Breakaway Guide To Censorship, Disinformation, Logical Fallacies & More

logic3
TheBreakaway | BreakawayConciousness
Zy Marquiez
May 18, 2017

As a preamble, let me preface this with a big thanks of appreciation to all of those individuals who have contributed to the crucial information provided below and who have sought to make it available to everyone.

Now, in order to learn how to navigate through the nefarious web of deception created these days within all types of media, there will be five distinct articles cited at length that outline information that’s quite vital for incisive individuals to know so they can become self-sufficient in their ability to discern the truth from veritable smoke screens.  It is suggested these are studied regularly until they are learned given how important and efficient they are.

Logical Fallacies will be the first tool addressed.  This is because logic is arguably one of the most important – if not the most important – tool an individual will have at their disposal in order to maneuver through their everyday life more efficiently, especially when dealing with the daily nonsense that the establishment and mainstream media espouses.  For those seeking additional information on Logic, please read 13 Great Reasons To Study Logic, and Socratic Logic V3.1 by Peter Kreeft Ph.D.

We will commence by citing a piece that was shared earlier this year.

In Logical Fallacies Employed In Every Day Life, we shared:

What is a logical fallacy?

A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Strong arguments are void of logical fallacies, whilst arguments that are weak tend to use logical fallacies to appear stronger than they are. They’re like tricks or illusions of thought, and they’re often very sneakily used by politicians, media, and others to fool people. Below follow some of the more common fallacies.

Strawman
Misrepresenting Someone’s Argument To Make It Easier To Attack
By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone’s argument, it’s much easier to prevent your own position as being reasonable, but this is kind of dishonest and serves to undermine honest rational debate.
Example: After will said we should put more money into health and education, Warren responded by saying he was surprised that Will hates our country so much that he wants to leave it defenseless by cutting military spending.

Slippery Slope
Asserting That If We Allow A to happen, then Z will consequently happen too, therefore A should not happen.
The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture.
Example: Colin Closet asserts that if we allow same-sex couples to marry, then the next thing we know we’ll be allowing people to marry their parents, their cars and even monkeys.

False Cause
Presuming that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other.
Example
: Pointing to a fancy chart, a Senator shows how temperatures have been rising over the past few centuries, whilst at the same time the numbers of terrorist attacks have been increasing; thus global warming causes terrorism. [Don’t believe me? Look it up – an actual senator that said this.]

Ad Hominem
Attacking your opponent’s character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.
Example: After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn’t married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.

Special Pleading
Moving the goalposts to create exceptions when a claim is shown to be false.
Example: Edward Johns claimed to be psychic, but when his ‘abilities’ were tested under proper scientific conditions, they magically disappeared. Edward explained this saying that one had to have faith in his abilities for them to work.

Loaded Question
Asking a question that has an assumption built into it so that it can’t be answered without appearing guilty.
Example: Grace and Helen were both romantically interested in Brad. One day, with Brad sitting within earshot, Grace asked in an inquisitive tone whether Helen was having any problems with a fungal infection.

The Gambler’s Fallacy
Believing that ‘runs’ occur to statistically independent phenomena such as roulette wheel spins.
Example: Red had come up six times in a row on the roulette wheel, so Greg knew that it was close to certain that black would be next up. Suffering an economic form of natural selection with this thinking, he soon lost all of his savings.

Bandwagon
Appealing to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation.
Example: Shamus pointed a drunken finger at Sean and asked him to explain how so many people could believe in leprechauns if they’re only a silly old superstition. Sean, however, had had a few too many Guinness himself and fell off his chair.

Black-Or-White
Where two alternative states are presented as the only possibilities, when in fact more possibilities exist.
Example: Whilst rallying support for his plan to fundamentally undermine citizens’ rights, the Supreme Leader told the people they were either on his side, or on the side of the enemy. [Note: George Bush did this by the way…]

Begging The Questions
A circular argument in which the conclusion is included in the premise.
Example: The word of Zorbo the Great is flawless and perfect. We know this because it says so in The Great and Infallible Book of Zorbo’s Best and Most Truest Things that are Definitely True and Should Not Ever Be Questioned.

Appeal To Authority
Using the opinion or position of an authority figure, or institution of authority, in place of an actual argument.
Example: When an individual states that vaccines are safe just because doctors say so, even though countless studies can be cited to eviscerate the ‘safety’ argument.

Appeal To Nature
Making the argument that because something is ‘natural’ it is therefore valid, justified, inevitable, good, or ideal.
Example: The medicine man rolled into town on his bandwagon offering various natural remedies, such as very special plain water. He said that it was only natural that people should be wary of ‘artificial’ medicines such as antibiotics. The converse is also true, which could be in a way called Appeal To Technology/Science.

Composition / Division
Assuming that what’s true about one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it.
Example: Daniel was a precocious child and had a liking for logic. He reasoned that atoms are invisible, and that he was made of atoms and therefore invisible too. Unfortunately, despite his thinky skills, he lost the game of hide and go seek.

Anecdotal
Using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument.
Example: Jason said that that was all cool and everything, but his grandfather smoked, like, 30 cigarettes a day and lived until 97 – so don’t believe everything you read about meta analyses of sound studies showing proven causal relationships.

Appeal To Emotion
Manipulating an emotional response in place of a valid or compelling argument.
Example: Luke didn’t want to eat his sheep’s brains with chopped liver and brussels sprouts, but his father told him to think about the poor, starving children in a third world country who weren’t fortunate enough to have any food at all.

The Fallacy Fallacy
Presuming that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that it is necessarily wrong.
Example: Recognizing that Amanda had committed a fallacy in arguing that we should eat healthy food because a nutritionist said it was popular, Alyse said we should therefore eat bacon double cheeseburgers every day.

Tu Quoque
Avoiding having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser – answering criticism with criticism.
Example: The blue candidate accused the red candidate of committing the tu quoque fallacy. The red candidate responded by accusing the blue candidate of the same, after which ensued an hour of back and forth criticism with not much progress.

Personal Incredulity
Saying that because one finds something difficult to understand that it’s therefore not true.
Example: Kirk drew a picture of a fish and a human and with effusive disdain asked Richard if he really thought we were stupid enough to believe that a fish somehow turned into a human through just, like, random things happening over time.

Burden Of Proof
Saying that the burden of proof lies not with the person making the claim, but with someone else to disprove.
Examples: Bertrand declares that a teapot is, at this very moment, in orbit around the Sun between the Earth and Mars, and that because no one can prove him wrong his claim is therefore a valid one.

Ambiguity
Using double meanings or ambiguities of language to mislead or misrepresent the truth.
Example: When the judge asked the defendant why he hadn’t paid his parking fines, he said that he shouldn’t have to pay them because the sign said ‘Fine for parking here’ and so he naturally presumed that it would be fine to park there.

No True Scotsman
Making what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of an argument.
Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like atrue Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.

Genetic
Judging something good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it comes.
Example: Accused on the 6 o’clock news of corruption and taking bribes, the senator said that we should all be very wary of the things we hear in the media, because we all know how very unreliable the media can be.

The Texas Sharpshooter
Cherry-picking data clusters to suit an argument, or finding a pattern to fit a presumption.
Example: The makers of Sugarette Candy Drinks point to research showing that of the five countries where Sugarette drinks sell the most units, three of them are in the top ten healthiest countries on Earth, therefore Sugarette drinks are healthy.

Middle Ground
Saying that a compromise, or middle point, between two extremes is the truth.
Example: Holly said that vaccinations are safe, but her scientifically well-read friend Caleb said that this claim was untrue because there were dozens of studies proving otherwise. Their friend Alice offered a compromise that vaccinations are sometimes safe.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Next we will proceed by citing various ways truth if often suppressed.  Many of these techniques are seen nigh daily, which is why its important to remain cognizant of them.

