All posts by Patricia Robinett

Who said it – when and why? – They tried to warn us.

1) The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst . . . It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.

2) The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it’s in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know…

For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed– and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First (emphasized) Amendment– the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution– not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and sentimental, not to simply “give the public what it wants”–but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

This means greater coverage and analysis of international news– for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security…

And so it is to the printing press–to the recorder of mans deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news– that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

1) J. Edgar Hoover, FBI Director, in 1956
2) John Fitzgerald Kennedy, President of the United States, in 1961

The deliberate dumbing down of the simple folk

Charlotte Thompson Iserbyt interview with Alex Jones
Oct 26, 2011

Charlotte Thompson Iserbyt served as the head of policy at the Department of Education during the first administration of Ronald Reagan. While working there she discovered a long term strategic plan by the tax exempt foundations to transform America from a nation of rugged individualists and problem solvers to a country of servile, brainwashed minions who simply regurgitate whatever they’re told.

This exclusive interview with Iserbyt breaks down how conditioning/training under a corporate agenda has replaced traditional education, leading to a deliberate dumbing down of Americans. Iserbyt further explains how Reagan signed agreements merging the U.S. and Soviet systems under the United Nations banner, turning over education and many other areas of public policy to global control.

This 74 minute exposé is a must see for anyone who wants to truly know why the education system is deliberately crafted to produce human drones with no critical thinking whose only skills are to be subservient, trust authority and follow orders.

Visit Charlotte Iserbyt’s website at
where you can also download her FREE E-BOOK ** Deliberate Dumbing Down of America**.

What should the simple folk drink? Fluoride lowers IQs…

EPA official and chemist, Dr. J. William Hirzy, expressed his view on fluoride at a Senate subcommittee hearing in 2000, which was contrary to very agency he worked for. This is what Hirzy had to say:

“If this stuff gets out into the air, it’s a pollutant; if it gets into the river, it’s a pollutant; if it gets into the lake, it’s a pollutant; but if it goes right into your drinking water, it’s not a pollutant. That’s amazing… There’s got to be a better way to manage this stuff “.

Under the EPA’s own regulatory guidelines fluoride is listed as a chemical neurotoxin with substantial health risks. Sodium silicofluoride and hexafluorosilicic acid are the hazardous chemicals that make up the fluoridation process and are waste products originally created by the aluminum and fertilizer industries.

In 1931 the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) under the direction of Andrew Mellon (The Mellon Institute) conducted fluoridation tests through the Public Health Service (PHS) by dentist H. Trendley Dean, who coincidentally, was the first director of the National Institute of Dental Research. Dean found that as fluoride levels began to rise, so did percentages of dental fluorosis. Dean claimed his test results lowered cavities even though it was just the opposite. Dean promoted the falsified findings and eventually became known as the “father of fluoridation”. Andrew Mellon, who held considerable authority as acting U.S. Treasurer, put pressure on (PHS) to push the fraudulent tooth decay agenda.

By 1939 ALCOA was already facing major lawsuits regarding fluoride emissions from factories. Gerald Cox, a Mellon industry researcher who was also financed by ALCOA, began selling the public on the idea of compulsory fluoridation. ALCOA knowingly used false dental research to cover up fluoride pollution and avoid damage claims. In 1946 Oscar Ewing was chief counsel for ALCOA and through a devil’s bargain headed up the Federal Security Agency (FSA) taking charge over (PHS). This was how fluoride was sold. Soon cities across the United States purchased the fluoridated water and began dripping it into the water supply under the propaganda campaigns directed by (PHS) and the American Dental Association (ADA). To this day, the ADA and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) still defend the fluoride test results that were fabricated over sixty five years ago.


