The orbit of asteroid 1998 QE2. (NASA / JPL / Caltech)
By Deborah Netburn
May 17, 2013, 7:00 a.m.
It’s 1.7 miles long. Its surface is covered in a sticky black substance similar to the gunk at the bottom of a barbecue. If it impacted Earth it would probably result in global extinction. Good thing it is just making a flyby.
Asteroid 1998 QE2 will make its closest pass to Earth on May 31 at 1:59 p.m. PDT.
Scientists are not sure where this unusually large space rock, which was discovered 15 years ago, originated from. But the mysterious sooty substance on its surface could indicate it may be the result of a comet that flew too close to the sun, said Amy Mainzer, who tracks near-Earth objects at Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge. It might also have leaked out of the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, she said.
We will know more after the asteroid zips closer to Earth and scientists using the Deep Space Network antenna in Goldstone, Calif., and the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico can get a better look at it. Astronomers at both observatories plan to track it closely from May 30 to June 9, according to a JPL release.
At its closest approach the asteroid will still be 3.6 million miles from our planet (about 15 times the distance between the Earth and the moon), but it will be close enough for these powerful radar antennas to see features as small as 12 feet across.
“With radar we can transform an object from a point of light into a small world with its own characteristics,” Lance Benner, JPL’s principal investigator for Goldstone radar observations, said in a statement.
There is no chance that asteroid 1998 QE2 could collide with Earth this go-around, and its next close approach won’t be until 2119.
Still, Mainzer said the size of the asteroid, and its potential for mass destruction, should remind us that there are some scary things flying around in space.
“This is a really big asteroid, similar in size to the one that killed off the dinosaurs, and it’s getting very close to us,” she said. “Fortunately we’ve been tracking its orbit very carefully so we know with great certainty it won’t hit us.
“We don’t need to panic, but we do need to pay attention,” she said.
So everywhere you look nowadays, you see news of the “tax scandal” where we have learned (gasp) that the white house ordered tax hits on people they didn’t like. Yeah, I know. BIG surprise. Who would have ever thought that taxes were a vehicle of intimidation?
The reality is that we all know that the IRS is the big bully on the street. They survive on fear and intimidation and would be powerless without it. They are the essence of everything wrong with the world.
Yeah, I know, pulling together group resources to make our country better is how we get great infrastructure like roads and schools and stuff like that. And so on some level this thing we call “taxes” is a good thing. And I think that if we went around our neighborhood and said, “hey, we need to build a park over here for the kids to play, can you help out?”, most would reach for their wallet. They’d even show up to dig the trenches and plant some trees. It is a giving born of love. And yet as soon as it is the IRS at your door, fear is the emotion that comes to mind.
Why does everyone I know (except for my friend Ted, who is seriously my hero) cower in the corner as soon as the word IRS comes up? Why is everyone so afraid of them? Really, EVERYONE is afraid of the tax man.
Recently, I noticed that they even went so far as to put iconic songstress Lauryn Hill in jail over it.
Perhaps it is because the IRS goes unchecked. They are the bulliest of the bullies, the scariest of the scary, and they can do anything they want at any time with no checks and balances and no real oversight. As long as they bring in the money, nothing you can do will will protect you if they want to bring you down. The rules are so varied, changing, and voluminous that no one can possibly get it right if a person has a complicated portfolio. I remember listening to a story on NPR a few years back where they took the same couples tax information to a multitude of tax preparers, all of whom came up with different figures for the amount due. Most notably the numbers varied widely and even the IRS themselves were unsure as to what the exact amount due really was.
So why isn’t the media talking about THIS aspect of the story? Why aren’t the examining the fact that the IRS has carte blanche to write a blank check out of your bank account and you have no real recourse. Yeah, yeah, the courts are supposed to give you a say but does anyone believe that they are on YOUR side here? Or do you think that they are enforcement arm of the IRS? Without them to back up the IRS, they have no real power at all.