In Thirteen Techniques For Truth Suppression, David Martin of [BrassCheck.com] writes:

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

  1. Dummy up. If it’s not reported, if it’s not news, it didn’t happen.
  2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the “how dare you?” gambit.
  3. Characterize the charges as “rumors” or, better yet, “wild rumors.” If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through “rumors.”
  4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
  5. Call the skeptics names like “conspiracy theorist,” “nut,” “ranter,” “kook,” “crackpot,” and of course, “rumor monger.” You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned.
  6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money.
  7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
  8. Dismiss the charges as “old news.”
  9. Come half-clean. This is also known as “confession and avoidance” or “taking the limited hang-out route.” This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal “mistakes.” This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken.
  10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
  11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They haven’t reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report it.
  12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.
  13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or reporting a distraction.

______________________________________________________________________________

Tackling the fundamentals in Disinformation – How It Works, Brandon Smith [Alt-Market.com] writes:

There was a time, not too long ago (relatively speaking), that governments and the groups of elites that controlled them did not find it necessary to conscript themselves into wars of disinformation.

Propaganda was relatively straightforward. The lies were much simpler. The control of information flow was easily directed. Rules were enforced with the threat of property confiscation and execution for anyone who strayed from the rigid socio-political structure. Those who had theological, metaphysical or scientific information outside of the conventional and scripted collective world view were tortured and slaughtered. The elites kept the information to themselves, and removed its remnants from mainstream recognition, sometimes for centuries before it was rediscovered.

With the advent of anti-feudalism, and most importantly the success of the American Revolution, elitists were no longer able to dominate information with the edge of a blade or the barrel of a gun. The establishment of Republics, with their philosophy of open government and rule by the people, compelled Aristocratic minorities to plot more subtle ways of obstructing the truth and thus maintaining their hold over the world without exposing themselves to retribution from the masses. Thus, the complex art of disinformation was born.

The technique, the “magic” of the lie, was refined and perfected. The mechanics of the human mind and the human soul became an endless obsession for the establishment.

The goal was malicious, but socially radical; instead of expending the impossible energy needed to dictate the very form and existence of the truth, they would allow it to drift, obscured in a fog of contrived data. They would wrap the truth in a Gordian Knot of misdirection and fabrication so elaborate that they felt certain the majority of people would surrender, giving up long before they ever finished unraveling the deceit. The goal was not to destroy the truth, but to hide it in plain sight.

In modern times, and with carefully engineered methods, this goal has for the most part been accomplished. However, these methods also have inherent weaknesses. Lies are fragile. They require constant attentiveness to keep them alive. The exposure of a single truth can rip through an ocean of lies, evaporating it instantly.

In this article, we will examine the methods used to fertilize and promote the growth of disinformation, as well as how to identify the roots of disinformation and effectively cut them, starving out the entire system of fallacies once and for all.

Media Disinformation Methods

The mainstream media, once tasked with the job of investigating government corruption and keeping elitists in line, has now become nothing more than a public relations firm for corrupt officials and their Globalist handlers. The days of the legitimate “investigative reporter” are long gone (if they ever existed at all), and journalism itself has deteriorated into a rancid pool of so called “TV Editorialists” who treat their own baseless opinions as supported fact.

The elitist co-opting of news has been going on in one form or another since the invention of the printing press. However, the first methods of media disinformation truly came to fruition under the supervision of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who believed the truth was “subjective” and open to his personal interpretation.

Some of the main tactics used by the mainstream media to mislead the masses are as follows:

Lie Big, Retract Quietly: Mainstream media sources (especially newspapers) are notorious for reporting flagrantly dishonest and unsupported news stories on the front page, then quietly retracting those stories on the very back page when they are caught. In this case, the point is to railroad the lie into the collective consciousness. Once the lie is finally exposed, it is already too late, and a large portion of the population will not notice or care when the truth comes out.

Unconfirmed Or Controlled Sources As Fact: Cable news venues often cite information from “unnamed” sources, government sources that have an obvious bias or agenda, or “expert” sources without providing an alternative “expert” view. The information provided by these sources is usually backed by nothing more than blind faith.

Calculated Omission: Otherwise known as “cherry picking” data. One simple piece of information or root item of truth can derail an entire disinfo news story, so instead of trying to gloss over it, they simply pretend as if it doesn’t exist. When the fact is omitted, the lie can appear entirely rational. This tactic is also used extensively when disinformation agents and crooked journalists engage in open debate.

Distraction, And The Manufacture Of Relevance: Sometimes the truth wells up into the public awareness regardless of what the media does to bury it. When this occurs their only recourse is to attempt to change the public’s focus and thereby distract them from the truth they were so close to grasping. The media accomplishes this by “over-reporting” on a subject that has nothing to do with the more important issues at hand. Ironically, the media can take an unimportant story, and by reporting on it ad nauseum, cause many Americans to assume that because the media won’t shut-up about it, it must be important!

Dishonest Debate Tactics: Sometimes, men who actually are concerned with the average American’s pursuit of honesty and legitimate fact-driven information break through and appear on T.V. However, rarely are they allowed to share their views or insights without having to fight through a wall of carefully crafted deceit and propaganda. Because the media know they will lose credibility if they do not allow guests with opposing viewpoints every once in a while, they set up and choreograph specialized T.V. debates in highly restrictive environments which put the guest on the defensive, and make it difficult for them to clearly convey their ideas or facts.

TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called “Alinsky Tactics.” Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist, and champion of the lie as a tool for the “greater good”; essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His “Rules for Radicals” were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one’s political opposition. But is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies, and by sacrificing one’s ethics? In reality, his strategies are the perfect format for corrupt institutions and governments to dissuade dissent from the masses. Today, Alinsky’s rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition.
Alinsky’s Strategy: Win At Any Cost, Even If You Have To Lie

Alinsky’s tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world, but they are most visible in TV debate. While Alinsky sermonized about the need for confrontation in society, his debate tactics are actually designed to circumvent real and honest confrontation of opposing ideas with slippery tricks and diversions. Alinsky’s tactics, and their modern usage, can be summarized as follows:

1) Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.

We see this tactic in many forms. For example, projecting your own movement as mainstream, and your opponent’s as fringe. Convincing your opponent that his fight is a futile one. Your opposition may act differently, or even hesitate to act at all, based on their perception of your power. How often have we heard this line: “The government has predator drones. There is nothing the people can do now…” This is a projection of exaggerated invincibility designed to elicit apathy from the masses.

2) Never go outside the experience of your people, and whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.

Don’t get drawn into a debate about a subject you do not know as well as or better than your opposition. If possible, draw them into such a situation instead. Go off on tangents. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty in your opposition. This is commonly used against unwitting interviewees on cable news shows whose positions are set up to be skewered. The target is blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. In television and radio, this also serves to waste broadcast time to prevent the target from expressing his own position.

3) Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

The objective is to target the opponent’s credibility and reputation by accusations of hypocrisy. If the tactician can catch his opponent in even the smallest misstep, it creates an opening for further attacks, and distracts away from the broader moral question.

4) Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.

“Ron Paul is a crackpot.” “Gold bugs are crazy.” “Constitutionalists are fringe extremists.” Baseless ridicule is almost impossible to counter because it is meant to be irrational. It infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage. It also works as a pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

5) A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

The popularization of the term “Teabaggers” is a classic example; it caught on by itself because people seem to think it’s clever, and enjoy saying it. Keeping your talking points simple and fun helps your side stay motivated, and helps your tactics spread autonomously, without instruction or encouragement.

6) A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

See rule No. 5. Don’t become old news. If you keep your tactics fresh, it’s easier to keep your people active. Not all disinformation agents are paid. The “useful idiots” have to be motivated by other means. Mainstream disinformation often changes gear from one method to the next and then back again.

7) Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.

Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. Never give the target a chance to rest, regroup, recover or re-strategize. Take advantage of current events and twist their implications to support your position. Never let a good crisis go to waste.

