Excellent news!

[tyler]

If this is true then it is a magnificent breakthough for mankind and a setback for the evil ones.......
http://www.rense.com/general86/aurop.htm

[decim]

Trade war?

Sounds dandy, when does it start?

[ex sheep]

Now that IS a bit of good news, and its so easy to stop, just stop dumping fluoride into the water supply. http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h276/DianneOnly/clap2.gif

[godspeed]

sounds like good news to me........alas we have some sensible soul out there who knows how to say............NO

[drhemp]

If it's true then that is indeed excellent news; great find Tyler.

Sorry to put a dampener on this, but I've noticed anything horrible that comes from Europe gets embraced with full enthusiasm from our Government, whereas anything good gets ignored.

They still have my DNA and fingerprints on their database even though I have never been charged with any crime and the European Courts told the Government they cannot keep the DNA and fingerprints of innocent people who have been arrested.

[freedom1st]

If it's true then that is indeed excellent news; great find Tyler.

Sorry to put a dampener on this, but I've noticed anything horrible that comes from Europe gets embraced with full enthusiasm from our Government, whereas anything good gets ignored.

They still have my DNA and fingerprints on their database even though I have never been charged with any crime and the European Courts told the Government they cannot keep the DNA and fingerprints of innocent people who have been arrested.

We British are sitting on the fence when it comes to Europe, we're not really committed at the moment and if the conservatives get in we may come out altogether. Now, I'm in two minds about Europe: on the one hand it seems like they're the enemy and they are looking at bringing in Codex for example. But on the other hand they do tend to come out with things that seem to be contrary to what the ptb want, eg. GM foods and now removal of fluoride. Also the German Chancellor often has a go, like when she criticised the central banks and the UK/US handling of the economy (other things as well which I can't quite remember at the moment). I know I've often found myself thinking Hmmmmm?

[steevo]

So does this mean that they will not be fluoridating our water supply ?

[gilly]

I'm confused. :confused:

I thought only bad things came from the European government.

[drhemp]

So does this mean that they will not be fluoridating our water supply ?

Well like I said, our Government they only tends to take notice of Europe if it is a nasty directive that will be to the detriment of the British people.

As mentioned above, Codex being a prime example, however, are you aware that Codex was deemed illegal by the European Courts and they simply ignored the judgement and carried on anyway, as in their eyes the profits of Big Pharma are more important than either the rule of law or freedom of health care to European citizens or indeed the health of the populations in general.

[steevo]

Well like I said, our Government they only tends to take notice of Europe if it is a nasty directive that will be to the detriment of the British people.

As mentioned above, Codex being a prime example, however, are you aware that Codex was deemed illegal by the European Courts and they simply ignored the judgement and carried on anyway, as in their eyes the profits of Big Pharma are more important than either the rule of law or freedom of health care to European citizens or indeed the health of the populations in general.


oh shit :(
so there is really never any good news coming out of Europe then. We knew that anyway didnt we :cool:

[decim]

This from the article is the real reason behind it, Trade.

"The decision effectively bans all processed food products from countries such as the USA, Australia and New Zealand, unless they can be positively proven to have been prepared using only water that was not fluoridated."

[drhemp]

oh shit :(
so there is really never any good news coming out of Europe then. We knew that anyway didnt we :cool:

Well I'd rather good things like this come out of Europe than nothing at all, I just wouldn't hold my breath, as we know this lot have a track record of ignoring the rule of law and doing whatever the fuck they like regardless of what anyone actually thinks in the country.

[texdallas]

Well I'd rather good things like this come out of Europe than nothing at all, I just wouldn't hold my breath, as we know this lot have a track record of ignoring the rule of law and doing whatever the fuck they like regardless of what anyone actually thinks in the country.

