P injection.” Br J Ophthalmol, Dec 1972, 55:848-849. Vaccines and Neurological Damage Nedar P R, and Warren, R J, “Reported Neurological Disorders Following Live Measles Vaccine”, 1968, Ped, 41:997-1001. Paradiso, G et al, “Multifocal Demyelinating Neuropathy after Tetanus Vaccine”, Medicina (B Aires), 1990, 50(1):52-54. Landrigan, PJ, Whitte, J, “Neurologic Disorders Following Live Measles-virus Vaccination”, JAMA, Mar 26, 1973, v223(13):1459-1462. Turnbull, H M, “Encephalomyelitis Following Vaccination”, Brit Jour Exper Path, 7:181, 1926. Kulenkampff, M et al, “Neurological Complications of Pertussis Inoculation”, Arch Dis Child, 1974, 49:46. Strom, J, “Further Experience of Reactions, Especially of a Cerebral Nature in Conjunction with Triple Vaccination”, Brit Med Jour, 1967, 4:320-323. Berg, J M, “Neurological Complications of Pertussis Immunization,” Brit Med Jour, July 5,1958; p 24. Bondarev, VN et al, “The Changes of the Nervous System in Children After Vaccination”, Pediatria, Jun 1969; 48:20-24. Badalian, LO, “Vaccinal Lesions of the Nervous System in Children,” Vop Okhr Materin Dets, Dec 1959, 13:54-59 Lorentz, IT, et al, “Post-Vaccinal Sensory Polyneuropathy with Myoclonus”, Proc Aust Ass Neurol, 1969, 6:81-86. Trump, R C, White, T R, “Cerebellar Ataxia Presumed Due To Live Attenuated Measles Virus Vaccine,” JAMA, 1967, 199:165-166. Allerdist, H, “Neurological Complications Following Measles Vaccination”, Inter Symp, Brussels, 1978, Development Biol Std, Vol 43, 259-264. Finley, K H, “Pathogenesis of Encephalitis Occurring With Vaccination, Variola and Measles, Arch Neur and Psychologist, 1938; 39:1047-1054. Froissart, M et al, “Acute Meningoencephalitis Immediately after an Influenza Vaccination”, Lille Med, Oct 1978, 23(8):548-551. Pokrovskaia, Nia, et al, “Neurological Complications in Children From Smallpox Vaccination”, Pediatriia, Dec 1978, (12):45-49. Allerdist, H, “Neurological Complications Following Measles Virus Vaccination. Evaluation of the Cases seen Between 1971-1977″, Monatsschr Kinderheilkd, Jan 1979, 127(1): 23-28. Ehrengut, W et al, “On Convulsive Reactions Following Oral vaccination Against Polio”, Klin Paediatr, May 1979, 191(3):261-270. Naumova, R P, et al, “Encephalitis Developing After Vaccination without a Local Skin Reaction”, Vrach Delo, Jul 1979, (7):114-115. Goswamy, BM, “Neurological Complications After Smallpox Vaccination”, J Ass Phys India, Jan 1969, 17:41-43. Schchelkunov, SN et al, “The Role of Viruses in the Induction of Allergic Encephalomyelitis,” Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR, 1990,315(1):252-255. [Vaccines contain viruses, too] Walker AM, “Neurologic events following diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis immunization,” Pediatrics 1988 Mar;81(3):345-349. Shields WD, et al, “Relationship of pertussis immunization to the onset of neurologic disorders: a retrospective epidemiologic study,” J Pediatr 1988 Nov; 113(5):801-805. Wilson J, “Proceedings: Neurological complications of DPT inoculation in infancy,” Arch Dis Child 1973 Oct; 48(10):829-830. Iakunin IuA, “[Nervous system complications in children after preventive vaccinations],” Pediatriia 1968 Nov; 47(11):19-26. [Article in Russian] Greco D, et al, “Case-control study on encephalopathy associated with diphtheria-tetanus immunization in Campania, Italy,” Bull World Health Organ 1985;63(5):919-925. Ehrengut W at Institute of Vaccinology and Virology, Hamburg, Germany states, “Bias in the evaluation of CNS complications following pertussis immunization are the following: 1) Notifications of post-immunization adverse events, 2) Publications by vaccine producers on the frequency of adverse reactions, 3) Comparison of permanent brain damage after DPT and DT immunization, 4) Pro-immunization, 5) Immunization associated viral encephalitis, 6) Accuracy of statistics, 7) Personal. A review of these points indicates an underestimation of CNS complications after pertussis immunization.” Reference: Ehrengut W, “Bias in evaluating CNS complications following pertussis immunization.” Acta Paediatr Jpn, 1991 Aug; 33(4):421-427. Vaccinations and Unexplained Diseases: Hiner, E E, Frasch, C E, “Spectrum of Disease Due to Haemophilus Influenza Type B Occurring in Vaccinated Children”, J Infect Disorder, 1988 Aug; 158(2): 343-348. Olin P, Romanus, V, Storsaeter, J, “Invasive Bacterial Infections During an Efficiacy Trial of Acellular Pertussis Vaccines — Implications For Future Surveilance In Pertussis Vaccine Programmes”, Tokai J Exp Clin Med, 1988; 13 Suppl: 143-144. Storsaeter, J, et al, “Mortality and Morbidity From Invasive Bacterial Infections During a Clinical Trial of Acellular Pertussis Vaccines in Sweden”, Pediatr Infect Disorder J, 1988 Sept; 7(9):637-645. Vadheim, CM, et al, “Effectiveness and Safety of an Haemophilus Influenzae type b Conjugate Vaccine (PRP-T) in Young Infants. Kaiser-UCLA Vaccine Study Group,” Pediartics, 1993 Aug; 92(2):272-279. [The vaccines caused fevers, irritability, crying, and seizures, but were declared to be "safe and ... effective ... ".] Stickl, H, “Estimation of Vaccination Damage”, Med Welt, Oct 14, 1972, 23:1495-1497. Waters, VV, et al, “Risk Factors for Measles in a Vaccinated Population”, JAMA, Mar 27, 1991, 265(12): 1527. Stickl, H, “Iatrogenic Immuno-suppression as a Result of Vaccination”, Fortschr Med, Mar 5, 1981, 99(9);289-292. Vaccine Citations Linking the Vaccine to the “prevented” Disease: Nkowane, et al, “Vaccine-Associated Paralytic Poliomyelitis, US 1973 through 1984, JAMA, 1987, Vol 257:1335-1340. Quast, et al, “Vaccine Induced Mumps-like Diseases”, nd, Int Symp on Immun, Development Bio Stand, Vol 43, p269-272. Green, C et al, “A Case of Hepatitis Related to Etretinate Therapy and Hepatitis B Vaccine”, Dermatologica, 1991, 182(2):119-120. Shasby, DM, et al, “Epidemic Measles in Highly Vaccinated Population”, NEJM, Mar 1977, 296(11): 585-589. Tesovic, G et al, “Aseptic Meningitis after Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine”, Lancet, Jun 12, 1993, 341(8859):1541. Johnson, RH, et al, “Nosocomial Vaccinia Infection”, West J Med, Oct 1976, 125(4):266-270. Malengreau, M, “Reappearance of Post-Vaccination Infection of Measles, Rubella, and Mumps. Should Adolescents be re-vaccinated?” Pedaitric, 1992;47(9):597-601 (25 ref) Basa, SN, “Paralytic Poliomyelitis Following Inoculation With Combined DTP Prophylactic. A review of Sixteen cases with Special Reference to Immunization Schedules in Infancy”, J Indian Med Assoc, Feb 1, 1973, 60:97-99. Landrigan, PJ et al, “Measles in Previously Vaccinated Children in Illinois”, Ill Med J, Arp 1974, 141:367-372. NA, “Vaccine-Associated Poliomyelitis”, Med J Aust, Oct 1973, 2:795-796. Vaccine Failures Citations: Hardy, GE, Jr, et al, “The Failure of a School Immunization Campaign to Terminate an Urban Epidemic of Measles,” Amer J Epidem, Mar 1970; 91:286-293. Cherry, JD, et al, “A Clinical and Serologic Study of 103 Children With Measles Vaccine Failure”, J Pediatr, May 1973; 