Fluoride and Children’s Intelligence: A Meta-analysis
Qin-qing Tang & Jun Du & Heng-hui Ma & Shao-jun Jiang & Xiao-jun Zhou
Humana Press Inc. 2008

Abstract This paper presents a systematic review of the literature concerning fluoride that was carried out to investigate whether fluoride exposure increases the risk of low intelligence quotient (IQ) in China over the past 20 years. MEDLINE, SCI, and CNKI search were organized for all documents published, in English and Chinese, between 1988 and 2008 using the following keywords: fluorosis, fluoride, intelligence, and IQ. Further search was undertaken in the website because this is a professional website concerning research on fluoride. Sixteen case–control studies that assessed the development of low IQ in children who had been exposed to fluoride earlier in their life were included in this review. A qualitative review of the studies found a consistent and strong association between the exposure to fluoride and low IQ. The meta-analyses of the case–control studies estimated that the odds ratio of IQ in endemic fluoride areas compared with nonfluoride areas or slight fluoride areas. The summarized weighted mean difference is −4.97 (95%confidence interval [CI]=−5.58 to −4.36; p<0.01) using a fixed- effect model and −5.03 (95%CI=−6.51 to 3.55; p<0.01) using a random-effect model, which means that children who live in a fluorosis area have five times higher odds of developing low IQ than those who live in a nonfluorosis area or a slight fluorosis area.


Effect of Fluoride in Drinking Water on Children’s Intelligence

Q Xiang,a Y Liang,a L Chen,b C Wang,b B Chen,a X Chen,b M Zhouc Shanghai, P.R. China

Summary: The Intelligence Quotient (IQ) was measured in 512 children, aged 8–13 years, living in two villages in Sihong County, Jiangsu Province, China, differing in the level of fluoride in their drinking water. In the high- fluoride village of Wamiao (water fluoride: 2.47±0.79 mg/L; range: 0.57–4.50 mg/L), the mean IQ of 222 children was significantly lower (92.02±13.00; range: 54–126) than in the low-fluoride village of Xinhuai (water fluoride: 0.36±0.15 mg/L; range: 0.18–0.76 mg/L), where the mean IQ of 290 children was higher (100.41±13.21; range: 60–128). The children’s IQs were not related to urinary iodine, family income, or parent’s education level. Higher drinking water fluoride levels were significantly associated with higher rates of mental retardation (IQ <70) and borderline intelligence (IQ 70–79). The Benchmark Concentration (BMC) for the concentration-response relationship between IQ


Fluoride & Intelligence: The 37 Studies
Fluoride Action Network | By Michael Connett & Tara Blank, PhD | UPDATED May 16, 2013

As of May 2013, a total of 43 studies have investigated the relationship between fluoride and human intelligence, and a total of 19 studies have investigated the relationship fluoride and learning/memory in animals. Of these investigations, 37 of the 43 human studies have found that elevated fluoride exposure is associated with reduced IQ, while 19 of the 20 animal studies have found that fluoride exposure impairs the learning and memory capacity of animals. The human studies, which are based on IQ examinations of over 11,000 children, provide compelling evidence that fluoride exposure during the early years of life can damage a child’s developing brain.

After reviewing 27 of these studies, a team of Harvard scientists concluded that fluoride’s effect on the young brain should now be a “high research priority.” (Choi, et al 2012). Other reviewers have reached similar conclusions, including the prestigious National Research Council (NRC), and scientists in the Neurotoxicology Division of the Environmental Protection Agency (Mundy, et al). In the table below, we summarize the results from the 37 studies that have found associations between fluoride and reduced IQ and provide links to full-text copies of the studies. For a discussion of the 6 studies that did not find an association between fluoride and IQ, click here.

Summary: When considering their consistency with numerous animal studies, it is very unlikely that the 37 human studies finding associations between fluoride and reduced IQ can all be a random fluke. The question today, therefore, is less whether fluoride reduces IQ, but at what dose, at what time, and how this dose and time varies based on an individual’s nutritional status, health status, and exposure to other contaminants (e.g., aluminum, arsenic, lead, etc). Of particular concern is fluoride’s effect on children born to women with suboptimal iodine intake during the time of pregnancy, and/or fluoride’s effects on infants and toddlers with suboptimal iodine intake themselves. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, approximately 12% of the U.S. population has deficient exposure to iodine.


