Connect with us

Alternative News

The Vatican Has Paid Close To $4 Billion To Settle Child Molestation Lawsuits

Published

on

The reality of child molestation by the Roman Catholic Church has surfaced time and time again, and yet, somehow, it continues to happen. If you watched the movie Spotlight, perhaps you have an idea of just how things are going down. But let’s break it down to date.

advertisement - learn more

While you can’t put a price on the innocence of a child, you can put a price on just how much the Roman Catholic Church has paid out in lawsuits over the never-ending epidemic of child molestation wreaking havoc in its ranks.

According to Jack and Diane Ruhl of the National Catholic Reporter, who decided to research this particular topic, since 1950, the Vatican has spent a disgusting $3,994,797,060.10. That’s nearly $4 billion to keep things hush hush. That number may even be a bit conservative, as we cannot know for sure the agreed upon “under the table” amount. 

The figure is based on a three-month investigation of data, which includes a review of over 7,800 articles from LexisNexis Academic and NCR databases and information from BishopAccountability.org. Reports from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops were also used. 

If the amount of money dished out was divided evenly amongst the U.S.’s 197 dioceses, each one would get almost $20 million.  An incredible amount of cash from hard working people who support the good faith and intentions of the Church — people who are parents to little boys being sexually abused — is being used to cover up unfathomable crimes executed by priests.

In the early nineties, a monk who worked at the Vatican opened up to The New Yorker, admitting: “You wouldn’t believe the amounts of money the church is spending to settle these priestly sexual-abuse cases.” By 1992, U.S. Catholic dioceses had given 400 million dollars to settle hundreds of molestation cases. That was a shocking chunk of change then, and that figure has only risen exponentially since. The men running the Vatican are well aware of the problem, and yet they refuse to provide justice.

advertisement - learn more

When Pope Francis addressed hundreds of bishops on the issue, he said:

I realize how much the pain of recent years has weighed upon you, and I have supported your generous commitment to bring healing to victims — in the knowledge that in healing we too are healed — and to work to ensure that such crimes will never be repeated.

His words of “generous commitment” only further show just how tightly knit the Church truly is — worried more about reputation than morality.

“The people he was talking to are the people who moved the pedophiles around to prey on kids,” said John Salveson, a 59-year-old Philadelphia businessman who was abused as a child by a priest. “If you gave me 100 years to pick a word to describe the U.S. bishops’ reaction to this crisis, ‘generous’ would never make the list.”

Terry McKiernan, who runs BishopAccountability.org, noted that Francis overlooked the fact that many dioceses around the country haven’t disclosed the names of abusers, and furthermore, continue to lobby against reforming statute of limitations laws that shield priests from prosecution for crimes from the past.

David Clohessy, executive director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, was once optimistic that Francis would push for change in how the Church handled the scandal, but has since lost hope. “There’s nothing he could say that would be helpful, because Catholic bishops have said it all before — ‘I’m sorry, we didn’t know, we’ll do better.’ We’ve heard that for decades,” he said. “This is a pope who has refused to take steps to expose one predator or punish one enabler. . . . He could simply defrock, demote, discipline, or even clearly denounce just one complicit bishop. He refuses, not one.”

Spanning many hundreds of years, children have suffered at the hands of child predators who remain safe in the authority and integrity of an honorable faith, yet organizations, investigators, reporters, etc. continue to raise awareness, while the Catholic Church continues their fight to block bills that would extend the statute of limitations for reporting sex abuse.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Congressional Hearing Could Be The Beginning Of The End For Hillary Clinton

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A public hearing examining Clinton Foundation malfeasance before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will be convened today, and will include supposedly 'explosive' testimony from three whistleblowers.

  • Reflect On:

    Is it possible that this hearing represents a watershed moment in the takedown of the Deep State?

For those who remain skeptical about the notion that the Trump Administration is working to take down a ‘Deep State’ that has long held power over the American government, the military, and its law enforcement and intelligence agencies, today’s (December 13, 2018) public hearing on investigations into the Clinton Foundation before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee may very well be a watershed moment.

Mind you, there is a second tier of skeptic to consider: those who accept the notion that a ‘Deep State’ or shadow government does exert tremendous power in our world and may very well have plans to create a totalitarian one-world government, but reject the notion that there is any real resistance to this power, especially not from Donald Trump.

Both sets of skeptics will point to the fact that there has been no concrete action, no major arrests of supposed key Deep State players. A case in point: is Hillary Clinton not still walking about freely, touring with her husband, flying out to India for a lavish wedding celebration, creating a buzz of excitement around the prospect that some lucky donor could get the opportunity to spend an evening of drinking and theatre with her?

OK, these events might be pathetic money grabs,  but certainly if some of the allegations against her were true, both groups would argue, would she not be behind bars by now? Suffice it to say, most people who have done any manner of research into the many claims against Hillary Clinton have concluded that while she is most likely a criminal, they just can’t see her getting arrested. But if–and it’s a big ‘if’–she ever does get arrested and convicted of a serious crime, that likely would satisfy the most ardent skeptic and give rise to widespread belief that the Trump Administration is working on, and succeeding in, taking down the Deep State. Let’s examine the possibility that things are headed in that direction.

advertisement - learn more

Two-Tiered Justice System

For those who have been following the stories of impropriety, illegality, and even sexual perversion surrounding Hillary Clinton (at times in connection with husband Bill), from Whitewater to Filegate to Benghazi to Pizzagate to Uranium One to the private email server, and more recently with Clinton Foundation malfeasance in the spotlight surrounded by many suspicious deaths, there is a sense that Hillary Clinton must be too high up, has too much protection, or is too well-connected to ever have to face criminal charges. Certainly if one listens to former FBI investigator James Comey’s testimony into his kid-gloves handling of Clinton’s private email server investigation, one gets the impression that he is one of many government officials that is in Clinton’s back pocket.

Whistleblower William D. Campbell echoes the sentiments that people like Hillary Clinton are receiving preferential treatment in a ‘two-tiered justice system’, as noted in this Sara Carter article:

A former whistleblower, who has spoken with agents from the Little Rock FBI field office last year and worked for years as an undercover informant collecting information on Russia’s nuclear energy industry for the bureau, noted his enormous frustration with the DOJ and FBI. He describes as a two-tiered justice system that failed to actively investigate the information he provided years ago on the Clinton Foundation and Russia’s dangerous meddling with the U.S. nuclear industry and energy industry during the Obama administration.

“(Mueller) received the documents, copies of which I still have, over a period of years and ignored a national security threat to the United States because of his political preference,” said Campbell, who said he is frustrated that the investigation into the Clinton Foundation and the other information he provided was apparently ignored years ago.

However, it must be noted that this was how things were then. Things have changed significantly within the system, though if you relied on Mainstream Media you would probably not have put together how much this ‘two-tiered justice system’ has started to be challenged based on firings and forced resignations within the Department of Justice, the FBI, and elsewhere. This post from Q-Anon probably gives us the best compilation of these actions:

Q!2jsTvXXmXs

Justice_1.jpg

[Updated]
James Baker – FIRED [reported today – resigned [false]] / removed Jan/FIRED 4.21
Lisa Page – FIRED [reported today – resigned [false]]
Testimony received.
Tracking_y.
[Added]
Mike Kortan, FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs – FIRED [cooperating under ‘resigned‘ title]
Josh Campbell, Special Assistant to James Comey – FIRED
[DOJ]
David Laufman, Chief of the Justice Department’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section [NAT SECHRC email invest] – FIRED/FORCE
John Carlin, Assistant Attorney General – Head of DOJ’s National Security Division – FIRED/FORCE
Sally Yates, Deputy Attorney General & Acting Attorney General – FIRED
Mary McCord, Acting Assistant Attorney General – Acting Head of DOJ’s National Security Division – FIRED/FORCE
Bruce Ohr, Associate Deputy Attorney General – Demoted 2x – cooperating witness [power removed]
Rachel Brand, Associate Attorney General – No. 3 official behind Deputy AG Rosenstein – FIRED/FORCE
Cross against House/Senate resignations/final term announcements + CEO departures.
CONSPIRACY?
FAKE NEWS?
THE SWAMP IS BEING DRAINED.
TRUST THE PLAN.
JUSTICE.
Q

——

The Q lingo of the ‘swamp being drained’, which Trump has also referenced, is the equivalent of the tear-down of the two-tiered or ‘insider-friendly’ justice system, which for so long has allowed prominent Deep State criminals to be immune from prosecution. Just the kind of rhetoric we have been hearing, including Clinton Foundation CFO Andrew Kessel’s semi-metaphorical admission, ‘I know where all the bodies are buried in this place,’ leads us to believe that things are now different.

The Hearing

What may finally soothe the anger of William D. Campbell and other whistleblowers is that their time seems to have finally come to be heard, and perhaps even have their findings acted upon, as today’s hearing seems to be striking a different tone to the ears of those who have in-depth knowledge of the crimes that have been alleged. This is certainly how rep. Mark Meadows, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, sees it:

Rep. Mark Meadows, chairman of the Freedom Caucus and member of the committee, said this time it will be different. He noted that the investigation is apparently ongoing with the FBI and DOJ and believes the information being delivered for Thursday’s hearing to be ‘explosive’ in nature and may help connect the dots.

Meadow’s told Fox New’s Martha MaCallum Tuesday, “the American people, they want to bring some closure, not just a few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having a hearing this week, not only covering over some of those 6,000 pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this.”

Meadows, who’s also on President Donald Trump’s short-list to replace Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly, noted that some “allegations (whistleblowers) make are quite explosive.”

“We just look at the contributions. Now everybody’s focused on the contributions for the Clinton Foundation and what has happened just in the last year,” he said. “But if you look at it, it had a very strong rise, the minute she was selected as secretary of state. It dipped down when she was no longer there.”

“And then rose again, when she decided to run for president. So there are all kinds of allegations of pay-to-play and that kind of thing,” Meadows added.

If, in fact, this hearing reveals anything serious like the long-suspected ‘pay-to-play’ strategy of the Clinton Foundation–which allegedly sought large donations in return for favors from the Clinton-run State Department–then Hillary Clinton will be in big trouble. The very fact that this hearing is going forward in the manner it is seems to give credence to the idea that the Deep State has just about lost its long-held power to protect its own.

The Takeaway

As Martin Luther King said, ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.’ It seems like those of us who have been researching and learning about the fraud and corruption in politics have been waiting so long for the truth to emerge and justice to be served as to have difficulty believing that it may ever arrive. Fortunately, we don’t have long to wait to see if this coming hearing is a true watershed moment and a harbinger for things to come.

That said, it is important to keep in mind that this is only a small part of a larger awakening that is happening on the planet right now, and if we hope to contribute to this awakening, we will realize that maintaining equanimity throughout the unfolding of these events is what is essential.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Finally, A Clear Explanation Of The “Baby It’s Cold Outside” Controversy

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Recently, the 1944 song 'Baby It's Cold Outside' came under fire from modern feminists claiming it was a song promoting rape culture. Some radio stations banned the song. A check into the lyrics and song's meaning proved that simply wasn't true.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are we so quick to jump to aggressive conclusions without simple research? Why are we so emotionally driven about everything these days? Why are we so quick to protect ourselves from 'offensive' things? Don't we decide to get offended?

When I first heard of the “Baby It’s Cold Outside” controversy it seemed to resemble the type of results from the common social engineering practices taking place right now whereby people are led to think incompletely about events and culture in order to create a divide amongst people. This creates enemies where they don’t truly exist and makes for a very easy to manipulate and control populace. Ultimately, this leads for people to call for greater governance.

And this is exactly what is happening when you observe the millions up in arms about issues they don’t fully understand, calling for the government or corporate bodies to step in and do something about it.

Common examples are microaggressions, trying to say everything is hate speech, and blaming gender, racism, or privilege at any possible time, even when those things have nothing to do with situations.

I feel this is often, not always, a reflection of the barriers we want to put up around ourselves so we don’t have to deal with much of the pain we have within ourselves. When we were children we were taught “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names can never hurt me.” The reason we are told that is simply because while we all do want to live in a world where everyone is nice to one another, people may sometimes say mean things. The piece we miss today is, how we react to what people say isn’t a reflection of what they said, it’s a reflection of how we feel within ourselves.

“I was just minding my own business looking for people to crucify in my witch hunts instead of dealing with my own pain…” JP Sears, Baby It’s Cold Outside Controversy Explained

Remember, when it comes to getting offended, we all decide what offends us and how to get offended by what someone says. TRUE empowerment means you have the control within yourself. We don’t have to allow things to offend us simply because someone says something, and this also doesn’t mean everyone is going to be mean to us all the time, this is an unsubstantiated fear.

advertisement - learn more

How The Controversy Began

The controversy began a few weeks ago when people claimed the lyrics of the song Baby It’s Cold Outside were promoting rape culture. A groundswell emerged on social media, causing the song to be banned on several radio stations in the US and Canada. Singer Melinda DeRocker even opted out of recording it on her recent holiday album.

But did anyone stop to find out what the writer of the song meant when they wrote it in 1944? Yes, actually, some did, thankfully.  But many didn’t and jumped on the hate bandwagon because nowadays many of us seem to have become headline and meme readers and take all we see as fact without ever questioning what we’re being told. We seem to shy away from delving deeper into content and research, as a general statement, and this is a big problem.

The truth is, the song’s composer Frank Loesser wrote the song so he and his wife Lynn Garland could perform it at holiday parties.

The song’s original score designates the duet partners as “wolf” and “mouse,” and genders are unspecified. This is why many decades of covers have had women and men switching roles as we saw with Lady Gaga and Joseph Gordon Levitt’s version where Gaga plays the wolf’s role. Heck, even Miss Piggy of the Muppets played the wolf as she pursued ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev.

The Real Meaning, All About Perspective

When you truly begin to observe the lyrics more clearly, you can actually deduce what it’s about. In fact, some have argued it’s a song about female empowerment.

In 2006, Slay Belle wrote for the feminist blog Persephone:

“At the time period the song was written, ‘good girls,’ especially young, unmarried girls, did not spend the night at a man’s house unsupervised,”

“Later in the song, she asks him for a comb (to fix her hair) and mentions that there’s going to be talk tomorrow – this is a song about sex, wanting it, having it, maybe having a long night of it by the fire, but it’s not a song about rape. It’s a song about the desires even good girls have.”

“The song ends with the woman doing what she wants to do, not what she’s expected to do, and there’s something very encouraging about that message.”

And in 2015, writer Helen Rosner decided to remove the part about the ‘aggressor’ in the song, or the wolf, and determined that the song was about a “sexually aware woman worried about slut-shaming.”

“The first two verses are both: (1) I have to go. (2)I’m having a great time, but (3) I’m scared of my family’s opinions,” Rosner wrote on Twitter. “She clearly wants to stay, is scared of the social ramifications of that choice, and in the end says ‘fuck society’s repressiveness’ & stays.”

“If you think Baby It’s Cold Outside is creepy, you are robbing the woman in that song of her agency,”
“You are the problem. I’m not kidding.” – Helen Rosner

The Takeaway

In this article, we covered 2 different perspectives of what this song is about. In 2018 it’s about rape, 2015 it’s about a sexually aware woman who is trying to avoid slut shaming, which was the same sentiment in 2006 as the song “was about sex, wanting it, having it, and maybe having a long night of it by the fire, a song about the desires even good girls have.”

The differences come down to important nuances that often don’t exist in many overly emotional activists these days: critical thinking. The 2006 and 2015 examples are intelligently thought out, researched, unemotional and balanced. The example from here in 2018 resembles movements that are about narratives, rhetoric, and creating enemies and divide. It’s angry, emotional and does not have a basis in truth when you take the time to analyze and look at original meanings.

I feel it’s very important we remember not to push so hard about taking sides and trying to identify with certain movements. The more we do this, the more we filter everything through that narrative. Thus we become unconscious.

I wanted to end with a laugh. I will say, I like JP Sears for his comedy. Sure sometimes I am not sure if it comes across to most people as making fun of spirituality and personal work, or if it just calls out the ridiculousness of some of it when we do it inauthentically, but he still has some great jokes. Perhaps though, a shift in his style is needed or even emerging, so his message, whatever it may be, can be a lot clearer to viewers.

That said, I feel in this video’s tone, it hits pretty well on what things are like today with many activists.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

If Cannabis Can Kill “Incurable” Brain Cancer, Why Is It Criminalized?

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Cannabis contains a compound that may kill brain cancers that chemotherapy and radiation can't touch. This is outlined by the research below.

  • Reflect On:

    Why has it been such a struggle for patients interested in medical marijuana to actually find it? Why, with all its medicinal potential, is this the case?

This article was written by Sayer Ji, Founder of Greenmedinfo.com. His work is reproduced and distributed here with permission. 

In recent years, we’ve focused heavily on educating our readers about the still relatively unknown role that cancer stem cells play in cancer, both in terms of conventional cancer treatment failure and the exceptionally promising role that natural interventions play in targeting these highly malignant cells.

It is encouraging to witness a growing awareness that cancer has been completely misunderstood, and that in order to make progress against the global epidemic we will have to go back to the wisdom of the ancients by using foods and spices instead of toxic chemicals and radiation to fight a disease that should be classified more as a survival mechanism unmasked than an inexorably lethal, genetically-driven condition. Even the National Cancer Institute now admits that it had been wrong for decades about “early stage” breast (DCIS) and prostate (HGPIN) “cancers,” and that they should be reclassified as indolent or benign lesions of epithelial origin, i.e. not “cancer” at all! Essentially, therefore, millions were overdiagnosed and overtreated for cancers they never had. Even now, despite this admission, the vast majority of conventional doctors have yet to account for, acknowledge, or integrate this radically different definition of cancer and its implications for treatment into their “standard of care.”

Only last week, we featured a new review on natural therapies that target cancer stem cells, many of which included common foods and spices. You can view it here. But one substance conspicuously absent from the list was cannabis, which is the herb we now turn to to give it a fair representation in the context of this topic.

A recent article published in the Journal Neuroimmune Pharmacology titled, “The Antitumor Activity of Plant-Derived Non-Psychoactive Cannabinoids,” reviewed the therapeutic potential of a non-psychoactive class of phytochemicals found in cannabis known as cannabinoids. Unlike THC, cannabinoids do not activate the cannabinoid 1 and cannabinoid 2 receptors in the central nervous system in any significant way, making their activity less controversial as they do not produce changes in perception and sensation associated with “recreational” and/or “psychedelic” drugs. There are actually over 60 cannabinoids in cannabis, but the second most abundant one, cannabidiol (CBD), has been found to inhibit and/or kill a wide range of cancers in the animal model, including gliobastoma (a difficult-to-treat type of brain cancer), breast, lung, prostate, and colon cancer. There have been a wide range of mechanisms identified behind these observed anti-tumor activities, including anti-angiogenic (preventing new blood vessel formation), anti-metastatic, anti-cell viability, but the one we wish to focus on in this report is its ability to to inhibit the stem-like potential of cancer cells.

Stem cells are unique within the body as they are capable of continual self-renewal, theoretically making them immortal relative to regular body cells (somatic cells), which die after a fixed number or replication cycles. In their normal state of function they are essential for healing and bodily regeneration, as they are capable of differentiating into the wide range of cells that make up the body and need to be regularly replaced when damaged.

advertisement - learn more

This so-called pluripotent property of stem cells is also observed in tumor formation and maintenance, as cancer stem cells are capable of producing the entire range of different cells that make up a tumor colony. Unlike regular tumor cells, cancer stem cells are uniquely tumorigenic because they are capable of breaking off from an existing lesion or tumor and forming a new tumor colony of cells. In this sense, they are “mother cells” at the heart of cancer malignancy, whose ability to colonize other tissues by producing all the “daughter cells” necessary to form a new tumor make their existence highly concerning from the perspective of cancer prevention and treatment. Radiation and chemotherapy, while capable of reducing the size of a tumor, actually enrich the post-treatment residual lesion or tumor with higher levels of cancer stem cells, and in some cases transform non-cancer stem cells into cancer stem cells, ultimately making the post-treatment state of the treated tissue far worse than its pre-treatment condition. This is why identifying and using natural, safe, effective and affordable ways to target cancer stem cells versus the non-tumorigenic tumor cells in a lesion or tumor is the only rational way to treat cancer, and should be the primary focus of present day cancer treatment approaches.

The new review discussed the way that cannabidiol targets and/or inhibits the cancer stem cell subpopulation in cancers such as the highly treatment-resistant form of brain cancer known as glioblastoma, which is widely considered by conventional medicine as “incurable.” A 2013 study,1mentioned in the review, found that patient-derived glioblastoma cells when exposed to cannabidiol saw a significant down-regulation of the genetic tumor marker Id-1, which has been closely correlated with brain cancer cell invasiveness. They also found that cannabidiol was capable of inhibiting neurosphere formation (a sign of cancer stem cell tumor formation), as well as was capable of inhibiting glioblastoma tumor invasiveness in an animal model.

The results of this preclinical study were so compelling that the researchers concluded cannibidiol might make an ideal adjunct treatment:

With its lack of systemic toxicity and psychoactivity, cannabidiol is an ideal candidate agent in this regard and may prove useful in combination with front-line agents for the treatment of patients with aggressive and high-grade glioblastoma tumors.

Integrative approaches often focus on using natural interventions as “adjuncts” to conventional, inherently toxic approaches like chemotherapy and radiation, we believe that another possibility exists, namely, that cannabidiol in combination with a wide range of other natural substances studied for targeting glioblastoma is more effective (and certainly far safer) than a combination approach. To view other anti-glioblastoma substances, view our database on the subject.

Another highly relevant study published in 2007 titled, “Cannabinoids induce glioma stem-like cell differentiation and inhibit gliomagenesis,”2 found that cannabinoids target the stem-like properties of glioma cells, encouraging their differentiation into functioning, non-tumorigenic cells, and inhibiting the dysregulated increased production of glioma cells.

A more recent 2015 study,3 found that glioblastoma cells treated with cannabidiol inhibited their self-renewal by down-regulating “critical stem cell maintenance and growth regulators.”

Another study, published last month, found that cannabidiol inhibits glioma stem-like proliferation by inducing autophagy, a natural form of programmed cell death.4

Consider, finally, that the cancer stem cell targeting and killing properties of cannabidiol are only one of a wide range of potential mechanisms through which cannabis as a whole plant, comprised of hundreds of different phytochemicals and phytonutrients, can treat cancer. We have indexed hundreds of studies on cannabis’ therapeutic properties, a good subset concerning its ability to prevent, kill, or regress a wide range of different cancer types. You can view them all on our cannabis research database.

Research on cannabis and brain cancer has only just begun, but considering the abject failure if not also sheer violence of conventional approaches, waiting for sufficient quantities of Pharma or government capital to flow in the direction of a non-patentable substance already saddled with archaic laws in some cases criminalizing its possession is a no win proposition. Anecdotes of healing with cannabis are not uncommon. One such report can be viewed on our colleague Dr. Jeffrey Dach’s website, titled, “Cannabis Oil Brain Tumor Remission,” demonstrating just how powerful cannabis and its cannabinoids may be for accomplishing what conventional approaches can not. Last year, we reported on a similar case of temporary remission in childhood leukemia using cannabis extract. Also, consider reports like this one, where a woman clearly being victimized by conventional medicine was able to replace 40 different medications through using raw cannabis juice.

The short of it is that the future of medicine, if it is to continue to advertise itself to be concerned with alleviating human suffering and being guided by “evidence,” must incorporate this safe, time-tested, affordable and effective healing agent into its standard of care. Failing to do so will not de-validate cannabis, rather, but the medical system itself. One might ask, if cannabis can treat “incurable” brain cancers, and is safer and more effective than chemotherapy and radiation, shouldn’t withholding it or information about its healing properties be considered criminal? Instead we still live in a time and age where simply possessing it or using it is in some jurisdictions classified as a criminal offense of dire if not irreparable consequence to our civil liberties. Perhaps we are at a critical turning point now and the aforementioned research will lead us all forward to a more enlightened medical ethos that respects the right of a patient to choose his or her treatment as long as it does no harm to others.

  • Get access to the upcoming documentary on the healing properties of medicinal cannabis starting on Dec. 12th, 2018. Save Your Spot.

 Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.”

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

EL

We Need Your Support...

 

With censorship, things have become tough. If just 5% of people seeing this today supported CE, we'd be able to fund a TRUE investigative team INSTANTLY. Your support truly matters and goes a long way! 

Thanks, you're keeping conscious media alive.