82:801-808. Jilg, W, et al, “Inoculation Failure Following Hepatitis B Vaccination”, Dtsch Med wochenschr, 1990 Oct 12; 115(41):1514-1548. Plotkin, SA, “Failures of Protection by Measles Vaccine,” J Pediatr, May 1973; 82:798-801. Bolotovskii, V, et al, “Measles Incidence Among Children Properly Vaccinated Against This Infection”, ZH Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol, 1974; 00(5):32-35. Landrigan, PJ, et al, “Measles in Previously Vaccinated Children in Illinois”, Ill Med J, Apr 1974; 141:367-372. Strebel, P et al, “An Outbreak of Whooping Cough in a Highly Vaccinated Urban Community”, J Trop Pediatr, Mar 1991, 37(2): 71-76. Forrest, JM, et al, “Failure of Rubella Vaccination to Prevent Congenital Rubella,”Med J Aust, 1977 Jan 15; 1(3): 77. Jilg, W, “Unsuccessful Vaccination against Hepatitis B”, Dtsch Med Wochenschr, Nov 16, 1990, 115(46):1773. Coles, FB, et al, “An Outbreak of Influenza A (H3N2) in a Well-Immunized Nursing home Population,” J Am ger Sociologist, Jun 1992, 40(6):589-592. Jilg, W, et al, “Inoculation Failure following Hepatitis B Vaccination,” Dtsch Med Wochenschr, Oct 12, 1990, 115(41):1545-1548. Hartmann, G et al, “Unsuccessful Inoculation against Hepatitis B,” Dtsch Med Wochenschr, May 17, 1991, 116(20): 797. Buddle, BM et al, “Contagious Ecthyma Virus-Vaccination Failures”, Am J Vet Research, Feb 1984, 45(2):263-266. Mathias, R G, “Whooping Cough In Spite of Immunization”, Can J Pub Health, 1978 Mar/Apr; 69(2):130-132. Osterholm, MT, et al, “Lack of Efficacy of Haemophilus b Polysacharide Vaccine in Minnesota”, JAMA, 1988 Sept 9; 260(10:1423-1428. Johnson, RH, et al, “Nosocomial Vaccinia Infection”, West J Med, Oct 1976, 125(4):266-270. Vaccines Causing Another Vaccinal Disease: Basa, SN, “Paralytic Poliomyelitis Following Inoculation With Combined DTP Prophylactic. A review of Sixteen cases with Special Reference to Immunization Schedules in Infancy”, J Indian Med Assoc, Feb 1, 1973, 60:97-99. Pathel, JC, et al, “Tetanus Following Vaccination Against Small-pox”, J Pediatr, Jul 1960; 27:251-263. Favez, G, “Tuberculous Superinfection Following a Smallpox Re-Vaccination”, Praxis, July 21, 1960; 49:698-699. Quast, Ute, and Hennessen, “Vaccine-Induced Mumps-like Diseases”, Intern Symp on Immunizations , Development Bio Stand, Vol 43, p 269-272. Forrest, J M, et al, “Clinical Rubella Eleven months after Vaccination,” Lancet, Aug 26, 1972, 2:399-400. Dittman, S, “Atypical Measles after Vaccination”, Beitr Hyg Epidemiol, 19891, 25:1-274 (939 ref) Sen S, et al, “Poliomyelitis in Vaccinated Children”, Indian Pediatr, May 1989, 26(5): 423-429. Arya, SC, “Putative Failure of Recombinant DNA Hepatitis B Vaccines”, Vaccine, Apr 1989, 7(2): 164-165. Lawrence, R et al, “The Risk of Zoster after Varicella Vaccination in Children with Leukemia”, NEJM, Mar 3, 1988, 318(9): 543-548. Vaccination Citations and Death Na, “DPT Vaccination and Sudden Infant Death – Tennessee, US Dept HEW, MMWR Report, Mar 23, 1979, vol 28(11): 132. Arevalo, “Vaccinia Necrosum. Report on a Fatal Case”, Bol Ofoc Sanit Panamer, Aug 1967, 63:106-110. Connolly, J H, Dick, G W, Field, CM, “A Case of Fatal Progressive Vaccinia”, Brit Med Jour, 12 May 1962; 5288:1315-1317. Aragona, F, “Fatal Acute Adrenal Insufficiency Caused by Bilateral Apoplexy of the Adrenal Glands (WFS) following Anti-poliomyelitis Vaccination”, Minerva Medicolegale, Aug 1960; 80:167-173. Moblus, G et al, “Pathological-Anatomical Findings in Cases of Death Following Poliomyelitis and DPT Vaccination”, Dtsch Gesundheitsw, Jul 20, 1972, 27:1382-1386. NA, “Immunizations and Cot Deaths”, Lancet, Sept 25, 1982, np. Goetzeler, A, “Fatal Encephalitis after Poliomyelitis Vaccination”, 22 Jun 1961, Muenchen Med Wschr, 102:1419-1422. Fulginiti, V, “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, Diphtheria-Tetanus Toxoid-Pertussis Vaccination and Visits to the Doctor: Chance Association or Cause and Effect?”, Pediatr Infect Disorder, Jan-Feb 1983, 2(1): 7-11. Baraff, LJ, et al, “Possible Temporal Association Between Diphtheria-tetanus toxoid-Pertussis Vaccination and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome”, Pediatr Infect Disorder, Jan-Feb 1983, 2(1): 5-6. Reynolds, E, “Fatal Outcome of a Case of Eczema Vaccinatum”, Lancet, 24 Sept 1960, 2:684-686. Apostolov. et al, “Death of an Infant in Hyperthermia After Vaccination”, J Clin Path, Mar 1961, 14:196-197. Bouvier-Colle, MH, “Sex-Specific Differences in Mortality After High-Titre Measles Vaccination”, Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique, 1995; 43(1): 97. Stewart GT, “Deaths of infants after triple vaccine.”, Lancet 1979 Aug 18;2(8138):354-355. Flahault A, “Sudden infant death syndrome and diphtheria/tetanus toxoid/pertussis/poliomyelitis immunisation.”, Lancet 1988 Mar 12;1(8585):582-583. Larbre, F et al, “Fatal Acute Myocarditis After Smallpox Vaccination”, Pediatrie, Apr-May 1966, 21:345-350. Mortimer EA Jr, “DTP and SIDS: when data differ”, Am J Public Health 1987 Aug; 77(8):925-926. Vaccines and Metabolism Citations: Deutsch J, ” [Temperature changes after triple-immunization in infant age],” Padiatr Grenzgeb 1976;15(1):3-6. [Article in German] NA, “[Temperature changes after triple immunization in childhood],” Padiatr Grenzgeb 1976;15(1):7-10. [Article in German] [Considering that the thyroid controls our Basal Metabolism, it would appear that vaccines altered (depressed) thyroid activity.] Vaccines Altering Resistance to Disease: Burmistrova AL, “[Change in the non-specific resistance of the body to influenza and acute respiratory diseases following immunization diphtheria-tetanus vaccine],” Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol 1976; (3):89-91. [Article in Russian] Vaccinations and Deafness Citations: So I did a background check to see if there was any scientific evidence linking vaccines to deafness and hearing loss. Here are some of the articles I found: Kaga, “Unilateral Total Loss of Auditory and Vestibular Function as a Complication of Mumps Vaccination”, Int J Ped Oto, Feb 1998, 43(1):73-73 Nabe-Nielsen, Walter, “Unilateral Total Deafness as a Complication of the Measles- Mumps- Rubella Vaccination”, Scan Audio Suppl, 1988, 30:69-70 Hulbert, et al, “Bilateral Hearing Loss after Measles and Rubella Vaccination in an Adult”, NEJM, 1991 July, 11;325(2):134 Healy, “Mumps Vaccine and Nerve Deafness”, Am J Disorder Child, 1972 Jun; 123(6):612 Jayarajan, Sedler, “Hearing Loss Following Measles Vaccination”, J Infect, 1995 Mar; 30(2):184-185 Pialoux, P et al, “Vaccinations and Deafness”, Ann Otolaryng (Paris), Dec 1963, 80:1012-1013. Angerstein, W, et al, “Solitary Hearing and Equilibrium Damage After Vaccinations”, Gesundheitswesen, May 1995, 57(5): 264-268. Brodsky, Stanievich, “Sensorineural Hearing Loss Following Live Measles Virus Vaccination”, Int J Ped Oto, 1985 Nov; 10(2):159-163 Koga, et al, “Bilateral Acute Profound Deafness After MMR Vaccination- Report of a Case”, Nippon Jibiin Gakkai Kai, 1991 Aug;94(8):1142-5 Seiferth, LB, “Deafness