Hello Jack & folks,
At 08:49 AM 26/07/02, Jack wrote:
Edited for response: preceded by ********
> Subject: CS>Re: Unsupported denials - not claims
> For Jack,
> people like you while well-meaning are very dangerous. You obviously have
> no technical research experience/qualifications and yet state amazing
> inaccuracies with such assurety that you could influence people out
> Anyone who makes statements like having no fear of horrors like Aspartame,
In a previous post I conceded that I was tossing aspertame, NOT because I am
<snip>
I really don't care what YOU fear, I am not afraid of the stuff.
*************** Hello Jack & folks,
My point, Jack. You don't have the knowledge. I suggest you DO do the work
and look into it.
Ignorance is no protection, my friend and statements like yours are
irresponsible and dangerous to the wellbeing of others. Especially as this
list has a good reputation and I'm sure you mean well.
AND Mike does a good job of sorting the list out here, but some of your
statements ( not prefaced as IMO) are socially/physically dangerous!
> Artificial Fluoridation ( a vastly different thing to Fluoride - a method
> by which you were obviously conned) is not well-informed.
Well if you know so much about fluoride, then share it with all of
us on the silver list, because some listers are afraid of it.
**************** Part of The System's con jobs on the public is obfuscation
- the NATURALLY occurring
Fluoride bears no relationship to the stuff they dispose of in our water
supplies. They are two different things and they continually
cross-reference them. Like "a" cigarette to 45 ml dose of nicotine. Same
stuff really.............
There is as much about Fluoride out in the cyberbog as there is on
Aspartame and by qualified experts. Go look. AND I don't mean "tools" like
Quackwatch....... go look up the owner of THAT business.
> THIS IS NOT A FLAME!
Well, that's how it strikes me.
************* No intent I assure you, merely to - as I'm sure you intend -
to pass on to people information that you have gleaned or - much better
still - personally researched or experienced.
> I only want to point out that the Psych Warfare Machine is so efficient
> that you need to be very, very careful before you jump in so POSITIVELY.
> Nothing is better than saying "in my opinion", ( IMO) "in my personal
> experience" (IMPE), and nothing beats supplying NUMBERS and REFERENCES.
I am aware of IMHO, and will use it as I see fit.
********* That would be good for all concerned.
>
> I recently had a whole of material dumped on me by a U.S. Govt.
> Whistleblower (at great personal risk to them) about the horrors
> of vaccination data held by them.
My wife and I were vaccinated - no mutations in our children,
our arms haven't fallen off, ( I forget ALL of the horrible things that
MIGHT happen if a person gets vaccinated).
I'm 73 years of age I do not get flu shots, don't need 'em.
I AM NOT AFRAID!!! :-)
************** Well, it is the opinion of some of the best and certainly
most heroic research scientists and whistleblowers in the world that you
were very, very lucky - especially having received the early Salk toxics -
even he admitted they were "rough".
Even 'Flu shots - does that mean you would have them if you got the flu
regularly?
Being "not afraid" Jack is easy in ignorance - bravery is only facing
understood odds.
I do not believe that an educated ( High School level) Mother would do it
to her children if she did as much research as she does about buying a new
dishwasher.
Given your stated age, it is perfectly understandable that you fell for
it. There simply was no avenue of truth in those days.
Just look up "MRP vaccine" and your hair will stand on end.
> No, this is not even off-topic.
> E.G. I am convinced that CS is a near-magic SPECIFIC bacteriacide/viricide,
you left out fungicide
***************** No, I did not actually. This is a whole different area.
VERY difficult to evaluate at my level with my resources. Moulds/fungii are
whole different ballgame
> PERSONALLY.
> I am YEARS off understanding it fully *scientifically*.
That is rather obvious.
****************** Well, I should hope so. Otherwise the "pot would be
calling the kettle......."
My years as Management Counsellor taught me the basics of ungoverned
verbosity as a danger, but working with "terminal" Cancer sufferers in the
last decade taught me a lot more.
> Despite being trained as a Dairy Bacteriologist a few centuries ago :-)
Past Life career?
************* Sure seems like it, now. But enough data is retained in the
cells to find the fascination of CS and its specific targetting abilities a
great hope for many - including me.
Killing any wog is simple - use Concentrated Sulphuric Acid. Works every
time on ANYTHING. Unfortunately, including the patient............ :-)
> My only concern is the vast quantities people ingest!
You haven't been following the research that has been done on
what constitutes a safe dose. That has been posted here, check the
archives.
************* "Safe Dose" in the pharmaceutical/scientific world is a very
fluid thing, Jack. I was given massive Cancer by exposure to "safe" levels
of MEK. Ever looked into Mecury toxicity Jack?
The big point is that CS by observation works in almost homeopathic doses
to me so far.
But constant "need" to ingest it surely should point to the idea that
SOMETHING is causing the need.
Talking to Vets ( no, not soldiers - animule doctors) about the old style
treatment of livestock can teach us a lot.
VERY funny book I recommend: "Dead Doctors Don't Lie" It is available
through various Nostrum peddling sources as an E-Book.
Best wishes to all,
John (Himagain!)
---
_____________________________________________________
All *MY* communications are certified virus-free. Why not yours?
Ask here for full info - *and* get it free. mailto:[email protected]
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.377 / Virus Database: 211 - Release Date: 15/07/02
