Page 282 of 798 FirstFirst ... 182232272278279280281282283284285286292332382782 ... LastLast
Results 2,811 to 2,820 of 7977
Like Tree195Likes


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 16 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 16 guests)

  1. #2811
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    working4change likes this.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2812
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #2813
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)


    from:The Idealist ♥
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #2814
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)


    Spain Study Confirms Hemp Oil Cures Cancer Without Side Effects

    By Mark Sircus Ac., OMD

    The medical science is strongly in favor of THC laden hemp oil as a primary cancer therapy, not just in a supportive role to control the side effects
    of chemotherapy. The International Medical Verities Association is putting hemp oil on its cancer protocol. It is a prioritized protocol list whose top five items are magnesium chloride, iodine, selenium, Alpha Lipoic Acid and sodium bicarbonate. It makes perfect sense to drop hemp oil right into the middle of this nutritional crossfire of anti cancer medicines, which are all available without prescription.

    Hemp oil has long been recognised as one of the most versatile and beneficial substances known to man. Derived from hemp seeds (a member of the achene family of fruits) it has been regarded as a superfood due to its high essential fatty acid content and the unique ratio of omega3 to omega6 and gamma linolenic acid (GLA) – 2:5:1. Hemp oil, is known to contain up to 5% of pure GLA, a much higher concentration than any other plant, even higher than spirulina. For thousands of years, the hemp plant has been used in elixirs and medicinal teas because of its healing properties and now medical science is zeroing in on the properties of its active substances.

    Both the commercial legal type of hemp oil and the illegal THC laden hemp oil are one of the most power-packed protein sources available in the plant kingdom. Its oil can be used in many nutritional and transdermal applications. In other chapters in my Winning the War on Cancer book we will discuss in-depth about GLA and cancer and also the interesting work of Dr. Johanna Budwig. She uses flax seed oil instead of hemp oil to cure cancer – through effecting changes in cell walls – using these omega3 and omega6 laden medicinal oils.

    Rick Simpson, the man in the above mentioned videos, has been making hemp oil and sharing it with friends and neighbors without charging for it. In small doses, he says, it makes you well without getting you high. “Well you can’t deny your own eyes can you?” Simpson asks. “Here’s someone dying of cancer and they’re not dying anymore. I don’t care if the medicine comes from a tomato plant, potato plant or a hemp plant, if the medicine is safe and helps and works, why not use it?” he asks.

    When a person has cancer and is dying this question reaches a critical point. The bravery of Rick Simpson from Canada in showing us how to make hemp oil for ourselves offers many people a hope that should be increasingly appreciated as money dries up for expensive cancer treatments. We are going to need inexpensive medicines in the future and there is nothing better than the ones we can make reasonably cheaply ourselves.

    For most people in the world it is illegal so the choice could come down to breaking the law or dying. There is no research to indicate what advantages oral use of hemp oil vs. vaporization but we can assume that advantage would be nutritional with oral intake. Dr. Budwig Below work would sustain this point of view especially for cancer patients.

    The Science

    According to Dr. Robert Ramer and Dr. Burkhard Hinz of the University of Rostock in Germany medical marijuana can be an effective treatment for cancer.[v] Their research was published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access on December 25th of 2007 in a paper entitled Inhibition of Cancer Cell Invasion by Cannabinoids via Increased Expression of Tissue Inhibitor of Matrix Metalloproteinases-1.

    The biggest contribution of this breakthrough discovery, is that the expression of TIMP-1 was shown to be stimulated by cannabinoid receptor activation and to mediate the anti-invasive effect of cannabinoids. Prior to now the cellular mechanisms underlying this effect were unclear and the relevance of the findings to the behavior of tumor cells in vivo remains to be determined.

    Marijuana cuts lung cancer tumor growth in half, a 2007 Harvard Medical School study shows. The active ingredient in marijuana cuts tumor growth in lung cancer in half and significantly reduces the ability of the cancer to spread, say researchers at Harvard University who tested the chemical in both lab and mouse studies.

    This is the first set of experiments to show that the compound, Delta-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), inhibits EGF-induced growth and migration in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expressing non-small cell lung cancer cell lines. Lung cancers that over-express EGFR are usually highly aggressive and resistant to chemotherapy. THC that targets cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2 is similar in function to endocannabinoids, which are cannabinoids that are naturally produced in the body and activate these receptors.

    “The beauty of this study is that we are showing that a substance of abuse, if used prudently, may offer a new road to therapy against lung cancer,” said Anju Preet, Ph.D., a researcher in the Division of Experimental Medicine. Acting through cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2, endocannabinoids (as well as THC) are thought to play a role in variety of biological functions, including pain and anxiety control, and inflammation.

    Researchers reported in the August 15, 2004 issue of Cancer Research, the journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, that marijuana’s constituents inhibited the spread of brain cancer in human tumor biopsies.[vii] In a related development, a research team from the University of South Florida further noted that THC can also selectively inhibit the activation and replication of gamma herpes viruses. The viruses, which can lie dormant for years within white blood cells before becoming active and spreading to other cells, are thought to increase one’s chances of developing cancers such as Kaposi’s Sarcoma, Burkitt’s lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease.

    In 1998, a research team at Madrid’s Complutense University discovered that THC can selectively induce programmed cell death in brain tumor cells without negatively impacting surrounding healthy cells. Then in 2000, they reported in the journal Nature Medicine that injections of synthetic THC eradicated malignant gliomas (brain tumors) in one-third of treated rats, and prolonged life in another third by six weeks.