And there's the rub will it be implemented don't hold your breath

[ex sheep]

We British are sitting on the fence when it comes to Europe, we're not really committed at the moment and if the conservatives get in we may come out altogether. Now, I'm in two minds about Europe: on the one hand it seems like they're the enemy and they are looking at bringing in Codex for example. But on the other hand they do tend to come out with things that seem to be contrary to what the ptb want, eg. GM foods and now removal of fluoride. Also the German Chancellor often has a go, like when she criticised the central banks and the UK/US handling of the economy (other things as well which I can't quite remember at the moment). I know I've often found myself thinking Hmmmmm?

The British may think that they are sitting on the fence, but really we are already in Europe, as it sits at the moment technically they can bypass the next election due in 2010, here is a good look at how much we are in already
http://www.eutruth.org.uk/

[yozhik]

Let's not be too pessimistic ... this ruling is actually very good news.

From the first line of the article;
Fluoridated water must be treated as a medicine, and cannot be used to prepare foods!

Why is this good news?
Because even if it is "all about trade", the ruling has defined fluoridation as a medical process.
This is key; Human Rights declarations, treaties, etc forbid enforced medication.

By now defining fluoridation as medicine, it now places fluoridated water into the realm of "enforced medication", which is a breach of International Human Rights.

[bob_jones]

The EU did stop GM and a load of dodgy chemicals too.

I suspect the EU is a nicer place than we are told, like Soviet Russia was not so bad after Stalin had gone.

And the whole NWO depopulation agenda is a but Walter Mitty, the bio-warfare scientists are not getting as many as the busses at the moment.

And the clique is a gay club at Bohemien Grove.

And they all fancy themselves as Anglo-Saxons.

So realy they may be in a sort of meglomania, with delusions of power they do not realy have.

I suspect positive racism will come out of it.

The EU will say..."Fine de-populate the globe. But not our people, do China and Africa".

And they will say why us?

And there will be competition to avoid de-population.

In fact if it get's nasty that might be the one thing that will cause it.

Not these silly food and germ plans they toss over.

Glad about the fluoride, I talk to people in Parliament about it.

They filibustered compulsory tap water fluridation off the agenda for years in the 1970s or 1980s.

They are not keen now either by my probe.

And you can't make baby food with fluorodated water as it damages teeth with a condition called fluordiosis.

But are people more docile in Manchester than Cardiff?

I doubt it stops mass protest as hoped anyway.

[bob_jones]

Let's not be too pessimistic ... this ruling is actually very good news.

From the first line of the article;


Why is this good news?
Because even if it is "all about trade", the ruling has defined fluoridation as a medical process.
This is key; Human Rights declarations, treaties, etc forbid enforced medication.

By now defining fluoridation as medicine, it now places fluoridated water into the realm of "enforced medication", which is a breach of International Human Rights.

This is good news.

But I don't think the mental health system has heard that enforced medication is not allowed.

And medication is a camoflage word anyway.

Chemical torutres to extract recantations, like the Spanish Inqisition.

But what do they expect?

[mrmoney]

Yes, this story is true and so, it looks like we won't be having our brains rotted with fluoride.

All we have to do now is get aspartame outlawed.

[bornfree]

This isnt new

It goes back to 2005 & further.

http://www.ukcaf.org/

http://www.ukcaf.org/files/medication_with_intent.pdf

http://www.ukcaf.org/files/ecj_ruling_on_functional_foods.pdf

Please bookmark the above site. There will be a big announcement in the next few days.

The tireless efforts of Douglas Cross & his wife have been going on for 20 years for the benefit of all. I had the pleasure of speaking to them both today at length & was honoured & humbled by their warmth & knowledge.

Their website is actually paid for by british councils against flouridation! Yes folks you heard it here first! British councils actually working for the benefit of the public :p

Andy 'burn em' Burnham hmmm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5515269/Health-Secretary-calls-for-universal-water-fluoridation.html

then

http://www.thisishampshire.net/news/4437364.New_health_secretary_quits_fluoridation_po st/

This idiot is supposedly pro-EU, who's courts over-rule the UK & ireland's highest courts. Yet the EU's ruling is being ignored by both irish & british governments. At their peril i think

[decim]

A cynic knows these people Always have at least two angles to everything.
I have yet to see a benefit for my country being in the eu.

