Tuesday, July 4, 2017

Was Barbara Bush the Babushka Lady?

George and Barbara Bush may be the Bonnie and Clyde of the modern clandestine era. It has crossed our mind that Barbara Bush may be the mysterious Babushka lady in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 when the Jewish Permindex corporation saw its murder plans of President Kennedy unfold.

According to our interpretation of Russ Baker's research, Barbara Bush is definitely a company woman who has helped George with alibis and plausible deniability, one such occasion being her contrived letter implying that she and George were in Tyler, TX giving a speech when the President was murdered. The letter was a fraud and a hoax like most things Bush.

George Bush was in the Dal-Tex building where he led a team of Operation 40 assassins in the ambush on the President. Barbara's true whereabouts are unknown - which leads us to the famed Babushka lady.

No one has ever found her, and there are no clear pictures of this mysterious woman. Clearly she was in disguise doing work for the assassins. No more reliable agent could be found than Barbara who has worked hand in hand with her husband's covert operations over the years.

The Babushka Lady was seen in Dealey Plaza near the motorcade at the time of the President's assassination. George Bush is known for naming his ships after his wife; perhaps the Babushka lady is another such paranomasia.

Babushka is a well known Russian word for a type of scarf or head covering, but Babs is sometimes short for Barbara as in the case of Babs Streisand. Bush would be the family name of one of the president's murderers. Stretch it out a little and you have Babushka Lady.

It's a wild stretch we know, but we like to explore all paths in our quest for truth.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

The Corporate Cow and the Government's War Against Good Food

Everyone knows that raw milk is bad for you, and that in order to be healthy, it must be pasteurized. These are the typical lies which flow from the sewers of the Food and Drug Administration and Center for Disease Control.

Raw milk has received a bad rap because of historical problems brought on by the industrial and urbanization revolutions of the late 19th and early 20th centuries when the filth and disease of urban centers caused many health problems for its inhabitants. Most Americans are familiar with Upton Sinclair's chronicles of these conditions in such classics as the The Jungle.

In a bad case of conflating ontology with unsanitary influences, the government determined that the only way to make milk safe for public consumption was to demand that it be pasteurized during which process it is heated to a certain temperature - typically above 151 F - in order kill bacteria.

The problem with pasteurization is that it kills good bacteria and probiotics which in turn kill the bad bacteria. Pasteurization also significantly reduces - contrary to deceptive claims by some authors - the nutritional value of milk which is considered one of the most complete foods in its raw state.

There is no doubt that the dirty practices - whether through ignorance or greed - of the past century cultivated unhealthy food production, but there is certainly nothing inherently dangerous about consuming raw, unpasteurized milk provided it is produced under clean sanitary conditions. Fostering healthy production and distribution methods is the course of action which the government should have taken.

On the contrary, honest researcher have discovered that pasteurized milk has been associated with far more illnesses and diseases than raw milk, a fact which the corporate owned CDC refuses to acknowledge. The CDC makes up "facts" about raw milk in order to infuse the public with a "healthy" sense of fear.

When Sally Fallon and Thomas Bartlett attempted to find the raw data which the CDC used to claim that raw milk was responsible for 45 cases of food-borne illnesses, they discovered that it could not be found. Neither could the CDC find it because the data was made up - a total fabrication.

Most allegations that raw milk was the culprit for food-borne illnesses turned out to be false because the alleged bacteria could not be found in the food alleged to be the cause of the illness.

Today's corporate cow is infested with so many drug, hormones, and diseases to produce the most possible milk for the least possible cost that it is no longer a safe bet. Consumers will be saddled for years overcoming the detriments of modern pasteurized milk as it takes its tolls on their healths.

The benefits of raw milk are numerous; the dangers of pasteurized milk are manifold. Americans need to demand that the government allow the production and distribution of raw milk in all 50 states. Why do we have a government which encourages the distribution of condoms so that high school kids can have sex, but prevents the production and sale of raw milk which is health giving?

Josh Axe, Raw Milk Myths: Are We Prisoners of Pasteurization? Part 1 of 3, draxe.com, nd, accessed 7/4/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.