But it seems to me like the government LIKES it that way. They like that people are afraid and intimidated into giving them money. They LIKE that the tax man is the scariest man in town for without that fear they would be powerless.
Instead the media focuses on the political aspect of it. Oh no! The president used the IRS to intimidate people! As if every other president, and politician for that matter, didn’t do the same thing. It’s a powerful tool and they all know it.
So perhaps they’ll turn it into the scandal du jour and they’ll hold some feet to the fire and then some low level scapegoat will get fired and then we’ll all forget about it and it will go back the way it is. We don’t believe we have any control over it, just like chem trails and fluoride in the water and genetically modified food and a healthcare system that leaves huge chunks of our country without so much as basic healthcare. The list goes on and on and is really a reflection of the powerlessness we, as a nation of people, feel at this moment in history? I sometimes wonder what it would take for us to rise up?
To me, this is a reflection of the power of fear and the power of consciousness. Until we can, as a world, find our way to vibrate ourselves beyond a world of chronic fear, the IRS will continue to rule by intimidation and do so unchecked and at the whim of the decision makers.
I only wish I knew how to change the cycle of fear to a cycle of love. I know it is possible. For they are only as powerful as we let them be.
I’d love to hear your suggestions or solutions. Together, we can always make a change if we just start.
It is so nice to see a Christian leader of our time actually step up and take a stand for the little guy. Moreover he does it from a place of credibility and humility that I have not seen in the Christian world since the loss of Mother Theresa. Too many of them are standing on their pulpits as their mega churches in their very expensive suits dishing out the fare of the day as they peddle their latest book and promise you riches in exchange for your donation.
As spiritual leaders and teachers, our role is to help bring the world together and to see to it that all of us have what we need to be safe and joyous. Pope Francis has seen the horrific affects of greed in the streets of Argentina, a country that collapsed under the weight of the financial tyranny. Having seen it, he comes to the role of pope with a new compassion that I have not seen in a pope in my lifetime. Long live Pope Francis. And may his words affect change. It is certainly time.
Pope Francis has denounced the global financial system, blasting the “cult of money” that he says is tyrannising the poor and turning humans into expendable consumer goods.
In his first major speech on the subject, Francis demanded that financial and political leaders reform the global financial system to make it more ethical and concerned for the common good.
He said: “Money has to serve, not to rule!”
It’s a message Francis delivered on many occasions when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires, and it’s one that was frequently stressed by retired Pope Benedict XVI.
Francis, who has made clear the poor are his priority, made the comments as he greeted his first group of new ambassadors accredited to the Holy See. – AP
Pope Frees Dove
Security personnel hand Pope Francis a cage containing two doves during his weekly general audience in St. Peter Square at the Vatican, Wednesday, May 15, 2013. As Francis toured the square in his open-topped popemobile at his Wednesday audience with the public, someone at the edge of the crowd thrust a white bird cage at him. Looking puzzled, his security detail took the cage, containing a pair of white doves, and handed it to Francis. Without hesitation, the pope opened the cage door, thrust a hand inside and extracted one dove, and with a flick of his hand, sent the bird flying over the square. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)
(NaturalNews) Angelina Jolie’s announcement of undergoing a double mastectomy (surgically removing both breasts) even though she had no breast cancer is not the innocent, spontaneous, “heroic choice” that has been portrayed in the mainstream media. Natural News has learned it all coincides with a well-timed for-profit corporate P.R. campaign that has been planned for months and just happens to coincide with the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on the viability of the BRCA1 patent.
This is the investigation the mainstream media refuses to touch. Here, I explain the corporate financial ties, investors, mergers, human gene patents, lawsuits, medical fear mongering and thetrillions of dollars that are at stake here. If you pull back the curtain on this one, you find far more than an innocent looking woman exercising a “choice.” This is about protecting trillions in profits through the deployment of carefully-crafted public relations campaigns designed to manipulate the public opinion of women.