    Led by Dr. Manuel Guzman the Spanish team announced they had destroyed incurable brain cancer tumors in rats by injecting them with THC. They reported in the March 2002 issue of “Nature Medicine” that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC.

    Researchers at the University of Milan in Naples, Italy, reported in the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics that non-psychoactive compounds in marijuana inhibited the growth of glioma cells in a dose-dependent manner, and selectively targeted and killed malignant cells through apoptosis. “Non-psychoactive CBD produce[s] a significant anti-tumor activiity both in vitro and in vivo, thus suggesting a possible application of CBD as an antineoplastic agent.”

    The first experiment documenting pot’s anti-tumor effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the U.S. government. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that marijuana’s psychoactive component, THC, “slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent.”

    Funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice — lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia. The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research even though the researchers “found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent.”

    “Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids,” an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute reports, “Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)” — two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. “Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size.”


    Spain Study Confirms Cannabis Oil Cures Cancer Without Side Effects « The Collapse Report
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  5. #2815
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  6. #2816
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Preppers: Are You Sinister, Selfish or Morally Depraved?

    Be Informed
    December 6th, 2012
    Comments (65)
    Read by 3,263 people

    The following article has been contributed by Be Informed, author of How Horrific Will It Be For the Non-Prepper. In part this is a rebuttal to the notion by some who suggest that preppers are socially selfish, morally depraved and even criminal. Moreover, the article serves to highlight the importance of why each individual, family and community must take it upon themselves to make preparations for disasters and unforeseen events.

    The term sinister is defined as being morally terrible, and along with buzz word selfish, is being widely insinuated as a description for the dedicated individual that puts away food, water, and other necessities for extended periods of time should their families ever be faced with hardship. It would seem that when an individual puts away what they need for a short time, like a few days, this is socially accepted as well as encouraged. Conversely, however, when an individual crosses some arbitrary threshold of too much preparing they get tagged with being a hoarder, as well as some self-serving creep uninterested in the well being of their neighbors, community, state, and country.

    Society has somehow slithered into this oddball conception that anything excessive, within their idea of just how much is too much, is not only selfish, but morally depraved. Gone are the days in which people were highly inspired to put away for tomorrow in the off-chance that things become lean and scarce. That kind of thinking has been replaced with the commercial paradigm of “living for the moment” and not thinking about what repercussions may come the next day. This has lead to toxic levels of phantom money floating around in the world of credit and debt for individuals and nations alike. All the while, a paradox exists insofar as how large of a soda an individual can get at their local convenience store or how massive a portion of food can be ordered at a restaurant. It is okay to spend and purchase excessively with credit cards because this is stimulating the economy, but putting away reserve food, water, and other supplies is “not accepted”!?!?

    Prepping has fallen into a category in which the masses have come to feel is only acceptable in very modest levels. “Too much” in a person’s home is regarded the same as someone drinking a 64 oz. soda as opposed to a REGULATED maximum size of 12 oz. or 16 oz. for a person’s “own good”.

    It is also felt in many communities that someone storing up too much food and supplies is so morally wrong that they have tried to enact laws against it. Normally these are based on health regulations which surmise that too much food breeds rats and other vermin. Code enforcement and health department agencies become involved. Of course this is total nonsense and nothing more than an excuse to further erode basic freedoms and make everyone blindly conform to what THEY deem socially acceptable behavior, even in the privacy of one’s own home.

    Naturally, along with condemnation towards those that put away for months or longer, comes the expectation that committed preppers share what they have sacrificed for with everyone in the community around them after a disaster. This is true even with those totally ill-prepared who laughed and mocked the prepper.

    For those “generous” individuals willing to share en masse, there is a big problem they need to be aware of. VOLUME. Even with years worth of supplies a family cannot feed an entire neighborhood or community. Check out this simply formula; you can plug in your own numbers to prove this.

    Let x= the number of people you have in a survival group.
    Let y= the approximate number of days of survival supplies you have.
    Let z= the number of additional people equally sharing your supplies.
    It goes like this: (x) (y) / (x+z), or x times y divided by x+z = the new number of days of supplies.

    Now let’s see how quickly someone’s survival supplies dwindle when divvied up with your broader community – many of whom failed to prepare for anything. Assuming that about 1% of the people prepare, this means that somewhere in the range of about 90 to 100 individuals need what you have prepared for each person in your family. A family of 6 would therefore have to share what they have with 540-600 people that have nothing on the average. Just for argument’s sake, let’s say it is 500 additional mouths that require feeding. Your family of six has stored enough food and supplies for 2 years or 730 days.

    x= 6 people, y= 730 days, z= 500.
    6 X 730 = 4380.
    6 + 500 = 506.
    4380 divided by 506 = 8.66 days.

    A family that has saved up and gone without commercialized luxury conveniences in order insulate themselves for two years now has not 2 years worth of supplies, but a little over a week’s worth of necessities left if the crowd of moochers continue to leech off of them.

    This may seem dramatic (500 people), but even with smaller numbers of additional freeloaders a full house of food can evaporate in very short order.

    Many would call it selfish not to share with everyone.

    But it’s a principle of basic mathematics.

    It’s akin to hundreds of people all trying to fit into a single life raft – it won’t work and everyone sinks, including the life raft.

    It is interesting when those in the media and social networks continue to ridicule those who put away what their family may need “later” as having moral deficiencies. Yet those same people who openly condemn preppers put away monetary security in the forms of savings accounts, 401k’s, and stocks for an emergency or retirement.

