Archive | September 2, 2016

Saudi Arabia Uses Israeli Firm G4S to Make E-Bracelets for Hajj*

Saudi Arabia Uses Israeli Firm G4S to Make E-Bracelets for Hajj*

Saudi Arabia has reportedly awarded G4S, the British security firm, a deal to make electronic bracelets for the millions of pilgrims who will be travelling to Mecca.

Saudi officials have said that the pilgrims should wear the devices upon arriving in the country and keep them on until they leave. They say the high-tech measure will help authorities provide care “and identify people.”

Press TV reports:

The British security group maintains close cooperation with the Israeli spy agencies. The bracelets will contain personal and medical information which can be accessed by security and services bodies via a smartphone.

According to the Saudi Gazette newspaper, wristlets are resistant and connected to a GPS location system.

The electronic bracelet was introduced by the Saudi government late June. It followed a stampede last year in which thousands of pilgrims lost their lives.

Saudi authorities have also installed more than 800 surveillance cameras at the Grand Mosque in the holy city of Mecca.

Cameras have been installed at Mecca’s Grand Mosque and will be linked to control rooms staffed by special forces monitoring pilgrim movements during Hajj rituals.

Saudi Arabia has come under harsh criticism over its handling of the Mina incident and critics have said the country is incompetent to host the annual Hajj congregation.

The crush of last year occurred after two large masses of pilgrims converged at a crossroads in Mina during the symbolic ceremony of the stoning of Satan in Jamarat on September 24, 2015.

Saudi Arabia claims nearly 770 people were killed in the incident, but Iranian officials say about 4,700 people lost their lives in the tragedy. The number of the Iranian fatalities is at least 464, the highest toll among all countries.

The tragedy came days after a massive construction crane collapsed into Mecca’s Grand Mosque, killing more than 100 people and leaving over 200 others wounded.

According to figures by Iran’s Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization, 11 Iranian pilgrims were killed and 32 others injured in the incident.

Following the tragedy, Saudi King Salman praised Saudi authorities for holding a “successful” Hajj.

This year, Iran has said it will not participate in the Hajj pilgrimage because of “obstacles” created by Saudi Arabia, among them its failure to guarantee the safety of Hajj pilgrims.


Related Topics:

E-bracelets for Hajj Pilgrims*

Saudis and Israeli’s Stage Hajj Stampede*

New Leaked Document Shows 7,000 Hajjis Killed in Mina*

Eyewitness Discloses Saudi Embassy’s Role in Masterminding Recent Massacre in Nigeria*

Wahhabism, Saudis and the Divided Ummah*

How Saudi Arabia is Sponsoring Religious Eugenics*

Top Illuminati Grand Wizard: “We Control Islam and We’ll Use It to Destroy the West.” (WW3)*

Qaradawi Responds to Violations of al-Sheikh and the Saudi Council of Senior Scholars with al-Azhar, Cairo*

Saudis Confess Defeat in Yemen*

Saudi Arabia Unleashes Frenzy of Attacks on Syrians*

Red Sea Deal: Are Israel and Saudi Arabia Forming a Joint Military*

Gates Pulls Investment from Security Firm G4S*

Disaster Capitalism, Immigration, and the Outsourcing of Violence in the U.K.*

Dissected Open Brains of Nazi Victims Discovered in German Psychiatric Institute*

Dissected Open Brains of Nazi Victims Discovered in German Psychiatric Institute*

Many brains extracted from the victims of the Nazi eugenics campaign have been uncovered during renovations at the Max Planck Psychiatric Institute in Munich, Germany.

According to Max Planck Society, the “brain collection,” which consists of 100 brain preparations from 35 cases, belonged to brain researcher Julius Hallervorden. Hallervorden was a member of the Nazi party. In 1938, he became head of the Neuropathology Department of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research, today known as the Max Planck Institute of Brain Research.