after Oral Poliomyelitis Vaccination – a Case Report and Review”, HNO, 1977 Aug; 25(8): 297-300 Pantazopoulos, PE, “Perceptive Deafness Following Prophylactic use of Tetanus anittoxin”, Laryngoscope, Dec 1965, 75:1832-1836. Zimmerman, W, “Observation of a case of Acute Bilateral Hearing Impairment Following Preventive Poliomyelitis Vaccination (type 3)”, Arch Ohr Nas Kehlkopfheilk, 1965, 185:723-725. Vaccinations and Kidney Disorders Citations: Jacquot, C et al, “Renal Risk in Vaccination”, Nouv Presse Med, Nov 6, 1982, 11(44):3237-3238. Giudicelli, et al, “Renal Risk in Vaccination”, Presse Med, Jun 11, 1982, 12(25):1587-1590. Tan, SY, et al, “Vaccine Related Glomerulonephritis”, BMJ, Jan 23, 1993, 306(6872):248. Pillai, JJ, et al, “Renal Involvement in Association with Post-vaccination Varicella”, Clin Infect Disorder, Dec 1993, 17(6): 1079-1080. Eisinger, AJ et al, “Acute Renal Failure after TAB and Cholera Vaccination”, B Med J, Feb 10, 1979, 1(6160):381-382. Silina, ZM, et al, “Causes of Postvaccinal Complications in the Kidneys in Young Infants”, Pediatria, Dec 1978, (12):59-61. Na, “Albuminurias”, Concours Med, Mar 1964, 85:5095-5098. [vaccination adverse reactions] Oyrl, A, et al, “Can Vaccinations Harm the Kidney?”, Clin Nephrol, 1975, 3(5):204-205. Mel’man Nia, “[Renal lesions after use of vaccines and sera].” Vrach Delo 1978 Oct;(10):67-9, [Article in Russian] Silina ZM, Galaktionova TIa, Shabunina NR, “[Causes of postvaccinal complications in the kidneys in young infants].” Pediatriia 1978 Dec;(12):59-61, [Article in Russian] Silina EM, et al, “[Some diseases of the kidneys in children during the 1st year of life, following primary smallpox vaccination and administration of pertusis-diphtheria-tetanus vaccine].” Vopr Okhr Materin Det 1968 Mar; 13(3):79-80, [Article in Russian] Vaccines and Skin Disorders Citations: Illingsworth R, Skin rashes after triple vaccine,” Arch Dis Child 1987 Sep; 62(9):979. Lupton GP, “Discoid lupus erythematosus occurring in a smallpox vaccination scar,” J Am Acad Dermatol, 1987 Oct; 17(4):688-690. Kompier, A J, “Some Skin Diseases caused by Vaccinia Virus [Smallpox],” Ned Milt Geneesk T, 15:149-157, May 1962. Weber, G et al, “Skin Lesions Following Vaccinations,” Deutsch Med Wschr, 88:1878-1886, S7 Sept 1963. Copeman, P W, “Skin Complications of Smallpox Vaccination,” Practitioner, 197:793-800, Dec 1966. Denning, DW, et al, “Skin Rashes After Triple Vaccine,” Arch Disorder Child, May 1987, 62(5): 510-511. Vaccinations and Abcesses: Sterler, HC, et al, “Outbreaks of Group A Steptococcal Abcesses Following DTP Vaccination”, Pediatrics, Feb 1985, 75(2):299-303. DiPiramo, D, et al, “Abcess Formation at the Site of Inoculation of Calmette-Guerin Bacillus (BCG),” Riv Med Aeronaut Spaz, Jul-Dec 1981, 46(3-4):190-199. Vaccinations and Shock: Caileba, A et al, “Shock associated with Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation Syndrome following Injection of DT.TAB Vaccine, Prese Med, Sept 15, 1984, 13(3):1900. Vaccines: The Weird, The Wild and The Hilarious Citations: Sometimes there are articles published about the strangest facts related to vaccines that defies our imagination and ability to understand them. They were written seriously by well-meaning scientific persons, but their titles can be seen differently. Some are funny, some are sad and some are purely scientific folly. See if you can figure these out: Pathel, JC, et al, “Tetanus Following Vaccination Against Small-pox”, J Pediatr, Jul 1960; 27:251-263. [Now you need a tetanus vaccination!] Favez, G, “Tuberculous Superinfection Following a Smallpox Re-Vaccination”, Praxis, July 21, 1960; 49:698-699. [Super means large/big/great!] Bonifacio, A et al, “Traffic Accidents as an expression of “Iatrogenic damage”, Minerva Med, Feb 24, 1971, 62:735-740. [But officer I was just vaccinated!] Baker, J et al, “Accidental Vaccinia: Primary Inoculation of a Scrotum”, Clin Pediatr (Phila), Apr 1972, 11:244-245. [Ooops, the needle slipped.] Edwards, K, “Danger of Sunburn Following Vaccination”, Papua New Guinea Med J, Dec 1977, 20(4):203. [Are vaccines phototoxic?] Stroder, J, “Incorrect Therapy in Children”, Folia Clin Int (Barc), Feb 1966, 16:82-90. [Agreed.] Wehrle PF, “Injury associated with the use of vaccines,” Clin Ther 1985;7(3):282-284. [Dah!] Alberts ME, “When and where will it stop”, Iowa Med 1986 Sep; 76(9):424. [When!] Breiman RF, Zanca JA, “Of floors and ceilings — defining, assuring, and communicating vaccine safety”, Am J Public Health 1997 Dec;87(12):1919-1920. [What is in between floors and ceilings?] Stewart, AM, et al, “Aetiology of Childhood Leukaemia”, Lancet, 16 Oct, 1965, 2:789-790. Nelson, ST, “John Hutchinson On Vaccination Syphilis (Hutchinson, J)”, Arch Derm, (Chic), May 1969, 99:529-535. [Vaccinations and STDs!] Mather, C, “Cotton Mather Anguishes Over the Consequences of His Son’s Inoculation Against Smallpox”, Pediatrics, May 1974; 53:756. [Is it for or against?] Thoman M, “The Toxic Shot Syndrome”, Vet Hum Toxicol, Apr 1986, 28(2):163-166. [Animals are not exempt from vaccination damage either!] Johnson, RH, et al, “Nosocomial Vaccinia Infection”, West J Med, Oct 1976, 125(4):266-270. [Nosocomial means a disease acquired in a doctor's office or hospital.] Heed, JR, “Human Immunization With Rabies Vaccine in Suckling Mice Brain,” Salud Publica, May-Jun 1974, 16(3): 469-480. [Have you had your suckling mice brains today?] Tesovic, G et al, “Aseptic Meningitis after Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine”, Lancet, Jun 12, 1993, 341(8859):1541. [AM has same symptoms as poliomyelitis!] Buddle, BM et al, “Contagious Ecthyma Virus-Vaccination Failures”, Am J Vet Research, Feb 1984, 45(2):263-266. Freter, R et al, “Oral Immunization And Production of Coproantibody in Human Volunteers”, J Immunol, Dec 1963, 91:724-729. [Guess what copro- means .... Feces.] NA, “Vaccination, For and Against”, 1964, Belg T Geneesk, 20:125-130. [Is it for or against?] Sahadevan, MG et al, “Post-vaccinal Myelitis”, J Indian Med Ass, Feb 16, 1966, 46:205-206. [Did I mention myelitis?] Castan, P et al, “Coma Revealing an acute Leukosis in a child, 15 days after an Oral Anti-poliomyelitis Vaccination,” Acta Neurol Bekg, May 1965, 65:349-367. [Coma from vaccines!] Stickl, H, et al, “Purulent [pus] meningitides Following Smallpox Vaccination. On the Problem of Post- Vaccinal Decrease of Resistance”, Deutsch Med Wschr, Jul 22, 1966, 91:1307-1310. [Vaccines are the injection of viruses cultured from pus ... ]
Recently Added Articles: UK General Medical Council Told Docs “Commit Fraud for MMR Vaccine Bonuses”
The Problem with Vaccines |
posted Mar 4, 2013, 3:30 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Mar 4, 2013, 11:00 AM
]
COINTELPRO (an acronym for Counter Intelligence Program) was a series of covert, and at times illegal, projects conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) aimed at surveying, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting domestic political organizations.