There's the reason they tell us, then there's the truth.

[arty2000]

oh shit :(
so there is really never any good news coming out of Europe then. We knew that anyway didnt we :cool:

chin up...you have monty python,benny hill and tada dr.who:)

[decim]

You're 30 years out of date with the first 2 there.

chin up...you have monty python,benny hill and tada dr.who:)

[arty2000]

You're 30 years out of date with the first 2 there.

reruns:cool:

[cruise4]

If they hadn't been putting it in we wouldn't need no ruling. Medical and Codex make me highly suspicious and i'd rather they all just get lost whatever.

[the nine]

I'm confused. :confused:

I thought only bad things came from the European government.

my thought too..
good ol' europe, we are so lucky to have them watching over us..maybe we should get rid of our 'fixed' government system and embrace a european superstate..it could be super fantasic!?!

[windeyaho]

If this is true then it is a magnificent breakthough for mankind and a setback for the evil ones.......
http://www.rense.com/general86/aurop.htm

Snopes-Urban Legends says nothing to discredit this link and the document therein. I have seen youtube vids that also seem to substantiate this change in direction.

PLEASE let this come to the USA. Bushing your teeth with alternative pastes and baking soda does little to filter this ugly chemical from your system if you have to rinse and spit with flouridated water. Thank goodness I'm on a well - however wells remain valid only if they are "grandfathered in" where I live. New ones garner intimidation and are suppressed by complicated restrictions-you are even told you can "only" hook up to the "rural" water service [chlorinated and flouridated] if you set up a new residence.

It takes 9 blasted YEARS to get flouride leeched out of your system. I refuse to use all of the "free" impregnated floss, brushes and pastes that the dentist pushes, nor will I get a flouride "treatment". He thinks I'm a nutter. :rolleyes: -do I get a choice? Peanut or Pecan, now with the blight under control, maybe I can opt for Chestnut.....

[ozpixie]

They might not be flouridating the water but they are adding it to a surprising number of medicines and foods. Please be careful.

[wise haven]

If they hadn't been putting it in we wouldn't need no ruling. Medical and Codex make me highly suspicious and i'd rather they all just get lost whatever.

This is probably paving the way for a dracononian Codex ruling. Vitamins will probably be ruled as medicine and therefore be banned as supplements or fortification in foods.
Next step will be the requirement of a pr:(escription for supplements or vitamins and the accompanying bureaucratic nightmare that will effectively put the smaller companies out of business resulting in big pharma having monopoly control over price and product standard.

[marpat]

Hold on, people keep saying everything is run by the illuminati, all government control, etc. yet here is a document that would appear to go contrary to what people are claiming to be the plans of the illuminati (flouridating water), coming from what would be considered one of their own organisations.

I think documents like this are proof that the illuminati doe not have abosulte control over all governing bodies. To say they do is obviously false if this document is true.

[ex sheep]

Hold on, people keep saying everything is run by the illuminati, all government control, etc. yet here is a document that would appear to go contrary to what people are claiming to be the plans of the illuminati (flouridating water), coming from what would be considered one of their own organisations.

I think documents like this are proof that the illuminati doe not have abosulte control over all governing bodies. To say they do is obviously false if this document is true.

What a load of rubbish.
This is one thing that appears to be slipping through their net, and you pick on it, typical.
How can anyone that is remotely awake say that the illuminati don't control everything.

On the other hand you would like us to believe there is no conspiracy, and that we are completely deluding ourselves, yeah, right. You are on a forum that is here because of the conspiracy and you are in the extreme minority, I wonder why you are really here, emm, let me think, oh yes, next thing you will be telling us is that the new vaccine is safe, well you will probably be first in the queue for it.