Julius Hallervorden

At the time, Hallervorden researched brain samples by extracting them from executed prisoners and from mentally ill people. Presumably, given his close ties with Josef Mengele, doctor at a Nazi concentration camp, Hallervorden might have conducted his research upon Jewish Holocaust victims.
In the 1990s, unethical labs were revealed due to political pressure. All samples collected between 1933 and 1945 have already been disposed.

But it appears, that the purging process was still incomplete. Max Planck Psychiatric Institute discovered samples, which contained both microscopic brain slides and “wet” specimens, during renovation.

““We must acknowledge our responsibility,” announced Max Planck Society President Martin Stratmann.

“It is our duty to give an identity to the dead,” adding that all specimens connected to criminal research in the Third Reich will be provided with a “dignified burial.”

Whether the discovered samples belong to the Nazieuthanasia campaign, still remains to be unknown. Samples could have been derived as a result of deliberate murder of mentally ill patients or from death camps.

“This [finding] is something new that was previously unknown, and joins other events that are suddenly uncovered after 70 years. Whoever thought this chapter was completely finished is mistaken,” said Dan Machman of the Yad Vashem Holocaust History Museum.


Related Topics:

Reliving the Past of Human Experimentation

Jobseekers are being coerced into experimental drug trials dressed up as “job opportunities”

Alien Abductees or Mind Control Experiments?*

US Vaporized and Experimented on the Indigenous of Marshall Islands*

Pentagon Admits 60,000 Black Soldiers Used in Human Experiment*

President Obama Orders Behavioural Experiments on American Public*

Coca-Cola and Cocaine is Old Business*

Coca-Cola and Cocaine is Old Business*

By Bartow Jerome Elmore

When news broke yesterday about the discovery of $56 million worth of cocaine at a Coca-Cola plant in France, the press was all abuzz. But as it turns out, this Cocaine-Cola connection is not entirely new; Coca-Cola has been intimately linked to domestic manufacture of cocaine in the United States for years.

A little glimpse into Coke’s history reveals all.

Yes, most people know that Coca-Cola’s first president Asa Candler became concerned about cocaine in the early 1900s and decided to remove any trace of the drug in the company’s famous drink, but few people know that Coke continued to use what is called “decocainized coca leaf extract” in its signature beverage. In company ledgers, this―mixed with kola nut powder― is what is known as Merchandise #5, one of the “secret ingredients.”

Here’s how the process works. Beginning in the early 1900s, Coca-Cola partnered with a company called Maywood Chemical Works based in Maywood, New Jersey (now the Stepan Company) to import coca leaves (which contain small quantities of the alkaloid found in purified cocaine powder) from Peru for Coca-Cola. The company removed the cocaine alkaloid from these leaves and then sold Coca-Cola the leftover extract. As per the cocaine, Maywood sold it under close federal supervision for approved medical uses.

Federal law sanctioned this practice. Legislators wrote a special exemption into the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914, the Jones-Miller Act of 1922, and subsequent counternarcotics legislation that allowed “decocainized coca leaves or preparations therefrom” to be sold in the United States. Some lawmakers called this clause the “Coca-Cola joker” because it was clearly designed to protect Coke’s secretive coca business.

Over time, Coke’s demand for coca leaves grew so great that legislation had to be passed to allow leaves to come into the country beyond what was needed for the manufacture of cocaine for medicinal purposes. These laws specified that alkaloids extracted from these coca leaves had to be destroyed with federal officials bearing witness.

All was well for Coke for many years under this arrangement, but in the 1960s, the company got a crazy idea: why not grow coca leaves secretly in the United States? That way the company would have a domestic source of supply.

It may sound outlandish, but that’s exactly what happened. In the 1960s, Coca-Cola, working with its partner, the Stepan Company, gained federal approval to begin a secret coca cultivation operation in Hawaii called the “Alakea” project. University of Hawaii scientists agreed to participate in the project but were prohibited from publishing any reports about their work because Coke did not want the public to know about its relationship to these coca leaves.

