(NaturalNews) For those of you following the ongoing drama of gun control,Piers Morgan and the Second Amendment, there have been some important developments today in Texas:

1. Piers Morgan (CNN) announced that he would be broadcasting live from Katy, Texas, from Tactical Firearms, one of the largest gun     retailers and shooting ranges in the nation.

2. Minutes later, Alex Jones alerted his nationwide radio audience to the situation, and based on incorrect information that had been given to him about Jeremy Alcede (the owner of Tactical Firearms) supporting an online ammo ban, Alex described Tactical Firearms on the air using language that implied Alcede supported new restrictions on the Second Amendment.

3. This information was incorrect. Alex appropriately reversed himself on air, in the last few minutes of the show, correcting his earlier statements. InfoWars.com has since posted a detailed article with the correction and additional details on tonight’s CNN broadcast from Katy, TX.

4. I personally spoke with Jeremy Alcede a few minutes ago, and he explained that his statement on ammo was “selectively edited” from a recorded interview he had done. The selective editing mischaracterized his statement, playing it out of context and creating a false impression. For the record, Alcede is very much pro Second Amendment and absolutely does not support any new restrictions on firearms magazines, ammo sales or gun sales.

5. (Many internet pundits will argue this point, but I just talked to the man and he confirmed with me that he does not, in any way, support compromises on the Second Amendment.

6. Alex Jones and crew are right now on their way to Katy, TX (roughly a 2-hour drive from Austin), where Alex reportedly plans to bullhorn Piers Morgan.

7. When I spoke to Jeremy Alcede a few minutes ago, he said his parking lot was “crawling with media from all over,” with satellite uplinks, media trucks, and huge crowds of supporters starting to gather. He told me on the phone that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott appeared to be arriving, but this was not confirmed and it might be incorrect.

8. Outspoken firearms rights advocate Ted Nugent is scheduled to show, and also Libertarian-leaning Texas Senator Ted Cruz who recently won a hard-fought election.

I have additional inside information about the history of Tactical Firearms and Jeremy Alcede, and I can assure you this man is not a gun grabber. He’s a committed, passionate supporter of the Second Amendment and individual liberty. Those who are accusing him of compromising on gun control are simply misinformed.

Piers Morgan has increasingly invited gun rights advocates to appear on his show because it’s the only thing keeping his ratings up. Morgan, whose audience is but a shadow of Larry King’s, famously attacked Larry Pratt on air, calling him a “stupid man.” He was then attacked himself by Alex Jones who lashed out at him in a now-famous tirade defending Second Amendment liberties and warning about the pattern of history where tyrants like Hitler, Stalin and Mao always “took the guns.”

The showdown in Katy, Texas begins in mere hours from the time of this publication. Given the wild card element of Alex Jones showing up with a bullhorn, plus hundreds of gun rights supporters filling the parking lot of the facility, it’s anybody’s guess what’s actually going to happen. But make no mistake: Texans are NOT giving up their guns, period.

Ain’t gonna happen. And any government foolish enough to try to take guns from Texans is going to find itself on a collision course with a new chapter of American history.

What Burger King didn’t expect to find was all the other DNA in its burger meat. DNA tests showed meat derived from flesh containing 56 chromosomes. Humans only have 23 pairs of chromosomes, or 46 total.

“We were duped,” admits Steve Grinder of Anything Goes Food Industries, Inc. which supplies Burger King with its ready-made meat-like product. “We were told the meat was derived from illegal aliens, and we thought that meant clever people smuggled it over the border. We did not realize it was literally harvested from extraterrestrial beings.”

Scientists study Whoppers in search of alien life forms

U.S. scientists have now flocked to Burger King stores to study the meat with DNA analyzers. “This could be the greatest discovery in the history of medical science,” said Joyce Jeepers as she swallowed some fries. “If we could genetically modify humans with these genetic sequences found in the burgers, we could theoretically grow our own aliens right here on Earth!” In a similar way, Monsanto has said it is interested in growing “self-aware soybeans that can run from superweeds” and thinks alien DNA might result in a “scientific breakthrough” in GE agriculture.

Burger King customers say the alien meat tastes “pretty much the same” as the soybean-enhanced meat filler product typically used by Burger King. “Aliens or not,” said one happy customer, “it still tastes great if you put enough ketchup on it.”

Aliens caught in Mexican drug war crossfire

So where did the alien meat really come from? It turns out that a colony of human / alien hybrids has been living in Northern Mexico for years and was recently gunned down after being caught in a drug war crossfire aided by Operation Fast & Furious. Given the extreme poverty across the region, the alien bodies were harvested for meat, then hiked across the border to a food processing facility in San Antonio, Texas where the Mexican nationals were each paid $50 plus given voter registration documents for the next election.

Because the drug war continues in Mexico, more alien meat is apparently on the way, and Burger King is considering promoting the alien DNA in its Whopper and changing the slogan to, “A taste that’s out of this world!”

“I never ate an alien before,” said Bethanne Dorma, a hungry customer at the Wachadoin, Mississippi Burger King. “I ate armadilla once, and I thought maybe it tasted like an alien. I gotta try this new Whopper and see if it tastes like armadilla.”

It is not yet clear what the repercussions for Earth might be when the alien civilization realizes we have EATEN its colony members.

According to a study from the University of Missouri-Kansas City and the University of Kansas Medical Center, children’s brains are being branded early on in life—even before they know how to read. While we can’t blame logos solely for the childhood obesity problem, there is little doubt that a the association a child’s brain makes with these logos could be having an effect on their relationship with food.

The study analyzed children’s brains when being shown food logos. The children, ages 10 to 14, were shown 120 logos—60 of them food-related and 60 of them non-food-related.  Using MRI technology, the researchers monitored their brains for activity. When shown food logos, the children’s brain activity was significantly increased compared to when they were shown non-food logos.

Specifically, the areas of the brain controlling rewards and appetite control “lit up” when shown the food logos, similarly to how they would if they were shown actual food.

To call this “worrisome” (as the researchers did) is putting it mildly.

“Some research finds that children identify the golden arches for McDonald’s before they know the letter M,” said Dr. Amanda Bruce.

In children, the areas of the brain governing self-control are not yet formed. When the logos of these disease promoters like McDonald’s are imprinted on the brain before self-control is developed, the results could be tragic.

According to Bruce: The theory is the increase in risk-taking behavior in adolescence is attributed to uneven development in brain regions associated with cognitive control and emotional drive. … The brains of children are ‘imprinted’ with food logos. Without the necessary inhibitory processes to aid in decision-making, youth are particularly susceptible to making poor choices about what to eat.

There is no question that advertising and entertainment are shaping countless people’s minds – especially children. In western society, the subconscious mind of the individual is often subject to a number of heavy influences, through entertainment mediums especially. Television, movies, music, and of course, advertisements, create a profound subconscious effect on the human mind that influences and helps to dictate the choices that they will make.

With an estimated 1 in 6 United States children being obese, this is certainly concerning. Add to that the fact that many American parents underestimate the risks of an overweight child, and we have a recipe for raising another obese generation.

Here are eight solid and scientifically-backed reasons why water fluoridation is nothing to celebrate:

1) Water fluoridation has failed to reduce dental expenditures. Fluoride apologists have long claimed that forced water fluoridation would greatly reduce dental costs for everyone. But according to the data, dental expenditures have actually increased dramatically since the advent of water fluoridation back in the 1940s, as have the number of dental professionals, dental schools, and overall industry profits.

2) Water fluoridation has actually increased rates of tooth decay. Likewise, there has also been a steady increase in tooth decay rates across the country, despite the fact that nearly three-quarters of the U.S. population is now receiving fluoridated water. Most of Europe and many other countries around the world do not fluoridate their water at all, and tooth decay rates in these areas are similar or even lower than they are in North America.

3) Water fluoridation has created an epidemic of dental fluorosis. Even the most devoted fluoride apologist will admit that chronic exposure to fluoride can lead to a form of tooth decay known as dental fluorosis, which is marked by brown or white staining and corresponding mottling on teeth. It would be scientifically foolish to insist otherwise when acknowledging the fact that as many as 60 percent of all adolescents, and particularly those who live in fluoridated areas, now suffer from the permanent condition.

4) Water fluoridation is responsible for damaging bones, triggering arthritis. Back in 2006, the National Research Council (NRC) published a report showing that the federal government’s maximum contaminant level for fluoride in water is a complete fraud. As it turns out, so-called “optimal” fluoride levels in water do not protect the health of children or adults, and regular exposure to fluoride in water can lead to brittle bones, pre-clinical skeletal fluorosis, and arthritis.

5) Children who drink fluoridated water develop lower IQs. According to information compiled by the fluoride awareness group Fluoride Action Network (FAN), at least 34 published studies have identified a link between fluoride exposure and reduced IQ levels. A recent review put together by researchers from Harvard University found that children living in fluoridated areas have 350 percent lower IQ levels on average compared to children living in non-fluoridated areas.

6) Fluoride calcifies the thyroid and pineal glands, two important hormone producers in the body. Another inconvenient fact about fluoride is that it binds to receptors throughout the endocrine system that are specifically reserved for actual nutrients. Fluoride has been shown to accumulate in both the thyroid and pineal glands, where it inhibits the normal production of hormones that regulate living systems throughout the body.

7) Fluoridated water is toxic to formula-fed babies. Did you know the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognizes fluoride as an “unapproved drug,” which means those who receive it are being forcibly medicated against their will and without informed consent? Fluoridated water is particularly harmful for the development of formula-fed babies, who admittedly receive toxic doses of fluoride whenever their parents mix baby formula with fluoridated tap water.

8) The fluoride added to most water supplies is an industrial waste product that causes cancer. Unbeknownst to many is the fact that the fluoride chemicals added to most municipal water supplies are not naturally occurring elements in the earth, but rather waste byproducts of industrial production systems. Such chemicals have never been properly safety tested, and they most definitely do not benefit oral health in any way. “The chemical used in over 90 percent of cities in North America are fluorosilicates,” explains Dr. Hardy Limeback, a dentist and former head of preventive dentistry at the University of Toronto. Dr. Limeback used to support water fluoridation, that is until he learned the truth about where it comes from and what it does to the human body. “[Fluorosilicates] are contaminated with cancer-causing arsenic and radioactive particles and have never been tested for safety in humans.”

To learn more about the dangers of fluoride, and to join the fight to get it removed from your own local water supply, visit: http://www.fluoridealert.org/.

The final decision is set to be announced at 7am local time (12 pm GMT) on Thursday.

Ecuador received a “direct” threat from the British authorities that they are prepared to storm the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and arrest Julian Assange. Ricardo Patino said the “written threat” was delivered to Ecuador’s Foreign Ministry and ambassador in London.

The letter the Ecuadorian Embassy received stated that British authorities have a legal basis, founded in the Diplomatic and Consular Act of 1987, to arrest Assange on the embassy’s premises.

Ecuador considers such a measure to be an “unacceptable act of hostility” against its sovereignty, the minister said, adding that if implemented it would force Ecuador to “respond.”

“We are not a British colony,” Patino said.

Asylum or not, Assange may not leave UK

As Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa decides on whether to grant Julian Assange political asylum, his long-awaited decision may ultimately be in vain. Lawyers claim that whatever the decision, the WikiLeaks founder will not likely make it out of the UK.

Assange has been holed up at Ecuadorian Embassy in London since June 19, after claiming asylum following a failed 18-month legal battle to prevent his extradition to Sweden.

The WikiLeak founder’s decision to seek asylum in Ecuador was motivated by fears that he could be extradited to the United States on charges of espionage upon being handed over to Swedish authorities. Assange believes he could face life imprisonment or even execution upon being shipped stateside.

However, the battle for asylum might only be the first hurdle Assange has to clear if he is to avoid extradition to Sweden. Former British government lawyer Carl Gardner told Reuters “the question of asylum is arguably a red herring” as no safe passage to Ecuador can probably be secured.

The Ecuadorian Embassy, which is patrolled day and night by police instructed to arrest Assange for violating his bail conditions, is laid out in such a way that there is realistically only one way out.

“There is no other exit [other than the main one]”, an anonymous security manager at the building where the embassy is housed told Reuters. “He is going to have to come out of the main entrance,” he continued.

“There is no way to bring a vehicle in because the car park is private and it is not connected in any way to their premises. He can climb out of a window, of course, but there are CCTV cameras everywhere,” he concluded.

Some have suggested that Assange be appointed as an Ecuadorian diplomat to receive immunity. Others have claimed he could illegally be smuggled out in a diplomatic bag. Barring these two unlikely scenarios, Assange’s fate ultimately lies in the hands of UK authorities, a reality which does not bode well for him.

“I can’t see the UK backing down and just allowing him safe passage out of the country,” Rebecca Niblock, an extradition specialist at London law firm Kingsley Napley, said.

“I think the UK will see their obligations under the European extradition system as overriding any diplomatic relations with Ecuador, who haven’t really been considering their diplomatic relations with the UK, apparently,” she continued.

But with neither option politically viable for the government of Ecuador, Assange might soon receive political asylum but remain a prisoner in Great Britain all the same.

On Wednesday, rumors began circulating that Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa had in fact granted Assange political asylum.

The reports forced Correa to take to Twitter, where he wrote the “Assange asylum rumor is false.” Correa, who added the world’s most infamous whistleblower to the “club of the persecuted” while appearing on Assange’s show on RT in May, said he is awaiting a Foreign Ministry report on the matter before making a final decision.

On Monday, Correa told state-Run ECTV that his decision on the asylum bid would be forthcoming by week’s end.

Ecuador’s foreign minister had previously indicated that the president would reveal his answer once the Olympic Games had concluded.

While a compromised version of the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 was introduced to the Senate in July, the false claim of  “. . . foreign governments, criminal syndicates and lone individuals are probing our financial, energy and public safety systems every day. It would be the height of irresponsibility to leave a digital backdoor wide open to our cyber adversaries” was perpetuated by President Obama.

Shawn Henry, a veteran of the cyber security division in the FBI, stated in a CBS interview that although he has no proof, Russia and China are behind infiltration and damage to computers in America, while also claiming that he feels it is “very, very likely” that a massive cyber-attack is due to occur.

According to Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary, Obama may just write an executive orderto ensure his cybersecurity agenda is implemented.

“In the wake of Congressional inaction and Republican stall tactics, unfortunately, we will continue to be hamstrung by outdated and inadequate statutory authorities that the legislation would have fixed. Moving forward, the President is determined to do absolutely everything we can to better protect our nation against today’s cyber threats and we will do that.”
Carney emphasized that Obama is focused on “protecting vital computer systems”. Since Obama’s coercion did not work on Congress, he could bypass Congress (as he has done several times before in this administration). Claiming “we can’t wait”, Obama could enact any or all of the provisions in the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 by EO. And this would enable federal agencies to regulate any authorities needed to take-over the free flow of information on the Internet in the name of protecting the private corporate sector.

An EO would be an illegal power grab in the vein of any would-be dictator.

The National Security Agency (NSA) has begun scouting colleges and universities for the next generation of American-grown hackers. The NSA wants an elite team of “computer geniuses” that are trained in hacking before they obtain their college degree. The students selected to train under this program will not be privy to the impact their work will have on cyber intelligence, military capabilities and law enforcement’s expansion of spying on Americans.

Neal Zing, technical director for the Information Assurance Directorate within the NSA, said:

We’re trying to create more of these, and yes they have to know some of the things that hackers know, they have to know a lot of other things too, which is why you really want a good university to create these people for you.

Back in 2011, Senator Joseph Lieberman wrote to Internet giant and NSA cooperative Google to gain their aid in censoring what he called jihadist content from blogger Jose Pimentel. Lieberman wrote:

Pimentel allegedly used the Internet to access instructions to make bombs and share his support for violent Islamic extremism. [Pimental's] site is just one of the many examples of homegrown terrorists Google-hosted sites to propagate their violent ideology.

Censorship and control of the Internet has been a favorite of the Obama administration. They have claimed that the infrastructure of the nation is susceptible to hacker infiltration. In the agenda to lockdown the Internet, the hackers have been quite useful. They have created the perfect nameless, faceless bogeyman. Lieberman has also been behind the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, from 2010.

In its current incarnation, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 has been blocked by a Senate vote of 52 to 46 which stopped the legislation dead in its tracks.

Senator John McCain, co-author of the NDAA, asserts that this bill greatly restricts and burdens corporations. Included in the bill were optional standards for computer systems that oversee American infrastructure such as power grids, dams and transportation.

In March of this year, members of the Senate met behind closed doors to attend a briefing by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), where a staged cyber-attack was performed with the intent “to provide all senators with an appreciation for new legislative authorities that would help the US government prevent and more quickly respond to cyber-attacks.”

The focus of the attacks were US banks, power grids and telecommunications systems.

However these systems are not connected to the Internet and therefore that argument is moot. In fact, the power grid and public water systems “are rarely connected directly to the public internet. And that makes gaining access to grid-controlling networks a challenge for all but the most dedicated, motivated and skilled — nation-states, in other words.”

The most curious recent hacker threat comes from CIA-controlled groups like Anonymous who mysteriously infiltrated the main database of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the collection agency for the privately-owned Federal Reserve Bank. They retrieved Mitt Romney’s tax returns, dating back 25 years to expose his lack of payment to the IRS, which covertly is a pro-Obama move to make Romney look bad in the public perspective.

Back in April, Anonymous was used to scare the Congress into supporting the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 when at the annual RSA conference, CEOs from major corporations came together to voice their concerns over hackers and admonish the US government for better security when it comes to “cyber-attacks by spies, criminals and activists.”

Anonymous and LulzSec (a pseudonym of the hacker group) were named at the conference.

The purpose of any and all cybersecurity legislation is to not only combine the US government’s ability through various agencies to collect data on unsuspecting Americans and decide who or what a threat is and have the legal-backing to “act accordingly”. The broad definitions of terrorism under the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, and the fact that the NSA recruits hackers points to the entire issue being a false flag with one mission: restrict the free-flow of information on the Internet.

On August 1, 2012 a federal appeals court ordered the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to clarify why they have yet to comply with a now year-old court decision mandating public hearings on the use of the so-called naked body scanners in airports across the nation.

These hearings were supposed to address the rules and regulations pertaining to the use of these scanners, which have been linked to significant health risks, place quite considerable costs on the taxpayer and most importantly don’t even work as they are supposed to.

Indeed, earlier this year a blogger exposed how easy it is to bypass these scanners while in 2010 an Israeli security expert said, “I don’t know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747.”

In response to the third request from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit finally stepped up.

In a short order, the court asked why the TSA has yet to follow through with being ordered “to act promptly” and hold public hearings with public adoption of rules and regulations of the use of scanners.
The original decision came on July 15, 2011 in response to a lawsuit filed by EPIC. The court set aside the constitutional challenge brought forth by EPIC in order to allow the government to conduct the aforementioned public hearings.

While the appeals court ruled 3-0 in favor of keeping the scanners in place stating, “screening passengers at an airport is an ‘administrative search’ because the primary goal is not to determine whether any passenger has committed a crime but rather to protect the public from a terrorist attack.”

However, they also ruled that the TSA breached federal law when they formally made the body scanners the “primary” screening method for passengers.

They ruled that in 2009 the TSA violated the Administrative Procedures Act since they did not hold the 90-day public comment period, after which they ordered them to carry it out.

For many observers at the time, including myself, the decision fell far short of actually holding the TSA accountable since there was no penalty whatsoever for the breach.

In the court order uploaded by Wired’s Threat Level, the judges ordered the TSA to respond by August 30. However, Lorie Dankers, a TSA spokesperson, told Wired that they did not plan to hold the hearings and respond to them until “next year.”

Personally, I doubt that this will actually result in any action taken against the TSA since, as before, the TSA will likely simply claim that following the law would hinder their ability to respond to “ever-revolving threats.”

Clearly I’m not the only one who is amazed by the brazenness of the TSA’s flouting of the law and refusal to follow the court order, evidenced by a White House petition with over 16,000 signatures entitled, “Require the Transportation Security Administration to Follow the Law!”

The petition, which was originally published by the director of information policy studies at the Cato Institute, Jim Harper, needs to reach 25,000 signatures before the Obama administration is supposed to respond.

That being said, the responses to the petitions have been so laughable in the past that there was actually a petition to take petitions seriously.

Therefore I’m not holding my breath in hopes of seeing either a meaningful response to the petition or the TSA being held accountable. I’d love to be surprised by seeing some of the much promised and never seen transparency of the Obama administration but saying that such a thing is likely is, in my opinion, a bit naïve.

Based on a new mathematical reconfiguration of the false claims that CO2 is affecting the earth’s temperature, acall for a “carbon deinvestment campaign” has been made.

By making carbon taxes a global and integral part of the “fee-and-dividend approach”, these climate change alarmists want to redistribute wealth from country to country as the globalists at the UN have outlined in various eco-terrorist manifestos.

However, real scientific data from real-world observations, and not the IPCC’s falsified computer model projections, are painting a different picture of what is actually happening with our weather and what the true effects of climate change actually are.

Anthony Watts, former television meteorologist, has conducted a study into the reliability of weather stations in the US Historical Climatology Network. According to Watts’ analysis of the position of the weather stations and their spoiling of assumed empirical data, results show the planet warming at just 0.155 degrees Celsius per decade, rather than the 0.309 C per decade cited by the government.

Watts believes that the reality of global warming is that it is not as “catastrophic, or as bad as it’s been portrayed.”

During the 2012 UN Earth Summit in Rio+20, a new global climate treaty was first and foremost on the agenda to force all the world’s nations to be bound by international mandate to follow the regulations of the UN with respect to climate change policies – which ultimately gives the UN control over each nation’s internal structures.

Alarmists are using efforts like the Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL) (pressuring Capitol Hill) to reintroduce this bill in letters to elected officials that use fear-mongering of man-made climate change as the purpose of such legislation.

The CCL claim :

As evidence keeps mounting about the dangerous trajectory of human-induced climate change, it becomes clear that Earth’s natural systems are rapidly approaching tipping points for global warming. Failure to act now will doom future generations to one cataclysm after another –shortages of food and water, displacement of millions from rising sea levels, more frequent and severe weather disasters, and the breakdown of civil society.

The hijacking of the environmental movement has produced non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and “green groups” that are able to raise funds and influence nations’ global warming policies for the agendas of the UN. By lobbying with fear-mongering they are successful in making overblown assumptions about the extreme weather, ocean acidification and melting glaciers.

Ocean fertilization, the use of plankton to push CO2 into the depths of the ocean, is a scheme invented by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) that approved ocean fertilization as a “preventative” measure of sequestering CO2 in the deep oceans. One of the most devastating effects is the increased acidification of the oceans.

Bill Gates and his colleague David Keith are funding alarmist scientists from Harvard University to spray thousands of tons of sun-reflecting chemical particles into the Earth’s atmosphere to artificially cool the planet. This solar geoengineering seeks to replicate volcano effects by shooting sulfates into the stratosphere using synthetic sulfate aerosols to reflect sunlight back out into space.

Solar geoengineering will directly amplify specific areas of study, as they have chosen sulfuric dust that mimics the emissions of volcanoes. An intended consequence of solar geoengineering is the whitening of our skies because of the nano particles being released to reflect sunlight. Sulfate aerosols cause whiter daytime skies, and sunsets to glow brighter.

And further amplification of our atmosphere with the use of solar geoengineering will directly affect immediate weather patterns across the globe. Effectively, the global warming effects alarmists are complaining about and blaming on man-made CO2 are actually causation of the UN’s various restructuring of the Earth’s atmospheric chemical elements into something more toxically sulfuric.

Are you ready to have a microchip implanted into your brain? That might not sound very appealing to you at this point, but this is exactly what the big pharmaceutical companies and the big technology companies have planned for our future.

They are pumping millions of dollars into researching “cutting edge” technologies that will enable implantable microchips to greatly “enhance” our health and our lives. Of course nobody is going to force you to have a microchip implanted into your brain when they are first introduced.

Initially, brain implants will be marketed as “revolutionary breakthroughs” that can cure chronic diseases and that can enable the disabled to live normal lives. When the “benefits” of such technology are demonstrated to the general public, soon most people will want to become “super-abled”. Just imagine the hype that will surround these implants when people discover that you can get rid of your extra weight in a matter of days or that you can download an entire college course into your memory in just a matter of hours.

The possibilities for this kind of technology are endless, and it is just a matter of time before having microchips implanted into your brain is considered to be quite common. What was once science fiction is rapidly becoming reality, and it is going to change the world forever.

But aren’t there some very serious potential downsides to having microchips implanted into our brains?

Of course there are.

Unfortunately, this technology is not as far off as you might think, and most people are not even talking about what the negative consequences might be.

According to a recent article in the Financial Times, the pharmaceutical company of the future will include a “bioelectronics” business that “treats disease through electrical signalling in the brain and elsewhere.”

Diseases such as diabetes and epilepsy and conditions such as obesity and depression will be will be treated “through electronic implants into the brain rather than pills or injections.”

These implants will send electrical signals to cells and organs that are “malfunctioning”. People will be totally “cured” without ever having to pop a pill or go under the knife.

It sounds too good to be true, right?

Well, the Financial Times says that British pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline is working very hard to develop these kinds of technologies. Moncef Slaoui, the head of research and development at GlaxoSmithKline, says that the “challenge is to integrate the work – in brain-computer interfaces, materials science, nanotechnology, micro-power generation – to provide therapeutic benefit.”

If a brain implant could cure a disease that you have been suffering from your whole life would you take it?

A lot of people are going to be faced with that kind of a decision in future years.

And this kind of technology is advancing very rapidly. In fact, some researchers have already had success treating certain diseases by implanting microchips into the brains of rats. The following is from a recent Mashable article….

Stroke and Parkinson’s Disease patients may benefit from a controversial experiment that implanted microchips into lab rats. Scientists say the tests produced effective results in brain damage research.

Rats showed motor function in formerly damaged gray matter after a neural microchip was implanted under the rat’s skull and electrodes were transferred to the rat’s brain. Without the microchip, rats with damaged brain tissue did not have motor function. Both strokes and Parkinson’s can cause permanent neurological damage to brain tissue, so this scientific research brings hope.

In addition, the U.S. government has been working on implantable microchips that would monitor the health of our soldiers and enhance their abilities in the field.

So this technology is definitely coming.

But it must be very complicated to get a microchip implanted into your brain, right?

Actually it is fairly simple.

According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, the typical procedure is very quick and it often only requires just an overnight stay in the hospital….

Neural implants, also called brain implants, are medical devices designed to be placed under the skull, on the surface of the brain. Often as small as an aspirin, implants use thin metal electrodes to “listen” to brain activity and in some cases to stimulate activity in the brain. Attuned to the activity between neurons, a neural implant can essentially “listen” to your brain activity and then “talk” directly to your brain.

If that prospect makes you queasy, you may be surprised to learn that the installation of a neural implant is relatively simple and fast. Under anesthesia, an incision is made in the scalp, a hole is drilled in the skull, and the device is placed on the surface of the brain. Diagnostic communication with the device can take place wirelessly. When it is not an outpatient procedure, patients typically require only an overnight stay at the hospital.

But is it really safe to have a device implanted into your head that can “talk” directly to your brain?

Many large corporations are banking on the fact that in a world that is always hungry for new technology that most people will not be bothered by such things.

For example, Intel is working on sensors that will be implanted in the brain that will be able to directly control computers and cell phones. The following is an excerpt from a Computer World UK article….

By the year 2020, you won’t need a keyboard and mouse to control your computer, say Intel researchers. Instead, users will open documents and surf the web using nothing more than their brain waves.

Scientists at Intel’s research lab in Pittsburgh are working to find ways to read and harness human brain waves so they can be used to operate computers, television sets and cell phones. The brain waves would be harnessed with Intel-developed sensors implanted in people’s brains.

The scientists say the plan is not a scene from a sci-fi movie, Big Brother won’t be planting chips in your brain against your will. Researchers expect that consumers will want the freedom they will gain by using the implant.

Once again, this is not something that will be forced on you against your will.

These big corporations are banking on the fact that a lot of people will want to get these brain implants.

Even now, some video game makers are developing headsets that allow users to play games usingtheir brain waves rather than a joystick or a control pad.

Other companies want to make it possible to directly connect your brain to the Internet.

As I have written about previously, IBM is aggressively working to develop this kind of technology. The following is from a recent IBM press release….

IBM scientists are among those researching how to link your brain to your devices, such as a computer or a smartphone. If you just need to think about calling someone, it happens. Or you can control the cursor on a computer screen just by thinking about where you want to move it.

Scientists in the field of bioinformatics have designed headsets with advanced sensors to read electrical brain activity that can recognize facial expressions, excitement and concentration levels, and thoughts of a person without them physically taking any actions.

The potential “benefits” of such technology are almost beyond imagination. An article on the website of the Science Channel put it this way….

If you could pump data directly into your gray matter at, say, 50 mbps — the top speed offered by one major U.S. internet service provider — you’d be able to read a 500-page book in just under two-tenths of a second.

How would the world change if you could download a lifetime of learning directly into your brain in a matter of weeks?

The possibilities are endless.

But so is the potential for abuse.

Implantable microchips that can “talk” directly to the brain would give a tyrannical government the ultimate form of control.

If you could download thoughts and feelings directly into the brains of your citizens, you could achieve total control and never have to worry that they would turn on you.

In fact, you could potentially program these chips to make your citizens feel good all the time. You could have these chips produce a “natural high” that never ends. That would make your citizens incredibly dependent on the chips and they would never want to give them up.

This kind of technology has the potential to be one of the greatest threats to liberty and freedom in the history of mankind.

At first these implantable microchips will be sold to us as one of the greatest “breakthroughs” ever, but in the end they could end up totally enslaving us.

So I will never be taking any kind of a brain implant, and I hope that you will not either.

The journalists of Channel One first met this man in 2008. At the time he was featured in the documentary “Plan Caucasus,” talking about the attempts of the western intelligence services in the early 1990′s to separate the Northern Caucasus and, in particular, Chechnya from Russia. Chechen by nationality, Berkan Yashar is now a Turkish politician, but in those years he was one of the ideologists of Johar Dudayev. He asked for a meeting, promising to tell the truth about the death of Osama bin Laden whom he met in the early 90-ies in Chechnya.

“In September of 1992 I was in Chechnya, that’s when I first met the man whose name was Bin Laden. This meeting took place in a two-story house in the city of Grozny; on the top floor was a family of Gamsakhurdia, the Georgian president, who then was kicked out of his country. We met on the bottom floor; Osama lived in the same building, “said Berkan Yashar. Berkan said he did not know why bin Laden visited while in Grozny, and said only one thing about his meetings: “Just wanted to talk.”

However, according to Channel One, in those years the former employee of Radio Liberty Berkan Yashar already had an operational name Abubakar, given to him by the CIA. According to Berkan, after that trip Chechen nationals appeared in Osama bin Laden’s circle. Berkan Yashar emphasized that they did not participate “directly in the terror bombings.” “They protected bin Laden, it was his choice because he trusted them entirely, and knew that they would never betray,” said Yashar. According to Yashar he was not the only one who knew about it, but the Russian security services and the CIA were aware of this as well.

Answering the question whether he believed that the Americans killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, Berkan Yashar answered: “Even if the entire world believed I could not possibly believe it.” “I personally know the Chechens who protected him, they are Sami, Mahmood, and Ayub, and they were with him until the very end. I remember that day very well, there were three sixes in it: 26 June 2006. These people, as well as two others from London and two Americans, all seven of them, saw him dead. He was very ill, he was skin and bones, very thin, and they washed him and buried him,” said Berkan Yashar.

Yashar stressed that although the two American Muslims and two British Muslims the guards of bin Laden and saw him dead, they did not participate in the funerals. “Only three Chechens buried him, according to his will,” said Yashar. Bin Laden was buried, according to Yashar, in the mountains on the Pakistan-Afghan border. “There was no assault,” said Yashar. “I know the American operations from the inside: they find the grave, dig out bin Laden and tell everyone about this. They need to show how technologically the security services worked, how each step was controlled, and then present it as a great victory to show that taxpayers are not paying taxes for nothing. ”

Berkan now blames himself for the fact that the Chechens from the protection of bin Laden, “the terrorist number one” are no longer alive after the U.S. intelligence services began to tap Berkan’s telephone conversations. He said he was the first one who announced the date of death of bin Laden. “I was the first one who announced the date of his death in November of 2008 at a conference in Washington, not naming any names, and it looks like it was when the Americans began to track my contacts,” he said.

The last security guard Berkan saw Sami, who, according to him, a few days before bin Laden was declared killed, was kidnapped by the U.S. intelligence agencies. According to Berkan, most likely, it was him who disclosed to them the exact place of burial in the mountains on the Pakistan-Afghan border.
In any case, the last call from Sami was from Pakistan. Berkan explained why he informed the journalists of Channel One: he feared for his life. According to him, only wide publicity around the world can protect him from the CIA. However, just in case, the Turkish secret services, according to him, provided him with guards and weapons.