    These people are not berated or expected to share what they have with those that don’t when it comes to money. When that same money is exchanged for Made In the USA food products and put away for when someone needs it, just like a saving’s account, the majority of people argue that it is wrong and morally selfish, especially when disaster strikes and they need access to those supplies.

    Again, what?

    Many individuals feel the only chance for the people after disaster is if the entire community works together as one unit. Unless MOST of them are fully willing to participate as a unit in some sort of mass food and necessities community storage program for dire times, this idealistic thought will fail miserably during INTENSE catastrophes. Without food you will have a bunch of people that won’t be able to function. It is not just storing enough food for the community at large for a week; it has to be for extended periods of time because most people fail to follow through on their promises to prepare individually. It is very unlikely that you’ll be successful in getting most people involved, and the subsequent lack of supplies will be all too apparent when a true disaster strikes.

    A sad cynical viewpoint, but all too true about basic human nature, is that MOST PEOPLE ARE JUST ALL TALK.

    To prove this about people becoming involved in the community, one only needs to see the actual number of individuals committed versus those who are not. Even in the best organized community, those committed to protecting the city or town at large usually hover at the same percentage as preppers, that magical 1%. Over-enthusiasm often blinds CERT volunteers to seeing the truth that most people just don’t care and will not be there to help. They will only be there to take. Few individuals and little resources in a mega disaster in proportion to dozens of times more people in need sadly becomes a wasted effort. There are exceptions to this and in those places they need to consider themselves to be very fortunate.

    For the most part, however, this is a reason why depending on yourself first is the best course of action before, during and after a true disaster.

    ANY town, county, state, or country can and will be completely overwhelmed by a true catastrophe. The simple facts are that emergency management in most communities is geared towards responses to “lightweight” SHTF events. Very seldom are plans in place for mega cataclysms in which stability might not be reached for very extended periods of time. Almost all aid organizations presume that outside help and rescue will come within days or a few weeks at the very worst. Throughout the history of civilizations, however, there have been episodes in which no outside help arrived for months or years because no one could. One example of this is WAR. Another is when someone is forced to remain as isolated as possible from the population because there is a very fatal and very contagious disease brewing. Exposure to others in the community during a true pandemic is suicide and usually reserved for those seeking some sort of martyrdom for themselves. Yet another reason why individuals dedicated to long term preparation for extremely difficult and very dangerous times are ALWAYS making a wise choice.

    One issue that someone should take into consideration with a survival group or even a community effort is devotion to the cause. Trust is a huge issue here and a primary consideration for people you let into your survival group or those that help you organize some sort of community survival group. There are not too many people actually willing to self sacrifice by putting away much of which is spent on their everyday present pleasures, including their time.

    To better illustrate this about true friends or allies, the number of whom you can usually count on one hand, ask yourself this:

    “Will that person, at the barest of sacrifice asked upon them, make an excuse for failure to help you?”

    “Is that person committed and consistently thinking and considering the survival group’s needs, even when those needs conflict with his or her own self-interests?”

    These are difficult and painful questions, the answers to which most people are not willing to admit to themselves about others, especially if we’re personally involved in their lives.

    Allowing the wrong person into a survival group of small numbers all the way up to an entire community response unit can be very damaging and hazardous. Humans require some social acceptance and will tell someone exactly what they want to hear, but bail out when needed or worse, turncoat on them.

    A CYNICAL philosophy is often the only way to protect a survival group and should not be viewed as selfish and unwilling to allow others into a group. A better word would be ‘extreme caution’. Loyalty is rare and it’s a primary reason for why so many dedicated preppers do not often expand their own groups towards others. It is also a golden reason for why many community emergency organizations will prove to be near useless if and when a true disaster hits an area. TRUST is a very difficult commodity to obtain with other people and is another key reason why smaller survival groups, especially family survival groups, will have a better chance of survival in short and long term scenarios.

    Okay you say, but what about actually using human selfishness to your advantage to form survival response teams in the community? The big problem with this is that unless an area has been devastated, the people are likely to lose interest quickly.

    Society today has far too many distractions and most people’s attention span is usually quite limited. Besides this, most people just don’t want to be bothered, because they feel it will never happen to them. Emergency management personal will scoff at this, but if they are truly honest with themselves and look at the actual numbers, there simply aren’t enough truly dedicated people.

    People don’t take emergencies or disasters seriously. After all, they’ve been convinced that the government and FEMA can clean it all up and make everything like it never even happened. “Everything will recover and things will return to normal no matter what happens, because it always has in the past.” This type of thinking after a mega disaster will leave most in mass graves and statistics for some future history book. Anyone who believes the majority of the masses are dependable and will come to help is fooling themselves.

    What, then, is the answer?

    The individual and family has to take personal responsibility for making sure that they have a sufficient amount of what they personally require stored up to use when needed. They should ignore the ignorant social rhetoric about committed preppers being selfish and morally wrong just because they plan and save up as much as possible. The more survival goods you can obtain, the more security you will have during minor inconveniences, as well as events that are much, much worse.

    Sharing of survival goods is a very personal choice when disaster strikes. After the work and sacrifice of saving, most preppers find themselves more apt to trade what they have for what they need rather than just giving it away. However, there is also strong belief in charity – even if it is anonymous – in the prepper community, and many take it upon themselves to store extra supplies in anticipation of this. Those who call preppers selfish are almost never the type of individuals that openly give what they have to everyone that is needy. These totally less than saints, hypocrites, usually cannot stand the humble life of the prepper/survivalist who takes the initiative to not fall into the commercialism of money spent on vastly overpriced junk that lacks any good quality or useful purpose. The prepper/survivalist usually avoids the flash and glitter and only purchases what is needed and functional.

    I leave everyone with this thought about who is actually selfish and morally off:

    Is it the person who demands sparkling jewelry and other trinkets, expensive gadgets, flashy automobiles, designer clothes and shoes that run in the hundreds of dollars, Christmas gifts (lots of them) in the most elegant wrapping paper – in other words a total superficial “look at what I’ve got” attitude?

    OR, is it the prepper/survivalist who spends resources on food, storage units, self defense, everyday necessities, safe secure places to retreat to during emergencies, warm clothes and blankets, and practical items so their family will not have to suffer – in other words a lifestyle of simple pragmatic saving for tomorrow in which family members self sacrifice for each other out of caring for each other’s well being?

    You be the judge of who in society is selfish and who is lacking in moral and spiritual character.

    Also by Be Informed:

    How Horrific Will It Be For the Non-Prepper?

    The List: A to Z Survival for the Abysmal Times Ahead

    They Will Take Everything If You Don’t Stop Them

    Preppers: Are You Sinister, Selfish or Morally Depraved?
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  7. #2817
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Preppers Who Make Surviving The Apocalypse Even Less Fun

    Brandon Smith
    December 7th, 2012
    Alt Market
    Comments (74)
    Read by 4,465 people

    Being forced to endure and survive a catastrophic macro event like a monetary or social collapse is perhaps one of the worst experiences I could imagine. Such a crisis leads to just about every crime and inhuman action in existence, and, the time required for a culture to right itself and rebuild is severely protracted. A hurricane or earthquake or tidal wave; these calamities are short lived and easy in comparison. The point is, as survivalists who are preparing to make an economic end-game scenario as “comfortable” to live through as we can, it is incumbent upon us to consider the kind of company we keep during the gambit. Some allies will make that mad world bearable; others will bring the madness to your doorstep

    Many preppers are aware of the dangers inherent in our progressively deteriorating nation. Unfortunately, some of them are completely unaware of the dangers inherent within themselves. Building a solid community of people to rely on during a collapse is absolutely essential, and the larger the group of liberty minded neighbors the better.

    But, if certain ground rules are not established from the very beginning, a rainbow of personal issues and character flaws could very well destroy years of effort. Care must be taken by all parties involved to ensure that internal conflicts remain at a minimum, and when they do arise, that each person is wise enough to resolve issues in an adult manner.

    I hate to say it, but you will inevitably run into some folks that are beyond compromise and beyond hope. Working with them is like pulling teeth…shark’s teeth…from your jugular. Here are just a handful of powder keg personalities that will make the apocalypse more than a living hell for you and your friends if they manage to latch onto or take leadership in your survival watch…

    1) The Self Assumed “Leader”

    The “Assumed Leader” is not actually a reliable or practical leader; he just thinks he is, and reminds everyone loudly whenever he can find occasion. He does not generally do this by screaming “I AM YOUR LEADER!” Instead, he attempts to micro-manage every aspect of the survival group and shows early signs of control issues. The Assumed Leader will first make forceful suggestions to test the waters, scoffing angrily whenever people do not strictly follow his advice. If he gains traction, his suggestions turn into orders, and he begins to act as though he is somehow in a superior position to the rest of the community.

    He seems to have an answer to every question or concern, which would be nice if he actually knew what he as talking about half of the time. Usually, this is not the case. He may have expertise in a certain field, like farming, or building, or engineering, or even defense, and this is indeed valuable. However, his mastery of one area of knowledge has inflated his ego to massive proportions and he now pretends as if he is some kind of hyper-educated elitist potentate. When approached with alternative options and methods, he will respond with ridicule as if you have no clue what you are talking about. When his ideas are criticized, he will react with fury, and try to remove dissenters from the community entirely.

    The best way to avoid these people is to discover them early in your prepping project, and to make certain that NO ONE becomes a De facto dictator. Every person with particular expertise within the community should be given respect in that specific field, but not given authority over all decisions. The experienced farmer should offer leadership when it comes to farming, but step aside when it comes to defense and defenders, and vice versa. It is best to keep in mind that the most effective leaders always ask those around them for aid and advice before coming to any conclusion. The worst leaders already assume they know everything.

    2) The Feudal Lord

    The Feudal Lord is an Assumed Leader who has managed to lure other preppers into a Commune, rather than a Community, and there is a considerable difference. He is often a well-off survivalist who has suddenly realized that for all his money and land and supplies, he is basically defenseless, and needs an organized group to protect his bounty. He entices other preppers into the fold with ideas that he is building a legitimate and fair community, and with land already available, many take interest.

    The problem is, the Feudal Lord believes possession of the land that the group is defending automatically makes him Grand Poobah, and that those people are not equals, but servants and serfs.

    I have found that Feudal Lords also have a tendency to charge people “fees” for the right to join their communes. They will argue that this is designed to “vet” candidates and see if they are truly “serious” about survival prepping. In the dark corner of their minds, however, they actually believe that they are OWED a tithe from anyone who wishes to earn the “privilege” of becoming a permanent installment on their property. From the very beginning they go into the project with almost no sincere regard for the people they are working with.

    The reality is, the Feudal Lord’s land and supplies are utterly meaningless without security and without aid. His survival riches can be taken in an instant by a mere handful of looters, or even one experienced raider. Without other people, treated as equals in survival and ready to lay down their lives to protect each other and him, he has nothing, and is foolhardy to think otherwise.

