Information has come to light which substantiates concern that something funky is going on with our water.
Janet C. Phelan
Driving up to the pumps, I have a distinct experience of entering “No Man’s Land.” Gas is up over three bucks in Oregon and shows no sign of ever coming down. It strikes me that this feels like an affront, a virtual assault —that the price of gas is actually attacking my ever-diminishing financial reserves, and laying waste that green stuff which constitutes my nest egg.
A confluence of forces are amassing at this point in time, which are keeping folks home much more than in past years. One is the price of gas. Another is the plunge of the dollar, world-wide. My intended trip to Jerusalem and points beyond will be deferred to a later date, for this reason alone.
Other economic realities buttress the decision to stick around home plate. Job insecurity coupled with the spectre of possible home foreclosure amp up the sense of financial anxiety. The net effect of these conditions is that Americans are more home-bound. Like so many other Americans, I look anxiously to the political horizon to see a sign of change but see only a changing of the guard as our collective economic future marches towards a dark terminus.
At the same time that the economic realities are keeping us close to home, the government is amassing campaigns, in cities across the country, to get us back on tap water and off bottled water.
The proponents of tap cite a number of reasons that they prefer tap to bottled–drinking bottled water contributes to the emission of greenhouse gases (because the water has to be transported ); the increasing amount of plastic bottles in landfills; the sapping of aquifers by bottled; and that selling water guts efforts to make safe drinking water a basic human right. There is increasing concern that chemicals leaching from plastic bottles into the contained water may, in fact, be carcinogenic.
Numerous reports recently peppered the main stream press alluding to high bacteria levels in bottled water and a low fluoride level in bottled water. Apparently, some people still believe that fluoride is good for you.
The American’s Bulletin published an expose back in 2007, citing a cover-up involving a double line water system and the planned use of water as a weapon, authorized under Section 817 of the U.S. Patriot Act. Section 817, The Expansion of the Biological Weapons Statute, is authorizing the use of toxins (poisons) and delivery systems (which is weapons terminology) apparently against citizens of the United States of America. It is the contention of this reporter that 817 is an “umbrella” statute, authorizing a number of poison projects, including, but not limited to, the water weapon.
One of the diabolical aspects of this particular city water project is its ability to selectively hone in on its targets. We live in a melting pot, with city council members living next door to rabbis who are living next door to drug dealers who are living next door to political activists.
In order for there to be a “clean sweep” and the intended populations removed from the planet, there would need to be a “surgical,” incisive attack on the target populations, leaving the non-targets unscathed. The water weapon, with its system of double lines and remote controlled valves, provides the necessary selectivity to accomplish the aims of those dead-set on removing certain elements.
And in order for the deployment of this weapon to gain maximum effect, the intended victims should be at home, not gallivanting in France or jet setting across country.