Sat, 28 Jan 2017 15:24 UTC
The mystery of how the effects of LSD can last so long, even though the drug itself is no longer present in a person's bloodstream, appears to have been solved, according to a new study conducted by a joint team of researchers from The University of North Carolina, Stanford University and the University of California.
Using a process known as crystallography, the researchers were able to examine exactly how LSD molecules interact with the serotonin receptors in our brain. According to the data, LSD actually embeds far deeper than previously thought thanks to its molecular structure which becomes wedged in the receptors and cannot break free.
On top of this, the brain receptors themselves engulf the LSD molecules with a layer of protein. This is why the molecules disappear from human bloodstreams so quickly and yet continue to have hallucinogenic effects for hours afterward.
Allgemeine Morgenpost Rundschau/ Fort Russ
Tue, 20 Dec 2016 18:58 UTC
An end at last for fake news: Truth Ministry cleans up
As announced by the SPD party chair, Thomas Oppermann, the Federal Government will adopt a law against "fake news" in January in order to prevent Russia's massive influence on the Bundestag election in 2017, as expressed by the FAZ (Fakenews Allgemeine Zeitung) [F is for Frankfurt, FAZ is like NYT -tr.]
Explication is forthcoming.
Tue, 06 Dec 2016 23:25 UTC
"It is beyond doubt that the shelling was conducted by the 'opposition' militants. Moscow understands who gave the Syrian militants the coordinates of the Russian hospital right at the moment when it started working," Spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry, Major General Igor Konashenkov said, adding that the defense ministry attributes the blame for the incident to "terrorists and their patrons in the US, the UK and France."
Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:45 UTC
So what drove Americans to vote for either Trump or Hillary in this week's US presidential election? Ask the mainstream media, or any Hillary supporter, and they'll probably tell you it was issues like liberal values and social justice. They'll also tell you that Trump supporters were motivated primarily by racism, sexism, and hatred. In reality, Trump voters were just as concerned about social injustice. In fact, this is the issue behind most popular votes around the world these days. And ironically, Trump voters were arguably more concerned about social justice than the liberals who voted Hillary because the social justice that drove millions to vote for Trump is very different to the 'social justice' that concerned Hillary supporters.
Here we need to note the clear distinction between the working-class 'rednecks' in the USA, and some of those in a more upwardly mobile financial position. Most people who voted for Trump were the 'rednecks' and they did so because they are feeling the negative effects of 8 years of the Obama government's 'liberal' economic and foreign policies that have continued unchanged since the 'conservative' Bush years (you might wonder why that is and how it works - hint: the president isn't the 'decider', by a long shot). Those policies coincided with the 2008 'crash' and the bank 'bailouts' that saw millions of American homes repossessed and many traditional manufacturing job losses, both of which disproportionately affected the poor.
It was precisely this marginalization of the most vulnerable in society that was behind the Brexit vote in the UK earlier this year. Both the British people's vote to leave the EU and American people's vote for Trump were not primarily votes for racism or xenophobia but votes against the neoliberal status quo under which the poor saw their living standards drop further and everyone saw war and death abroad increase.
To underline the bipartisan nature of these protest votes; in the US it was the nominally 'left' government candidate that was rejected while in the UK the protest vote occurred under the nominally 'right' Conservative government. The point being; the supposed 'left'/'right' political paradigm in Western democracies no longer exists. It has been replaced by a combination of neoliberalism and neoconservatism, two fancy words that describe ideologies that together form the 'elite' project for transnational globalization and domination of the world's resources by corporations and their political friends through the 'projection' of US military power around the world.
When Trump was offered to these marginalized and war-weary people as the only alternative to Hillary, they took the offer without much further thought. In addition, based on emerging voter poll data, it seems that it was not only the poor who rejected Hillary and all she stands for, but 54% of white male college graduates voted for Trump. Broken down by income bracket, while 52% of voters earning less than $50,000 a year voted for Clinton, and 41% for Trump, of the 64% of American voters who earn more than $50,000 a year, 49% chose Trump, and 47% Clinton. So, far from the core voter motivation in this election being one of 'anyone but Trump', it may have been closer to 'anyone but Hillary'.
Tue, 08 Nov 2016 14:53 UTC
In terms of the 'bigger picture', this year's election is something of a watershed. For the first time the US population is being emotionally manipulated to not just choose between Democrat and Republican, but between two candidates that are clearly (even to the average American) reprehensible assholes. At the same time, the people are being encouraged and manipulated to find as many ways as possible to ignore the fact that the candidates are disgusting individuals, and choose one anyway.
The sane response to being offered either a shit sandwich or a shitshake is to refuse both, but apparently a decent percentage of Americans have, in essence, lost their senses.
Fri, 23 Sep 2016 21:57 UTC
Officially, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) is a UK-based organization providing data to the Western press about troop movements, government policy and public sentiment in Syria. The Western press then reprints the information they are given - no questions asked:
based out of a small house in Coventry, England, and his 'team of four activists in Syria'.
Apparently all it takes to inform the entire Western media about everything that is happening on the ground in Syria is four people. Four people could, theoretically, provide reasonably objective reports, but only if they were open to receiving information from many sources, including ones supportive of the Syrian government. They might even be able to produce - using objective discernment - reliable statistics of casualties, refugees and terrorists/rebels. But SOHR has consistently reported the 'civil war' from only the perspective of the so-called 'rebels', discounting Syrian government reports out of hand, as well as reports from civilians that reveal rebels' crimes.
That fact alone makes SOHR about as reliable a source of information on the Syrian conflict as the US State Department and the British Foreign Office, who have a vested interest in spinning the war to produce one end: the death or removal of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad.
Fri, 23 Sep 2016 09:34 UTC
Most active-duty members of the US military would prefer the government to refrain from overseas missions involving so-called nation-building, a number of costly and ambiguous efforts to reconstruct post-war countries, according to a poll run by the Military Times and Syracuse University's Institute for Veterans and Military Families (IVMF).
The survey, described by the Military Times as a first-of-its-kind study, included a question: "How do you view the US government's continued involvement in nation-building efforts, establishing democracies in the Middle East and North Africa using US military and financial support?"
About 55 percent of service members said they "strongly oppose"or "somewhat oppose" those efforts, while 23 percent responded positively to an idea of carrying out such missions. The remaining 22 percent were either unsure or of no opinion on the issue.
Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:05 UTC
On Tuesday July 5th, Alton Sterling, 37, was selling CDs for cash outside a store in Baton Rouge, as he did most days. On this particular day he was approached by a homeless man who repeatedly asked him for money. Sterling told the man to leave him alone several times before resorting to showing the man that he was armed. The previous day Sterling had purchased the weapon for his own protection. "He didn't have a gun before that," barber Ronnie Harton, 50, told the New York Daily News. "He said he had to protect himself, because he had all this money on him [from selling CDs]. Around this area, you get robbed real quick."
Perhaps resentful that his requests for money were rebuffed by Sterling, the homeless man called 911 on his cell phone and told police that there was an "armed man in the parking lot." When police arrived and confronted Sterling, he was tackled to the ground, tased and, apparently because police were told he was carrying a firearm, publicly executed with two shots in the chest and four in the back.
Comment: The 9/11 effect: What happens when the "world's only superpower" decides that it needs to demonize 1.5 billion Muslims in order to justify its imperial expansion into Muslim countries (and everywhere else) in order to keep Russia contained, and it does this for 15 straight years?
The decision came from a second court appeal in a case of Japanese Muslims who argued that the broad monitoring is unconstitutional, invades their privacy, and infringes on their freedom of religion.
"They made us terrorist suspects," Mohamed Fujita, one of the plaintiffs in the case, told Al Jazeera. "We never did anything wrong — on the contrary."