The signs were all there from the beginning of the scheme: Angelina Jolie’s highly polished and obviously corporate-written op-ed piece at the New York Times, the carefully-crafted talking points invoking “choice” as a politically-charged keyword, and the obvious coaching of even her husband Brad Pitt who carefully describes the entire experience using words like “stronger” and “pride” and “family.”
But the smoking gun is the fact that Angelina Jolie’s seemingly spontaneous announcement magically appeared on the cover of People Magazine this week — a magazine that is usually finalized for publication three weeks before it appears on newsstands. That cover, not surprisingly, uses the same language found in the NYT op-ed piece: “HER BRAVE CHOICE” and “This was the right thing to do.” The flowery, pro-choice language is not a coincidence.
What this proves is that Angelina’s Jolie’s announcement was a well-planned corporate P.R. campaign with carefully-crafted messages designed to influence public opinion. But what could Jolie be seeking to influence?
…how about trillions of dollars in corporate profits?
Upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision to rule on patent viability for BRCA1 gene
Angelina Jolie’s announcement and all its carefully-crafted language had four notable immediate impacts:
1) It caused women everywhere to be terrified of breast cancer through the publishing of false statistics that drove fear into the hearts of anyone with breasts. (See below for explanation.)
2) It caused women to rush out and seek BRCA1 gene testing procedures. These tests just happen to be patented by a for-profit corporation called “Myriad Genetics.” Because of this patent, BRCA1 tests can cost $3,000 – $4,000 each. The testing alone is a multi-billion-dollar market, but only if the patent is upheld in an upcoming Supreme Court decision (see below).
3) It caused the stock price of Myriad Genetics (MYGN) to skyrocket to a 52-week high. “Myriad’s stock closed up 3% Tuesday, following the publication of the New York Times op-ed,” wrote Marketwatch.com.
4) It drove public opinion to influence the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision to rule in favor of corporate ownership of human genes (see more below).
Women all over the world are being duped into supporting Angeline Jolie, having no idea that what she’s really doing is selling out women to the for-profit cancer industry. But to fully understand what’s happening, you have to dig deeper…
Myriad Genetics sees stock price skyrocket thanks to Jolie, and Obamacare will funnel billions their way
“Salt Lake City-based Myriad Genetics (MYGN) holds the patent on the test that determined the actress had an 87% chance of developing breast cancer, as well as the genes themselves,” wrote MarketWatch.com.
And that’s only the beginning. If the U.S. Supreme Court can be influenced to uphold Myriad’s patent, it could mean a trillion-dollar industry over just the next few years. Even more, Myriad Genetics is reportedly “ripe for mergers” according to the financial press, because it’s part of the super-hot human genome industry.
“The world’s largest maker of DNA testing and analysis tools, Life Technologies Corp. said that it is set to be acquired by Thermo Fisher Scientific for a record $13.6 billion,” writes MarketWatch.com. “A race that kicked into high gear more than 26 years ago is heating up, with foreign governments and corporations joining the U.S. in funding the quest to map all the human genomes. And even as the recent flurry of mergers and acquisitions in the genomics space has spurred returns, investors still have opportunities to profit from this multibillion-dollar industry.”
The higher Myriad’s stock price goes, the more profitable a merger becomes for its current owners. So Jolie’s P.R. stunt just happened to generate unknown millions of dollars in value for the very people who claim a patent monopoly over the breast cancer genes residing in the bodies of women. Coincidence? Hardly.
Obamacare mandates taxpayers pay for BRCA gene testing: yet another government handout to wealthy corporations
But here’s what’s even more crooked about all this: You know how Obama likes to talk “free market” but actually engages in so-called “crony capitalism” by handing out money to all his corporate buddies, Wall Street insiders and deep-pocketed campaign donors? Part of Obamacare — the “Affordable Care Act” — mandates that taxpayers pay for BRCA1 genetic testing!
Myriad Genetics, in other words, stands to receive a full-scale windfall of profits mandated by government and pushed into mainstream consciousness through a campaign of “medical terror” fronted by Angelina Jolie and the New York Times. Are you starting to see how this all fits together yet?
This is all one big coordinated corporate sellout of women, and it’s all being hidden by playing the “women’s power” card and using “choice” language to more easily manipulate women. Angelina Jolie, remember, is a key spokesperson for the United Nations, an organization already caught engaged inchild sex slavery and drug running. Although Jolie obviously isn’t engage in that sort of behavior, her job is to covertly influence American women into supporting a carefully-planned, plotted and executed corporate profit campaign that turns women’s bodies into profits.
Here’s why the Supreme Court decision puts trillions of dollars at stake…
Details on the upcoming Supreme Court decision
The ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation filed a lawsuit in 2009, challenging the corporate ownership of human genes. Anyone who believes in women’s rights, human rights, civil rights or even the right to eat non-GMO foods should immediately agree that corporations should NOT be able to patent human genes and then use those patents to rake in billions of dollars in profits while stifling scientific research into those genes.
A question to all women reading this: Do you believe a corporation in Utah owns your body? If not, you should be opposed to corporate ownership of human genes. It also means you should oppose Angelina Jolie’s P.R. campaign because although she’s running a brilliant public relations campaign, behind the scenes her actions are feeding potentially trillions of dollars of profits directly into the for-profit human gene patenting industry that denies human beings ownership over their own genetic code.
On May 12, 2009, the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) filed a lawsuit charging that patents on two human genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2, are unconstitutional and invalid. On November 30, 2012, the Supreme Court agreed to hear argument on the patentability of human genes. The ACLU argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court on April 15, 2013. We expect a decision this summer.
On behalf of researchers, genetic counselors, women patients, cancer survivors, breast cancer and women’s health groups, and scientific associations representing 150,000 geneticists, pathologists, and laboratory professionals, we have argued that human genes cannot be patented because they are classic products of nature. The suit charges that the gene patents violate the First Amendment and stifle diagnostic testing and research that could lead to cures and that they limit women’s options regarding their medical care.
Got that? If the Supreme Court rules against Myriad Genetics, it will cause a multi-billion-dollar breast cancer genetic testing industry to collapse virtually overnight. This means a huge loss for not just Myriad, but also many other human gene corporations that wish to exploit the human body — including the bodies of women — for monopolistic profits. (All patents are government-granted monopolies.) Ultimately, trillions of dollars in corporate gene patents are at stake here.
Patenting human genes is huge business
Today, about 20 percent of your genes are already patented by corporations and universities. As the ACLU explains, “A gene patent holder has the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even looking at a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing has been delayed, limited or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents.”
This means that when corporations own patents on human genes, it stifles scientific research while granting that corporation a monopoly over the “intellectual property” encoded in your own DNA! (How criminal is that? You decide…)
What this means is that if the Supreme Court rules against Myriad, it would set a precedent that woulddismantle the entire human gene patenting industry, affecting trillions of dollars in future profits.
This, I believe, is the real reason behind Angelina Jolie’s announcement. It seems designed to invoke women’s emotional reactions and create a groundswell of support for corporate-owned genes, thereby handing these corporations a Supreme Court precedent that will ensure trillions in future profits. It’s a for-profit PR stunt that tries to trick women into supporting a corporate system of patents and monopolies that claims, right now, to own portions of the bodies of every woman living today.
While most media outlets have no clue about the patent issues at stake here, the Detroit Free Presstook notice, saying:
“The Hollywood star’s decision to get tested for a breast cancer gene mutation, undergo a double mastectomy and then write about it calls attention to a case now pending before the court. The justices have just weeks to decide if Myriad Genetics’ patent on the two genes that can identify an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer is legal. Critics complain that the company’s monopoly leaves them as the sole source of the $4,000 tests needed to determine each woman’s risk.”
Lying with statistics: Jolie’s 87% risk exaggeration
There’s more to this story than just the patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Angelina Jolie is also using blatantly misleading statistics to terrify women into thinking their breasts might kill them.
In the NYT op-ed piece, Jolie claims her doctor told her she has an “87% risk” of developing breast cancer. But what she didn’t tell you is that this number doesn’t apply to the entire population: it’s actually old data derived almost exclusively from families that were previously documented to have very high risks of breast cancer to begin with.
A study published on the National Human Genome Research Institute website and conducted by scientists from the National Institutes of Health reveals that breast cancer risks associated with BRCA1 genes are significantly lower than what’s being hyped up by Jolie and the mainstream media.
In fact, in a large room of 600 women, only ONE will likely have a BRCA mutation in her genetic code. The actual incidence is 0.125 to 0.25 out of 100 women, or 1 in 400 to 1 in 800. I used 600 as the average of 400 and 800.
And out of that 1 in 600 women who has the mutation, her risk of breast cancer is only 56 percent, not 78 percent as claimed by Jolie. But 13 percent of women without the BRCA mutation get breast cancer anyway, according to this scientific research, so the increased risk is just 43 out of 100 women.
So what we’re really talking about here is 1 in 600 women having a BRCA gene mutation, then less than half of those getting cancer because of it. In other words, only about 1 in 1200 women will be affected by this.
Yet thanks to people like Jolie and the fear-mongering mainstream media, women all across the nation have been terrified into believing their breasts might kill them and the best way to handle the problem is to cut them off!
This, my friends, is the essence of doomsday fear mongering. This issue affects less than one-tenth of one percent of women but is being riled up into a nationwide fear campaign that just happens to feed profits into the for-profit cancer diagnosis and treatment industry, not to mention the monopolistic human gene patenting cartels.
That’s the real story of what’s happening here. Don’t expect to read this in the New York Times.
Corporate media refuses to mention real prevention and treatment options
As part of the breast cancer fear mongering and treatment scam now being run across the mainstream media, nearly all media sources are prohibiting any mention of holistic or natural options for treatment or prevention.
Sure, the media talks about “options,” but all those options just happen to lead back to the for-profit cancer industry. As an example, read this story by ABC News, part of the lying mainstream media that misinforms women and pushes a corporate agenda:
If you do test positive for BRCA, you have options, and you don’t necessarily have to go the Jolie route. Some women choose not to have surgery. Instead, they increase cancer surveillance with imaging tests. These include regular mammograms to test for breast cancer, and regular pelvic sonograms and blood-tests to watch for ovarian cancer.
Nope, the “options” being pushed by mainstream media are nothing more than mammograms, surgery, radiation and chemotherapy — all owned and run by the for-profit cancer industry that feeds on women and exploits their bodies for profit.
Nor is their any discussion of the total scam of the “pink ribbons” cancer cure industry which is primarily focused on giving women cancer through “free mammograms.” As any scientist or physicist already knows, mammograms cause cancer because they emit ionizing radiation directly into the breast and heart tissues. Get enough mammograms done and sooner or later they will detect breast cancer because they caused it! To date, 1.3 million women have been harmed by mammography.
Thanks, Angelina, for keeping the wool pulled over the eyes of women everywhere while selling out to for-profit, monopolistic, corporate interests that incessantly seek to exploit women for profit.
Photo credit: PEOPLE Magazine cover, used under Fair Use for public commentary and education.
As a subscriber to Mike Dooley’s daily emails called “Notes from the Universe” (www.tut.com). I get these lovely little spiritual reminders in my email box each day. I think this is a great thing for everyone and I recommend it highly. I thought today’s was quite good and decided to share.
The top 10 things people claim to have taken for granted when they were alive:
10. How important they were to so many.
9. How easy life was when they stopped struggling.
8. That all of their prayers and thoughts were heard.
7. That there really were no coincidences.
6. How far ripples of their kindness actually spread.
5. What really was important: happiness, friends, love.
4. That any and all of their dreams could have come true.
3. How good looking and fun they always were.
2. How much guidance they received, whenever they asked for help.
1. That God was alive in everything, including themselves.
As expressed by the recently departed, fresh after their life-review on the big, BIG screen.