    This is not to say that all landowners who try to centralize a group on their property are seeking to become mini-kings of a mini-kingdom. If rules and agreements are made early on, and everyone understands their role, then such an arrangement could work. But, if the landowner purposely avoids set agreements, appoints roles to people without asking them, changes the plan regularly to suit himself, and tries to leech money out of participants, then it’s time to walk away now before it is too late.

    Eventually he WILL use his position as landowner as a means to dominate, and will threaten to cast people out who disagree with his methods.

    The best way to avoid these characters and the commune situation altogether is to not centralize on a single piece of land, but to organize in a neighborhood fashion, where everyone maintains sovereign control of what they do and all aid is voluntary.

    3) The Moral Relativist

    There is, sadly, a small subsection of survivalists out there who do not plan to live off their own preps; they plan to confiscate the preps of others by force and solve every problem at the barrel of a gun. In their mind, a crisis situation calls for the abandonment of conscience and the application of a “survival of the fittest” mentality. They believe that morals are all well and good when civilized society remains, but a source of weakness during catastrophe. Their philosophy is: Only the strongest of men will be able to set aside principle and “do what needs to be done”. That is to say, they believe you must become the monster to defeat the monster.

    In fact, only men who are able to hold onto their principles during the worst moments are strong. Weak men run away from conscience, using the excuse that times are “different and difficult”. They are not survivalists, they are terrorists in every sense, and they will only hurt our ultimate goal of rebuilding a free, prosperous, and individualistic society.

    These people should be avoided like the plague. They will make enemies wherever they go, ask you to do highly questionable things, and push your community into annihilation. Eventually, somebody is going to put them out of their misery, and it’s best to not be around when that happens.

    4) The Obsessive

    The Obsessive is a person whose drive is initially impressive but also ultimately destructive. His entire life revolves around survival prepping and impending doom. Certainly, it is better to be extra concerned about the economic crisis on the horizon than to be utterly oblivious. A smart man over-prepares. But, there is such a thing as overkill, even in the world of survivalism.

    No one can ever do enough fast enough in this person’s eyes. He will whine constantly about how he is the only one taking preparations seriously, and how everyone else is a lazy bum. He will become frantic on a daily basis, admonishing the group or community on their lack of urgency. In a leadership position, this person is a nightmare, creating constant waves of tension and panic, instead of calmly offering solutions or constructive criticism.

    Obsessives are generally unimaginative people with little talent or intelligence who use their prepping lifestyle as their only means to feel superior to others. They tend to become legends in their own minds, dreaming of the day when everyone will desperately cling to them and their remedial survival know-how. They fantasize about all the people who “wouldn’t take their advice” (usually smug advice), crawling in squalor begging them for help one day.

    The Obsessive’s motto is: “Let me tell you why you are wrong and how you are lazy!” Instead of: “How can I help you fix this?”

    We all need a break once in a while from the horrors we know are waiting for us. To step back and enjoy what we can of a beautiful day or good friends is not the same as being a freeloader or a backslider within your prepper group. Survival is about more than sustaining the body. It is about more than chopping wood, stockpiling ammo, and slaving over a piece of land from sun up until sundown like a mindless drone just to get by; it is also about sustaining the heart and the mind. Otherwise, what is the point of living?

    5) The Ulterior Motive Drama Queen

    The Drama Queen is a man or woman who is loosely interested in survivalism, but wants to join your community for other reasons, and these reasons may cause many members dismay. The opposite of The Obsessive, you’ll notice a strange non-involvement on their part or lack of interest as far as participating in survival discussions and decision making. They will often hand over all their survival preparation plans to another person or persons, while hovering like a gnat around the community searching for that special something.

    They may be looking for friends and social recognition. They may be afraid of collapse and simply trying to lock into ANY group regardless of whether they fit, becoming disenchanted later. They may enjoy the excitement of feeling like they are involved, and are living vicariously through the accomplishments of others. They may just be looking for a date. Ultimately, their primary objective is not to build a working community, but to get something out of the community beyond safety.

    If they do not get what they want, they raise hell, using whatever excuse happens to be handy without ever admitting their real motivations. They will deliberately start unnecessary drama, attempt to create divisions, focus on one person as the cause of all their troubles, or blame the whole group for the heartache in their life. They will attempt to draw everyone into their personal soap opera in the hopes of becoming the focal point, sharing strange and extremely private issues with anyone who accidentally offers to listen.

    Eventually, they will be seen for what they are and will lose the ear of the other preppers, who obviously have better things to worry about, but not after wreaking some havoc in the process.

    6) The Zealot

    The Zealot has a perfect picture in his mind of how his survival community is going to look. Absolutely perfect. The problem is, all people are imperfect and all have different conceptions of life, and this disturbs and disrupts the Zealot’s fantasy. It is one thing to be careful in whom you associate with when assembling a prepper organization, but it is entirely another to hold everyone to insane standards that even you cannot meet.

    The Zealot usually wants to be in charge so that he can vet and control each member of the group, but this is not always the case. Zealots are also sometimes highly anti-social, showing interest in a group for a short time and then suddenly walking away as if no one is up to par. He may base his zealotry on a misplaced religious fervor or philosophical inflexibility, but he will not be happy until everyone sees the world the way he does, or until they meet his grandiose brand of moral flawlessness. For him, it is not enough that the community around him shares a love for liberty and a disdain for tyranny, they must also be “spiritually pure” in his eyes.

    One mistake or disagreement by a member of the group earns them a black mark on the Zealot’s list which he never forgets. From then on, that member is the enemy, and the Zealot will engineer conflict after conflict until the person gives up and goes away, or until he can convince the group that person is more trouble than they are worth.

    The great dilemma for any survivalist is to balance personal freedom and a peaceful home life with the reality that they will not last long without relying on a group. Other people bring talent, friendship, and safety to our lives, but they also bring baggage.

    The key is to work with those who know how to manage as much of their own baggage as possible, who are aware of themselves and are willing to police their own quirks, and who have not swan dived off a cliff into extreme disturbia. No survival community can withstand the savage assault of national collapse otherwise.

    You can contact Brandon Smith at

    Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.

    To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page.

    Preppers Who Make Surviving The Apocalypse Even Less Fun
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  8. #2818
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    “Doomsday Prepper” Raided By Police, FBI After Criticizing Obama

    Paul Joseph Watson
    December 7th, 2012
    Comments (86)
    Read by 4,608 people

    A “doomsday prepper” in a rural area of Maryland became a target for police and the FBI after he told an undercover cop that he was “very irritated” about Barack Obama’s re-election, sparking an investigation that eventually led to 46-year-old Terry Porter being thrown in prison and having his home raided by 150 armed officers.

    "Doomsday Prepper" Raided By Police, FBI After Criticizing Obama - YouTube

    The series of events began when an anonymous person contacted state police in early November claiming Porter was “getting crazier and crazier” and had been stockpiling “machine gun-style firearms” at his home in Sharpsburg. The police followed up by sending an undercover officer to Porter’s home pretending to be a potential customer for his welding business.

    According to a charging document filed in Washington County District Court,

    Porter “openly admitted to being a prepper” (as if this was an illegal act in and of itself) and said that he was “very irritated” about the recent presidential election.

    Porter had also invested in an underground bomb shelter and had installed surveillance cameras on his property.
    Once the investigation into Porter began, police discovered that he had a 1992 felony drug conviction and was therefore barred from owning firearms. On Thursday last week, no less than 150 armed and militarized police and FBI agents in the guise of tactical assault teams descended on Porter’s house as if they were confronting a terrorist cell.

    The raid also included helicopters, SWAT crews, armored vehicles and even excavation equipment.
    Porter was absent at the time of the raid but turned himself in the next morning at Hagerstown Barrack.After the raid, the claim that Porter was stockpiling “10-15 machine gun-style firearms” was demolished when police uncovered “four shotguns, a .30-30-caliber rifle and two .22-caliber rifles,” hardly a deadly mass arsenal.

    It is important to stress that Porter’s possession of guns merely provided a justification for the police raid and came to light only after authorities began to investigate him over his anti-Obama statements.As the Intel Hub highlights, “The fact that 20 years before he had a drug conviction enabled the FBI to carry out a raid they would have never even considered if it wasn’t for the fact that they knew that the man was preparing and was distrustful of the government.

    To say the raid was simply for illegal possession of firearms is to ignore all the facts of this horrific story.”
    Porter’s neighbors expressed their fury at the needless expense of the raid, noting that Porter was a trustworthy man who did not pose any kind of violent threat.

    “It was ridiculous for (the man), who would not hurt another person for anything.

    Unless you would attack him, he’s not going to go after anyone,” said 35-year-old Heather Hamilton who lived around the corner from Porter, adding that the whole episode was “a big waste of taxpayer money.”

    Friend and neighbor Doug Bigelow said he “would feel safe leaving his kids with the man,” and that he was “Surprised at what was going on” because Porter lived his life “on the “straight and narrow.”“Taxpayers should be outraged at this over-zealous reaction to what we now learn is a man who simply feared for a crisis coming to America (don’t we all!) and had become a “doomsday prepper ” —-in addition to having a neighbor with a grudge who likely turned him in,” writes Ann Corcoran.
    “It is true that Porter had a 20-year-old drug conviction on his record but apparently had no subsequent run-ins with the law. He is legally not allowed to own a gun so he does have a legal problem, but that doesn’t justify the cost and scope of this massive operation.”

    We have previously documented the fact that so-called “preppers,” who given the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy should be being lauded by the authorities as a good example to other Americans, are now being treated as terrorists.

    Flyers aimed at Military Surplus stores produced under the auspices of the FBI’s Communities Against Terrorism project earlier this year characterized bulk buying of food – a staple of prepper behavior - as a potential terrorist activity.

    Earlier this year we also reported on the case of David Sarti, who was featured in National Geographic’s Doomsday Preppers show. Sarti visited his doctor complaining of chest pains, only to have the doctor later commit him to a psychiatric ward and alert authorities, before Sarti was declared “mentally defective” and put on an FBI list that stripped him of his second amendment rights.

    Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for and Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

    “Doomsday Prepper” Raided By Police, FBI After Criticizing Obama
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  9. #2819
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Guest Post: Is Real Food Too Expensive?

    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/07/2012 12:03 -0500

    Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,
    Is Real Food Too Expensive?

    Please don't claim real food is "too expensive" to eat. What's "too expensive" is unhealthy processed and fast foods.

    It is a truism that food is expensive in America. What if we ask, "is real food expensive in America?"

    Let's define "real food" as unprocessed or minimally processed: raw fruits and vegetables, whole grains, unprocessed meat. Minimally processed would include rolled oats, 100% whole wheat bread, tofu, etc.

    Exhibit #1: I recently bought this real food, here in America, for less than $5: 9 oranges, large bag of mustard cabbage, large bag of Shanghai bok choi and a large bag of malabar spinach. It was not in the "half off" bin; I paid the full retail price:

    Exhibit #2: all of the above, plus 30 eggs and a hand of bananas: total less than $10:

    Each of these vegetables makes 4 to 6 servings, and the 2.5 dozen eggs provides plenty of protein for multiple meals. I could have added some excellent frozen fish for under $2 a pound, and cooked a few ounces per serving--a typical serving in traditional Asian cuisine, where one piece of chicken is thinly sliced and added to vegetables to feed four people.