Countries that Fluoridate their Water, Quick Facts

  • Most developed nations do not fluoridate their water. In western Europe, for example, only 3% of the population consumes fluoridated water.
  • While 25 countries have water fluoridation programs, 11 of these countries have less than 20% of their population consuming fluoridated water: Argentina (19%), Guatemala (13%), Panama (15%), Papa New Guinea (6%), Peru (2%), Serbia (3%), Spain (11%), South Korea (6%), the United Kingdom (11%), and Vietnam (4%).
  • Only 11 countries in the world have more than 50% of their population drinking fluoridated water: Australia (80%), Brunei (95%); Chile (70%), Guyana (62%), Hong Kong (100%), the Irish Republic (73%), Israel (70%), Malaysia (75%), New Zealand (62%), Singapore (100%), and the United States (64%).
  • In total, 377,655,000 million people worldwide drink artificially fluoridated water. This represents 5% of the world’s population.
  • There are more people drinking fluoridated water in the United States than the rest of the world combined.
  • There is no difference in tooth decay between western nations that fluoridate their water and those that do not.


How the one percent keeps the simple folk ignorant

Who are you going to believe?
The media or your own lying eyes?

By “ignorance”, I am not suggesting that anyone who reads this blog is less than intelligent. Au contraire – our readers are the most intelligent people on the planet. What I mean to say is that if we allow the mainstream media to entertain us, thinking that they are informing us, we’ll be in a state of ignoring – ignoring a lot of what we need to know.

As we at report on uncomfortable subjects such as:

  • vaccines and other pharmaceutical drugs that poison, cripple and kill rather than cure
  • medical procedures that maim and harm rather than heal
  • chemicals and metallic particles dropped in huge white plumes that don’t evaporate but instead spread out to turn a clear blue sky into a white, milky haze
  • additives to the public water supply that act as emotional numbing agents
  • assassinations and other crimes that were never fully investigated
  • false flag operations that have been used to justify wars and the curtailing of our civil liberties
  • elements of social control and mind control
  • corruption in corporations and government agencies, Congress, etc
  • psyops
  • and much more

And about these subjects, we hear a tiny, clear, empty silence – or at most only a whisper – in the mainstream media.

The media’s job is not to make us the best informed people on the planet. Its apparent job is to sell advertisements and to keep us tuned in by entertaining us. Yet it appears that a very high priority of the mainstream media is to distract us from important topics that we need to be aware of, issues that determine the quality of life on this planet – even issues of life and death. We are taught to ignore what is in front of us by a media that is concentrated in very few hands and focuses on the trivial more often than important issues. It seems that the nightly news is often no more than a propaganda machine.

George Bush Admits Mainstream Media Pre-Packaged-News,False Stories

Talking points and canned stories

Aiding and abetting

We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years.

It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.

Quote from David Rockefeller, speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany

Media consolidation

The entire media here and abroad is owned and operated by only a few corporations and these corporations in turn are owned by banking interests. These six corporations control what Americans watch, hear and read… and therefore what the citizens believe.

Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, CBS Corporation and NBC Universal

Armageddon or Evolution

By Professor Dr. Edward Schellhammer, author of the books Trilogy on Economics, Politics, Deicide, and Armageddon or Evolution and many others.

This is an educational presentation that explores the fundamental problems of humanity and the state of the planet. Posing the ultimate challenge: Armageddon or Evolution. 19K views in 4 days. Please like, share and comment to make this go viral.

Stunning visuals with hard hitting captions. We at may not agree with every detail of this slide show, but it effectively makes important points. It’s an excellent presentation. Let’s choose evolution, folks.

Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Drug Safety Myth

Dr. Mercola asks, “Do Pharmaceutical Companies Have a Moral Duty to Do No Harm?”

If a corporation is a “person” – and I understand that even governments now are corporations – and a “person” has a moral and legal obligation to do no harm, then yes, a corporation as well has a moral and legal duty to do no harm. If corporate employees – including government employees – were to be held equally accountable for the “sins” of the corporation, then we would see a rapid improvement in the moral standards of all corporations. Not one good employee would cooperate with corruption and every corporation would dismiss anyone – from a secretary to the CEO – who suggested placing corporate profits over the wellbeing of either the corporation or the public.

The first in a series of lectures from Cambridge, MA, October 8, 2009, sponsored by the Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics at Harvard about “institutional corruption”.

