Session 3 September 2008

Gimpy said:
Did you notice that one of the small triangles along the bottom is missing?

Sorry, it took me so long to reply, I didn't catch this question earlier. If you look at the other pics of this crop circle that portion is there so i think the apparent missing triangle in the first photo i posted must be due to glare or angle or something like that. Here's another photographer's picture of it.

OliversCastleOHSteveAlex.jpg


Also the wheat appears to be bent not broken:

aWiltshire%20zomer%202008%2025%20142.jpg
 
Laura said:
New session:

Session Date: September 3rd 2008

(List of those present deleted for privacy)

(planchette begins to move... )



(J) In Germany, the rest of the world bombed Germany...

A: Yes. Expect it in the USA ultimately.

Q: (J) Would that be nuclear bombs?

A: And more.

Session073094 said:
Q: (L) Will there be atomic war?
A: No.
The C's said back in 1994 that there would be no atomic war. Now(and since 2002 at least) they're saying that there is going to be one? :huh: Or by nuclear bombs, do they just mean cosmic impacts giving off radiation?
 
Exploding nuclear bombs don't necessarily constitute a nuclear war, osit. A "terrorist" (whether from the inside or the outside) could drop a bomb and there would be no "real" war, because they don't have a target for retaliation. It could also mean that comets hit nuclear reactors or something along the lines..

A nuclear war, for me, is an open war between two or more states. FWIW
 
Gottlike said:
Exploding nuclear bombs don't necessarily constitute a nuclear war, osit. A "terrorist" (whether from the inside or the outside) could drop a bomb and there would be no "real" war, because they don't have a target for retaliation. It could also mean that comets hit nuclear reactors or something along the lines..

A nuclear war, for me, is an open war between two or more states. FWIW


Well, unless it was done away with, there is the M. A. D. treaty/protocol in effect. (It stands for Mutually Assured Destruction) Its the Cold War 'nuclear deterrant' that basically states if the US or USSR detects a nuclear strike, all missles are then launched. I haven't found anything on this so far this am, but I'm mid coffee. :)
 
Gimpy said:
Well, unless it was done away with, there is the M. A. D. treaty/protocol in effect. (It stands for Mutually Assured Destruction) Its the Cold War 'nuclear deterrant' that basically states if the US or USSR detects a nuclear strike, all missles are then launched. I haven't found anything on this so far this am, but I'm mid coffee. :)

Quote from Wikipedia

Wikipedia said:
The doctrine assumes that each side has enough nuclear weaponry to destroy the other side and that either side, if attacked for any reason by the other, would retaliate with equal or greater force. The expected result is an immediate escalation resulting in both combatants' total and assured destruction.
(...)
Whether MAD was the officially accepted doctrine of the United States military during the Cold War is largely a matter of interpretation. The term MAD was not coined by the military but was, however, based on the policy of "Assured Destruction" advocated by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara during the 1960s. The United States Air Force, for example, has retrospectively contended that it never advocated MAD and that this form of deterrence was seen as one of numerous options in U.S. nuclear policy. Former officers have emphasized that they never felt as limited by the logic of MAD (and were prepared to use nuclear weapons in smaller scale situations than "Assured Destruction" allowed), and did not deliberately target civilian cities (though they acknowledge that the result of a "purely military" attack would certainly devastate the cities as well). MAD was implied in several U.S. policies and used in the political rhetoric of leaders in both the U.S. and the USSR during many periods of the Cold War.

Looks like MAD was never "really" in effect, just a possible option (as an instrument to compel to peace). It also states that missiles will only be launched when the attack is ascertained to originate from the enemy (US / USSR). In case of a terrorist attack the US wouldn't retaliate against any country, osit.
 
[quote author=the session]Is it harmful to those infected with L bacteria?[/quote]

What kind of "bad" bacteria does the "L bacteria" mentioned at the session mean? I suppose not lactic acid bacteria?

I can confirm that probiotics are helpful. With the help of eating them I got rid of my weak enteritis I had for many years, after two weeks only. I tried this out few months ago and continue to eat probiotics daily, but the overall recovery is still a very slow process.
 
talking about pyro, by chance I was seeking pyrenees in wikipedia in spanish and I found that pyrenees is named in euskera (the vasco idiom that supposedly could derive from the atlantean) "pirinioak" very interesting is the bit "oak" , and diverses combinations between these fragments. might it be interpreted as tree of fire or tree of pyramids? Also when I searched in internet "piri" it gave some results as:
The Piri Reis map (an antique mistery)
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/PiriRies.HTM
and also reference to an african chili plant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piri_piri
"pirini" is an surname too.
 
ArdVan said:
[quote author=the session]Is it harmful to those infected with L bacteria?

What kind of "bad" bacteria does the "L bacteria" mentioned at the session mean? I suppose not lactic acid bacteria?

[/quote]

There is such a thing as L-form bacteria:
_http://bacteriality.com/2007/08/15/l-forms/
 
There is such a thing as L-form bacteria:
_http://bacteriality.com/2007/08/15/l-forms/

Interesting! I've been reading there about how Vitamin D suppresses the immune system, and the info about L-form bacteria. To think I've spent the entire summer trying to lay out in the sun whenever I could cuz I thought I was doing myself some good. I've got fibromyalgia-like symptoms now (among other things), that could be the result of an entire life of sun worshipping. Who wouldda thunk it? Here I was worrying about skin cancer instead... :rolleyes:

Problem is, one usually can't waltz into one's doctor's office and say, "hey, I need to go on the Marshall Protocol." :nuts:
 
Problem is, one usually can't waltz into one's doctor's office and say, "hey, I need to go on the Marshall Protocol." :nuts:

I've read some stuff of the marshall protocol and the bacteriality website. There are letters and information for doctors at http://www.marshallprotocol.com. Perhaps your doc can order your levels of vitamin D metabolites to assess the situation.

At least you can avoid artificial sources of vitamin D, take probiotics and make a diet low in processed carbs and sugars so your healthy bacteria can grow again and don't seek the sun on purpose ;) Detoxifying also strengthens the body.
 
At least you can avoid artificial sources of vitamin D, take probiotics and make a diet low in processed carbs and sugars so your healthy bacteria can grow again and don't seek the sun on purpose ;) Detoxifying also strengthens the body.

Yes, I've ordered that book, it's taking its good old time in arriving too!!! Problem is also, not many doctors are going to bother reading anything on that (or any other) site. I do plan on asking for blood work that will include Vit D on my next visit.
 
Thanks for that!

This summer I've taken a bit of sun, it was 3 days at the end of June and another 2 in August. My skin gets tanned very quickly. Then the same week after the last sunbath I got this mosquito beat on my forehead that swelled up to something monstruos! I really didn't know what the hell was going on, but maybe by now I have a clue :)

Don't know really, but it was like an autoimmune response that lasted for over a week. (hot chamomile compress reduced the inflammation a lot)

Then I remembered with the help of my family that when I was a child I was used to the same kind of swelling of the skin, something I've nearly lost memory of (almost no sun for decades). Thing is me and family were used to stay a whole month on holidays or more, always on the seashore, and getting a lot of sun. And mosquito bites seemed to be more 'poisonous' on that period, guess what...

On the other hand I got my feet healed in just one day by swimming on the sea. I had nearly 30-40 red spots in each foot that simply won't go away around the first days of July, but after a series of baths on the same day in August I found the scars completely dried up the very next morning! I thought it was benzene intoxication (and perhaps it was) and I was trying every kind of remedies like a detoxing diet, vitamin c, niacin, c.silver... for over a month, but nope, only the sea salt did the job. Coincidence?
 
I do plan on asking for blood work that will include Vit D on my next visit.

FWIW, the metabolites to assess the issue of L-bacteria are 1,25 dihydroxyvitamin-D and 25 hydroxyvitamin-D.
 
I'm quite fascinated by this subject of L-form bacteria, but rather sceptical of prolonged antibiotic usage as well as sceptical about eliminating all sources of vit. D that the Marshall Protocol suggests. Has anyone here been on or presently on the Marshall Protocol? If so, would you like to share your experiences?
 
Kel said:
I'm quite fascinated by this subject of L-form bacteria, but rather sceptical of prolonged antibiotic usage as well as sceptical about eliminating all sources of vit. D that the Marshall Protocol suggests.

Antibiotics kill healthy bacteria too, and that is no good. The Marshall Protocol sounds a bit drastic to me, I think people should try other things first like detoxifying and restoring healthy bacteria with probiotics, for example.

There is an interesting article about vitamin D not being a vitamin, but rather an immunosuppressive steroid which acts as a steroid and a hormone. Under normal circumstances, people don't take hormones.

Article available here: The Truth About Vitamin D: Fourteen Reasons Why Misunderstanding Endures
 
Back
Top Bottom