    $10 in fast food might get you two "value meals" of saturated-fat burgers, fries and sugar-water drink. $10 in packaged food will buy an assortment of fake-food: frozen pizzas, snacks, sugar-bomb breakfast bars, etc.

    Is real food expensive in America? As a percentage of median household income ($49,777), no. Is processed or fast food expensive? If the "value" is measured in nutrition and well-being, yes, the cost is very high indeed.

    Apologists often cite four reasons why people (and more particularly, low-income people) tend to eat so poorly in America. One is the high cost of "real food." This is not quite true, as shown above: if you shop at Asian or Latin markets, you will find prices for fresh produce and other real food is typically much lower than in conventional supermarkets.

    The second reason offered is that there are no grocery stores in low-income areas. This is also not quite true, as the aforementioned ethnic markets are typically only found in low-income immigrant-friendly areas.

    The third excuse is that low-income people lack a proper stove/oven. The majority of Indian, Chinese and southeast Asian cuisine is prepared in one saucepan or wok that only needs one burner, a cutting board, one knife and a stirring/serving tool. The variety and healthy qualities of these cuisines are well-known. You only need one burner and a single saucepan/wok to make a huge range of healthy meals.

    The fourth reason given is that people work long hours and have no time to cook, especially low-income workers with long commutes on public transport.

    I routinely prepare a healthy meal with the above vegetables or equivalent (green beans, etc.) and a few ounces of meat in about a half hour. With a pressure cooker (widely available at garage sales, etc.), you can prepare a pot of beans or lentils (dal) in less than an hour.

    Compare these modest investments of time with surveys that routinely find Americans of all incomes and ethnicities watch up to four hours of TV or equivalent "entertainment" (web-surfing, videogaming, etc.) a day. Some surveys put the total even higher than four hours.

    So the apologists are claiming that people find four hours to watch TV, etc., but they have to stop at fast food outlets for dinner because they have no time to prepare a meal with real food.

    None of these excuses hold water. Even more absurdly, some apologists claim that "people don't know how to cook." With dozens of cooking shows being broadcast and thousands of recipes available to anyone with a smartphone or Internet connection, this strains credulity. There are even these useful things called cookbooks that can be borrowed from a public library.

    Let's also recall that up to 40% of all food in the U.S. is thrown in the garbage. Do you throw away what is costly? No, you throw away what is cheap.

    What it boils down to is convenience, marketing and engineering: processed food and fast-food are engineered to "taste good" (i.e. salty, fatty and sweet), marketing hypes them 24/7 and Americans have been brainwashed to worship convenience above all else.

    So please don't claim real food is "too expensive" to eat. What's "too expensive" is unhealthy processed and fast foods.

    Guest Post: Is Real Food Too Expensive? | ZeroHedge

    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  10. #2820
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Why Are Preppers Hated So Much?

    By Michael, on December 10th, 2012

    Have you noticed that it has become trendy to bash preppers? For a long time the prepper movement was ignored, but now it has become so large that it is getting very difficult for the mainstream media to pretend that it is not there. In fact, it has been estimated that there are now approximately 3 million preppers in the United States alone.

    So now the mainstream media has decided that mocking the movement is the best strategy, and lots of “critics” and “skeptics” out there have picked up on this trend.

    Instead of addressing the very real issues that have caused millions of Americans to prepare for the worst, those criticizing the prepper movement attempt to put the focus on individual personalities. They try to find the strangest nutjobs they possibly can and then hold them up as “typical preppers”.

    The goal is to portray preppers as tinfoil hat wearing freaks that need to be locked up in the loony bin for their own personal safety and for the good of society. The criticism of preppers has really ramped up in recent months, and it will likely get even worse in 2013. The establishment does not like any movement that is outside of their control, and the prepper movement is definitely not under their control.

    Often, hit pieces on the prepper movement are disguised as articles or shows that are supposed to be “balanced” looks at the movement. This is especially true of shows such as “Doomsday Preppers“. That show is the highest rated show that the National Geographic channel has ever had, and it can be a lot of fun to watch. But if you notice carefully, they almost always try to feature people that they consider to be “freaks” or that are “on the fringe of society”. Many other “reality shows” follow the exact same recipe. The goal is to draw high ratings by running a “freak show” that people can’t help but watch.

    Even if you go on such a show and try to do your best to explain your prepping in a rational and coherent manner, they will still edit the footage so that it makes you look like a freak. It really is a no-win proposition. These shows are trying to make it clear that preppers should be mocked. The underlying implication is that these people are crazy and that what they are doing is stupid.

    And at the end of each segment, the producers of the show are careful to include reasons why the prepper that was just featured is being irrational and why the things they are preparing for are extremely unlikely to happen. Just in case you missed the message they have been trying to communicate the entire time, they come right out and tell you the conclusion that you are supposed to come to.

    And of course we see the same attitudes reflected in reviews of the show. For example, the following is from a recent Los Angeles Times review of the new season of Doomsday Preppers…

    Still, it’s hard not to feel for young Jason from tiny Plato, Mo. (pop. 109), who is awaiting worldwide financial collapse with his homemade, nail-studded “mace-ball bat,” and that his is a life on the verge of going completely wrong. “I’m not afraid to have to kill,” Jason says, in his camouflage pants and dog tag, and there seems to be no question in his mind that it will come to that. (“Jason has always been a worrywart,” says his mother.)

    Or for Big Al, from Nashville, who is getting ready for old-school nuclear war by digging down into the earth and surrounding himself with steel. (“I prefer not to use the term ‘bunker’ — to me, it’s an underground house.”) He spends months at a time by himself down there, training for the inevitable — which he expects to weather alone — cooking different combinations of canned goods and, you know, spending too much time alone. One leg pumps constantly as he talks.

    The preppers don’t want my pity, of course — quite the opposite, I’m sure. The joke will be on me, they would say, when I am expiring from fallout or smallpox, being carried away in a tornado or torn apart by the hungry ravaging hordes. (I am not even prepared for the Big Earthquake that might more probably get me.)

    Would this Los Angeles Times reporter mock other groups of Americans in a similar manner?

    Probably not.

    But the establishment has made it clear that it is open season on preppers, so this particular writer mocks them with no fear.

    Not that any prepper that is thinking clearly would go on a show such as “Doomsday Preppers” anyway. Sure, it is nice to be on television, but if you are a serious prepper then one of the last things you want to do is to go on television and advertise your preparations to millions of people.

    Others have picked up on the contempt that the establishment has for preppers and have started to issue their own critiques of the movement. For example, an “emergency manager” named Valerie Lucus-McEwen recently published a blog post entitled “Doomsday Preppers are Socially Selfish” that got a lot of attention…

    You might wonder why someone like me, who has been in the business of encouraging disaster preparedness for a very long time, is so critical of people who are doing just that. It’s because they are being socially selfish – preparing themselves and the hell with everyone else. Instead of spending time and energy making changes that would benefit the larger community, in their very narrow focus of loyalty they are more concerned about themselves.

    Emergency Managers can’t afford that kind of attitude. It is diametrically opposed to everything we do. Our job is to prepare individuals and communities and jurisdictions and regions and – ultimately – the globe for disasters, knowing we won’t always succeed.

    She followed up that venomous attack with another blog post in which she declared the following…
    Selfish is defined as concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself, seeking or concentrating on one’s own advantage or well being without regard for others. By that definition, Doomsday Preppers are socially selfish – Disaster Preppers are not.

    Subsequently, she has issued a very brief apology, but what she wrote is very typical of the type of thinking that is out there these days. Anyone that does not “trust the government” and attempts to become “self-sufficient” is actually very “selfish” and is not “being a good citizen”.

    And sadly, it appears that being a “prepper” is now enough to get special attention from the authorities. For example, a 46-year-old prepper in rural Maryland named Terry Porter recently had his home raided by 150 armed law enforcement officers.

    The details of this incident were described in a recent article by Paul Joseph Watson
    According to a charging document filed in Washington County District Court, Porter “openly admitted to being a prepper” (as if this was an illegal act in and of itself) and said that he was “very irritated” about the recent presidential election.

    Porter had also invested in an underground bomb shelter and had installed surveillance cameras on his property.
    Once the investigation into Porter began, police discovered that he had a 1992 felony drug conviction and was therefore barred from owning firearms. On Thursday last week, no less than 150 armed and militarized police and FBI agents in the guise of tactical assault teams descended on Porter’s house as if they were confronting a terrorist cell. The raid also included helicopters, SWAT crews, armored vehicles and even excavation equipment.Porter was absent at the time of the raid but turned himself in the next morning at Hagerstown Barrack.After the raid, the claim that Porter was stockpiling “10-15 machine gun-style firearms” was demolished when police uncovered “four shotguns, a .30-30-caliber rifle and two .22-caliber rifles,” hardly a deadly mass arsenal.

    Would 150 officers have shown up at his home if he had not been identified as a “prepper”?

    Of course not.

    But “preppers” have been labeled as “dangerous” and “crazy” and that is the way that law enforcement authorities now treat them.

    So why are preppers hated so much?

    It is because they are a direct challenge to the status quo.

    Just by prepping, preppers are proclaiming that they do not have faith in the system.

    But most people have complete and total faith in the system, and many of them do not like to have that faith questioned. As I have written about in other articles, polling has found that most Americans expect that the government will take care of them if disaster strikes. Most people have been trained to “trust the experts” and to “trust the government” all of their lives, and that conditioning can be very difficult to overcome.

    This blind faith in the system is a big reason why so many Americans have not made any preparations at all. In fact, one recent poll discovered that most Americans do not even have three days worth of food in their homes…

    A recent survey found that 55 percent of Americans have less than three days supply of food in their homes. Many people have no emergency supplies, or even a first aid kit.
    That absolutely astounds me.

    Another poll discovered that 64 percent of all Americans are “unprepared for a major natural disaster”.

    So what is going to happen to them if something even worse than a major natural disaster hits?

    For example, what if the electrical grid went down and we had no more power for an extended period of time?

    Well, one survey found that 21 percent of all Americans believe that they would survive for less than a week, and an additional 28 percent of all Americans believe that they would survive for less than two weeks. Close to 75 percent of all Americans said that they would be dead before the two month mark.

    So I guess we sure had better hope and pray that nothing goes seriously wrong, eh?

    The truth is that it isn’t the preppers that are crazy.

    Rather, it is the people that believe that everything will always be fine and that the government will always take care of them that are crazy.

    Our world is becoming increasingly unstable, and now is the time to get prepared.

    You may get mocked a bit for prepping now, but later on you sure will be glad that you prepared for the worst.

    Why Are Preppers Hated So Much?
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts