To Silence Wikileaks, Hillary Clinton Proposed Drone Strike on Julian Assange

Under Intense Pressure to Silence Wikileaks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Proposed Drone Strike on Julian Assange.

Julian Assange and his free-speech brainchild Wikileaks were once lauded as global heroes of public service among United States politicians and policy makers. But by 2010, four years after its inception during the President George W. Bush administration, Assange and his organization were no longer considered lovable troublemakers and mavericks.

Image result for wikileaks

By Nerti U. Qatja@VOP_Today


TruePundit.com – A year into President Barack Obama’s first term, Wikileaks was suddenly considered an out-of-control free-speech Frankenstein wreaking havoc on United States foreign policy and intelligence gathering at the direction of Assange, its proverbial Dr. Frankenstein.

The honeymoon for the whistle-blower web site, once a darling of the Democratic Party, was now over. Even more alarming, Assange’s personal safety and organization were increasingly at risk from U.S. concerns.

By November 2010, Assange was a household name globally, but especially on Capitol Hill. And in the State Department alone his prowess of releasing otherwise secret, damning military documents and emails were filling conference rooms at Foggy Bottom and the White House with policy wonks and bureaucrats desperately seeking to squelch the upstart Wikileaks. At the State Department, meeting after meeting was conducted about how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her inner circle were going to squash Assange and Wikileaks latest planned document dump on the United States. Deemed “CableGate,” Assange planned to release confidential cables, or communications, unveiling damaging internal conversations between State Department personnel and its foreign assets and allies.

Image result for wikileaks

Prodded by the looming CableGate, Clinton met with staff on Tuesday November 23, 2010 shortly after 8 a.m. on Mahogany Row at the State Department to attempt to formulate a strategy to avert Assange’s plans to release an enormous batch of 250,000 secret cables, dating from 1966 to 2010. Assange had professed for months to rain the internal cables down on Clinton and President Obama. The collective fear was the context of the secret cables would hamper U.S. intelligence gathering and compromise private correspondences and intelligence shared with foreign governments and opposition leaders. Splashing such juicy details on television news shows and the front pages of major newspapers in the country was great for the media but lousy for intelligence and foreign policy. Many, including Clinton and her elected boss, expressed fear these revelations would embarrass and expose intelligence allies of the United States and set America’s already fragile foreign policy back decades.

“By its very nature, field reporting to Washington is candid and often incomplete information,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement responding to Wikileaks’ anticipated tidal wave release of intelligence. “It is not an expression of policy, nor does it always shape final policy decisions.”

Clinton’s State Department was getting pressure from President Obama and his White House inner circle, as well as heads of state internationally, to try and cutoff Assange’s delivery of the cables and if that effort failed, then to forge a strategy to minimize the administration’s public embarrassment over the contents of the cables. Hence, Clinton’s early morning November meeting of State’s top brass who floated various proposals to stop, slow or spin the Wikileaks contamination. That is when a frustrated Clinton, sources said, at some point blurted out a controversial query.

“Can’t we just drone this guy?” Clinton openly inquired, offering a simple remedy to silence Assange and smother Wikileaks via a planned military drone strike, according to State Department sources. The statement drew laughter from the room which quickly died off when the Secretary kept talking in a terse manner, sources said. Clinton said Assange, after all, was a relatively soft target, “walking around” freely and thumbing his nose without any fear of reprisals from the United States. Clinton was upset about Assange’s previous 2010 records releases, divulging secret U.S. documents about the war in Afghanistan in July and the war in Iraq just a month earlier in October, sources said. At that time in 2010, Assange was relatively free and not living cloistered in in the embassy of Ecuador in London. Prior to 2010, Assange focused Wikileaks’ efforts on countries outside the United States but now under Clinton and Obama, Assange was hammering America with an unparalleled third sweeping Wikileaks document dump in five months. Clinton was fuming, sources said, as each State Department cable dispatched during the Obama administration was signed by her.

Clinton and other top administration officials knew the compromising materials warehoused in the CableGate stash would provide critics and foreign enemies with a treasure trove of counterintelligence. Bureaucratic fears about the CableGate release ultimately proved to be well founded by Clinton, her inner circle and her boss in the White House. The revelations of these U.S. diplomat generated correspondences were damaging on many levels, and among thousands of examples, included:

  • One cable detailed a discussion between Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh and Gen. David H. Petraeus where Saleh indicates he would cover up and accept blame for America’s missile strikes against al-Qaeda in Yemen.
  • U.S. diplomats offered various countries a meeting with President Obama and untold millions of dollars, if these countries agreed to accept detainees from the Guantanamo Bay prison.
  • U.S. diplomats engaged in low-level spying by collecting foreign diplomats’ personal information, including credit card numbers to track their global travel itineraries.
  • The cables also exposed the sensitive behind-the-scenes diplomacy involved in winning sanctions against Iran,
  • The cables exposed U.S. officials’ plan to extract highly enriched uranium from Pakistan,
  • Intelligence was divulged on North Korea’s ties to Tehran’s weaponry program, how it helped Iran obtain missiles that could strike Moscow and Western European cities.
  • Documents were released naming Arab officials and their concerns and complaints about Iran’s nuclear program,
  • One such leak detailed King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia pleading with  the United States to “cut off the head of the snake,” meaning Iran’s nuclear program.
  • In cables from U.S. diplomats, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is described as an “alpha-dog.”
  • Afghan President Hamid Karzai, confidential U.S. diplomat correspondences alleged, was “driven by paranoia.”
  • German Chancellor Angela Merkel “avoids risk and is rarely creative.”
  • Gaddafi spends much time in public with a “voluptuous blonde” Ukrainian nurse.
  • Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister, “appears increasingly to be the mouthpiece of Putin” in Europe after receiving “lavish gifts” including large energy contracts thanks to the negotiations  of a “shadowy,” Russian-speaking Italian intermediary.
  • And thousands more of additional intelligence revelations along the same lines.

Following Clinton’s alleged drone proposal, another controversial remedy was floated in the State Department to place a reward or bounty for Assange’s capture and extradition to the United States, sources said. Numbers were discussed in the realm of a $10 million bounty. A State Department source described that staff meeting as bizarre. One minute staffers were inquiring about the Secretary’s blue and black checkered knit sweater and the next minute, the room was discussing the legalities of a drone strike on Assange and financial bounties, sources said.

Immediately following the conclusion of the wild brainstorming session, one of Clinton’s top aides, State Department Director of Policy Planning Ann-Marie Slaughter, penned an email to Clinton, Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, and aides Huma Abebin and Jacob Sullivan at 10:29 a.m. entitled “an SP memo on possible legal and nonlegal strategies re Wikileaks.”

“Nonlegal strategies.” How did that phrasing make it into an official State Department email subject line dealing with solving Wikileaks and Assange? Why would the secretary of state and her inner circle be discussing any “nonlegal strategies” for anything whatsoever? Against anyone? Shouldn’t all the strategies discussed by the country’s top diplomat be strictly legal only? And is the email a smoking gun to confirm Clinton was actually serious about pursuing an obvious “nonlegal strategy” proposal to allegedly assassinate Assange? Numerous attempts were made to try and interview and decipher Slaughter’s choice of email wording, however, she could not be reached for comment. Insiders said Slaughter is keeping a “low profile” in Princeton, NJ until she is nominated for a position in Clinton’s cabinet if the Democrat is elected in November. Likewise, True Pundit attempted to contact Mills, Abedin, and Sullivan for their perspectives on this story. None commented on the record.

shortccc

Slaughter’s cryptic email also contained an attached document called “SP Wikileaks doc final11.23.10.docx.” That attachment portion of Slaughter’s “nonlegal strategies” email has yet to be recovered by federal investigators and House committee investigators probing Clinton’s email practices while at State. Even Wikileaks does not have the document. Slaughter, however, shed some light on the attachment: “The result is the attached memo, which has one interesting legal approach and I think some very good suggestions about how to handle our public diplomacy.”

But did it also include details on the “nonlegal strategies” teased in the subject line?

Sources confirm Clinton took the email and attachment with her to the White House for an afternoon meeting with Secretary of Defense Bob Gates and National Security Advisor Tom Donilon prior to an additional evening meeting at the White House. President Obama, sources said, did not attend the early meeting with Gates as he was traveling with Vice President Joe Biden. President Obama did attend the second meeting, however, and Wikileaks and Assange’s planned release of secret cables were discussed at length, sources said. Attending this meeting were President Obama, Clinton, Gates, Donilon, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral “Mike” Mullen, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright as well as a half dozen or more various policy aides, sources confirmed.

Did Clinton also share her alleged morning query of droning Assange with the members of the National Security Council and the President? Was it discussed among the top secret subjects in the meeting? Or was Clinton planning to conduct or hatch her own secret foreign policy in defiance of the President, a likely violation of the Logan Act?

Now, almost six years after allegedly threatening to assassinate Julian Assange, some former State Department personnel believe perhaps Clinton’s comments were an attempt at brevity or humor by the former secretary of state, sources said. But since when is Clinton known for her beaming sense of humor and wit? Joking or not, is it appropriate for the top diplomat of the United States to even jest about droning the Wikileaks founder, largely considered an international journalist and whistle blower? State Department personnel would not talk on the record about the Assange meetings or Clinton’s comments. But sources familiar with the meeting said their recollections were jarred again by a recently released report from the FBI’s July interview with Clinton where she acknowledged a penchant for discussing drone strikes to eliminate troublesome foes.

The FBI’s 302 report from Clinton’s email investigation interview, again, specified that Clinton had “many discussions” related to “nominating” drone strikes on individuals:

“Clinton could not recall a specific process for nominating a target for a drone strike and recalled much debate pertaining to the concurrence process. Clinton knew there was a role for DOD, State and the CIA but could not provide specifics as to what it was. Due to a disagreement between these agencies, Clinton recalled having many discussions related to nominating an individual for a drone strike. When Clinton exchanged classified information pertaining to the drone program internally at State, it was in her office or on a secure call. When Clinton exchanged classified information pertaining to the drone program externally it was at the White House. Clinton never had a concern with how classified information pertaining to the drone program was handled.”

Sources said Clinton’s comments on neutralizing Assange fits a pattern of callousness when combined with the FBI testimony that she often considered droning individuals and then coupled with her reaction to Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi’s death in Oct. 2011.

Image result for hillary clinton

Gaddafi was tortured and killed, largely due to Clinton’s maneuvering in the Middle East and Libya. During a sit down interview with CBS News, a Clinton aide notified the room during a taping break of news reports that Gaddafi had been dragged throughout the streets of Libya and ultimately killed. Unaware the camera was still rolling, a jovial and proud Clinton pronounced: “We came. We saw. He died.” This was Clinton’s initial response to the dictator’s demise. A cackling Clinton was then joined in laughter by the CBS correspondent and off-camera aides and staff.  Again, more proof of a disturbing habit of treating human life as a disposable commodity like a soiled diaper.

Unable to legally counter or stop Wikileaks, and likely abandoning any and all legal and “nonlegal strategies,” Clinton and her staff were forced to weather the collateral damage of CableGate. In fact, just five days after Clinton’s meetings on Mahogany Row in the State Department and the White House, Wikileaks began releasing cables to news outlets globally on Sunday November 28, 2010.

Shortly after CableGate, the WikiLeaks founder sought refuge from authorities and threats by hiding at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.

Now 45, Assange is in his fifth year living quarantined inside the embassy. Clinton remains the Democratic nominee for the presidency of the United States.

Advertisements

Donald Trump: Only Explosives Could Have Brought Down World Trade Towers on 9/11

In an interview on September 11, 2001 swaggering-real estate mogul Donald Trump and present Republican presidential candidate remarked that the World Trade Center Twin Towers were likely brought down through controlled demolition.

trump-trade-center-ii

Standing to a model called Twin Towers II, Trump in 2005 said plans to build the Freedom Tower should be scrapped. PHOTO: The Age

By Nerti U. Qatja@VOP_Today – Source: James F. Tracy


This prescient observation has been intentionally overlooked by major media in the wake of 9/11′s fifteenth anniversary.

screen-shot-2016-09-15-at-10-17-39-am

Many corporate news outlets chose instead to single out a off-handed comment by Trump early on in the exchange where he momentarily ‘bragged’ that he ‘owned the tallest building’ in Manhattan next to the WTC– while failing to recognize and highlight his much more important expert opinion a few moments later concerning the World Trade Center’s fate alongside those of its inhabitants.

“At one point during the nearly 10-minute interview,” Washington Post political reporter Jenna Johnson writes, “Trump mentioned that his building in the Financial District was now the tallest.

“Forty Wall St. actually was the second-tallest building in downtown Manhattan, and it was, actually, before the World Trade Center, was the tallest,” Trump said in an interview with WWOR-TV in New York when asked whether his building had been damaged. “And then when they built the World Trade Center, it became known as the second-tallest, and now it’s the tallest.”

The Huffington Post likewise took the statement out of context to carry on the now-routine Trump-bashing campaign.

“Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has been widely criticized for bragging, after the collapse of the twin towers on Sept. 11, 2001, that his building at 40 Wall Street was now the tallest skyscraper in lower Manhattan.”

“Not only was Trump’s boast despicable, coming as it did just hours after nearly 3,000 people lost their lives ― it was also a lie, according to architectural reports reviewed by The Huffington Post.”

The above suggests an effort to mislead and confuse political reportage in an attempt to suppress any meaningful discussion of and plea for a true investigation of the most significant historical and geopolitical event in the past half century.

Image result for 9/11

Trump’s ‘boast’ took place at around the two-minute mark. Yet here is Trump’s key remark from that discussion that begin at 5:30, following the interviewer’s suggestion that explosives may have been the cause of the WTC Towers’ destruction and Trump explaining his understanding of the buildings’ architectural components:

“I happen to think they had not only a plane but bombs that exploded almost simultaneously, because I can’t imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built where the steel is on the inside around the elevator shaft. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have, and it [came down] almost just like a can of soup.”

Americans live in the ‘United States of Amnesia,’ as Michael Eric Dyson once put it, largely because of deceptive media and educational institutions, both of which airbrush history for the Inner Party, much as in  Soviet Russia or Orwell’s 1984.

Image result for 9/11

In fact, Trump’s September 11, 2001 observation eerily corroborates the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth version of the World Trade Center towers free fall. Trump recognized from first hand knowledge the Towers “very strong structures” and maintained only powerful explosives could have taken them down in such a fashion. He dismissed cartoon physics and remarked that an aluminum plane could not have sliced through the steel-girded exterior.

WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange: Facebook is CIA Spying Machine

Facebook is “the most appalling spying machine ever invented,” according WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who recently spoke with Russia Today, while awaiting extradition from England to Sweden on sexual assault charges.

Image result for Julian Assange

By Nerti U. Qatja@VOP_Today


“Here we have the world’s most comprehensive database about people, their relationships, their names, their addresses, their locations, their communications with each other, and their relatives, all sitting within the United States, all accessible to US Intelligence,” said Assange during the interview.

Assange asserts that Google, Yahoo and other US-based technology companies are also complicit in the US government’s aims to keep watch over the world’s citizens.

“Facebook, Google, Yahoo, all these major US organizations have built-in infaces for US intelligence,” he said. “It’s not a matter of serving a subpoena, they have an interface they have developed for US Intelligence to use. Now, is the case that Facebook is run by US Intelligence? No, it’s not like that. It’s simply that US Intelligence is able to bring to bear legal and political pressure to them. It’s costly for them to hand out individual records, one by one, so they have automated the process.”

Assange goes on to say that anytime anyone adds information to their Facebook profile they “are doing free work for US intelligence agencies.”

“The WikiLeaks founders’ proclamations of tech giants’ Big Brother operations follows recent revelations that Apple, Microsoft and Google collect location-related information about customers who use devices that run their iOS, Windows Phone 7 and Android mobile operating systems.”

Revelations about so-called Location-gate sparked outrage (and a lawsuit) among customers, who were appalled that their mobile devices were used to keep track of their approximate movements.

Image result for Julian Assange

The uproar caused Apple CEO Steve Jobs to respond to the criticism, saying that “Apple is not tracking your iPhone.” Instead, “Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database with the goal of providing iPhone users an improved traffic service in the next couple of years,” according to statement posted on the company’s website.

With the public becoming seemingly more wary of its supposedly “private” data being used by corporations, is Facebook the next to face its collective wrath?

Watch the full Assange interview below (Facebook comments begin around the 2:00 mark):

Anonymous – Message to the United States Government 2016

People shouldn’t be afraid of their government, governments should be afraid of their people.

We are Anonymous.

We are Legion.

We do not forgive.

We do not forget.

Expect us.

Image result for Anonymous - Message to the United States Government 2016

By Nerti U. Qatja@VOP_Today – Source: Anonymous Official


NEW MESSAGE:


Anonymous – Message to the Citizens of America

Greetings world, We are Anonymous.

We were originally planning to release this particular message if Trump was to become president of the United States. But we later realized, that whoever does become president, whether its Trump, Sanders, or Hillary Clinton. In the end, nothing will stop us, or the citizens of the United States from the inevitable. Be it state wide uprisings, mass protests, or revolution.

If America ever does have a revolution, be it one of blood, we will survive the eve and end of Spring. We will survive the eve and end of Summer. We will survive the eve and end of Autumn. We will survive the eve and end of Winter. But at what cost? A violent revolution will only destroy the very fabric the founding fathers fought and struggled so indefatigable to place. However, if America has a bloodless revolution, not only will it unite the masses, the citizens of other nations will see this as a possible, and realistic choice. If the citizens of the United States do decidedly deploy a bloodless revolution, what will stop the citizens from other countries from rising up to their own petty system? By no means is this a call to arms, nor are we declaring war against the United States government. We are only conveying a message to the masses. The citizens of America, like others who have rose up against the system, are tenacious for justice. And as we all know, America’s policies affect the globe on a grand stage. But one has to question, what event, decision, or action will the U.S. government take which will alert the masses of the corrupted body that is the U.S. government? Who will lead this revolution? Who will counter it? Will we have a revolution of betrayal and of power struggle like the lost revolutions in the Arab world? Many will not bother to contemplate this and will only find it as naive and ludicrous. Some will go far as to say that revolutions will never exist anymore. Is a revolution in America truly needed right now? The answer lies within you if it does or does not.

Until the majority of the masses are not able to strive in becoming what they want to be in life, it is in that moment where they will rise and fight against the system.

So it has to be asked, how many more martyrs will there be? How many more voices will have to perish for the U.S. citizenry to notice and care? Until we cease fighting with one another over the non-essential, until we cease our cynic selves, we will never see the light at the end of the tunnel. Until then however, we are nothing more, and nothing less, then slaves and animals. Yet we are also not blind, we are fully aware of the mitigating steps the United States government takes to ensure the trust between the people is balanced. There is interaction, but these steps of “interaction” are too small, and too slow. Such a question however, is too early to state since our next president is right around the corner. If he, or she, does not deliver or fulfill the policies they intended to bring it will be safe to say that the current government is no longer functional. Our economy will further destabilize, our representatives will be hailed as uncooperative, and our system, will be destroyed. For over a decade, voting was useless. When it comes to U.S. grounds, corporations and lobbyists are the true leaders of this country and are the ones with the power to control our lives.

Nevertheless, to rebuild our government, we must first destroy it.

Our time for democracy is here.
Our time for real change is here.

We call upon the Citizens of the United States to stand beside us in overthrowing this corrupted body and call upon a new era. Our allegiance is to those whom fought tirelessly for justice, because they are us, and we are them.

This Operation, will be engaged, when the citizens of the United States begin to rise against a government which does not hold its democratic values, against a government that does not listen to its people, against a government which only intends to fulfill its own agenda, against a government whom only functions behind closed doors, and against a government which censors dissidents.

We are the common citizen.
We will never forgive.
We will never forget.

To the United States government, and to the empires of the world…
We are not terrorists. We are Anonymous.
We are not criminals. We are the messengers of the light.

Therefore, we declare our right on this earth, to be a man, to be a human being, to be respected as a human being, to be given the rights of a human being, in this society, on this earth, in this day, which we intend, to bring into existence…

The Oldest Man In The World: 256 Years Old Man Reveals SHOCKING Secrets To The World

What is the longest a person has ever lived for? Meet Li Ching Yuen, a man who lived an astonishing 256 years!  And no, this is not a myth or a fictional tale.

Image result for The Oldest Man In The World: 256 Years Old Man Reveals SHOCKING Secrets To The World

By Nerti U. Qatja@VOP_Today – Source: Spirit Science and Metaphysics


According to a 1930 New York Times article, Wu Chung-chieh, a professor of theChengdu University, discovered Imperial Chinese government records from 1827 congratulating Li Ching-Yuen on his 150th birthday,  and further documents later congratulating him on his 200th birthday in 1877. In 1928, a New York Times correspondent wrote that many of the old men in Li’s neighborhood asserted that their grandfathers knew him when they were boys, and that he at that time was a grown man.

Image result for The Oldest Man In The World: 256 Years Old Man Reveals SHOCKING Secrets To The World

Li Ching Yuen reportedly began his herbalist career at the age of 10, where he gathered herbs in mountain ranges and learned of their potency for longevity. For almost 40 years, he survived on a diet of herbs such as lingzhi, goji berry, wild ginseng, he shoo wu and gotu kola and rice wine. In 1749, at the age of 71, he joined the Chinese armies as teacher of martial arts.  Li was said to be a much-loved figure in his community, marrying 23 times and fathering over 200 children.

According to the generally accepted tales told in his province, Li was able to read and write as a child, and by his tenth birthday had traveled in Kansu, Shansi, Tibet, Annam, Siam and Manchuria gathering herbs. For the first hundred years he continued at this occupation. Then he switched to selling herbs gathered by others. He sold lingzhi, goji berry, wild ginseng, he shou wu and gotu kola along with other Chinese herbs, and lived off a diet of these herbs and rice wine.

HE WASN’T THE ONLY ONE

According to one of Li’s disciples, he had once encountered an even older 500-year-old man, who taught him Qigong exercises and dietary recommendations that would help him extend his lifespan to superhuman proportions. Apart from Qigong and a herb-rich diet, what else can we learn from this Master of Longevity?

How about this: On his death bed, Li famously said, “I have done all that I have to do in this world”. Could his peaceful last words also hint at one of the biggest secrets to a long and prosperous life? It’s interesting to note that in the West, we’re often taught to believe that aging is something that must be “beaten” with high tech infrared devices and state of the art medication.

HIS SECRET TO LONG HEALTH:

Li was asked what his secret was to longevity. This was his reply: “Keep a quiet heart, sit like a tortoise, walk sprightly like a pigeon and sleep like a dog.” These were the words of advice Li gave to Wu Pei-fu, the warlord, who took Li into his house to learn the secret of extremely long life.

Li maintained that inward calm and peace of mind combined with breathing techniques were the secrets to incredible longevity. Obviously, his diet would have played a large role. But its fascinating that the old living person in recorded history attributes his long life to his state of mind.

WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO BELIEVE?

With the average lifespan for the Western world currently sitting between 70-85 years, the thought of someone living over 100 years old seems like quite the stretch. The thought of someone living over 200 years old seems extremely suspicious. But why don’t we believe that people can live this long?

We have to keep in mind that some people in this world don’t live a grueling 9-5 lifestyle, they don’t have to deal with the stresses of debt, they aren’t breathing polluted city air, and they exercise regularly. They don’t eat refined sugars or flour, or any foods that have had pesticides sprayed on them. They aren’t living off of the standard American diet.

They aren’t eating fatty meats, sugary deserts, and genetically modified foods. No antibiotics. No alcohol and no tobacco. Their diets not only exclude junk foods that we so often indulge in, they also include superfoods and herbs which are like steroids for our organs and immune system.

They also spend their spare time in nature practicing breathing techniques and meditating which have been proven to improve mental, physical, and emotional health. They keep things simple, get proper sleep, and spend a great deal of time in nature under the sun. When we get a chance to relax in the sun, we feel instantly rejuvenated and call this a “vacation”. Imagine spending a lifetime doing that in the mountains, and combining that with perfect mental, spiritual, and physical well-being.
[endgoogle]

I do not doubt for a minute that if we all did the things we knew we were supposed to do, that living to be 100 years old would be commonplace. When we treat our bodies right, who knows how long we can live for?

BOOM: Pepsi Admits Its Soda Contains Cancer-Causing Ingredients

When the Center for Environmental Health released test results showing that Pepsi intentionally covered up the presence of high levels of 4-Mel in its popular soft drinks in 2013, the company denied both the presence of this chemical in its beverages and the fact that it was dangerous. 4-Mel, which is short for 4-Methylimidazole, is a compound that is formed in the manufacturing of caramel coloring, and is a known carcinogen.

Image result for Pepsi cancer

By Nerti U. Qatja@VOP_Today – Sources: Natural News


Since then, the drinks maker has fought against complying with California state requirements to place a cancer warning label on the beverages that contain the ingredient, which include not only Pepsi, but also Diet Pepsi and Pepsi One.

Now, a settlement in a class action lawsuit against Pepsi has gained preliminary approval from a federal judge in California. As part of the proposed settlement, Pepsi has agreed to ensure its caramel coloring’s 4-Mel levels do not exceed 100 parts per billion in products that are being shipped for sale within the U.S. They will also be required to test the soda using specific protocols.

Image result for Pepsi cancer

The soft drink giant also agreed to these measures in a different lawsuit that was settled in a California state court last year. The new settlement, however, expands the reach of these measures from California to the entire country.

Pepsi failed to warn consumers that its drinks contain known carcinogens

The lawsuit accused Pepsi of failing to warn people that its beverages contain 4-Mel, which California has officially recognized as a cancer-causing chemical.

2014 Consumer Reports test showed that the 4-Mel in Pepsi exceeded the permitted level of 29 micrograms per bottle or can, which would mean that they were in violation of common law and consumer protection statutes in the state of California.

In particular, this violates California’s Proposition 65, which has been in place since 1985, and requires manufacturers to provide consumers with clear warnings when their products will expose them to toxic or cancer-causing chemicals.

The state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment set the cutoff at 29 micrograms because that level creates a risk of cancer of one in 100,000.

Citing a 2013 Mintel and Leatherhead Food Research report, Consumer Reports said that caramel coloring is the world’s most widely used food coloring. At the time, Pepsi tried to say that because Prop 65 refers to exposure per day rather than exposure per can, and that the average amount of diet soda that its drinkers consume daily is less than a can, there was no need to place a warning on it. Consumer Reports disagreed, however.

“No matter how much consumers drink they don’t expect their beverages to have a potential carcinogen in them. And we don’t think 4-MeI should be in foods at all. Our tests of Coke samples show that it is possible to get to much lower levels,” toxicologist Dr. Urvashi Rangan said.

Is drinking soda really worth risking cancer and obesity?

It simply does not make sense for people to expose themselves unnecessarily to an ingredient that merely serves to color their food, and consumers have the right to be aware of what they are putting in their bodies. The popularity of books like Food Forensics serves to illustrate the growing desire by Americans to know what ingredients their food products contain.

Image result for Pepsi cancer

The cancer-causing caramel coloring in Pepsi is not the only reason consumers should steer clear of it. Soft drinks are also believed to be behind the nation’s obesity epidemic.

A UCLA study found that adults who consumed one sugary drink such as a soda every day had a 27 percent higher likelihood of being classified as overweight than those who did not drink such beverages.

Moreover, drinking just one soda each day adds up to a total of 39 pounds of sugar each year! That means that regular soda drinkers can cut their risk of obesity and cancer in one fell swoop simply by giving up the habit for good.