Within months, those working on Alakea could happily report that coca shrubs were growing in Hawaii, but celebrations lasted only so long. Soon a fungus wiped out the entire crop and the project was abandoned.

The failure of Alakea was really no matter for Coke, which simply continued sourcing leaves from Peru. All of this was channeled through Stepan, a third-party buffer that helped keep Coke’s coca trade out of sight. Import records show that Stepan is still happily bringing in coca leaves in the 2010s.

What’s problematic about all this is that cocaleros, coca farmers in Peru, have been getting a raw deal. For years, Coca-Cola has enjoyed exclusive access to coca leaves coming into the United States and cocaleros have been prohibited from selling other coca products—teas, candies, and flours—to American markets. Coke has no doubt liked it this way because competition for coca leaves would drive up prices, which is never good for business.

But cocaleros see it differently. Peruvians with intimate knowledge of coca production in the Andes told me back in 2012 that coca farmers would love nothing more than to “revalorize” the coca leaf and once and for all quash the misconception that the coca leaf and purified cocaine are the same thing. Then cocaleros might experience a commercial boon that would allow them to abandon exploitative relationships with drug lords and monopolistic buyers.

Today, if I were to travel to Peru and try to return home with a small batch of coca leaves (perhaps to brew tea), I would be detained by border officials.

So here’s the essential question: if Coke can work partnerships to bring coca leaves into the United States, why can’t the rest of us? That’s the real story behind the Cocaine-Cola connection.


Related Topics:

What is the Harm in Cocoa Leaves!

Coke’s Assault of Destruction

Nixon Advisor Admitted War on Drugs Invented to Crush Anti-War and Black Movements*

Drop in Drug Trafficking Followed Expulsion of U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration*

Engineers Proves Native Americans Were Right about the Dakota Pipeline*

Engineers Proves Native Americans Were Right about the Dakota Pipeline*

By Matt Agorist

Earlier this month, a few dozen Native Americans showed up to protest the $3.8 billion, 1,172-mile-long pipeline that would cross right through their sacred land. As word spread, however, the few dozen turned into more than 4,000 native Americans. Because of the large turnout, a brief victory ensued for the people after the developers of the four-state oil pipeline agreed to halt construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline until after a federal hearing.

Before the hearing started, however, North Dakota homeland security director Greg Wilz ordered the removal of state-owned trailers and water tanks from the protest encampment, despite the sweltering heat, because of alleged disorderly conduct.

In spite of the government clamping down on them, the protesters remained vigilant. And, on Friday, they saw another victory. The Army Corps of Engineers confirmed that Energy Transfer Partners, the company constructing the Dakota Access Pipeline, does not have a written easement from the agency to build on Corps property, just north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation.

“That’s true they don’t have the easement that’s required to install the segment that’s across the Oahe project,” said Larry Janis, Army Corps Of Engineers, according to KFYR. 

Now, the project seems to be in limbo as there is no current timetable on when the easement will be granted. However, the Corps has stated that they have issued a permission that will allow for the easement to be written.

Meanwhile, there is an ongoing case, which began last week in D.C., that is revealing a slew of corruption. As DESMOG reports:

“A review of court documents for the case currently unfolding in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. has revealed that the tribal liaison for Energy Transfer Partners tasked with abiding by Section 106 passed through the revolving door and formerly worked for the Army Corps. The finding also raises key ethical questions in the field of archaeology.

That liaison — Michelle Dippel — technically works for a Dakota Access LLC contractor named HDR, a company which helps pipeline companies and other oil and gas industry infrastructure companies secure permits for their projects. Dippel, the South Central Region Environmental Services Lead for HDR, began her career as a project manager for the Army Corps’ Fort Worth District and also formerly worked for the natural gas pipeline company Spectra Energy.”

Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II, explains below how this conflict of interests allowed for the fast-tracking of the pipeline, via the New York Times:

““The Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation supported more protection of the tribe’s cultural heritage, but the Corps of Engineers and Energy Transfer Partners turned a blind eye to our rights. The first draft of the company’s assessment of the planned route through our treaty and ancestral lands did not even mention our tribe.

“The Dakota Access pipeline was fast-tracked from Day 1 using the Nationwide Permit No. 12 process, which grants exemption from environmental reviews required by the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act by treating the pipeline as a series of small construction sites.”

“Without closer scrutiny, the proposal breezed through the four state processes.”

As news of insider deals and corruption spread, a number of protesters left the camp at Sacred Stone and descended on the law offices of Fredrikson and Byron — the firm representing the Dakota Access in court.

Protesters demanded to know why the attorneys are representing the pipeline.

“We’re here to protect the water. We’re here in prayer. The songs we’re singing were prayer songs. So we really wanted them to answer to some of the people. Some of the Standing Rock members specifically. Why would you want to threaten their lives and their water?” said Joye Braun one of the protesters.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe has every reason to be furious about the construction of this pipeline, and their protest is undoubtedly just. The people of the Great Sioux Nation were betrayed by the United States government, who violated the nation-to-nation treaty by allowing permission of this pipeline before obtaining the tribe’s free, prior, and informed consent for its construction.

The Standing Rock protest represents far more than a single pipeline. It is a stand against oppression that shows the people’s struggle for freedom.

As Winona LaDuke stated in her analysis of all that is at stake, “What Would Sitting Bull Do?”

“I am not sure how badly North Dakota wants this pipeline. If there is to be a battle over the pipeline, it will be here. For a people with nothing else but a land and a river, I would not bet against them. The great Lakota leader Mathew King once said, “the only thing sadder than an Indian who is not free, is an Indian who does not remember what it is to be free.”

The fate of the pipeline now rests in the hands of a federal judge who will rule on the legality of the Dakota Access Pipeline on September 9. Will the people be victorious and protect their land and remain free? Or, will their history be rewritten once again, this time, with freedom defined as everything except big oil’s right of way?


Related Topics:

Eugenics: Kidnapping of the Indigenous Sioux in South Dakota*

Drones That Shoot Tasers Are Now Legal for Police Use in North Dakota*

The Vanishing Indigenous Nations of the U.S. – Five Facts*

DNA Testing Proves Genealogy of indigenous Americans is One of the Most Unique in the World*

Native American Council offers Amnesty to 220 million Undocumented Whites*

Navajo Nation Is Suing the EPA over Colorado’s Mining Catastrophe*

Indigenous Americans Banned from Protesting on their Own Land*

Indigenous Activists Chase McCain off the Navajo Land he intends to Mine*

EPA which Spilt 3 Million Gallons of Toxic Waste Uses Oily Tanks to Deliver Potable Water to Navajos*

Indigenous Women Shut Down Tar Sands Pipeline Hearing*

Protesters Are Killing Big Oil and Mining*

The Secret Oil War Has Begun*

U.S. Tried to Blackmail Morales against Nationalizing Bolivian Oil*

Preparing for War or a Huge Profit? Oil Supertankers Forming “World’s Biggest Traffic Jam”*

A Sea of Oil Tankers off the Coast Of Singapore*

Maduro Accuses U.S. Of Taking over Venezuela’s Oil*

Did the West Fake an Entire Attack on their al-Qaeda for an Oil Pipeline?

U.K. Taxpayers Subsidising World’s Largest Oil Companies to Exploit Its Own Natural Resources*

Texas, a Dangerous Place to Have a Baby*

Texas, a Dangerous Place to Have a Baby*

By Nina Martin

African-American women are bearing the brunt of the crisis

Researchers studying maternal mortality in the United States recently reported an ominous trend: The rate of pregnancy-related deaths in Texas seemed to have doubled since 2010, making the Lone Star State one of the most dangerous places in the developed world to have a baby. Reproductive health advocates were quick to blame the legislature for slashing funding in 2011–12 to family-planning clinics that serve low-income women, calling the numbers a “tragedy” and “a national embarrassment.”

Now a 15-member state task force has issued its own maternal mortality report, offering a new view of what might be going on. The bottom line: Maternal deaths have indeed been increasing in Texas, members said, and African-American women are bearing the brunt of the crisis. For 2011 and 2012, black mothers accounted for 11.4% of Texas births but 28.8% of pregnancy-related deaths.

“The disparity in the rates for African-American women is incredibly important and not widely recognized,” said Lisa Hollier, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston who heads the Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Task Force.

But the overall maternal mortality rate and actual number of maternal deaths remain uncertain, as does the underlying reason for the sudden jump in 2011–12. Among the challenges encountered by task force members as they try to find answers: Recent changes aimed at keeping better track of maternal deaths — such as check boxes on death certificates noting that a woman was recently pregnant — have led to confusion and more inaccuracies.

“The short answer is, I don’t know” what caused pregnancy-related deaths to rise sharply in that period, Hollier said.

“The longer answer is I think it’s unlikely that there is a single explanation. The problem is complex and the increase is likely due to a multitude of factors.”

The task force’s most eye-opening findings weren’t about deaths but severe maternity morbidity — complications so serious that mothers might have died without major medical and technological intervention and/or sheer luck. Such cases were far more common than deaths, the report said, and far more common among African-American women.

At the same time, Latina women, who now account for nearly half of births in Texas, made up just 30.8%of maternal deaths. They also had a much lower rate of severe complications than African Americans.

The report contains other surprises that will give medical experts and policymakers plenty to think about in Texas and beyond. The leading cause of maternal deaths wasn’t one of the traditional culprits (hemorrhage, infection, pregnancy-induced hypertension) but rather cardiac problems. The second leading cause: drug overdoses. Haemorrhages and blood transfusions were the biggest factors associated with severe complications.

And women aren’t just dying in the hospital during or immediately after childbirth. According to the new report, about 60% of maternal deaths occurred six weeks or more after delivery. That figure is particularly important because more than half of the nearly 400,000 births in Texas every year are covered by Medicaid, but benefits for many mothers expire 60 days after they give birth.

The lack of health insurance — Texas has the largest number of uninsured people in the country and has rejected Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act — could be contributing to maternal deaths and near-deaths, task force members said.

“If a person had been in regular care, maybe those cardiovascular [problems] would have been identified” before the mother died, said June Hanke, a strategic analyst and planner at the Harris Health system in Houston who advocated for the creation of the task force and is now a member. Without insurance,

“if you need medication, can you really afford it? Do you even know your blood pressure is high?”

Mental-health issues were another overlooked yet critical factor in maternal deaths and severe morbidity, including drug-related fatalities, the task force said.

For many Texas women,

 “there are no mental-health services and even less addiction drug and alcohol services,” said Nancy Sheppard, a task force member and licensed social worker with the Seton Healthcare network in Austin.

“A lot of time the drugs are being used to self-medicate because [mothers] cannot get mental-health treatment.”

Mothers who receive antidepressants may not be able to afford them when they lose their Medicaid coverage.

“To quit antidepressants cold turkey is very bad. You have to be weaned off that,” Sheppard said.

“Postpartum, your hormones are raging, you’re operating on two hours of sleep, you’re not a normal person to begin with. It is a perfect storm, it really is.”

Maternal mortality has become a growing public health concern in the U.S. in recent years, as rates have risen nationally at the same time they have fallen in virtually every other affluent country. The first step to bringing the numbers down is to figure out how many women are dying and why, a process that has proven to be surprisingly difficult.

The Texas task force was established by the state legislature in 2013 with a mandate to identify and review all maternal mortality cases in the state as well as trends in major pregnancy complications. About two-thirds of U.S. states conduct maternal mortality reviews. The Texas committee uses the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions’ definition of pregnancy-related deaths: any maternal fatality within one year of pregnancy, “from any cause related to or aggravated by … pregnancy,” including chronic health conditions or “a chain of events initiated by pregnancy.” The final count includes homicides and suicides but not motor vehicle deaths and deaths from non-pregnancy-related cancers.

By matching death and birth certificates and other data, the task force identified 100 maternal deaths in 2011 and 89 in 2012. Next, members began to conduct reviews of the 2012 cases. The process was greatly complicated by the complexity of medical records, the lack of consistency among medical examiners and health-care providers in how they report data, and the requirement to redact all identifying information — patient names, provider names, and so forth — before the task force could begin its review. By the time its initial report was completed this summer, the task force had finished reviewing just 11 deaths.

To come up with the rate for severe morbidity, the task force analyzed discharge data for every obstetric hospitalization in 2012, noting those that had at least one major indicator of major complications — everything from stroke and sepsis to blood transfusions.

One thing the task force report did not do was calculate a maternal death rate for 2011–12. By contrast, the study recently published in the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology found that the mortality rate in Texas had jumped from around 18.6 deaths per 100,000 births in 2010 to around 33 deaths per 100,000 births in 2012 — an increase that researchers said was difficult to explain “in the absence of war, natural disaster, or severe economic upheaval.” The overall U.S. maternal mortality rate was 23.8 deaths per 100,000 births in 2014, the study said.

That article, by researchers at the University of Maryland, Boston University, and Stanford University, employed a different methodology from what the Texas group used, and its mortality-rate calculations would suggest significantly more maternal deaths than what the task force found — closer to 125 deaths in 2012. Hollier said the actual number of deaths is less important than the upward trend.

“To say, is that 89 or 86 or 93 is almost a distraction from the real issue, which is that the rate is rising,” Hollier said.

The task force did not study whether the family planning cuts in the 2011–12 legislative session — largely aimed at Planned Parenthood but affecting other providers as well — might have triggered the spike in mortality. But other analysts doubted the cuts were to blame, noting that they took effect in late 2011 and 2012, after maternal deaths had already started to rise.

But task force members said the cuts certainly didn’t help low-income women who depended on clinics like Planned Parenthood for basic health care and preventing pregnancies that might prove dangerous. The Texas record is

 “horrific … relative to the rest of the nation, and there’s absolutely no excuse for it,” Sheppard said.


Related Topics:

Giving Birth Naturally 

African-American Women and Childbirth

Black Women Targeted with Eugenics Drug*

The Growing Problem of Pregnancy Stroke

Investigation into Mystery Behind Premature Births

Popular Herbicide Causes Birth Defects

Ma’afa: The Truth Behind Birth Control…

Reclaiming the Birthing Process

36 Infants Die After Receiving Vaccine*

Eight Infants Added to the Hit List of 5-in-1 Vaccine*

Infant of Pro- Vaccine Parent Dies Following 5 Doses of Vaccine*

Link Between Child Mortality And Unvaccinated Kids*

Israel admits to Birth Controlling Ethiopian Women*

GMO Technology Brought Soaring Cancer, Birth Defects and Failing Farms to Argentina*

Pregnant and Brain-dead, yet Forced to Incubate a Fetus*

Criminalizing Pregnancy or is Something Else Afoot!?*

Not in the U.S.: Policeman Sentenced to Death for Killing a Pregnant and Unborn Child*

Yaz and Yasmin, the Birth Control Pills that can Kill*

Miracle of Pregnancy: Couple Told to Abort or Die*

Monsanto’s GMO Bt Toxins Found in 93% of Pregnant Women*

Mexican Study: Lower Mother Mortality and Violence against Women in Less ‘Liberal’ States*

Are the Birth Defects of Zika virus Caused by Tdap Vaccine?

Rockefellers Funded Eugenics Initiative to Sterilize 15 Million Americans*

Drug Free Psychiatry and Beyond Globalized Eugenics