Famed economist Dean Baker discusses the corruption, criminality, fines, and the ludicrous profit margins in the pharmaceutical industry with Doctor Sidney Wolf.

These two videos accompany a rather lengthy essay by Dr. Mercola located on the Mercola website.

Insanity in “Science” – Bird Flu Researchers Push To Make Virus More Contagious

1984, anyone?

Excerpt from transcript:
(find audio link and full transcript at Boston’s NPR website

JEREMY HOBSON, HOST: Well, one way some scientists say they can prevent the spread of this new strain of avian flu is to make it even deadlier so they can study it. Carey Goldberg, health reporter here at WBUR, joins us to talk about that. And, Carey, before we get to what the scientists are trying to do, why does it seem like – whether it’s H5N1 or H7N9 – that the avian flu will not go away?

CAREY GOLDBERG, BYLINE: Well, it’s because the threat just keeps on looming, Jeremy. I mean, it’s not my favorite topic, these sort of potential bird flu pandemics that could sweep humanity and kill millions, but it is a real threat. And researchers say that it has happened before, that there have been strains of flu that crossed from birds and created epidemics in humans. And they’re just very concerned that it could happen again on a global scale now that we live a global life.

HOBSON: Well, so tell us about this news today of a debate among scientists about creating more dangerous avian flu viruses for research purposes.

GOLDBERG: Right. It seems counterintuitive. But today, what these scientists are saying – these are some leading avian flu researchers – and they are publishing a public letter in the two most prestigious American science journals, Nature and Science. And they’re saying that they think it’s really important that they go ahead and work on modifying this new virus, H7N9, that we were just hearing about from Dr. Horby to make it even more dangerous, more resistant to drugs and more easily transmitted. And they call this gain-of-function research…

And now for a bit of sanity…

Americans Are Finally Learning About False Flag Terror

This, and much more – examples of governments admitting to false flag operations – to be found at

“This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
– Plato

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
– U.S. President James Madison

“A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler

“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin

Israeli woman fined $140 a day for refusing to circumcise son

See full article and photo at

Rabbinical judges in the case said they fear the effect that allowing Israeli Jews to freely decide on the ritual circumcision of their own children might have on the global debate over the issue.

An Israeli woman is being fined NIS 500 ($140) every day for refusing to circumcise her one-year-old-son, Israel’s Channel 2 reported today. There is no sweeping legal requirement for Jews in Israel to circumcise their children, but the woman is undergoing a divorce process at the Haifa Rabbinical Court, and her husband has appealed to the court to pressure the woman into circumcising the son.

“I’ve been exposed to a lot of information about circumcision and decided not to proceed with the circumcision,” the woman told Channel 2. “I have no right to cut at his genitals and to maim him, and the court has no authority to force me to.” Her lawyer also said the rabbinical court does not have the authority to enforce the procedure, but the secular family court would. The woman went on to add she was unemployed, and cannot afford to pay the fine, which already adds up to NIS 2,500 ($700). She said her husband originally had no objections to avoiding circumcision when the child was born, but changed his mind during the divorce process.

The rabbinical judges in the case said in their decision the woman was opposing the circumcision as a means to bringing her husband back to her. They also referred explicitly to the growing debate around ritual male circumcision elsewhere in the world, and voiced their fear of the precedent that could be created by a Jewish Israeli woman allowed not to circumcise her son.

“We have witnessed for some time now public and legal struggles against the brit milah in many countries in Europe and in the United States,” the judges wrote. “The public in Israel has stood as one man [sic] against these trends, seeing them as yet another aspect of displays of anti-Semitism that must be combatted. How will the world react if even here the issue of circumcision is given to the discretion of any person, according to their own beliefs?”

Religious courts in Israel hold complete sway over all matrimonial issues, including divorce. An appeal to the Haifa District Court by the woman was turned down, and the woman said the only resort left now is an appeal to the Supreme Court.

More on the circumcision debate:
Stand up for your son: Say ‘no’ to ritual circumcision
My (inadequate) justification for circumcision
Outlawing circumcision: Anti-Semitic and Islamophobic