[decim]

If they ban aspartame, mobile phones,(unless full protection paid for by the government or phone companies, for our homes & bodies is provided) pesticides, plastics for food or water, inorganic fertilizers, manufactured food additives & preservatives, abusive use of animal medications on farm animals, unnecessary vaccines, pharmaceutical conglomerates, foreign companies siphoning all wealth, without paying anything back to the countries they make their billions from, then I might believe 'they' are not all bad.

[yozhik]

This is probably paving the way for a dracononian Codex ruling. Vitamins will probably be ruled as medicine and therefore be banned as supplements or fortification in foods.
Next step will be the requirement of a pr:(escription for supplements or vitamins and the accompanying bureaucratic nightmare that will effectively put the smaller companies out of business resulting in big pharma having monopoly control over price and product standard.

No probably about it.
Its written in and will be implemented.
Vitamins are prescription only by (I think) 2010 when Codex Alimentarius is brought in.

[the nine]

No probably about it.
Its written in and will be implemented.
Vitamins are prescription only by (I think) 2010 when Codex Alimentarius is brought in.

is this in the UK too, Yoz?

[mephibosheth]

Full article:

http://www.ukcaf.org/european_court_ruling_spells_an_end_to_fluoridatio .html

Folks, this doesn't strike me as 'good news'. Look at what they're saying. They're NOT saying that flouridation is bad and harmful, but rather, that it is 'medicinal', and thus must be regulated as medicine, not food.



Functional drinks are those products that have two different purposes – for example, nutrition and exerting a positive effect on some medical condition. They include 'near-water drinks with added minerals' and, in view of the properties claimed for fluoridated water by fluoride advocates, it must be classified as a 'funtional food', and therefore falls within the scope of the relevant legislation.

The Court ruled that, where two different sets of rules appear to apply to a product, medicinal legislation must take precedent, and the product must be regulated as a medicine.


This basically paves the way for classifying as 'medicinal' ANY food product with 'added minerals' that 'exert a positive effect on some medical condition'.

IOW, total control of food and food trafficing.


As a 'medicinal water', the protection afforded by the water quality regulations that shield consumers from hazardous substances in drinking water does not apply. Its use in the processing of foodstuffs is also prohibited, under the food safety legislation.


What does it take to get a food classified under a medicinal license? All this does is shift the way, for instance, bottle water will be labelled and marketed. And probably increase its costs. Yes, it may reduce flouridation in processed foods and drinking water, but look at the implications of the ruling regarding the addition of minerals to foodstuffs.

However, the article above points out that--


One solution would be to grant a medicinal licence to fluoridated water. But the Court ruled that any evaluation of a functional drink may only be done under the rigorous procedures required to scrutinise any pharmaceutical product. In the present state of scientific concern over the evidence of its lack of efficacy and safety it is impossible to imagine that such a licence could ever be granted. If it were, it would immediately result in a world-wide denunciation from the scientific community that is fully aware of the improper commercial influence that is at the heart of the international promotion of fluoridated products.


The problem being, it seems more likely that medicinal licenses will be granted than not, unless there is a massive scientific, cultural, and economic movement to block the use of flouride.

So, where does this leave 'enhanced' water products, or other drinks that contain 'added minerals' or other herbs and ingredients? It's a short step to require medical licences to these too, and, I reckon, a much larger step to get them licensed--due to lack of rigourous testing or dubious beneficial claims.

8)

[mephibosheth]

This is probably paving the way for a dracononian Codex ruling. Vitamins will probably be ruled as medicine and therefore be banned as supplements or fortification in foods.
Next step will be the requirement of a pr:(escription for supplements or vitamins and the accompanying bureaucratic nightmare that will effectively put the smaller companies out of business resulting in big pharma having monopoly control over price and product standard.


That's the danger, for sure.

8)

[dangermouse]

That's the danger, for sure.

8)

Thats what I saw straight away from that.