The FBI has used covert operations against domestic political groups since its inception; however, covert operations under the official COINTELPRO label took place between 1956 and 1971. COINTELPRO tactics have been alleged to include discrediting targets through psychological warfare; smearing individuals and groups using forged documents and by planting false reports in the media; harassment; wrongful imprisonment; and illegal violence, including assassination. The FBI's stated motivation was "protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order."
So, Let's examine the different ways how this is done. What follows are 5 basic perspectives on a multitude of ways that a flow of information can be destroyed or disrupted
Section 1. Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
Section 2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Section 3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
Section 4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
Section 5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression Now we are ready to begin. SECTION 1: Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time atwww.abovetopsecret.com) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
Final Thoughts on Techniques - 'CONCLUSION'
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
*-*-*-*-*-*
SECTION 2:
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. *-*-*-*-*-* SECTION 3:
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin. *-*-*-*-*-* SECTION 4:
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established. Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country. Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female. The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists. It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:
"You're dividing the movement."
[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:
"You're a leader!"
This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
*-*-*-*-*-* SECTION 5:
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.
Of course this list is not complete but it is a good place to start. (G) Source of Information: Exposing The Truth on Facebook ESSENTIAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 1. Wiki-Cointelpro 2. A Short History of FBI COINTELPRO 3. COINTELPRO: The Sabotage Of Legitimate Dissent (Examples) 4. Cointelpro Video Documentary: Part 1 of 6
|
posted Jan 21, 2013, 12:40 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Mar 18, 2013, 5:34 AM
]
I have recently had several extended debates with friends over the nature of the Peer Review Process and whether or not it can be justified as a form of empirical evidence. Clearly the basic idea is very sound and yet i can not help but point out several flaws in its daily use. 1. The insular and secretive nature of the process makes data manipulation possible and prevents real cross analysis from anyone outside the box. 2. Most scientists work directly for the Government and are put under pressure to produce results that are consistent with public policy. 3. The nature of scientific development itself requires approximation and is limited to the relationships of description through basic senses. Of course, there is no real substitute for: extensive research, in depth practical experience and good old tried and tested methods. We must however approach with caution the regulation of conclusions based on ideas we can not personally verify. The complexity of this problem should not be understimated. So, with that in mind, here is some basic information to support the theory suggested above. What is Peer Review?Peer review means that an action of an individual person may be looked at again (reviewed) by someone of similar competence in that activity - a peer.
More formally it is a process of self-regulation by a profession or a
process of evaluation involving qualified individuals within the
relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards, improve performance and provide credibility. In academia peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication.
Peer review can be categorized by the type of activity and by the
field or profession in which the activity occurs. In general, those
involved in a given profession or particular organization identify their
particular process by the generic term "peer review". So, even when
qualifiers are applied the elements of peer review may appear to be
inconsistent. For example, medical peer review can refer to clinical peer review, or the peer evaluation of clinical teaching skills for both physicians and nurses,
or scientific peer review of journal articles, or to a secondary round
of peer review for the clinical value of articles concurrently published
in medical journals. Moreover, "medical peer review" has been used by the American Medical Association
to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in
health care organizations, but also to the process of rating clinical
behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards.
Thus, the terminology has poor standardization and specificity, particularly as a database search term. Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review
A Presentation of Evidence of Faked Study or Research:
(A) Call for global crackdown on fake medicineshttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20313541 "In Canada we have seen a fake version of the heart drug Avastin come
into the country that contains no active drug, just starch and nail
polish remover.'' (B) Experts and Studies: Not Always Trustworthyhttp://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1998644,00.html ''Two-thirds of the findings published in the top medical journals are
refuted within a few years. It gets worse. As much as 90% of physicians'
medical knowledge has been found to be substantially or completely
wrong. In fact, there is a 1 in 12 chance that a doctor's diagnosis will
be so wrong that it causes the patient significant harm.'' (C) Elsevier editorial system hackedhttp://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/elsevier-editorial-system-hacked-reviews-faked-11-retractions-follow/ ''Authors submitting fake email addresses for potential peer reviewers, to ensure positive reviews.'' More on the above story:
Elsevier published 6 fake journalshttp://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27383/title/Elsevier-published-6-fake-journals/ ''Scientific publishing giant Elsevier put out a total of six publications
between 2000 and 2005 that were sponsored by unnamed pharmaceutical
companies and looked like peer reviewed medical journals, but did not
disclose sponsorship, the company has admitted.'' (D) South Korean plant compound researcher faked email addresses so he could review his own studieshttp://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/08/24/korean-plant-compound-researcher-faked-email-addresses-so-he-could-review-his-own-studies/ ''Scientists frustrated by the so-called “ third reviewer”
— the one always asking for additional experiments before recommending
acceptance — might be forgiven for having fantasies of being able to
review their own papers.''
(E) False positives: fraud and misconduct are threatening scientific researchhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice ''Dutch psychologist Diederik Stapel. He was found to have fabricated data
for years and published it in at least 30 peer-reviewed papers,
including a report in the journal Science about how untidy environments may encourage discrimination.''
(F) Frozen Planet: BBC 'faked' polar bear birthhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8950070/Frozen-Planet-BBC-faked-polar-bear-birth.html ''The accompanying voiceover from Sir David Attenborough referred to cubs
being born “beneath the snow” and the footage was intercut with scenes of
polar bears in the wild.''
(G) Merck Makes Phony Peer-Review Journal http://www.bioethics.net/2009/05/merck-makes-phony-peerreview-journal/ ''The Scientist
has reported that, yes, it’s true, Merck cooked up a phony, but real
sounding, peer reviewed journal and published favorably looking data for
its products in them.'' More on the above story: Merck published fake journal http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27376/title/Merck-published-fake-journal/ ''It came to light in the context of a civil suit filed by Graeme
Peterson, who suffered a heart attack in 2003 while on Vioxx, against
Merck and its Australian subsidiary, Merck, Sharp & Dohme Australia
(MSDA).''
(H) Scientific misconduct 101: How to fake a science paperhttp://www.significancemagazine.org/details/webexclusive/1049265/Scientific-misconduct-101-How-to-fake-a-science-paper.html ''Because that is the ultimate aim of the scheme: get your research in the media. As the website Churnalism.com
has shown, it is surprisingly easy to get news outlets to publish press
releases verbatim if they sound convincing and interesting enough.'' More on the above story: Integrative medicine and the point of credulity http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c6979 ''So called integrative medicine should not be used as a way of smuggling
alternative practices into rational medicine by way of lowered standards
of critical thinking. Failure to detect an obvious hoax is not an
encouraging sign.'' (I) Society Of Corporate Compliance And Ethics Establishes Code Of Ethics For Compliance And Ethics Professionalshttp://www.science20.com/pr_newswire_uk/society_of_corporate_compliance_and_ethics_establishes_code_of_ethics_for_compliance_and_ethics_professionals "This Code is the expressed commitment to professionalism in the worldwide community of compliance and ethics professionals,"
(J) Study: Scientific research fraud on the risehttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57523932/study-scientific-research-fraud-on-the-rise/ ''Fraud was the No. 1 cause of retractions, accounting for 43 percent of
them. When fraud was combined with other areas of misconduct, such as
plagiarism, it explained about 2 out of 3 retractions, the study found.''
(K) The Limits and Power of Peer Reviewhttp://www.minnesotamedicine.com/PastIssues/PastIssues2006/June2006/Commentary-Hammerschmidt-June2006.aspx ''Peer reviewers don’t judge whether or not experiments have actually been
performed and reported completely. Often such judgments can only be
made after extensive familiarity with an author’s work.''
(L) US scientists “more prone” to fake research?http://blogs.nature.com/news/2010/11/us_scientists_more_prone_to_fa_1.html ''A peer-reviewed study that claimed “American scientists are
significantly more prone to engage in data fabrication or falsification
than scientists from other countries” caused surprise when it dropped
into Nature’s inbox.'' More on the above story: US Scientists Significantly More Likely to Publish Fake Research http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101115210944.htm ''A total of 788 papers had been retracted during this period. Around
three quarters of these papers had been withdrawn because of a serious
error (545); the rest of the retractions were attributed to fraud (data
fabrication or falsification).''
(M) Government documents reveal vaccines to be a total hoaxhttp://www.naturalnews.com/038598_vaccines_medical_hoax_government_documents.html "[T]he JCVI (Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization) made
continuous efforts to withhold critical data on severe adverse reactions
and contraindications to vaccinations to both parents and health
practitioners in order to reach overall vaccination rates which they
deemed were necessary for 'herd immunity,' a concept which ... does not
rest on solid scientific evidence," explains Dr. Tomljenovic in the
introduction to her paper.
(N) Scientist admits IPCC used fake data to pressure policy makershttp://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/23/breaking-news-scientist-admits-ipcc-used-fake-data-to-pressure-policy-makers/ ''The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report
that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it
was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.''
(O) Why experts are usually wronghttp://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/why_experts_are_usually_wrong_LsjnnoKdgoOoH5QJHmT5QO ''As much as 90% of medical knowledge has been gauged to be substantially
or completely wrong. We spend about $95 billion annually on medical
research in the US, but average life span here has barely increased
since 1978 — and most of the improvement was due to the drop in smoking
rates.''
(P) The ups and downs of peer reviewhttp://advan.physiology.org/content/31/2/145.short ''This article traces the history of peer review of scientific
publications, plotting the development of the process from its
inception to its present-day application. We
discuss the merits of peer review and its weaknesses, both perceived and
real,
as well as the practicalities of several major
proposed changes to the system.''
(Q) The perils of peer review in economics and other scienceshttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01199669?LI=true ''The quality of researchers' work in economics and other sciences is
generally evaluated through a system of peer review. In an experimental
test it is shown that the peer review system can be very inefficient by
creating a bias towards incremental development of existing methods and
against exploration of new methods.''
(R) OA publisher accepts fake paperhttp://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/27458/title/OA-publisher-accepts-fake-paper/ ''An open access journal has agreed to publish a nonsensical article
written by a computer program, claiming that the manuscript was peer
reviewed and requesting that the "authors" pay $800 in "open access
fees."
(S) Lies, Damned Lies, and P-Valueshttp://www.masstortsstateoftheart.com/2010/03/articles/epidemiology/lies-damned-lies-and-pvalues/ ''You see, an impressive sounding statement like "the association between
exposure and disease was highly significant (P<0.05)" does NOT mean
(a) that there's a 95% chance that the association is causal; (b) that
the absence of an association can almost certainly be ruled out; nor
does it necessarily mean that (c) the finding is momentous, compelling
or even important. It doesn't even say that if the test were to be
repeated that its results would likely hold.''
(T) Is Peer Review Censorship?http://iai.asm.org/content/77/4/1273.full ''Given the unpleasantness of having one's work rejected,
as well as a desire for more-rapid communication of scientific
findings, some scientists have expressed nostalgia for the
good old days when nearly any submitted manuscript was
accepted for publication, and some have even compared peer review to
censorship.''
(U) Experts Are Made ... Not Bornhttp://www.k12.com/educators/curriculum-approach/k8-approach/experts-are-made-not-born ''Mastery Takes Effort: Successful athletes are made by the blood, sweat, and tears they put into honing their natural talents. Chess masters have played tens of thousands of games of chess. A concert pianist practices his craft every day, sometimes for hours on end.''
(V) An Automatic CS Paper Generator !!!http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/ ''SCIgen is a program that generates random Computer Science research
papers, including graphs, figures, and citations. It uses a
hand-written context-free grammar to form all elements of the
papers. Our aim here is to maximize amusement, rather than coherence.'' End of evidence ... perhaps Just for the record ... i am not against the peer review process but we need to use careful and considered discernment before we follow a meme based on blind faith. (G) Anyway, you might still be interested enough to watch the link below. The CDC Documentary - The Trouble With Experts Additional Articles:
1. Studies prove most medical research is false http://www.naturalnews.com/039416_medical_research_scientific_fraud_false_data.html
''Bekelman et al. report that about two thirds of academic medical centers hold equity interest in companies that sponsor research within the same institution. Moreover, Campbell et al. report that two thirds of medical school department chairs receive departmental income from drug companies and three-fifths received personal income.'' |
posted Jan 7, 2013, 12:22 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Jan 7, 2013, 12:41 AM
]
There are many reasons for Homeschooling from a concern about the school environment to the need to provide religious or moral instruction or even a dissatisfaction with the instruction available at other schools.
We have, at least, an estimated 1.9 to 2.5 million kinder-garden to 8th grade homeschooled children in the US. While homeschooling has long been looked over statistics show that these children are rising to the occasion and easily meeting the standards of Universities and work force market place needs. For centuries, homeschooling was the only option for most people. Today, it's viewed with mixed opinions as some question it's legitimacy. However, statistics show that homeschooled students outperform students who go to structured schools in a great number of areas. So, as American schools struggle to compete with the rest of the world, more and more parents are pulling their children out of the system and opting to homeschool them instead. How effective is homeschooling compared to traditional education? Well, let's take a visual look at who is doing better- publicly schooled students or those who are choosing the alternative.
Who does better at school and who is more successful?
THE HISTORY OF HOMESCHOOL
HOMESCHOOL DOMINATION
HOMESCHOOL BY THE NUMBERS
HOMESCHOOL ADVANTAGE
HOMESCHOOL REASONS
NOTE: All information was compiled using graphics from the website: Visual.ly
Additional information that might be of interest:
1. Celebrities that Give Homeschooling a Good Name
2. Important and Famous People Who Were Homeschooled
3. Who are famous or important homeschooled men and women from history?
4. A-list kids who were homeschooled
5. Famous Homeschoolers
|
posted Dec 13, 2012, 3:52 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Feb 22, 2013, 12:38 AM
]
If Pasi Sahlberg and Tony Bennett were to agree to discuss how to improve student learning in the U.S. and sell tickets I’d camp out to be first in line. And if the tickets somehow were already gone, I’d pay any scalper’s price. Sahlberg, who formerly served in a post equivalent to secretary of education in Finland, spoke this afternoon at Indiana University. He has been touring the U.S. promoting his book, Finnish Lessons, a commentary on what other nations (especially the U.S.) can learn from Finland when it comes to education.
Finland has been a flashpoint of debate in American education reform circles lately. The small Nordic nation of 5.5 million has earned great notice for dramatically improving its international test scores to the point now where its kids routinely rank among the very best in the world academically. When reformers complain about the mediocre test performance of the U.S. they sometimes point to Finland, a nation that 30 years ago also had mediocre scores before a steady rise that eventually pushed it to the top of the heap. Some are asking: If Finland can do it, why can’t we? But others say Finland is so different — in size, population, homogeneity, culture and economics — that its experience is mostly irrelevant. For some background on this debate and Sahlberg’s book, check out t his story in The Atlantic magazine. He obviously believes Finland’s lessons are relevant, even as he acknowledges the significant differences from the U.S. He also is well traveled. Sahlberg spoke admiringly of what he liked about education systems all around the world — in places like Canada, South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Germany and others. Every system is different and nations should borrow good ideas or learn from the experience of others rather than expect to find a ready-made system somewhere that can be copied and put in place to solve all problems. Finland’s system, he said, could not work in the U.S. Factors of societal, economic and cultural differences must be considered and will always shape a country’s education system to make it unique. But if Sahlberg insisted he couldn’t prescribe exactly what the U.S. needs to do to succeed, he was confident he could identify some of what we’re doing wrong. He shared four lessons for the U.S. from Finland that challenge some of the school reform conventional wisdom in the U.S. and especially in Indiana. In short, he argued that several of the fundamental beliefs of reformers here — reformers like Bennett — were just flat wrong.
Follow the link below to read the most important lessons.
OTHER IMPORTANT ARTICLES:
(A). What Can We Learn From Finland?
(B). Why Are Finland's Schools Successful?
(C). We can learn from Finland’s school success despite the differences in our cultures (D). What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland's School Success
FUTHER READING & INFORMATION:
(E). Why Finland's Unorthodox Education System Is The Best In The World
(F). Best Education In The World: Finland
AVAILABLE VIDEO REPORTS: 1. The Finland Phenomenon - Part 1
3. Pasi Sahlberg on the Finnish Education System (TVO)
4. Finland's Education Success (BBC) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlYHWpRR4yc&feature=related
5. Finland's Education Success - CNN report
6. Pasi Sahlberg: "Finnish Lessons: What can the world learn''
7. What can we learn from Finnish education system? (Version 2)
Please feel free to send me any more reports of relevant information.
Added Information: February 2013: Responses to questions about Finland’s system from AERO members In the '70s the Finns had private fee paying 'grammar' schools for 55% of the kids aged 11 and upwards. These schools selected their students by 'academic ability' and 'parental ability to pay.' Research showed that student outcome at 16 and 18 was almost entirely predicated on parental income (what a surprise!). After much political debate eventually sufficient consensus was found around an agenda that created the comprehensive and local 'nine year school' (7-16) for everybody; fee charging was abolished as was academic selection at 11. Selection and 'streaming' into classes by academic ability within schools was also made illegal in further reforms a few years later. A collaborative ethos systematically replaced a competitive one. Special needs education was provided on such a large scale that over 40% of students benefit from it for something at some point in their schooling so there was absolutely no stigma attached to it.
There are no nationally applied tests until 16 and these are largely used formatively to guide students as to how best pursue their upper secondary education from 16 to 19/20 where there is a choice between academic and vocational routes.. There is no system of national inspection. The national curriculum is fairly unprescriptive and teachers are trusted to adapt it to local circumstances and students' interests. Both the Swedish speaking and the Finnish speaking students have their own national organisations that are frequently consulted by government policy makers. Add to this that all teachers from kindergarten to university have to have masters degrees with a research component and all belong to a single, and highly influential education union.
There is no merit pay for the 'best' teachers, salary being based on experience and all is achieved for less % of the national GDP than is spent on education in the UK or the US. Teaching is a prestigious career in Finland, though not especially highly paid, and there is great competition among the best graduates to enter the profession each year. The fact that all teacher's have a master degree means that career switch is not difficult at any time for such well qualified people.
As to the private schools when fee charging was made illegal - well most of them chose to become part of the new comprehensive system but 75, most Steiner Waldorf schools, chose to remain independent. They are free to users and are funded partly or mainly by the state and partly by trusts and charities. My guess is that Sudbury or Summerhill type schools would be treated in this way if they existed. This is based on my experience in advising the Swedish speaking national board in Finland on the creation of a student initiated project in 2005/6 whereby more student democracy was introduced into a small network of schools in Helsinki. The senior adviser proudly produced some articles about the school that she had attended 40 years before that had been modelled on Summerhill inspired by the ideas of AS Neill.
When I talk about Finnish education to people in the UK they are amazed that such a system, so different in every way from our own, can work without failing its children. They are even more amazed when I tell them that Finland comes top of the league tables for best education system in Europe and equal best in the world with South Korea and has done since 2001.
(OECD/PISA and now also the Economist Information Unit 'Learning Curve' league tables.) Written by Derry at The Alternative Education Resource Organisation.
|
posted Nov 6, 2012, 4:53 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Dec 13, 2012, 4:03 AM
]
There can be no doubt that reading is the essential foundation of learning. It has been, as such, recognized all throughout history as much as to be evidenced in the following statistics which in themselves hold revolutionary implications for society.
I have divided the information into three parts related to the sources that i have discovered.
SECTION 1: The Basic Premise SECTION 2: The Scholarly Perspective SECTION 3: Furthermore
SECTION 1: The Basic Premise ............................................... At the time of the American Revolution (1775-83), literacy levels in the thirteen colonies were about 90%. This was in an era before mass schooling. It has now been almost 100 years since mass schooling was introduced in North America, but our literacy levels seem to have decreased significantly, according to this CBC news article:
Literacy groups estimate that up to nine million Canadians face some difficulties with reading and writing.
I am sure that there are many factors influencing these statistics, but it seems obvious that our school systems have not done a great job. Less obvious is how literacy is defined, as the same news article states that only 1% of Canadians are actually illiterate. Literacy groups have their own self-preservation agenda as does the industrial school system, so statistics can be thrown about by various parties for their own purposes.
Anyone who wants to think about literacy and schooling today should ask if our enormous public education system is really meeting the needs of our children and our society. As Churchill said, “First we shape our structures, then our structures shape us”
Above text Source:
Wiki-whitewash:
Note: Wikipedia has omitted some data from it's web page which appears show an, on average, growth in literacy skills. However, i draw your attention to the sale of books by Mark Twain, Thomas Paine and his luminaries or even The Websters Dictionary not to mention the proliferation of such books as the Bible through churches pre 1800. You may also wish to try to read newspapers that were printed over 100 years ago to find examples of the great breadth and depth of average language skills. (G)
Here as some newspaper archive links:
The Library of congress: US Newspaper Directory
The Largest Online Newspaper Archive:
.....
SECTION 2: The Scholarly Perspective ..........................................................
Let us consider the claim that 'every man was able to read', in the following article: Literacy in Early America by Jack Lynch Freedom of the press was prominent in the minds of the Founders—the First Amendment’s protection of free expression features in every story of the development of the United States. Freedom of the press, though, counts for little without an audience for what is printed, because only a literate population makes the right to a free press meaningful. That’s why Thomas Jefferson said a free press wasn’t enough to guarantee a healthy democracy. As he wrote to Charles Yancey, a prominent Virginia legislator, in 1816, “Where the press is free, and every man able to read, all is safe.” “Every man able to read.” Early Americans were uncommonly interested in the power of the printed word, and therefore in literacy. George Fisher’s 1748 educational book,The Instructor; or, American Young Man’s Best Companion, said: Tis to ye Press & Pen we Morals owe All we believe & almost all we know. The press and pen played a large part in shaping the character of eighteenth-century America, but only insofar as there were people to read what was written. Literacy is among the keys to understanding the early chapters of the American story, but it is difficult to make claims about it—evidence is hard to find. Because the act of reading itself leaves no traces, historians have to look for indirect evidence. Some of that evidence is clear. A surviving letter or diary in someone’s handwriting, for example, is proof that the writer was literate, and the presence of books in a will is nearly as persuasive. But letters and diaries rarely survive, and about one man in four, and one woman in twenty, left a will. Besides, the wills of people known to be literate don’t necessarily list everything in a household, and books were not always enumerated. Clues like these are valuable when they survive, but they don’t tell us much about the literacy of a larger population. Other kinds of evidence can tell us more about the populace as a whole. Records from circulating libraries, for instance, are revealing—but again, not many have survived, and in any case they cover only those wealthy enough to pay the subscription fees. The number of newspapers or booksellers in a region likewise provides a rough index of the literacy of the population, though it is impossible to translate these into hard figures about the proportion of people who could read. We can assume that those who attended school learned at least the rudiments of writing, but records are spotty, and some people who never went to school became proficient readers: in the 1960s, historians Bernard Bailyn and Lawrence Cremin reminded their colleagues that education was not synonymous with schooling. The best evidence of literacy historians find is the ability to sign legal documents. People were often expected to put their name to deeds, parish registers, and baptismal records in early America, but many still signed these documents with a “mark.” In 1766, the English jurist William Blackstone said in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, “Our illiterate vulgar” make “a cross for their mark when unable to write their names.” A signature in a register shows the writer was literate; a mark proves the opposite. This evidence, though, isn’t entirely reliable. As University of Colorado historian Gloria L. Main says, “Measuring ‘literacy’ is problematical . . . because the term encompasses not one skill but two, each with a separate range of competency”—that is, the ability to read and the ability to write. In the eighteenth century, the two were taught as separate skills. Many people learned the rudiments of reading but never to write—in those cases, a mark in place of a name may give us a false negative about someone’s ability to read. It’s also possible that some people who could not read, or could not read well, learned the alphabet well enough to write their names. In those cases, signing a name gives a false positive. Despite the caveats, we can generalize about patterns of literacy. In 1974, University of Montana scholar Kenneth Lockridge’s groundbreaking book, Literacy in Colonial New England, surveyed evidence from legal records and offered provisional conclusions—“The exercise is bound to be tentative, as it uses a biased sample and an ambiguous measure”—but he made the case that, among white New England men, about 60 percent of the population was literate between 1650 and 1670, a figure that rose to 85 percent between 1758 and 1762, and to 90 percent between 1787 and 1795. In cities such as Boston, the rate had come close to 100 percent by century’s end. Lockridge and his successors showed that literacy was higher in New England and the mid-Atlantic colonies than in the South, and higher in the cities than in the countryside. Traders and shopkeepers were more literate than farmers. They showed that American literacy was high by European standards. As the University of Delaware’s F. W. Grubb wrote in 1990: Of all European countries perhaps only Scotland surpassed America in literacy by 1800. Not only had the European literacy revolution been transplanted to the American periphery during the colonial period, but colonial literacy had somehow leaped past that of northwestern Europe. Such research confirmed a widespread belief in early America itself. In 1800, a magazine calledThe Columbian Phenix and Boston Review reported that “no country on the face of the earth can boast of a larger proportion of inhabitants, versed in the rudiments of science, or fewer, who are not able to read and write their names, than the United States of America.” Perhaps it should have been no surprise, because literacy had been an American obsession since the beginning. As early as 1642, Massachusetts passed a law ordering the selectmen to monitor children’s ability “to read & understand the principles of religion & the capitall lawes of this country.” And though New Englanders were more devoted to public schooling than southerners throughout the eighteenth century, schemes for literacy education were widespread throughout the colonies and the early United States. Thomas Jefferson, for instance, drafted a Virginia Assembly bill in the 1770s, titled “A Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge,” that began: Those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny; and it is believed that the most effectual means of preventing this would be, to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people of large. He proposed a series of public schools at which “reading, writing, and common arithmetick” would be taught to “all the free children, male and female.” Jefferson’s qualification, though, demands our attention: “all the free children” excludes slaves, roughly 40 percent of Virginia’s population. This fact had gone largely unnoticed among historians of literacy, who had grown accustomed to writing about the “near-universal literacy” achieved by the end of the eighteenth century. Beginning in the late 1970s, scholars began to ask whether “universal” was the right term. Since so much of the evidence about literacy came from legal documents, it was necessarily limited to those who could sign such documents—which, at the time, usually meant free white adult males. Scholars have begun asking about the excluded groups. One of the important excluded groups was women. Main has written, “Historians have tended to treat female literacy as a minor postscript to the larger tale of literacy’s spread, but the story for women has important dimensions of its own.” Jefferson’s plan for a public school system included girls, but that was not typical of eighteenth-century education; women’s literacy lagged behind men’s. Lockridge’s figures make the case: while male literacy in New England rose from 60 percent in the late seventeenth century to 90 percent by the early days of the Republic, he estimated female literacy in the same period as rising from 31 percent to 48 percent—roughly half the rate of males. In some ways, though, the story of women’s literacy is more dramatic than men’s. As Bard College’s Joel Perlmann and Boston College’s Dennis Shirley write, “Half the women born around 1730 were illiterate; virtually all the women born around 1810 were literate.” Though women lagged behind men chronologically, their progress came faster. The rise in female literacy highlights changes in social roles. As Main writes, “Traditional female roles did not require” literacy, and powerful prejudices worked to inhibit the public exercise of trained intelligence by women. At some point in the modernizing process, nonetheless, female literacy also began to expand. For this to have occurred, society must first have enlarged its assessment of female capability before liberalizing the scope of permissible feminine activity. Among the factors for this increase was the rising number of women who became schoolteachers, part of a process Perlmann and Shirley called “the feminization of schoolteaching.” If it is difficult to develop reliable evidence about free women’s literacy, it is harder still to make claims about slaves, male and female. Here we are often compelled to rely on evidence left by their owners. Though it is fragmentary and frequently unreliable, when it survives, it can be revealing. George Washington’s will freed all his slaves at his death in 1799. Less familiar is this provision: “The negroes thus bound are (by their masters and mistresses) to be taught to read and write and to be brought up to some useful occupation.” Other slave masters thought it important to educate their enslaved. Many justifications of slavery were based on the premise that introducing “savage” Africans to “civilized” Western society was an act of generosity, giving unenlightened pagans the opportunity of being saved by Christianity. Many owners saw teaching their slaves to read the Bible as a religious obligation. Historian Jeffrey H. Richards of Old Dominion University tells the story of Samuel Davies, the first Presbyterian minister in Piedmont Virginia, who worked to educate slaves throughout the South in the 1750s. Though not the first, he was the most committed and the most successful evangelical preacher who taught slaves to read, convinced that literacy was a precondition of Christian devotion. Davies, for all his belief in the inherent intelligence of slaves and the need to treat them humanely, was no abolitionist. He made the case to white owners that literate slaves would be “better Servants.” And it is true that some owners saw practical advantages in having literate slaves, since they could form a kind of middle management between the free whites and the illiterate field hands. But, as Illinois historian Janet Cornelius says, “literacy was a two-edged sword” for owners: slaves’ literacy might serve to increase the owners’ control, “but resourceful slaves seized the opportunity to expand their own powers.” Many slave-owners were nervous about educating their slaves, because slaves who learned to read and write gained privacy, leisure time, and mobility. A few wrote their own passes and escaped from slavery. Literate slaves also taught others and served as conduits for information within a slave communication network. Literacy could be the first step on the path to freedom. The slaves knew this better than anyone, and there is a tradition of slave narratives in which the acquisition of literacy is central. Ex-slave and English abolitionist Olaudah Equiano wrote that he “had long wished to be able to read and write,” and “took every opportunity to gain instruction.” In his Interesting Narrative he gives a comic scene of the time he first tried to make sense of the mysteries of writing: I had often seen my master and Dick employed in reading; and I had a great curiosity to talk to the books as I thought they did. . . . I have often taken up a book, and have talked to it, and then put my ears to it, when alone, in hopes it would answer me; and I have been very much concerned when I found it remained silent. In the nineteenth century, former Maryland slave, abolitionist, orator, and editor Frederick Douglass described a fascination for “this mystery of reading.” After he got his first few lessons, though, his owner warned the teacher that, “if you learn him now to read, he’ll want to know how to write; and, this accomplished, he’ll be running away with himself.” Douglass’s literacy not only facilitated his own freedom but helped advance the abolitionist cause. For many slaves, learning to read and write was the first opportunity they had to direct the course of their own lives. The eighteenth century gave us nearly universal literacy, but true universality has remained an aspiration rather than a reality. Since plain-English expert Rudolph Flesch published Why Johnny Can’t Read in 1955, educators have been aware that, even in the wealthiest nation in the world, with one of the most extensive systems of education, literacy remains less than universal. Most disturbing are the disparities in literacy rates among different populations, especially among ethnic and racial minorities. Just as many slaves discovered in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, literacy can be a source of power, and never more so than in the twenty-first century. America remains preoccupied with literacy—such has been the case since colonial times. Every presidential administration in decades has devoted resources to improving literacy, especially that of poorly served segments of the population. It’s not merely a matter of improving job prospects for students with poor reading ability; it’s more fundamental than that. As Thomas Jefferson recognized two centuries ago, a democracy is healthy not only where “the press is free,” but where a literate public is able to make that freedom meaningful. Jack Lynch, author of Becoming Shakespeare: The Unlikely Afterlife That Turned a Provincial Playwright into the Bard (Walker & Co., 2007) is a professor of English at Rutgers University. He contributed to the spring 2010 journal “His Integrity Inflexible, and His Justice Exact”: George Wythe Teaches America the Law.”Suggestions for further reading: Janet Cornelius, “‘We Slipped and Learned to Read’: Slave Accounts of the Literacy Process, 1830–1865,” Phylon 44, no. 3 (1983): 171–86.
Robert E. Gallman, “Changes in the Level of Literacy in a New Community of Early America,” Journal of Economic History 48, no. 3 (Sept. 1988): 567–82.
F. W. Grubb, “Growth of Literacy in Colonial America: Longitudinal Patterns, Economic Models, and the Direction of Future Research,” Social Science History 14, no. 4 (Winter 1990): 451–82.
Deborah Keller-Cohen, “Rethinking Literacy: Comparing Colonial and Contemporary America,” Anthropology & Education Quarterly 24, no. 4 (Dec. 1993): 288–307.
Kenneth A. Lockridge, Literacy in Colonial New England (New York, 1974).
E. Jennifer Monaghan, Learning to Read and Write in Colonial America (Amherst, MA, 2005).
Joel Perlmann and Dennis Shirley, “When Did New England Women Acquire Literacy?” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 48, no. 1 (Jan. 1991): 50–67.
Jeffrey H. Richards, “Samuel Davies and the Transatlantic Campaign for Slave Literacy in Virginia,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 111, no. 4 (2003): 333–78.
Source of text:
.....
SECTION 3: Furthermore .....................................
We can also explore this topic through the following original research:
One of the most commonly cited sources on this subject is Lawrence A. Cremin's book American Education:
The Colonial Experience, NY: Harper & Row, 1970. For bibliographic information, see the Library of Congress: http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v3=1&DB=local&CMD=010a+79123923&CNT=10+records+per+page
Cremin was a professor at Columbia University. His research indicated that literacy among adult white males was 70 to 100 percent in Colonial America versus 48 to 74 percent in England. "Education historian Lawrence A. Cremin, who has written several books about American education, has concluded that literacy rates among American whites were as high or higher than in provincial England, and significantly above those in Ireland.
'At a time when estimates of adult male literacy in England ran from 48 percent in the rural western midlands to 74 percent in the towns . . . adult male literacy in the American colonies seems to have run from 70 percent to virtually 100 percent . . . .'
"While educational attainment data were not abundantly collected in early America, noted educational historian Lawrence Cremin infers from his extensive research that U.S. adult male literacy in the eighteenth century was between 70-100 percent (1970, p. 546). He, like Dupont de Nemours, compared U.S. literacy most favorably with England, the closest in attainments, even though England lagged behind with its 50 to 75 percent literacy rate for adult males."
Source:
However, Cremin also asserted that the overall rate of literacy in Colonial America was probably lower than in England because of extensive illiteracy among American blacks and Indians. "...comparing the American colonies first with the English metropolis and then with Ireland (which was colonized by the English at roughly the same time as North America), I would maintain that literacy rates in the colonies on the eve of the Revolution were only slightly below those in England (rates among whites were roughly the same as those in provincial England, but extensive illiteracy among American blacks and Indians lowered the overall American rates) and significantly above those in Ireland, testifying to the vitality and efficacy of American educational institutions.'
Additional sources: "Kenneth Lockridge's study of literacy in colonial New England is relevant here. Lockridge found that, in 1660, 60 percent of New England males signed their wills; it was 70 percent in 1710, 85 percent in 1760, and 90 percent by 1790. He estimates that half of those unable to sign wills could read. Thus, there was practically universal adult male literacy in New England by 1790."
"In 1750 nearly 90 percent of New England women (and virtually all men) could read and write, giving this region a higher literacy rate than any other area in Europe or America."
"This emphasis on universal literacy resulted in New England's having the highest literacy rate in the world at the time. The literacy level in the other colonies, although significantly lower than New England, was higher than England. In England, the opposite trend was at work, leading to stagnation, and possibly even a decrease in literacy among the working classes. Estimates of male literacy levels during the colonial period, while inexact, nonetheless demonstrate this. Immigrants to all of the North American colonies were more literate than the general population of the countries they left. In New England, the literacy rate was over 50 percent during the first half of the Seventeenth century, and it rose to 70 percent by 1710. By the time of the American Revolution, it was around 90 percent, certainly the highest on earth."
"If the ability to write one's name (rather than just making a mark on a document) is evidence of literacy, then, excluding American Indians and African Americans, there was near universal literacy, in excess of 80-90 percent, for both men and women by the end of the eighteenth century (Perlmann & Shirley, 1991). Of course, all such studies of literacy during these early years of the nation depend on samples of adults who do not represent the entire adult population of the colonies and so are contentious on the basis of sampling bias."
Search strategy: "literacy in" colonial america "revolutionary war" "literacy rate" colonies "literacy rate" "in england" "adult * literacy" colonies cremin, colonial literacy
Source of Quotes:
Any which way you cut the cake it is evident that there has a monumental and continental shift in the way we approach literacy in society. All of the evidence points to a decline in this essential skill and it is left to the open interpretation of the reader who may assume, or even reason, how and why this has been the case. (G)
Additional Information which may be of use:
Examples of Modern problems with literacy:
BBC NEWS - Literacy progress has stalled http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17368311
The 'Dismal picture' of adult literacy in UK http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jan/29/literacy-numeracy-skills
English children's literacy levels 'among the worst in the developed world' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-496985/English-childrens-literacy-levels-worst-developed-world.html
Illiterate Britain: One in five adults struggling to read and write http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2122007/Illiterate-Britain-One-adults-struggling-read-write-t-use-chequebook.html
Read all about it: Britain's shameful literacy crisis http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/26/britains-shameful-literacy-crisis
Trends in standards of literacy in the United Kingdom http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000000650.htm
Struggling pupils don't catch up, data shows http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16721884
Two Examples of Questionable Statistics:
List of countries by literacy rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate
Literacy & The State of The Nation http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0000/3816/FINAL_Literacy_State_of_the_Nation_-_30_March_2010.pdf
Extra facts, figures, interesting stuff and images:
Historical Images Online:
A few additional statistics to support his information can be found here:
|
posted Oct 19, 2012, 6:39 AM by Graham William Hendrey
[
updated Oct 19, 2012, 6:52 AM
]
The Shakespeare authorship question is the argument about whether someone other than William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon wrote the works attributed to him. Anti-Stratfordians—a collective term for adherents of the various alternative-authorship theories—say that Shakespeare of Stratford was a front to shield the identity of the real author or authors, who for some reason did not want or could not accept public credit. Although the idea has attracted much public interest, all but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief and for the most part disregard it except to rebut or disparage the claims. Shakespeare's authorship was first questioned in the middle of the 19th century, when adulation of Shakespeare as the greatest writer of all time had become widespread. Shakespeare's biography, particularly his humble origins and obscure life, seemed incompatible with his poetic eminence and his reputation for genius, arousing suspicion that Shakespeare might not have written the works attributed to him. The controversy has since spawned a vast body of literature, and more than 70 authorship candidates have been proposed, including Francis Bacon, the 6th Earl of Derby, Christopher Marlowe, and the 17th Earl of Oxford. Supporters of alternative candidates argue that theirs is the more plausible author, and that William Shakespeare lacked the education, aristocratic sensibility, or familiarity with the royal court that they say is apparent in the works. Those Shakespeare scholars who have responded to such claims hold that biographical interpretations of literature are unreliable in attributing authorship, and that the convergence of documentary evidence used to support Shakespeare's authorship—title pages, testimony by other contemporary poets and historians, and official records—is the same used for all other authorial attributions of his era. No such direct evidence exists for any other candidate, and Shakespeare's authorship was not questioned during his lifetime or for centuries after his death. Despite the scholarly consensus, a relatively small but highly visible and diverse assortment of supporters, including prominent public figures, have questioned the conventional attribution. They work for acknowledgment of the authorship question as a legitimate field of scholarly inquiry and for acceptance of one or another of the various authorship candidates. The arguments presented by anti-Stratfordians share several characteristics. They attempt to disqualify William Shakespeare as the author and usually offer supporting arguments for a substitute candidate. They often postulate some type of conspiracy that protected the author's true identity, which they say explains why no documentary evidence exists for their candidate and why the historical record supports Shakespeare's authorship. Most anti-Stratfordians say that the Shakespeare canon exhibits such breadth of learning and intimate knowledge of the Elizabethan and Jacobean court and politics that no one but a highly educated nobleman or court insider could have written them. Apart from literary references, critical commentary and acting notices, the available data regarding Shakespeare's life consist of mundane personal details such as vital records of his baptism, marriage and death, tax records, lawsuits to recover debts, and real estate transactions. In addition, no document attests that he received an education. No personal letters or literary manuscripts certainly written by Shakespeare of Stratford survive. To sceptics, this suggests the profile of a person who differs markedly from the playwright and poet. Some prominent public figures, including Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, Helen Keller, Henry James, Sigmund Freud, Charlie Chaplin and Orson Welles, have found the arguments against Shakespeare’s authorship persuasive, and their endorsements are an important element in many anti-Stratfordian arguments. At the core of the argument is the nature of acceptable evidence used to attribute works to their authors. Anti-Stratfordians rely on what they designate as circumstantial evidence: similarities between the characters and events portrayed in the works and the biography of their preferred candidate; literary parallels with the known works of their candidate; and hidden codes and cryptographic allusions in Shakespeare's own works or texts written by contemporaries. By contrast, academic Shakespeareans and literary historians rely on documentary evidence in the form of title page attributions, government records such as the Stationers' Register and the Accounts of the Revels Office, and contemporary testimony from poets, historians, and those players and playwrights who worked with him, as well as modern stylometric studies. All these converge to confirm William Shakespeare's authorship. These criteria are the same as those used to credit works to other authors and are accepted as the standard methodology for authorship attribution.
Article Source:
Essential Additional Information:
1. ‘Anonymous’ and the Shakespeare conspiracy theory that wouldn’t die
2. Shakespeare's 'co-author' named by Oxford scholars
3. Frontline & The Shakespeare Mystery
4. Shakespeare Conspiracy Theories
5. Shakespeare trust attacks new 'conspiracy theory' film Anonymous
6. The Great Shakespeare Conspiracy
8. Who wrote Shakespeare's plays – and does it matter?
9. William Shakespeare: The Identity / Authorship Problem
10. Shakespeare Conspiracy: The Book |
|