8) The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

This goes hand in hand with Rule No. 1. Perception is reality. Allow your opposition to expend all of its energy in expectation of an insurmountable scenario. The dire possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.

9) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

The objective of this pressure is to force the opposition to react and make the mistakes that are necessary for the ultimate success of the campaign.

10) If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.

As grassroots activism tools, Alinsky tactics have historically been used (for example, by labor movements or covert operations specialists) to force the opposition to react with violence against activists, which leads to popular sympathy for the activists’ cause. Today, false (or co-opted) grassroots movements and revolutions use this technique in debate as well as in planned street actions and rebellions (look at Syria for a recent example).

11) The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. Today, this is often used offensively against legitimate activists, such as the opponents of the Federal Reserve. Complain that your opponent is merely “pointing out the problems.” Demand that they offer not just “a solution”, but THE solution. Obviously, no one person has “the” solution. When he fails to produce the miracle you requested, dismiss his entire argument and all the facts he has presented as pointless.

12) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. The target’s supporters will expose themselves. Go after individual people, not organizations or institutions. People hurt faster than institutions.

The next time you view an MSM debate, watch the pundits carefully, you will likely see many if not all of the strategies above used on some unsuspecting individual attempting to tell the truth.
Internet Disinformation Methods

Internet trolls, also known as “paid posters” or “paid bloggers,” are increasingly and openly being employed by private corporations as well governments, often for marketing purposes and for “public relations” (Obama is notorious for this practice). Internet “trolling” is indeed a fast growing industry.

Trolls use a wide variety of strategies, some of which are unique to the internet, here are just a few:

  1. Make outrageous comments designed to distract or frustrate: An Alinsky tactic used to make people emotional, although less effective because of the impersonal nature of the Web.
  2. Pose as a supporter of the truth, then make comments that discredit the movement: We have seen this even on our own forums — trolls pose as supporters of the Liberty Movement, then post long, incoherent diatribes so as to appear either racist or insane. The key to this tactic is to make references to common Liberty Movement arguments while at the same time babbling nonsense, so as to make those otherwise valid arguments seem ludicrous by association. In extreme cases, these “Trojan Horse Trolls” have been known to make posts which incite violence — a technique obviously intended to solidify the false assertions of the think tank propagandists like the SPLC, which purports that Constitutionalists should be feared as potential domestic terrorists.
  3. Dominate Discussions: Trolls often interject themselves into productive Web discussions in order to throw them off course and frustrate the people involved.
  4. Prewritten Responses: Many trolls are supplied with a list or database with pre-planned talking points designed as generalized and deceptive responses to honest arguments. When they post, their words feel strangely plastic and well rehearsed.
  5. False Association: This works hand in hand with item No. 2, by invoking the stereotypes established by the “Trojan Horse Troll.” For example: calling those against the Federal Reserve “conspiracy theorists” or “lunatics”; deliberately associating anti-globalist movements with racists and homegrown terrorists, because of the inherent negative connotations; and using false associations to provoke biases and dissuade people from examining the evidence objectively.
  6. False Moderation: Pretending to be the “voice of reason” in an argument with obvious and defined sides in an attempt to move people away from what is clearly true into a “grey area” where the truth becomes “relative.”
  7. Straw Man Arguments: A very common technique. The troll will accuse his opposition of subscribing to a certain point of view, even if he does not, and then attacks that point of view. Or, the troll will put words in the mouth of his opposition, and then rebut those specific words.

Sometimes, these strategies are used by average people with serious personality issues. However, if you see someone using these tactics often, or using many of them at the same time, you may be dealing with a paid internet troll.

Stopping Disinformation

The best way to disarm disinformation agents is to know their methods inside and out. This gives us the ability to point out exactly what they are doing in detail the moment they try to do it. Immediately exposing a disinformation tactic as it is being used is highly destructive to the person utilizing it. It makes them look foolish, dishonest and weak for even making the attempt. Internet trolls most especially do not know how to handle their methods being deconstructed right in front of their eyes and usually fold and run from debate when it occurs.

The truth is precious. It is sad that there are so many in our society who have lost respect for it; people who have traded in their conscience and their soul for temporary financial comfort while sacrificing the stability and balance of the rest of the country in the process.

The human psyche breathes on the air of truth. Without it, humanity cannot survive. Without it, the species will collapse, starving from lack of intellectual and emotional sustenance.

Disinformation does not only threaten our insight into the workings of our world; it makes us vulnerable to fear, misunderstanding, and doubt: all things that lead to destruction. It can drive good people to commit terrible atrocities against others, or even against themselves. Without a concerted and organized effort to diffuse mass-produced lies, the future will look bleak indeed.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Knowing how disinformation works, now we will take a gander at 25 Rules Of Disinformation that were written by H. Michael Sweeney, although we found them personally at WashingtonsBlog.com:

Preface: This handy set of rules covers most of the games which disinformation artists play on the Internet (and offline). When you know the tricks, you’ll be able to spot the games. Even if you’ve read this list before, you might be surprised at how useful it is to brush up on these tricks.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

  1. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.
  2. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumors”. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.
  3. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
  4. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
  5. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
  6. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
  7. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
  8. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
  9. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
  10. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
  11. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
  12. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.
  13. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
  14. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
  15. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
  16. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
  17. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”.
  18. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
  19. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
  20. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
  21. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
  22. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
  23. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
  24. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Now to anchor all of the above information, we will cite How To Spot – And Defeat – Disruption On The Internet which comes from WashingtonsBlog.com:

We’ve seen a number of tactics come and go over the years.  Here are the ones we see a lot of currently.

  1. Start a partisan divide-and-conquer fight or otherwise push emotional buttons to sow discord and ensure that cooperation is thwarted.   Get people fighting against each other instead of the corrupt powers-that-be.  Use baseless caricatures to rile everyone up.  For example,  start a religious war whenever possible using stereotypes like “all Jews are selfish”, “all Christians are crazy” or “all Muslims are terrorists”.  Accuse the author of being a gay, pro-abortion limp-wristed wimp  or being a fundamentalist pro-war hick when the discussion has nothing to do with abortion, sexuality, religion, war or region.  Appeal to people’s basest prejudices and biases. And – as Sweeney explains – push the author into a defensive posture:

Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule … Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

  1. Pretend it’s hopeless because we’ll be squashed if we try.  For example, every time a whistleblower leaks information, say “he’s going to be bumped off”.   If people talk about protesting, organizing, boycotting, shareholder activism, spreading the real facts, moving our money or taking other constructive action, write things to scare and discourage people, say something like  “we don’t have any chance because they have drones and they’ll just kill us if we try”,  or “Americans are too stupid, lazy and greedy, so they’ll never help out.”  Encourage people to be apathetic instead of trying to change things.
  2. Demand complete, fool-proof and guaranteed solutions to the problems being discussed.   For example, if a reporter breaks the story that the big banks conspired to rig a market, ask “given that people are selfish and that no regulation can close all possible loopholes … how are you going to change human nature?”, and pretend that it’s not worth talking about the details of the market manipulation.  This discourages people from reporting on and publicizing the corruption, fraud and other real problems.  And it ensures that not enough people will spread the facts so that the majority know what’s really going on.
  3. Suggest extreme, over-the-top, counter-productive solutions which will hurt more than help, or which are wholly disproportionate to what is being discussed.   For example, if the discussion is whether or not to break up the big banks or to go back on the gold standard, say that everyone over 30  should be killed because they are sell-outs and irredeemable, or that all of the banks should be bombed. This discredits the attempt to spread the facts and to organize, and is simply the web method of the provocateur.
  4. Pretend that alternative media – such as blogs written by the top experts in their fields, without any middleman – are untrustworthy or are motivated solely by money (for example, use the derogatory term “blogspam” for any blog posting, pretending that there is no original or insightful reporting, but that the person is simply doing it for ad revenue).
  5. Coordinate with a couple of others to “shout down” reasonable comments.  This is especially effective when the posters launch an avalanche of comments in quick succession … the original, reasonable comment gets lost or attacked so much that it is largely lost.
  6. Use an army of sock puppets.  You can either hire low-wage workers in India or other developing countries to “astroturf” or – if you work for the government – you can use hire military personnel and subcontractors to monitor social media and “correct” information which you don’t like (and see this), or use software which allows you to quickly create and alternate between numerous false identities, each with their own internet address.
  7. Censor social media, so that the hardest-hitting information is buried. If you can’t censor it, set up “free speech zones” to push dissent into dank, dark corners where no one will see it.
  8. When the powers-that-be cut corners and take criminally reckless gambles with our lives and our livelihoods, protect them by pretending that the inevitable result – nuclear accidents, financial crisesterrorist attacks or other disasters – were “unforeseeable” and that “no could have known”.
  9. Protect the rich and powerful by labeling any allegations of criminal activity as being a “conspiracy theory”.  For example, when Goldman gets caught rigging markets, label the accusations as mere conspiracies.

The following 4 tactics from Sweeney are also still commonly used …

  1. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.
  2. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
  3. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
  4. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
  5. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

Postscript:  Over a number of years, we’ve found that the most effective way to fight disruption and disinformation is to link to a post such as this one which rounds up disruption techniques, and then to cite the disinfo technique you think is being used.

Specifically, we’ve found the following format to be highly effective in educating people in a non-confrontational manner about what the disrupting person is doing:

Good Number 1!

Or:

Thanks for that textbook example of Number 7!

(include the link so people can see what you’re referring to.)

The reason this is effective is that other readers will learn about the specific disruption tactic being used … in context, like seeing wildlife while holding a wildlife guide, so that one learns what it looks like “in the field”.   At the same time, you come across as humorous and light-hearted instead of heavy-handed or overly-intense.

__________________________________________________________________________________

The above amalgamation of tools, techniques, tips, and data points should not only be able to help individuals ascertain the modus operandi used against them regarding censorship, disinformation, deception et al. but also assist in what to do in response to them where applicable.

Be it a newcomer, or an old timer, this information will serve as an excellent foundation for those looking to learn the ways that the establishment casts its nefarious webs, or perhaps serve as a review to those that have been doing this for a long time.

Make sure to review it from time to time in order to make sure it’s not forgotten.

___________________________________________________________

Suggested resources reviewed below for those seeking ideas to self-teach and become autodidacts:

7 Phenomenal Books For Homeschoolers, Self-Directed Learners & Autodidacts
13 Great Reasons To Study Logic
Open Source Education – Examples
What’s An Elite Education?  Famous Teacher Explains
Socratic Logic V3.1 by Peter Kreeft Ph.D.
The Trivium – The Liberal Arts Of Grammar & Rhetoric by Sister Miriam Joseph Ph.D.
How To Read A Book – The Classic Guide To Intelligent Reading by Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren
Philosophy 101 – An Introduction To Philosophy Via Plato’s Apology by Peter Kreeft Ph.D.
The Complete Workbook For Arguments – A Complete Course In Critical Thinking [2nd Ed.] by David R. Morrow & Anthony Weston
The Imaginative Argument – A Practical Manifesto For Writers by Frank L. Cioffi
Sherlock Holmes – The Complete Stories by Arthur Conan Doyle

The following books reviewed below cover the disturbing issues within the public schooling system:

Rotten To The Common Core by Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.& Gary Lawrence
Dumbing Us Down – The Hidden Curriculum Of Compulsory Schooling by John Taylor Gatto
A Different Kind Of Teacher – Solving The Crisis Of American Schooling by John Taylor Gatto
Weapons Of Mass Instruction by John Taylor Gatto
Drilling Through The Core, by Sandra Stotsky & Contributors

Related Links:

The True Purpose Of Modern Schooling
How A Generation Lots Its Culture by Professor Patrick Deneen
Underground History Of American Education With John Taylor Gatto
The Pathological Methodology Of Forced Schooling
Charlotte Iserbyt – The Secret History Of Western Education [Full Documentary]
Against School – How Public Education Cripples Our Kids & Why
Lessons From IKEA Founder & MIT Admissions Director
What Is Education?  Elite Curriculum

___________________________________________________________
This article is free and open source.  All individuals are encouraged to share this content and have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Zy Marquiez and TheBreakaway.wordpress.com.
___________________________________________________________
About The Author:

Zy Marquiez is an avid book reviewer, researcher, an open-minded skeptic, yogi, humanitarian, and freelance writer who studies and mirrors regularly subjects like Consciousness, Education, Creativity, The Individual, Ancient History & Ancient Civilizations, Forbidden Archaeology, Big Pharma, Alternative Health, Space, Geoengineering, Social Engineering, Propaganda, and much more.

His other blog, BreakawayConsciousnessBlog.wordpress.com features mainly his personal work, while TheBreakaway.wordpress.com serves as a media portal which mirrors vital information nigh always ignored by mainstream press, but still highly crucial to our individual understanding of various facets of the world.

Breakaway Guide To Simplifying Your Life

By: Zy Marquiez
January 17, 2016

“Simplicity is the ultimate form of sophistication.”
– Leonardo Da Vinci

“If you can’t explain it simple enough, you can’t understand it well enough.”
– Albert Einstein

———————–

Upon musing a bit about the term ‘simplicity’ it occurred to me to search for the term “Law of Simplicity”. There were many tips on simplifying everything, and countless permutations of the idea in various ways, but no actual law [that was apparent to me] that could be easily shared. If anyone finds a solid ‘simple’ [pun intended] then please share it with us, as its pertinent to the focus of this blog.

Let’s get to the core of the issue: simplicity.

Two definitions according to dictionary.com are:

“the state, quality, or an instance of being simple.”

“freedom from complexity, intricacy, or division into parts.”

Pretty straight forward, right?

For our purposes we will distil it one step further for the purposes of this blog and say: to keep things as simple and as practical as possible. Simple.

You must be asking yourself, why are we even talking about this topic? Great question.

Because depending on what point of view one uses, and in this case we’ll use a detached-macro point of view of society as a whole, then it’s pretty obvious people tend to complicate their lives way more than they should.

These complications seep into every aspect of an individual’s life, and end up taxing them in countless way.

Are people even cognizant of it? Some definitely are; however, many are not.

Here are what some incisive minds have stated about keeping things simple:

“Beauty of style and harmony and grace and good rhythm depend on simplicity”
– Plato

“Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance.”
– Coco Chanel

“Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated.”
– Confucius

“In character, in manner, in style, in all things, the supreme excellence is simplicity.”
– Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

“Be as simple as you can be; you will be astonished to see how uncomplicated and happy your life can become.”
– Paramahansa Yoganda

– Simplicity will stand out, while complexity will get lost in the crowd.”
– Kevin Barnett

“The ability to simplify means to eliminate the unnecessary so that the necessary may speak.”
– Hans Hoffman

“The greatest ideas are the simplest.”
– William Golding

– “If you can’t explain it to a six year old, you don’t understand it yourself.”
– Albert Einstein

“It is not a daily increase, but a daily decrease. Hack away at the inessentials.”
– Bruce Lee

Its quite noteworthy that such individuals engaged in this particular thought process. It alludes to the importance of this topic.

Keeping the above insights in mind, what are some aspects of life that people tend to complicate?

Relationships, food, health, politics, etc.

Relationships? That should be an obvious one, and one everyone can relate too. Let’s distill this in its most simplest form.

If someone – be it a lover, friend, acquaintance, etc – in a relationship treats you like trash, all the time, or heck, most of the time, then they’re probably definitely not worth your time/energy. Bam. Simple. No excuses. Once you start justifying the erroneous actions of others as righteous [for whatever] reason, or giving them excuses, when it’s obvious they just don’t truly care [if they did, they wouldn’t be treating you like crap, all the time], you’re doing yourself a world of disservice.

It doesn’t matter if they are family or not. In fact, family members in many situations get away with everything AND the kitchen sink because they are family. Remember, putting up with their bullshit is a choice. No excuses. Keep it as simple as you wish, or as complicated.

Next on the menu, food.

Food? Why food? Because eating things that are a poor excuse for food, only makes things complicated.

If you don’t believe me, look at the epidemic of diseases that’s rampant costing hundreds of thousands of lives due to many reasons, a strong one being food. Why food? Because much of food is laden with toxins such as fluoride, aspartame, GMOs, etc. Each of those by itself can cause diseases. When taken in combination, which most people do, it’s a toxic free for all and your health is on the menu.

How to simplify this? Easy. Eat the best, most healthy food that you can. Nourish your body with that which empowers it.

Health being the most vital component in life, let’s elaborate further to be more precise.

Researching Non-Genetically modified, organic, locally grown [if possible] pesticide free food is a good great start. Making sure you drink fluoride-free water is even better.

Many can attest to the wonders of having real, nutrient-dense food like our ancestors did. A great book that talks about this is The Paleo Approach by Sarah Balantyne. Coupled with that, another outstanding book to keep in mind is Gut & Psychology Syndrome, by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride MD. The latter book touches on the intricate complexities of the human gut system, and how that fuels disease when your microbiota has been eviscerated by processed foods.

Why is ‘going out of your way’ [as some people argue] to eat real food worth it? Because not doing it is costing millions of lives. Sugar alone, which most people have in processed foods, fuels cancer like liquors fuel parties on the weekends. It’s insane how many people don’t know the inflammatory effects of sugar. That’s only one aspect of food that causes death. There are many more ingredients beyond sugar that should be incisively contemplated.

Unfortunately, sugar has been linked to countless other diseases.

In the article, The Truth About Sugar Addiction, Dr. Mercola sheds light onto 76 different ways sugar can ruin your health.

As a wise person once said, you pay for your health now with real food, or you pay for it later with disease, money and life.

Next on the list, is health.

One might be prompted to think , ‘Didn’t we just cover health?’ From the food angle, yes. From other angles, no.

Food already dovetails quite well into health. That’s only a start. Let’s buttress the above with another point.

As said mentioned elsewhere:

If the average person spends 5-hours daily watching television, then they are probably sitting too much. Sitting too much has dire consequences for one’s health, as some of you may know.

In his article named Watching Too Much TV Linked To Early Death, Dr. Mercola elucidates best:

If you watch television for three or more hours a day, your risk of premature death is double that of someone who watches only one hour or less, according to new research published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.1 The health risks of too much sedentary behavior, including too much sitting, are now widely known.” [Bold emphasis added]

If you want more information about that, please read Dr Mercola’s article cited above. It’s quite detailed and thought-provoking, if sobering.

The above information should be enough to make people contemplate deeply about the health choices they are making. Keep in mind, we’re only talking about sitting and watching TV.

Solution? Stay active. No complicated suggestions here. Just do anything that gets you moving, and bam, you’re health is better than it was if you’re remaining stagnant.

Lastly, politics.

Boy oh boy, where can’t we go here?

In interest of simplicity, let’s synthesize this to the most simplest form.

If a scoundrel politician – regardless of whatever party they are from – lies, they shouldn’t be trusted. If they are caught being bought-off by special interest, they shouldn’t be trusted. And of course, if they are caught stealing, they should not be trusted. No exceptions. What’s so hard about that?

Blind trust of those that throw y/our interests under the bus, each and every day is exactly how we got here in the first place.

When people are not held accountable, they will unleash crimes of godlike proportions. Just look at Wall Maul Street.

In a quick synopsis:

If someone treats you poorly, let them go. Eat real non-GMO organic healthy foods like our ancestors did, if not your life/health will become exponentially complicated. Quit sitting so much while watching TV & don’t trust lying crooks. Solid advice, right?

Simple.

To finalize, within the confines of this blog, ‘the law of simplicity’ will be used to denote instances where we will be making issues as simple as possible for the individual. In such a way, life will be much easier to navigate through, and things that used to be chaotic will literally crumble right before your eyes. Many have reaped these rewards. It’s time for everyone else to do so as well.

The only thing left is making the choice.

Make your life as simple as you wish, or as complicated.

The choice is yours.

“Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things.”
– Isaac Newton

“Nothing is more simple than greatness; indeed, to be simple is to be great.”
– Ralph Waldo Emerson

“How many undervalue the power of simplicity! But it is the real key to the heart.”
– William Wordsworth

————————————————————————–

Sources & References:

The Breakaway Guide To Fluoride
The Breakaway Guide To Aspartame
Growing Doubt – A Scientist’s Experience With GMOs
[Review] Recommended Book -The Paleo Approach: Reverse Autoimmune Disease and Heal Your Body by Sarah Balantyne, Ph.D
[Review] Gut And Psychology Syndrome by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride MD
Here is How Candida May Actually Cause Cancer
http://articles.mercola.com/sugar-addiction.aspx
http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2014/07/11/watching-tv-premature-death.aspx

The Breakaway Guide To The CDC [Part 2]

By: Zy Marquiez
December 27, 2015

If the CDC’s [Centers For Disease Control] credibility [or lack thereof] hasn’t been teetering on the brink, then it has surely has fallen of the deep-end.

Over a year ago, the CDC was banging the drumbeats of war pandemics in an effort to fuel fears of ebola.

The CDC’s ineptitude was proven – yet again – with the fact that they admitted that Ebola can now spread through the air, despite them saying not long ago contradictory statements.

Of course, the widespread fear of Ebola spawned intense fear, and the main example is the fact that , 250,000 hazmat suits were sent to Dallas, TX.

There were many folks attempting to make this alleged pandemic [in which nigh nobody seemed to get sick] seem far larger than it really was.

Yet, even if it was a real pandemic, one death in the amount of time that it was here on US soil, coupled with the fact that the exposure that had taken place [via incompetence, or worse] was quite common, made all that took place seem rather weak and all the intense fear overblown. Fear sells though.

There are worse issues that are taking place on a daily basis, year in and year out.

One of these has been outlined and spoken at length by investigative journalist/researcher Jon Rappoport of NomoreFakeNews.com.

Rappoport has elucidated numerous times about the rather incisive example of this is the fact that at according a study conducted by Dr. Barbara Starfield in July 26, 2000 that was published in the JAMA titled Is US Health Really the Best in the World?” 225,000 Americans die every year due to medical mistakes. That is composed by 119,000 deaths that were due to errors committed in hospitals, and 106,000 deaths a year by FDA-approved drugs.

Those studies are nigh two decades old, and they are still staggering. Newer numbers elucidate to something vastly worse.

That goes without saying, with flu season among us, and Ebola displaying ‘flu like symptoms’, it surely is quite convenient for vaccines pushers that Ebola’s symptom’s mirror those of the flu.

It really wouldn’t surprise me if we began hearing Ebola fears being fanned again rather soon.

With that in mind, Johnson & Johnson not long ago announced it plans to have 250,000 experimental Ebola vaccines ready to go soon. In conjunction with that, they will push to have 1,000,000 vaccines prepared by next year

This entire ordeal seemed like the dream scenario for vaccine pushers. There was:

a] an alleged virus that can prompt extreme fear based on myriad symptoms;
b] which allows for a greater number of [false] possible victims to be established/quarantined;
c] conveniently taking place at the nascent stages of yet another hyped up virus, which mirrors the very symptoms Ebola is claimed to have;
d] being managed in a way that if it such pandemic had really taken place, the government seemed to be doing everything possible not to stop, but to allow this to spread by bringing more and more people within the country;
e] thus allowing Big Pharma/Big Medica to reap untold profits the longer this continues.

That is exactly the point. By this playing out over the long term this allows for calculated [incremental, perhaps, given Ebola’s nigh non-existent spread rate] control and perhaps medical martial law of the populace, whilst simultaneously allowing those who own the patents for the vaccines to make untold millions.

Sure seemed like something out of a script, didn’t it?

It goes to show the lack of insight, foresight and common sense bandied about by the brass at the Centers For Disease Control Creation.

In fact, we can expect even a larger propaganda campaign to be launched next time this happens. Bank on it. That is their modus operandi.

Don’t forget the fact that with flu season among us, the amount of false-positives if this happens will also be high because of the flu, and also given the inaccuracies of the PCR test.

Dream scenario for the vaccine pushers?

Yes indeed. Only if we allow it to be.

————————————————————-
Sources:
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2015/12/17/the-breakway-guide-to-the-cdc-part-1/
http://www.naturalnews.com/047430_ebola_airborne_transmission_cdc.html
http://www.infowars.com/exclusive-u-s-government-orders-250000-hazmat-suits-to-be-sent-to-dallas/
https://wordpress.com/post/thebreakaway.wordpress.com/1915
http://naturalsociety.com/johnson-johnson-1-million-experimental-ebola-vaccine-doses-ready-public/
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/08/05/ebola-the-us-diagnostic-test-is-utterly-ureliable/

The Breakway Guide To The CDC – [Part 1]

CDC Protocol

“Trust is the glue of life.  It’s the most essential ingredient in effective communication.  It’s the foundational principle that holds all relationships.”
– Stephen Covey

———————————————–

By: Zy Marquiez
December 17, 2015

A lot of citizens are currently concerned about a possible Ebola pandemic scenario. Who could blame them? Most are taught as younglings to believe that government is good while also taught to trust authority. Police, Firemen, Nurses, Teachers, Bankers, are just some of the examples of positions which people surrender authority too without thinking twice.

When was the last time you, or anybody else for that matter, when in a position of emergency actually bothered to check someone’s credentials verifying them with the local Police Station, Hospital, etc.? Absolutely nobody. People just assume the individuals that seem like a person of authority are in fact that.

Usually that happens when the dilemma is a vital one, correct? Except, nobody knows what skeletons any of those individuals might be hiding in their proverbial closets. And in the days where priests – again, another position of authority – can be part of pedophile rings, anything is possible.

Which brings me to my next point: the all-knowing Centers for Disease Control [CDC].

The notorious CDC, which was founded in 1946, claims that it wants its healthcare workers to be ‘safe and prepared’.   Who doesn’t want that? With such rosy words being bandied about by this private organization, once again, many people are quick to trust those in positions of authority.

Simply because someone, or something – such institution for instance – is in position of authority does not mean that they know what they are doing, and it certainly does not mean they are trustworthy.

Surely, there are many great individuals in places of authority, but these points are not about them. It is about the blind trust that is taught to children, who whence turned into adults are unprepared to critically think and evaluate each scenario that arises in their lives with a fine-toothed comb, so to speak.

Now, everyone makes mistakes. We progress and learn from them on a case by case basis. Institutions, corporations and business are no different. But Government entities, business, and corporations should be held by high standards because they have the ability to affect tens of millions of people. With such power should come greater responsibility/accountability.

We are not seeing that with the CDC, however. What we are witnessing are incomprehensible actions that leave you nigh breathless in respect to their slated dictum.

One would figure such an institution would have the public’s well-being at heart. Such is not the case though.

Would a trustworthy institution in a position of authority collude with Big Pharma to conceal data on 3,500 miscarriages that took place from the H1N1?

Would a trustworthy institution in a position of authority misrepresent raw milk data, which has the ability to help tens of thousands of individuals?

Would a trustworthy institution in a position of authority continue the fallacy of antibody theory, which was exposed nigh five decades ago, and keep advocating for vaccinations when there is ample evidence of their extensive dangers?

Would a trustworthy institution in a position of authority opt to patent Ebola? A patent basically not only allows the person/institution that patented the invention to profit from it, but it also grants exclusive rights to them, thus preventing others from exploiting such ventures.

The plot thickens sickens

Knowing the above information, should we not be concerned?

Weigh the above carefully in your mind.   Ponder about what the ramifications are, because they are only the tip of the iceberg.  Keep in mind, the above examples are simply but a select few of a much larger collection of ‘mishaps’.

With that in mind, would YOU bet your LIFE and those of whom you love on such an institution?

As always, the choice is yours.

————————————————————-

Sources:
http://www.infowars.com/pope-francis-1-in-50-clerics-is-a-pedophile/
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/08/02/merck-flu-vaccine-conflicts.aspx
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/01/cdc-misrepresents-raw-milk-statistics.aspx
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/study-disproves-cdcs-primary-justification-vaccination
http://www.naturalnews.com/046290_Ebola_patent_vaccines_profit_motive.html
https://www.google.com/patents/CA2741523A1?cl=en

The Breakaway Guide To The FDA – [Part 1]

By: Zy Marquiez
December 16, 2015

There are many agencies in power whose premise is supposedly to protect a certain aspect of your life, health for instance.  The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] happens to be one of those agencies.

By their very website their charter clearly states:

“FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.”1

Some would surmise that since the FDA – with the above maxim to boot – is a Government Agency, then it must be doing its’ job.  However, nothing could be further from the truth.

A few glaring instances of their failure to follow their very adage will be presented below.  These examples implicitly dissolve the FDA’s very dictum.

Let’s now take a gander at an excerpt from the unparalleled book 63 Documents The Government Dosn’t Want You To Read by Jesse Ventura & Dick Russell.

BackGround

Each year, more than 300,000 Americans are hospitalized and 5,000 die after consuming contaminated foods and beverages.  Recent high-profile outbreaks of foodborne illness have raised serious questions about FDA’s inspections process and its ability to protect the Nation’s food supply.  The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry requested that the Office of Inspector General [OIG] review the extent to which FDA conducts food facility inspections and identifies violations.

FDA inspects food facilities to ensure food safety and compliance with regulations. During an inspection, FDA inspectors may identify potential violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act as well as other applicable laws and regulations.  Based on the outcome of the inspection, FDA assigns a facility one of three classifications: official action indicated [OAI], voluntary action indicated [VAI], or no action indicated [NAI].  In addition, FDA may choose to change a facility’s initial classification to another classification under certain circumstances.

FDA relies on several approaches to determine whether a facility corrected the violations found by inspectors.  FDA may review evidence provided by a food facility describing any completed corrective actions.  FDA may also reinspect a facility to verify that corrections were made.

Findings

On average, FDA inspects less than a quarter of food facilities each year, and the number of facilities inspected has declined over time.  Between the fiscal years [FY] 2004 & 2008, FDA inspected annually an average of 24 percent of the food facilities subject to its inspection.  Except for a few instances, there are no specific guidelines that govern the frequency with which inspections should occur.  Further, the number of food facilities that FDA inspected declined between FY’s 2004 & 2008, even as the number of food facilities increased.  In addition, the number of inspections of facilities that have been desginated by FDA as “high risk” has also declined.  FDA officials noted the overall decline in FDA inspections was largely due to a decline in staffing levels.

Fifty-six percent of food facilities have gone 5 or more years without an FDA inspection.  FDA identified 51,229 food facilities that were subject to inspection and were in business from the start of FY 2004 until the end of FY 2008.  Of these, 56 percent were not inspected at all, 14 percent were inspected a single time, and the remaining 30 percent were inspected two or more times.  If FDA does not routinely inspect food facilities, it is unable to guarantee that these facilities are complying with applicable laws and regulations.

The number of facilities that received OAI classifications has declined over time.  The number of inspected facilities that received OAI classsficiations decreased from 614 in FY 204 to 283 in FY 2008.  The percentage of facilities that received OAI classifications also dropped from nearly 4 percent to nearly 2 percent during this 5-year period.  In addition, nearly three-quarters of the facilities that received OAI classifications in FY 2008 had a history of violations.  Two percent of facilities that received OAI classifications refused to grant FDA officials access to their records.

FDA took regulatory action againts 46 percent of the facilities with initial OAI classifications; for the remainder, FDA either lowered the classification or took no regulatory action.  In FY 2007, a total of 446 facilities initialy received OAI classifications.  FDA took regulatory action against 46 percent of these facilities.  For the remainder, FDA lowered the OAI classification for 29 percent and took no regulatory action for 25 percent.

For 36 percent of the facilities with OAI classifications in FY 2007, FDA took no additional steps to ensure that the violations were corrected.  In FY 2007, 280 facilities received OAI classifications that were not lowered by FDA.  For 36 percent of these facilities, FDA did not reinspect them within a year of the inspection or review other evidence provided by facilities to ensure that the violations were corrected.2

As can be gathered by the information above, the FDA has had an extremely questionable modus operandi for starters.  Their failure to act in many circumstances against violating facilities not only shows their lack of initiative to tackle issues that are imperative, but in addition also showcases the downright negligence to carry out their charter, which poses a great threat to the American public’s health.

The fact that the FDA does not also have the manpower to conduct its much needed operations is no excuse for the poor inspection performance either.

In addition to their lassitude in face of violations, the FDA has also undertaken a censorship operation in attacking walnuts, not only claiming they pose no health benefits, but also stating them to be “unapproved drugs.”3 In fact there is plentiful evidence that points to the contrary.Not only have walnuts been shown to help againts osteoporosis, but its also been shown to safeguard againts cancer.5

Now why would the FDA undertake a campaign against a food that helps fight cancer?  Was that just one case in which they attacked by ‘coincidence’ a beneficial food, or are there other examples of this?  Do they have an agenda we do not know about?  Is there additional evidence of this?  We will continue to ask questions and dig deeper into the FDA’s hazardous track record.

For now, always remember, healthy skepticism never hurt anybody.  And always make sure to do your research irrespective of topic – it can only be beneficial.

The choice is yours, always.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Sources for this article:

[1] http://www.fda.gov/aboutfda/whatwedo/default.htm

[2] 63 Document’s The Government Does Not Want You To Read.  Jesse Ventura & Dick Russell.  Skyhorse Publishing.  New York.  2011.  p.146, 147, 148.

[3] http://www.naturalnews.com/029698_censorship_FDA.html

[4http://www.naturalnews.com/034951_walnuts_prostate_cancer_osteoporosis.html

[5] http://www.naturalnews.com/028584_walnuts_prostate_cancer.html

What Does It Mean To ‘Breakaway’?

By: Zy Marquiez
December 21, 2015

The term breakaway is an outgrowth/spawn from the notion of the ‘Breakaway Civilization’. The term ‘Breakaway Civilization’ was an idea that is the brainchild of historian and notable scholar Richard Dolan, who coined the term a few years ago.

Behind this particular premise lies [pun intended] a group of people so sophisticated they operated literally as a separate civilization from the rest of humanity. This is given to the extremely advanced knowledge and technological capabilities/infrastructure that they were able to create/reverse engineer not only by learning what they could from deeply classified black projects et al, but also from essentially monopolizing information and controlling access to it, thus preventing the rest of society/humanity from benefiting from such advanced progress.

Richard Dolan tackles this notion best in his special analysis called A Breakaway Civilization: What It Is, & What It Means For Us.

Dolan implores us to consider:

“Now ask yourself, given (a) great secrecy, (b) great amounts of money, (c) several decades, (d) enough genius-level scientists working for you, and (e) extraterrestrial or alien technology to study, is it possible for key breakthroughs to be made without the rest of the world ever learning of them? Breakthroughs so substantial that they create new areas of scientific study, new technologies, new capabilities, new interactions with these “others,” and as a result a radically new understanding of humanity itself and the cosmos within which we live?

Would such changes result in a clandestine world so different that it might qualify as a separate civilization? One that has broken away from our own?

I think the answer to that is yes.”

That should elucidate quite well the conundrum that he is analyzing.

On one hand, as elucidated above, we have the idea of a Breakaway Civilization – a select group of people which has detached from humanity and created its own metastructure. Such a sophisticated/advanced civilization is undoubtedly powerful given the technological progression, which would not be linear by any means.

On the other hand, for the purpose of this and future blogs, we will now focus on the term ‘Breakaway’ as we intend to use for the basis of this, and future blogs.

For our intended purposes, the term Breakaway will apply in its most simplest form, to the single individual at a local level.

Just to clear [assumptions] it up, this is not intended to mean or pertain to infer that individuals have to have the capability to do exactly what the Breakaway Civilizations have accomplished. Far from it.
However, as individuals, its meant to be pondered deeply as to how an individual can breakaway from the current control grid that taxes every facet of their life.

By control grid, we mean the for-profit, financially-taxing, propaganda-laden, disease-causing, mind-reducing, war-profiteering, Big Brother surveillance stage grid that has been covertly weaved/webbed around the asleep populace.

The beauty of this conundrum is that, one need not believe in the thesis of Mr. Dolan – which is a strong one, mind you – for one to be able to see the benefits an individual – who is the foundation of society – can accrue at the local level if they were doing everything possible for the betterment of their health/finance/time.

Why couldn’t an individual decrease their dependency on a system that taxes their time, health, and money in more ways than most can imagine?

Don’t think it’s possible? People are already doing aspects of it. It’s called self-sufficiency. Is it possible right now to quit being reliant on every aspect of society? Who knows? However, that does not mean that one need not dissolve individual dependency by continually funding the very system that burdens your life, and that of your kith and kin.

In the end, breaking away is just an idea. But an idea that when carried out thoroughly, consistently relentlessly & methodically will net individual results that will allow people/families/communities to live a healthier life.

Imagine as an individual or a family, not having to rely on the system for food, power, or corporations for certain jobs. A lot of things can be done from home. That’s just the tip of the proverbial iceberg too.

In the end, it’s a choice.

————————————————————
Source:

http://www.afterdisclosure.com/2011/04/breakaway.html
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2015/11/20/the-individual-the-foundation-of-society/
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2015/11/17/what-is-the-best-use-of-your-time/
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2015/12/11/breakaway-guide-to-personal-health/
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2015/12/09/financial-flagship-managing-financial-oversights/

Breakaway Guide To Neotame


By: Zy Marquiez
December 12, 2015

Upon laying a strong foundation in respect to what type of nonsense takes place unabated in our food with Aspartame, let us now move forward and dig deeper into it’s respective cousin – Neotame.

In similar fashion to Aspartame, Neotame, which is a chemical derivative of the prior, incorporates components that are metabolized into formaldehyde, a highly noxious poison, and an excitotoxic amino acid that agitates thereby damaging, nerves.

Keep in mind, aspartame currently accounts for over 75% of all side effects complaints received by the FDA’s Adverse Reaction Monitoring System [ARMS] for the past 4 years.  A Monsanto-created chemical, Neotame has nigh the same composition, and in fact could be far worse.

Once their patent for Aspartame was expiring, Monsanto opted to develop Neotame and therein had no trouble gaining approval in 2002 from the FDA.

It is theorized that the artificial sweetener Neotame is between 7,000 to 13,000 times sweeter than sugar, and 30-60 times sweeter than aspartame.  This would thus allow manufacturers to use an infinitesimal amount of this substance within their product.

Due to the fact that the FDA requires no labels whatsoever of ingredients which contributes less than 1% of their product, in some instances the neurotoxin Neotame can be used in foods without therein having to be subsequently listedon the lable.  Also, Neotame is surreptitiously concealed within the questionable “natural flavors” section on some packaged foods.

This highly concentrated, white crystalline powder contains the same synthetic derivative of the two amino acids as aspartame – L-aspartic acid and L-phenylalanine – plus the chemical methanol, or wood alcohol. To this compound 3-dimethylbutyl has been added. NutraSweet Company states that neotame is perfectly safe, yet 3-dimethylbutyl happens to be on the Environmental Protection Agency’s [EPA] most hazardous chemical list.

In a letter written to the FDA in March 3, 1998, Dr. Robert – who is a physician & director of the Palm Beach Institute for Medical Research – stated the following:

“I am writing to express my extreme opposition to approving the Food Additive Petition for Neotame submitted by Monsanto Company.

It is my professional opinion that this chemical poses a potential major health and environmental hazard to the American public — particularly in the absence of extensive, detailed and long term animal and human studies [which I have been unable to obtain] that could prove its safety to my satisfaction. I am a Board-certified internist, and have been the unsalaried director of the Palm Beach Institute for Medical Research [not-for-profit] since 1964.

This opinion is based on more than a decade of intense, corporate-neutral clinical and epidemiological research concerning the widespread serious medical problems directly attributable to products containing aspartame [NutraSweet, Equal]. My own database currently exceeds 1,150 reactors. I have documented these reactions in more than a score of published articles and letters, and three books.

The fundamental issue is that Neotame, a synthetic variation of aspartame, requires extensive evaluation before the FDA should accept a superficial opinion about its purported safety based largely on limited short-term data involving potentially flawed protocols that were almost totally funded by corporate contracts. [For perspective, I have not received a cent of industry money for my researches.] This matter is discussed at length in my publications relative to both animal and human studies.

The timing and self-serving corporate interests of this petition are suggested by the fact that the patent off aspartame expired several years ago.

The approval of any analog of aspartame for human use MUST be challenged. In my opinion, there is already sufficient evidence for aspartame products to be withdrawn from the market as an “imminent public health hazard” NOW! I have documented severe neurological, intellectual, psychiatric, metabolic, endocrine, allergic and other reactions to aspartame products in hundreds of patients. Moreover, there is considerable reason to invoke aspartame and its metabolites as a cause of significant contributory factor in the aggravation of precipitation of diabetes and its complications, multiple sclerosis, brain cancer [see enclosed peer-reviewed article], and the acceleration of Alzheimer’s disease [refer to my book ‘DEFENSE AGAINST ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE’]. I summarized these perceived hazards in previous correspondence to Representative Newt Gingrich [copy enclosed] requesting a new Congressional hearing on the safety of aspartame products.”

Two years before the FDA approved neotame, the Monsanto Co. sold the NutraSweet Co. to J.W. Childs Equity Partners II, L.P., a private equity firm that also own the Sunny Delight Beverage Co. and Mattress Firm, among other companies. At the time of this purchase, NutraSweet issued a press release bragging about how neotame would drastically change the sweetener industry, even though it had not yet been approved for use.

Commenting on the company’s plans for neotame, Nick E. Rosa, a former senior vice president at Monsanto who was given the position of president and CEO of NutraSweet at the time the company transferred ownership to J.W. Childs, had this to say:

“The NutraSweet Company revolutionized the sweetener industry in 1981 with the introduction of aspartame, and we intend to do it again with neotame when we receive approval from various regulatory agencies around the world.”

Just as predicted, NutraSweet strong-armed FDA approval for neotame in the U.S. in 2002, and quickly expanded approval to at least 69 other countries in the following decade. But the company presumably still has a lot of work to do if it hopes to bring neotame to the same level as aspartame, which is sold in more than 100 countries and used in more than 5,000 consumers products used by 250 million people worldwide.

Both Aspartame and Neotame contain substances that are metabolized into formaldehyde, a highly toxic poison, and an excitotoxic amino acid that agitates, thereby damaging, nerves.

At the time Neotame was originally approved by the FDA, Feingold.org, which battles the addition of many dodgy food additives, stated:

We did a search of MedLine to find studies of adverse effects or side effects of Neotame. Only four studies appeared, two of which were not studies, and the other two of which were actually a single study done by NutraSweet company researchers.

Feingold aptly described one of the nonstudies as effectively saying, “If we don’t look, we won’t know anything bad.” The other, by the World Health Organization, is not a look at potential toxicity, but rather is about setting acceptable daily intakes of Neotame, along with other artificial sweeteners. Note: One must wonder how the FDA justifies non-listing of an ingredient for which there’s an acceptable daily intake.

Mary Nash Stoddard, founder of the Aspartame Consumer Safety Network, compared the historic arc of tobacco company research with that of Aspartame. It applies equally well to Neotame:

There is a parallel issue with which to compare the Aspartame issue. That of cigarettes and the deadly effects of smoking. The massive Tobacco Industry was able to produce large volumes of scientific studies showing smoking “does not” cause: lung cancer, heart disease, strokes or death. Today, mainstream science accepts the fact that smoking can be deadly and addictive. So it is with Aspartame & Neotame, whose approval was based, not on scientific fact, but as an issue of public policy.

So what are possible alternatives?

Stevia is an herb that has been used as a sweetener in South America for hundreds of years. It is calorie–free, and the powdered concentrate is 300 times sweeter than sugar. It is widely used all over the world. In Japan, for example, it claims 41% of the sweetener market, including sugar, and was used in Japanese Diet Coke until the company replaced it with aspartame to “standardize” worldwide.

Another possibility is Palm Sugar. Palm sugar is a nutrient-rich, low-glycemic crystalline sweetener that looks, tastes, dissolves and melts almost exactly like sugar, but it’s completely natural and unrefined. It’s acquired from the flowers growing high on coconut trees, which are opened to collect their liquid flower nectar. This nectar is then air-dried to form a crystalline sugar that’s naturally brown in color and naturally rich in a number of key vitamins, minerals and phytonutrients, including potassium, zinc, iron, and vitamins B1, B2, B3 and B6.

It is never refined or bleached like white sugar.  So the nutrients it was made with are still there. That’s rare for sweeteners, most of which are highly refined. Even stevia is highly refined in its white powder form [real stevia is a green herb].

Lastly there is Xylitol, which has been shown to have many health benefits, yet few know of its healing power to prevent ear infections in children. It inhibits bacterial growth thus helping to avoid the use of dangerous antibiotics.

Xylitol is a natural low-calorie, low-glycemic sugar substitute produced from the fibers of fruits, vegetables, and trees such as plums, raspberries, corn, and birch. Xylitol is as sweet as sugar and can be used safely by diabetics. As xylitol is a mild sugar alcohol, excessive consumption over 30 grams per day can cause a temporary laxative effect that disappears with continued use as the body adapts. It is also important to find a source of xylitol that is GMO free if made from corn.

The best way to avoid illnesses is by avoiding the products that cause them.  After many years of researching Aspartame, its more than obvious that this is one of the main engines of disease in the products which harbor it.

After a step back when one takes a focused look into the subject at hand, one comes to realize that the evidence is undeniable.

Definitely implore you to take a gander, and really understand the gravity of the situation.  Your health and that of your loved ones depends on it.

————————————————————————————————-

Sources & Additional Links:

http://www.neotame.com/pdf/WSJ_Neot.pdf
http://www.naturalnews.com/031767_neotame_sweeteners.html
http://www.feingold.org/PF/neotame.html
http://iaspub.epa.gov/sor_internet/registry/substreg/searchandretrieve/searchbylist/search.do
http://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/05/05/25/neotame-the-new-artificial-sweetener-more-dangerous-than-aspartame.htm
http://www.gaia-health.com/articles351/000368-neotame-neurotoxic-fda-says-no-lable.shtml
http://www.chemicalbook.com/ChemicalProductProperty_EN_CB4274454.htm
http://www.chemicalbook.com/RiskAndSafety.htm#Risk
http://www.naturalnews.com/031767_neotame_sweeteners.html
http://www.astro.sunysb.edu/tracy/whatis.html
http://webhome.idirect.com/~wolfnowl/aspartame3.htm
http://www.sweetpoison.com/newsletter/august-2003.html
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/02/08/neotame-receives-fda-approval-but-is-not-widely-used-yet.aspx
http://www.naturalnews.com/034320_aspartame_sweetener_side_effects.html