The Eu is a bit like pedo offering the kids sweets to come in his car. And we know what usually happens .. btw there no pedos when I was kid .. I had to buy my own fuckin sweets :D

[call2571]

It makes it sounds good.Flouridated water must be treated as medicine.
It should be treated as very toxic poison.
It is already in our water anyway.It has been for years.

[yozhik]

is this in the UK too, Yoz?

Codex Alimentarius, from what I understand, is a UN initiative ... so as a member of the Security Council, you can bet it will be in the UK.

[rodin]

Codex Alimentarius, from what I understand, is a UN initiative ... so as a member of the Security Council, you can bet it will be in the UK.

UN = Jew End

Alger Hiss. Harry Dexter White. They were behind it. Communist spies. Marx real name Mordecai. Communism = Jewish Supremacy in action even more than Zionism. It is more hidden, subversive, revolutionary.

It tells of utopia and brings horror

For a leading truth forum this place does not come down hard enough on impostors, nor is it aware enough of the big picture

[rodin]

Codex Alimenatrus is just part of the full spectrum war waged on your physical and mental health. 'But we are living longer - how can they be attacking us'. Good question. Still trying to figure that one out.

[yozhik]

Codex Alimenatrus is just part of the full spectrum war waged on your physical and mental health. 'But we are living longer - how can they be attacking us'. Good question. Still trying to figure that one out.

You're looking at this from the wrong angle.

We, us, human beings ... we're simply enslaved working units.
"They" are keeping us alive longer, to get us to produce more.
It is economically viable to have us working until the age of 65 or thereabouts.
The problem for "them" is what to do with us once we are no longer an "economically viable work unit".
There was a time when we were rewarded, with a pension ... as a than you.
Now, not only is the retirement age being extended to squeeze more working years out of each production unit, but now there is a very real danger that there will be no pension; it is no longer economically viable.

They increased out lifespan to increase our production output.
Now, they take the working life to its limits of 65, 66 or even 67 years of age ... to reduce the number of "working units" that will become eligible for pension payments.

Its simply a case of probability and life expectancy curves, for the highly paid insurance actuaries in the back office.

"At what age does our exposure become minimized in relation to the revenue of the unit's lifetime production"?

That answers both of your questions;
1. why are we living longer ... to produce more and to increase the ROI per working unit.
2. why are they attacking us ... to minimise the payments beyond the working life (economically productive) of each enslaved unit.

The ultimate goal would be to make us stronger and healthier for longer, so we could produce more ... then the day we can no longer produce at an economically viable rate ... we die of natural causes.

This would be "their" wetdream.

[mephibosheth]

We, us, human beings ... we're simply enslaved working units.
"They" are keeping us alive longer, to get us to produce more.
It is economically viable to have us working until the age of 65 or thereabouts.


This doesn't really make much sense.

If 'they' were really concerned about maximizing 'production' then you'd expect that they would engineer much shorter lifespans in order to get a continual stream of workers who are in their prime, in the fullness of youth, peak health, strength, and vitality--no to mention more naive. And the greater and faster the turnover, the less chance that the 'scheme' would be discovered, and thus, the longer said workers could continually be 'enslaved'.

Instead, 'they' are extending our lifespans? Well, we consume as much or more as we produce. And the more of us that live longer, the greater the burden on the ecosystem and societal infrastructure, not to mention the greater risk of revolution. And as each 'unit' gets older the risk on them dramatically increases--as health and strength and vitality decrease and chance of injury and serious mistake rises. There is a limited number of masters of trade needed, thus extended working experience, but these would be filled by only the most robust work units who could work up to 65 with the health and strength of a 30 year old.



They increased out lifespan to increase our production output.


Of what? What are we 'outputting' that we also aren't consuming ourselves?

If there is an elite skimming rewards off the top of the production stream, it won't matter to them if the workers are 16, 35, 60, or 160, as long as production continues to be efficient enough to allow them to keep skimming off the top without doing much themselves. Investing in the health and well-being of their worker units just to squeeze a couple more years of diminishing production returns doesn't seem like good sense.

Nor does this correlate with the apparent plan the same 'they' has to poison people...unless increasing the lifespan is also meant to prolong the suffering state--to make people strong enough to endure lengthy illness and thereby increased dependency on manufactured 'solutions', where worker units are busy churning out 'medicines' to feed to machine, not knowing that they are contributing to the conditions of their own suffering...

8)

[bob_jones]

If they hadn't been putting it in we wouldn't need no ruling. Medical and Codex make me highly suspicious and i'd rather they all just get lost whatever.

+1

[yozhik]

This doesn't really make much sense.

If 'they' were really concerned about maximizing 'production' then you'd expect that they would engineer much shorter lifespans in order to get a continual stream of workers who are in their prime, in the fullness of youth, peak health, strength, and vitality--no to mention more naive.

And the greater and faster the turnover, the less chance that the 'scheme' would be discovered, and thus, the longer said workers could continually be 'enslaved'.
I can't agree with this.
Maybe if all production was manual labour, then fair enough ... but there are many workplace studies that show the false economy of an aggressive "hiring and firing" policy due to down time, hand over time and retraining.

Experience is also an intangible asset which still has immense value.


Instead, 'they' are extending our lifespans? Well, we consume as much or more as we produce. And the more of us that live longer, the greater the burden on the ecosystem and societal infrastructure, not to mention the greater risk of revolution.
Again, you're thinking inside the box.
Still placing the "cost" or the "profit" in terms of ecosystems and society.

What if the whole game was designed around enslavement and control?
Globalisation, one world currency, RFID implants, cashless economies ... what have these "goals" got to do with the ecosystems and societal infrastructures? I would suggest nothing ... but they have everything to do with enslavement and control.

And as each 'unit' gets older the risk on them dramatically increases--as health and strength and vitality decrease and chance of injury and serious mistake rises. There is a limited number of masters of trade needed, thus extended working experience, but these would be filled by only the most robust work units who could work up to 65 with the health and strength of a 30 year old.
Again, if all production was manual labour, this view would hold weight ... but its not just about manual labour.

Think of this as life insurance.
It's just high level actuaries, number crunching.

I haven't looked at any research, but I am going to guess that the retirement age of 60 was proportionatley aligned with the average life expectancy, as the "new" retirement age of 65 is to the current life expectancy.

In Australia I believe the retirement age has been pushed out to 67.

That smells an awful lot like insurance and actuaries crunching numbers to me.
Not only do they delay pension payments to those approaching retirement by 1 or 2 more years, saving MILLIONS, but they also now create a number of people who never reach retirement age, because those additional 1 or 2 years were all they would have had on the pension before leaving this mortal coil.

Those numbers come from someone in a back office, hitting a few calculators and looking through a few actuary tables, then coming up with a policy that "if we increase the retirement age to XX, then an additional Y% of people will not reach it, saving £Zmillion per year ..."

It's all about the £££

[bob_jones]

This is probably paving the way for a dracononian Codex ruling. Vitamins will probably be ruled as medicine and therefore be banned as supplements or fortification in foods.
Next step will be the requirement of a pr:(escription for supplements or vitamins and the accompanying bureaucratic nightmare that will effectively put the smaller companies out of business resulting in big pharma having monopoly control over price and product standard.

I remember going into Holand and Barrat in Bangor and telling them about the plan to ban vitamins, they had not been told.

Secret democracy!

I said Article One of the European Convention outlaws any behavior by the EU that interferes with the free trade of individuals.

The vitamin industry took the banners to court on that basis and won a reprieve for vitamins.

They won!

It is an old chestnut as the gun lobby tried to stop Tony Blair banning guns under the same Article.

But you can still buy a 7 shot pump action Winchester Shot gun in the UK with a licence.


As long as your gun is old fasioned it is OK.

My oh! My! Those old blasters are more acurate than a Luger 9mm and can take an arm off in one shot!
:eek: