Daily Archives: January 11, 2017

Obama signs massive land grab in Nevada and Utah near Bundy ranch, setting up another potential clash as he leaves office

Image: Obama signs massive land grab in Nevada and Utah near Bundy ranch, setting up another potential clash as he leaves office

(NaturalNews) If you haven’t figured out by now that President Obama is doing all he can to sabotage and trip up President-elect Donald J. Trump before he takes office, then you’re not paying attention. As time runs out on his presidency, he is doing everything he can to make Trump’s first years in office as chaotic and treacherous as possible.

To wit, Obama just signed an executive order designating a massive amount of land in Nevada and Utah as the Golden Butte National Monument—a portion of which just happens to be near lands owned and operated by Cliven Bundy, who, along with supporters, engaged in an armed standoff with Bureau of Land Management personnel just a few years ago over long-claimed grazing rights for Bundy’s cattle. And the grab does include land that the Bundy’s have used to graze their cattle.

Is Obama exacting some payback, while at the same time attempting to provoke an armed incident which he would certainly use for his own political advantage while disrupting the incoming Trump administration? It sure looks that way.

As reported by Intellihub, the massive new land grab includes the very site of the Bundy Ranch standoff, in addition to land very close to the Bundy Ranch itself. “With this move Obama has possibly triggered another armed standoff while also heading off any moves set to be made by incoming President Donald Trump,” the site reported.

Administration says environment, Native Americans prompted action but, as usual, that’s not true

According to a fact sheet published by the White House, Obama’s order designates “two new national monuments, protecting sacred sites, spectacular scenery, and important natural and cultural resources in the desert landscapes of southeastern Utah and southern Nevada. The creation of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah and the Gold Butte National Monument in Nevada follow years of robust public input from tribes, local elected officials, and diverse stakeholders, and draws from legislation introduced in Congress.”

The fact sheet also acknowledged that the radical Obama has also taken away more land from states and the people than any previous president, as if that’s something to be proud of. Add to that the fact that the federal government already owned more than 85 percent of all lands in Nevada, while owning a sizeable portion of Utah’s land as well.

Intellihub reported that at present, it’s difficult to know actually how much land Obama just grabbed, under the phony guise of “environmental protection” and deference to “Native American tribes.”

In an interview, Jason Vantatenhove, national media director for Oathkeepers and founder of Ex-Media, told Natural News there were several political implications to the grab.

“This will wind up in the political arena,” he said, adding that in reality, unlike what the White House is claiming, there are actually a number of “indigenous tribes fighting against it,” as well as local political leaders.

Vantatenhove said the administration’s lie about taking action on behalf of Native Americans to preserve their land is par for the course. He said he’s learned that over the years, having been at the first Bundy standoff as well as other citizen actions against the federal government, including the Malheur standoff in Oregon in January and, more recently, the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota.

Follow the money?

At present, he told Natural News, there are no plans for armed militia groups to take up positions near the Bundy Ranch, and there have been no moves by federal agencies to mark off the new federal preserves.

But that could change at a moment’s notice. And he did say that some groups had put calls out to their members to prepare to move to the area.

“This Golden Butte area doesn’t include the Bundy Ranch but it does include a good portion of their grazing allotment, where the original legal conflict began” in 2014, Vantatenhove said. And that could certainly inflame the issue because the Bundy’s have invested a lot of money in the infrastructure there, including cultivating and developing water sources.

Cliven, along with sons Ryan and Ammon, remain in jail on charges stemming from the Malheur standoff.

Vantatenhove also speculated that there could be a financial reason for the land grab. He noted that the Golden Butte region contained one of the country’s largest gold reserves, and is also home to several deposits of very valuable minerals.

“Just follow the money,” he said. “You look at Malheur, it’s the same thing. It’s got one of the world’s richest deposits” of uranium, which is vital in the manufacture of nuclear energy and nuclear missiles, as well as gold, he said.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for Natural News and News Target, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.







Obama’s EPA to approve dramatic increase in limits on radiation exposure allowable in public drinking water

Image: Water crisis: Obama’s EPA to approve dramatic increase in limits on radiation exposure allowable in public drinking water

(NaturalNews) As one of its closing acts before leaving the stage, the Obama administration plans to relax EPA guidelines regarding maximum allowable radiation levels in the nation’s drinking water, increasing them to levels thousands of times above current legal limits.

A federal lawsuit filed by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) led to the release of documents confirming details of the planned “Protective Action Guides” (PAGs) to be implemented, which include the new radically higher maximum allowable radiation levels.

PEER has accused the EPA of jeopardizing public health in favor of public relations.

From a PEER press release dated December 22, 2016:

“Following Japan’s Fukushima meltdown in 2011, EPA’s claims that no radioactivity could reach the U.S. at levels of concern were contradicted by its own rainwater measurements showing contamination from Fukushima throughout the U.S. well above Safe Drinking Water Act limits. In reaction, EPA prepared new limits 1000s of times higher than even the Fukushima rainwater because ‘EPA experienced major difficulties conveying to the public that the detected levels…were not of immediate concern for public health.’”

EPA kept details of new guidelines a secret

Although the EPA released its proposed PAGs for public comment, it conveniently neglected to include “all but four of the 110 radionuclides covered, and refused to reveal how much they were above Safe Drinking Water Act limits.”

Only after the PEER lawsuit forced the EPA to release the pertinent documents did it become clear how much the levels were to be increased. Even so, more than 60,000 people had already left comments in opposition of the proposed guidelines on the agency’s website.

Current drinking water radiation limits are defined under the Safe Drinking Water Act, established in the 1970s.

The documents obtained by PEER revealed that the EPA plans to raise maximum allowable limits of iodine-131, cobalt-60 and calcium-45 to more than 10,000 times the levels allowed under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Others would be hundreds or thousands of times higher under the new guidelines.

The agency’s justification for withholding the new proposed limits from the public until after the proposal had been adopted was that it wanted to “avoid confusion.”

The EPA deliberately hid the details not only from the public, but also from some of its own staff, according to PEER:

“The documents also reveal that EPA’s radiation division even hid the new concentrations from other divisions of EPA that were critical of the proposal, requiring repeated efforts to get them to even be disclosed internally.”

Even the George W. Bush administration’s attempt to introduce higher limits – a plan that was ultimately withdrawn – was modest in comparison to the levels proposed under the Obama EPA.

On December 1, outgoing EPA administrator Gina McCarthy gave final approval to all of the proposed PAGs – except for the drinking water standards. It’s unclear at this point whether she will actually approve the water section before leaving office, or whether she will leave the issue to the next administration to deal with.

Voice your opposition (before it’s too late)

There appears to be a good chance McCarthy will approve the rest of the PAGs before the changing of the guard, and there is still time to make your opposition to the proposals known.

It’s important to understand that higher allowable radiation limits will take pressure off the nuclear and fracking industries as well, which may be the real motivation for the establishment of the new guidelines – with Fukushima merely serving as an excuse to do so.

“The Dr. Strangelove wing of EPA does not want this information shared with many of its own experts, let alone the public,” said PEER executive director Jeff Ruch. “This is a matter of public health that should be promulgated in broad daylight rather than slimed through in the witching hours of a departing administration.”

If you would like to voice your opposition to the EPA plan, click here.






Processed fries with the Gospel? McDonald’s now stationed in the Vatican


(NaturalNews) In what some are already calling an unholy alliance, McDonald’s has just opened a new restaurant located – of all places – in the Vatican.

Yes, the golden arches have popped up next to St. Peter’s Basilica, and many people are unhappy about the fact, arguing that the fast food giant has no place in such a spiritually significant and historic setting.

Critics of the Vatican’s agreement to lease the property – located about 100 yards from the Vatican State – include high-ranking members of the clergy.

From Vice:

“When plans for the McDonald’s, known as the McVatican, were announced in October, Cardinal Elio Sgreccia told La Repubblica that the restaurant was a ‘disgrace’ that served ‘food that I would never eat.’ He added that the money spent on renting the real estate, for which McDonald’s is shelling out roughly $31,000 per month, should be used to help the poor instead.”


‘McVatican’ offends cultural, culinary purists

Placing a McDonald’s in such a location seems incongruous on so many levels. It does reek of blasphemy to open such a modernist monstrosity next to some of the world’s most revered architectural marvels, and to even consider serving Big Macs and McNuggets in the culinary paradise that is Rome should be classified as a punishable offense.

“It’s a business decision that ignores the culinary tradition of Roman cuisine,” said the cardinal.

Others echoed Cardinal Sgreccia’s sentiments, including a citizens group which is protesting the McDonald’s opening over its potentially negative impact on the cultural ambiance of the area.

From The Guardian:

“The Committee for the Protection of Borgo was the first group to raise the alarm over the proposed restaurant. It said the fast food chain would distort the area and inflict a ‘decisive blow on an already wounded animal’ given the abundance of mini-markets and stands selling religious trinkets in the area.”

In fact, the area around the Vatican is already home to several fast food outlets. There’s a McDonald’s near the Vatican Library and another one 200 yards away from that one (with a Burger King located in-between).

What makes this McDonald’s unique is that it is located on Vatican-owned property – which, incidentally, formerly housed a religious bookstore. Critics say the property should be leased to an entity more in line with the Catholic Church’s mission, or at least one that reflects the neighborhood’s cultural heritage.

Co-branding scheme in the works?

But in many ways, it’s a perfect marriage; McDonald’s and the Catholic Church have a lot in common. Both are found in every corner of the globe, and both generate staggering amounts of money – mostly collected from poor people.

It’s not hard to imagine a co-branding scheme – perhaps priests could begin offering a supersized option for the wafers and wine distributed during communion? Maybe the Mickey D sign could list how many souls are being saved along with the number of hamburgers being served?

And maybe a little product placement in the Bible wouldn’t hurt, either – how about a miracle of the loaves and McFishes?

Seriously, it shouldn’t be such a surprise that the two entities are now connected – they both operate at a global level and their goals truly aren’t so disparate. Both make it their mission to reach as many people as possible, and both depend on income primarily gleaned from the lower economic strata of the population.

It may not be long before one can obtain physical and spiritual sustenance under one roof – or arch, as the case may be – in every major city in the world. This may mark the beginning of a long and prosperous partnership between two financial powerhouses.

Imagine how many billions could be served and saved at the same time …







Fluoride Is Poison: A Quick Demo (Video)


Published on Apr 24, 2012

EDIT: Wrote a letter to the editor of my local newspaper on why we should end water fluoridation in my city, you can check it out and borrow for your city here: http://www.truthstreammedia.com/post/…

We are forcibly being medicated with fluoridation of our tap water in cities across the US, even though fluoride is a non-pharmaceutical, chemical waste and the main ingredient in rat poisons and many pesticides. This video doesn’t even go into the myriad studies that have been done to show the harmful effects of fluoridated water on every system in your body. Instead, I just tried to look at this issue from a logical justification standpoint. If you swallow toothpaste, you are urged on the tube itself to call the Poison Control Center immediately, but somehow if you drink eight glasses of fluoridated water, it’s fine? Where is the logic in that? There’s information out there to show that the amount of fluoride in a serving of toothpaste is the same as a glass of fluoridated water (if the water doesn’t have MORE)!

Continuing on that logic train, how much of the water you drink even comes in contact with your teeth where cavities form for very long anyway? If you really want fluoride for your teeth, toothpaste is readily available for a dollar or two at any grocery or drug store. It is absolutely unnecessary to drink it.

The bottom line: fluoridated tap water makes no sense. There’s a reason Hitler was fluoridating water in Nazi concentration camps, and I’m pretty sure it wasn’t because he was overly concerned about their dental health. He added fluoride to pacify the prisoners and keep them docile. And now we’re drinking it? Think about it.

To learn more about fluoride and what you can do about it, check out http://www.fluoridealert.org where you can also take action by writing to your local representatives about the dangers of fluoridated water. People in cities all over America have petitioned their reps to get fluoride out of their water and some have won the battle—you can’t win if you don’t try!


4 Questions That Will Make You Question Reality (Video)




Published on Jan 4, 2017

Reality – what does that word mean to you?

Narration provided by JaM Advertising New Mexico http://www.tasteofjam.com

As well as forming a personality type out of a random assortment of chemicals, the human brain is also capable of creating its own subjective social realities, by perceiving events and individuals in a way which pleases it the most. This next entry is a little lighter than the rest because my brain is tired and I’m trying to figure out how biased and racist all my relatives were over Christmas.Elon Musk knows a thing or two about technology, at least I hope he does; has anyone actually looked inside a Space-X rocket or a Tesla car? There could be just a bunch of cats taped together in there for all we know.

Walmart secretly hides $76 billion in overseas tax havens after pillaging American businesses


(NaturalNews) Just because Walmart figured out a way to sell consumer products for cheaper than your local mom and pop shop, effectively putting it out of business, doesn’t mean that this multinational corporation is evil — or so goes the claim by many a radical capitalist in defense of one of the world’s most hated businesses. Too bad this isn’t actually the case, though, as it has now come to light that part of Walmart’s takeover strategy involves hiding its billions of dollars in profits in offshore tax havens to avoid paying the exorbitant taxes otherwise incurred by small businesses.

More than $76 billion worth of Walmart’s assets, according to a new report, are held overseas in trusts and other crafty financial instruments, shielding the company from its U.S. tax burden. A shocking 90% of Walmart’s overseas assets are currently being held in either Luxembourg or the Netherlands, the former of which doesn’t even have a single Walmart store within its borders.

By manipulating its holdings into at least 78 offshore subsidiaries and branches, more than 30 of which were created just in the past six years, Walmart has avoided paying more than $3.5 billion in income taxes during this time, according to research compiled by the United Food & Commercial Workers International Union. Walmart units in Luxembourg alone, where the company doesn’t have any stores, somehow reported $1.3 billion in profits between 2010 and 2013, for which it paid taxes at a rate of less than 1%.

According to Bloomberg Business, every single one of Walmart’s roughly 3,500 stores located in China, Central America, the U.K., Brazil, Japan, South Africa and Chile are owned by special units in the British Virgin Islands, Curacao and Luxembourg, all of which are tax havens. Such information was gathered from publicly available documents filed by Walmart and its many subsidiaries in countries around the world.

Walmart, Apple, Amazon and many others gain upper hand over small business by sheltering assets overseas

The corporate income tax in the U.S. is said to hover around 35%, which is quite the pretty penny in terms of its cut of business revenues. And while there’s substantial evidence to show that a federal income tax isn’t even constitutionally legitimate in the first place, small businesses fighting the Walmart giant and other multinational corporate predators don’t have the luxury of dodging it like this.

Consequently, Walmart, Apple, Amazon and many others are able to gain an upper hand by avoiding these taxes, which isn’t at all fair in a supposedly free marketplace. And to make matters worse, Walmart is among the worst corporations when it comes to employee pay and benefits, hence its reputation as a predator and an exploiter.

“This report is continuing evidence that everybody has been engaging in cross-border tax avoidance,” stated Stephen E. Shay, a professor at Harvard Law School and former deputy assistant secretary for international tax affairs at the Obama Treasury Department, to Bloomberg Business.

According to the report, Walmart’s offshore earnings have ballooned substantially since 2008, escalating from $10.7 billion to $23.3 billion. For this and other reasons, the group Americans for Tax Fairness is calling on the European Union to conduct an investigation into Walmart’s overseas tax shelters, particularly in Luxembourg, to see if the company is profiting from illegal state aid.

You can read the group’s report on Walmart here:

“Typically, the primary purpose for a corporation to set up subsidiaries in tax havens where it has little to no business operations and few, if any, employees is to pay little, if any, taxes and to maintain financial secrecy,” says Americans for Tax Fairness.

Previously, Natural News has also reported on how Walmart, along with Costco and other Western supermarkets, profit from slave labor in Asia.

Sources for this article include: