Archives

The Company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline Just Had 2 Major Spills*

The Company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline Just Had 2 Major Spills*

Millions of gallons of drilling fluids have spilled into Ohio’s wetlands.

By Fiona Macdonald

Environmentalists say their “worst fears” have been confirmed, with the company behind the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline getting caught producing two major spills in its latest project, just one month after construction started.

The Rover Pipeline will ultimately carry natural gas across Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, and Canada, crossing three major rivers in its path – but these latest incidents have caused millions of gallons of drilling fluids to flow into Ohio’s wetlands.

News of the leak came out this week thanks to regulatory filings obtained by the Ohio chapter of environmental group, the Sierra Club.

In the documents, Energy Transfer Partners – the company behind the Rover Pipeline and the Dakota Access Pipeline – confirmed receiving notice of these “inadvertent” environmental violations.

According to the paperwork, on 13 April 2017, 7.6 million litres (2 million gallons) of drilling fluids were detected spilling into a wetland next to the Tuscarawas River in Stark County by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

The drilling fluids covered an estimated 46,000 square metres (500,000 square foot) area of the wetlands and had “impacted water quality“, according to the report.

On 14 April 2017, another 190,000 litres (50,000 gallons) of drilling fluids were detecting, spilling into a wetland in Richland County in the Mifflin Township.

Drilling fluids themselves aren’t necessarily toxic or dangerous – you can think of them like a type of mud-based lubricant used to assist in the drilling of boreholes.

In this case, the fluid contained a type of clay known as bentonite, as well as mud and cuttings from the hole.

Those ingredients aren’t in themselves dangerous in small doses, but what’s concerning is that when they’re released on waterways and wetlands in large quantities, they can affect water quality and the fragile balance of local ecosystems.

Spokesperson Alexis Daniel told Bloomberg that the spills wouldn’t change the timeline of the US $4.2 billion pipeline, which is scheduled to be completed November 2017.

“Once the incidents were noted, we immediately began containment and mitigation and will continue until the issues are completely resolved,” she said.

Once it’s completed, the Rover Pipeline will cross some particularly important waterways in its 1,147-km (713-mile) length – including the Maumee, Sandusky, and Portage rivers, all of which feed into Lake Erie.

The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the Rover Pipeline’s construction in February, and when it’s finished, it will transport an estimated 92 billion litres (3.25 billion cubic feet) of natural gas from the U,S,’ eastern shale to the market each day.

But the Ohio Sierra Club says these early spills are evidence that Energy Transfer Partners aren’t properly equipped to construct the pipeline without further environmental damage, and are protesting the continuation of the project.

“Construction just began just a few weeks ago, yet Energy Transfer has already spilled more than 2 million gallons of drilling fluids in two separate disasters, confirming our worst fears about this dangerous pipeline before it has even gone into operation,” director of the Ohio Sierra Club, Jen Miller, told Eco Watch.

“We’ve always said that it’s never a question of whether a pipeline accident will occur, but rather a question of when. These disasters prove that the fossil fuel industry is unable to even put a pipeline into use before it spills dangerous chemicals into our precious waterways and recreation areas.”

“Construction on the Rover Pipeline must be stopped immediately, as an investigation into Energy Transfer’s total failure to adequately protect our wetlands and communities is conducted,” she added.

To be fair, pipelines haven’t had the best environmental track record lately.

In December last year, as the Standing Rock protests continued over the Dakota Access Pipeline, a nearby pipeline spilled 176,000 gallons of oil into a creek just 2.5 hours away.

Worse, no one knows how long the pipeline was leaking before a local property owner noticed the spill.

That incident wasn’t associated with Energy Transfer Partners, but it’s just another sign that companies need to do a better job of monitoring and regulating these pipelines if they’re going to continue to build them.

Let’s hope the affected Ohio waterways can be cleaned up quickly, and that these notices from the Environmental Protection Agency are enough to keep Energy Transfer Partners vigilant throughout the rest of construction.

Source*

Related Topics:

2010 Gulf Oil Spill Caused Widespread Land Loss*

DAPL is Just the Beginning of the end in the Largest Native American Land Grab in 100 Years*

BNP Paribas Latest Bank to Dump Dakota Access Pipeline*

Portland Votes to Divest from All Corporations*

Buffet, Gates Foundation, Bono’s RED and the Dakota Access Pipeline

Cherokee Nation Sues Drug Companies and Retailers for Illegal Prescribed Opioids in the Cherokee Nation*

Cherokee Nation Sues Drug Companies and Retailers for Illegal Prescribed Opioids in the Cherokee Nation*

Today, the Cherokee Nation filed a lawsuit against McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen, CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., charging the companies with failing to prevent the flow of illegally prescribed opioids to men, women and children in the Cherokee Nation.

This lawsuit is the first of its kind filed in the United States, as it seeks to hold distributors and retailers responsible for perpetuating the opioid crisis in the 14 counties in northeast Oklahoma that comprise the Cherokee Nation. Experts expect other jurisdictions to file similar claims as communities grapple with the financial and social burdens of the opioid epidemic.

“Tribal nations have survived disease, removal from our homelands, termination and other adversities, and still we prospered. However, I fear the opioid epidemic is emerging as the next great challenge of our modern era,” said Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Bill John Baker.

“As we fight this epidemic in our hospitals, our schools and our Cherokee homes, we will also use our legal system to make sure the companies, who put profits over people while our society is crippled by this epidemic, are held responsible for their actions.”

Pharmacies and opioid distributers, under federal law, have a responsibility to alert regulators of suspicious orders and illegitimate prescriptions. Suspicious activities would include: when a distributor fills a single pharmacy’s orders that are suddenly thousands of pills above the average or are disproportionate to the size of the area’s population; patterns of employee theft; and pharmacy customers seeking opioids for nonmedical purposes. When suspicious orders are filled, highly dangerous controlled substances are diverted into the hands of unauthorized users and the illegal black market, fueling the opioid epidemic.

According to the DEA, over 2.75 billion milligrams of opioids were distributed in Oklahoma in 2015. An estimated 845 million milligrams were distributed in the 14 counties of the Cherokee Nation. That averages out to between 360 and 720 pills per year for every prescription opioid user in the Cherokee Nation. Based on CDC reports, deaths from opioid-related overdoses more than doubled within the Cherokee Nation between 2003 and 2014. For adults within the Cherokee Nation, overdose deaths now outnumber deaths due to car accidents.

“These companies must be held accountable for their gross negligence, which has fueled the opioid epidemic. We deserve better,” said Cherokee Nation Attorney General Todd Hembree.

“They enabled prescription opioids to fall into illicit distribution channels, failed to alert regulators of extreme volume, and incentivized sales of these drugs with financial bonuses. We will not stand by while children are born addicted to opioids and our citizens die.

The Cherokee Nation is represented by special counsel Richard Fields of Fields PLLC and Boies Schiller Flexner partners Steve Zack and William Ohlemeyer.

“The defendants will need to answer for turning a blind eye to the grave harm they are causing individuals, their families and communities, which are left to pick up the pieces,” said Fields.

“We look forward to presenting this evidence to the Cherokee tribal court so that the citizens most harmed by the opioid epidemic can get the justice they deserve,” said Ohlemeyer.

The full complaint, which was filed in Cherokee Nation tribal court, can be found here: http://bit.ly/2pVQ4cq

Source*

Related Topics:

DEA Delays Ban on Kratom Amid Popular Protest Government Pushback*

Allah’s Medicine Chest: Kratom (Mitragyna Speciosa)

Banning Kratom: Dozens of Congressmen Speak Out against Tyranny on Health*

Pharma Execs Arrested in Conspiracy to Create Opioid Addicts for Profit*

The World’s First Island Powered by an Off-Grid Renewable Energy System*

The World’s First Island Powered by an Off-Grid Renewable Energy System*

By Lorraine Chow

A tiny, scenic island lying off Scotland’s west coast is truly a model for sustainable, off-grid living. With no mainland electricity connection, the Isle of Eigg gets its electricity from the water, the wind and the sun.

After decades of using diesel generators, in February 2008 the residents of Eigg officially switched to their own renewable electricity supply, becoming the world’s first community to launch an off-grid electric system.

The 12-square-mile island, with its small population of 105 residents, gets ’round-the-clock power via a combination of hydroelectric generators, wind turbines, a photovoltaic array and a bank of batteries. On days when renewable resources are low or during maintenance, two 80kW diesel generators provide backup.

“The set-up that we’ve got now will carry the island all day and put charge into the batteries for the evening,” John Booth, the former director of the community-owned Eigg Electric company, told the BBC.

On days when there is a surplus of power—like when it’s particularly windy or rainy—electric heaters automatically switch on in Eigg’s church and community hall, which is ideal for keeping shared spaces warm throughout the winter.

This means “virtually no central heating in the system at all,” Booth pointed out.

 “We don’t charge for it because the whole community benefits.”

As the BBC detailed, before making the transition to renewables, the island relied on noisy and expensive diesel generators that could only run for a few hours a day. But with the new power system, energy is available 24 hours a day.

Eigg residents are encouraged to use their power responsibly. Each house has a maximum use limit at any one time of 5kW, which is enough for an electric kettle and washing machine to run at the same time, or fifty 100w light bulbs. Businesses get 10kW. Residents are fined if they use too much power but meters help keep electricity use on track.

The whole thing is run by and for the island,” Booth said.

Researchers from all around the world—Brazil, Alaska and Malawi—have visited the isle to learn how the unique system can be adapted elsewhere.

Source*

Related Topics:

Scotland’s Eigg Island: Self Sufficient and Owned by its Residents*

Children in Scotland Murdered in Paedophile Snuff Movies*

After Brexit Scotland, Ireland Referendum to Leave U.K.*

How a Meeting in Cork Could Save Rural Europe*

The Pathological State of Britain*

Ireland Removing the Right to Live in the Countryside*

Tens of Thousands March Across U.S. Demanding Donald Trump Release His Tax Returns*

Tens of Thousands March Across U.S. Demanding Donald Trump Release His Tax Returns*

Protesters took to the streets in midtown Manhattan and dozens of U.S. cities on April 15, coinciding with the traditional deadline for U.S. federal tax returns (this year the filing date has been pushed backed two days, to April 18). Protesters marched, calling on President Donald Trump to release his tax returns, saying Americans deserve to know his tax history, his business ties with foreign powers, and conflicts of interest, if any exist.

Trump is the first major-party presidential nominee in more than 40 years to refuse releasing his tax returns, saying that he is under IRS audit – however, there is no law prohibiting him from releasing his own returns in these circumstances. Trump also stated that American voters don’t care; he declared a $916 million loss in 1995, which was, The New York Times reported, “a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years.”

“Thanks to Trump, I think that releasing your taxes when you run for president now has to be a law,” 51-year-old New Yorker Marni Halasa, who arrived in a tutu and leggings made of fake dollar bills and holding a sign that read “Show Me The Money!”, told Reuters.

The nationwide protests, dubbed the Tax March for economic justice, stemmed from the Women’s March that took place a day after Trump’s inauguration. The Tax March, among the largest protests since the Women’s March, unfolded a day after the White House announced that it would end the practice of releasing White House visitor logs, an attempt by Trump (who had promised to ‘drain the swamp’ in Washington) to shield his activities from scrutiny.

The tax returns of presidents and vice presidents are automatically audited every year, and it is totally legal to publish their tax returns. Although there is no legal obligation, U.S. presidents and presidential candidates have released their returns voluntarily for decades.

But Trump – who has repeatedly admitted using legal loopholes to minimize his tax burden – has justified his refusal to publish tax returns by noting they are being audited; however, federal tax authorities say that does not bar him from releasing the documents.

67-year-old Ellen Lodwick, a retired corporate researcher from Maryland, cast doubt on Trump’s businesses:

“There are probably many illegal or questionable investments in things that could affect how he looks at government and legislation, because he’s too connected.”

Why does he want to hide his taxes? That’s what I want to know. He promised transparency; remember ‘Drain the swamp?” 53-year-old Martha Marquez, a graduate school professor who attended the Palm Beach march holding a sign that read “Show Me Yours and I’ll Show You Mine,” told The New York Times.

In Los Angeles, television director Mike Stutz turned up at the march holding a sign that read: “What Tax Returns? Putin paid cash. Trust your oligarchs,” referring to allegations of contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia, led by President Vladimir Putin.

Source*

Related Topics:

IRS Hires Private Debt Collection Agencies to Collect Unpaid Taxes*

Trump Team Tied to Atlantic Coast Pipeline Now Being Pushed by White House*

World War 3: Trump Begins Paying His Penance to Rothschilds*

Trump is Filling Top Pentagon and Homeland Security Positions With Defense Contractors*

Trump To Continue Bankrupting The U.S. Through Foreign Wars*

Leaked Trump Presidential Memo Would Free U.S. Companies to Buy Conflict Minerals from Central African Warlords*

Jewish Members of Trump Administration Might Explain a Few Things*

Obama not Trump Ordered the Voter Fraud Investigation*

Trump Signing Executive Order Forcing Continuation of DAPL and Keystone XL*

Trumps Seems to be Doing the Cabals Bidding with Goldman Sachs Heavily Entrenched in his Administration*

Why You Should NEVER Sign ‘Refusal to Vaccinate’ Document*

Why You Should NEVER Sign ‘Refusal to Vaccinate’ Document*

THE REFUSAL TO VACCINATE DOCUMENT

The Refusal to Vaccinate document was created by the CDC or the American Academy of Paediatrics ‘legal department’ as a response to the growing number of toxic vaccines recommended by them and the growing number of parents who are becoming educated on this issue. According to CDC recommendations, our children should now receive 37 doses of vaccines between 0-16 years. [See Vaccine Schedule]

This document, now being used to overcome vaccine awareness, is the most diabolical strategy possible! It is unlikely that physicians have any idea what they are asking their patients to sign . . . or to sign away. It is essentially a signed confession. So please read and understand why no one should sign it and why it is really something other than what it appears to be.

TWELVE REASONS YOU CANNOT SIGN REFUSAL TO VACCINATE

Here are 12 reasons why no parent can sign this document unless they are interested in being statutorily charged with neglect or intentionally causing harm. Repeating more boldly: this document, if signed, could be used to have your child(ren) removed from your custody! It was created to stand up in court, which is why they require the parent’s signature to be “witnessed”?

#1
The document attaches a child ID # that will be identifiable in the electronic records system across the country. Everyone from the school to the NSA will be able to determine who is and who is not vaccinated.

#2
The scientific term for HPV vaccine is listed to discourage parents from making the connection to the dangerous vaccine for HPV called Gardasil. [See Gardasil: Former Merck Doctor predicts greatest medical scandal of all time]

#3
Establishing a vaccination history is part of the Police state registry system being set up to track your vaccination status.

#4
The CDC Vaccine Information Statement is pure unadulterated propaganda. The vaccination information coverup was documented and exposed in an extremely important paper Health Hazards of Disease Prevention (2011). Also see info about the CDC – #9 (below).

#5
Again the parent is misled to think the truth about vaccine risks is on the CDC web site.The doctor has the vaccine package inserts right in his/her office. Why is it not offered and explained to the parent? The physicians themselves may or may not have read them. However, physicians are certainly aware that if the parents read the ‘official risks’ put out by the drug corporations, they would refuse the vaccines. Full disclosure is almost NEVER a part of the process.

#6
“I understand the following: The risks and benefits of the recommended vaccine(s).”

This of course would be agreeing to a false statement. You cannot understand the risks without reading and understanding the package inserts, therefore how can you answer in the affirmative? And what about all of the vaccine facts that aren’t even listed in the package inserts that have been ‘covered up’ for many years?

#7
Parents are falsely told that without vaccines their children could suffer dire illnesses but are not told the dire illnesses/injuries the vaccines themselves could cause . . . including death.

#8
This refers to the “herd immunity myth” of 1933, which has been proven unscientific over and over and over again. Simply put: if other children have been vaccinated – and the vaccines work – they won’t contract a disease from your child.

#9
Entities are listed as “strongly recommending” the vaccine schedule. Again however, parents are NOT given full disclosure as to exactly who/what the entities are and what their motivations might be. Listed on the Refusal to Vaccinate document are the following entities and a brief description of their motivation:

  • The ‘physician’ – is rewarded for administering vaccines by higher reimbursements for his fees. His vaccine “rates” are checked to determine whether or not he/she is entitled to more money. Physicians, public health workers, and drug companies have all been given immunity from any possible lawsuits that may arise as a result of vaccine-caused injury or illness. In other words, if a vaccine harms your child or causes autism you cannot sue any of them. They all have a liability exemption.
  • The American Academy of Paediatrics which is a corporation headquartered in the STATE OF ILLINOIS – that receives lots of money from drug corporations for advertising in their journal, etc. This organization relies heavily on what they falsely believe to be a “government” health advocacy agency known as the Center for Disease Control (CDC).
  • The American Academy of Family Physicians which is a corporation headquartered in the STATE OF KANSAS – that also receives lots of money from drug corporations for advertising in their journal, etc. This organization also relies heavily on what they falsely believe to be a “government” health advocacy agency known as the Center for Disease Control (CDC).
  • The Center for Disease Control (CDC) which is a corporation headquartered in the STATE OF GEORGIA. The CDC IS NOT PART OF A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT. Repeat: the CDC IS NOT PART OF A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT! It is a private for-profit corporation listed on Dun and Bradstreet that is chartered under the umbrella of the private for-profit UNITED STATES corporation with extremely close ties to the pharmaceutical companies and a sordid history of corruption. [See: CDC Exposed]

Bottom line: all of the above “entities” make more money if they vaccinate our children and even more if our children get sick from the vaccines . . . including the paediatricians themselves.

#10
This is the broadest and most nefarious part of this document.

“Nevertheless, I have decided at this time to decline . . . I know that failure to follow the recommendations about vaccination may endanger the health or life of my child and others . . . I therefore agree to tell all health care professionals in all settings what vaccines my child has not received because he or she may need to be isolated or may require immediate medical evaluation and tests that might not be necessary if my child had been vaccinated.”

This is not only deceptive and untruthful [see numbers 2-8] it is asking you to confess that you know you are harming your child (and others) and don’t care. It is asking you to agree to inform any/all people who represent themselves as healthcare “professionals” (not defined) of your child’s vaccination record. You are also consenting to allow undefined healthcare professionals to remove your son or daughter from your care and place him or her in isolation for unproven or unknown exposure to a myriad of undefined communicable diseases – with or without testing.

#11
This is an admission that you understand this contractual document – and its significance – ‘in its entirety’. This means that you accept the false information sited as factual, chose NOT to do what you now know to be good for your child and others (are negligent), obligate yourself to embarrass and confuse your child by tracking and reporting on the vaccines you protected your child from, and give permission for your child to be tested or removed from your care and put in isolation for any ‘supposed’ exposure to any ‘undefined’ communicable disease by anyone calling themselves a healthcare worker. [Ohio Revised Code 3701.13]

In short, the form wants you to attest to the following . . . in writing and in the presence of a witness:

  • You understand you are signing a contract with performance requirements
  • You accept false information as factual and don’t care
  • You don’t care if your child or others are harmed by your decision
  • You agree to volunteer to all pretend healthcare workers your child’s vaccine record
  • You agree to allow others to test and/or isolate your child for unproven exposure to a disease

#12
Here is the kicker. As you are asked to sign, initial and date this document in front of a witness, should a custody dispute ever arise (either between parents or with Child Protective Services) this document could be used against the mother or father that signed it.

In defense of physicians, they have been told – via the instructions accompanying the Refusal to Vaccinate document – that parents could sue them should their sons or daughters come down with any of the diseases vaccines are supposed to prevent. Their fear of being sued is why physicians are so insistent that parents sign the Refusal to Vaccinate document.  An excellent alternative, for both physician and parent, is the Vaccination Notice.  This notice corrects misconceptions about vaccines, the herd immunity myth, and the CDC. It also brings the liability (or lack thereof) to the physicians attention. See The Vaccination Notice.

Source*

Related Topics:

Vaccine Induced Chronic Fatigue Syndrome*

How One Father Told His Paediatrician “No” to Vaccines*

Death from Vaccinosis and an Imprisoned Father*

H.R. 1313 Bill Would Require Medical Procedures Like Vaccines as Requirement for Employment*

Triplets Regress into Autism Following Flu Vaccine*

Polio Vaccine Refusal Cases among Well-educated People Baffle Officials in Pakistan*

Norwegian Study Links Flu Vaccine to Narcolepsy Risk*

Varicella Occurring From Chickenpox Vaccination*

DTP Vaccine Associated With 212% Increased Infant Mortality Risk*

Lab Report Analysis Found Round Up in MMR Vaccine*

Ontario give Doctors no Choice but to Refer Patients for Assisted Death*

Ontario give Doctors no Choice but to Refer Patients for Assisted Death*

MPP Jeff Yurek proposes a conscience rights amendment for Ontario physicians

 

By Lianne Laurence

A Liberal-dominated committee has refused to add conscience rights protection to Ontario’s bill regulating euthanasia and assisted suicide.

The finance and economic affairs committee voted down Progressive Conservative health critic Jeff Yurek’s proposed conscience rights amendments to Bill 84 on Tuesday.

The Liberal move leaves conscientiously objecting doctors with no protection against a College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario’s policy forcing them to give patients requesting euthanasia an “effective referral” — that is, to a willing and accessible colleague for the purposes of accomplishing the act.

The CPSO policy also forces doctors to effectively refer patients who request “medical services” as abortion or abortifacient contraception.

Doctors who refuse can be disciplined by CPSO and could lose their license to practise.

“We were very disappointed,” says Larry Worthen, spokesperson for the Coalition for HealthCare and Conscience.

“We met with various politicians that were involved and we described for them the ways that people could access medical assistance in dying without affecting conscience rights and yet they still voted to not include the conscience amendment,” he told LifeSiteNews.

The Coalition for Conscience had also launched a massive lobbying campaign for conscience rights in Bill 84, and 25,000 people sent letters to MPPs, Worthen said.

Moreover, 31 of the 42 oral presentations to the committee also asked for a conscience right amendment to the bill, he said. That doesn’t include the written submissions to the committee.

The Liberal refusal to protect conscience rights will cost them, says Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

“This is a crucial item,” he told LifeSiteNews.

“Liberal backbenchers are going to find it awfully hard to get elected in the next election if they don’t start supporting conscience rights and issues that matter to doctors and people in Ontario.”

Liberal intransigence on this point is a bit surprising to Monte McNaughton, the first MPP to speak up for conscience rights at Queen’s Park.

“Ontario’s still the only jurisdiction in the world that is moving forward with effective referral protocol,” the MPP for Lambton-Kent-Middlesex told LifeSiteNews.

“You would think the government would look to other jurisdictions on how they protected conscience rights.”

Moreover, conscience rights protection has widespread support, he pointed out.

“I’ve raised this a number of times in the House, introduced petitions signed by thousands of concerned people right across Ontario,” McNaughton said, adding that there are

“a number of organizations and individual doctors who have been raising this for months now.”

That includes the Ontario Medical Association, which sent representatives to meet with McNaughton and other MPPs, and is “on the record wanting the government to move away from effective referral protocol and to ensure that conscience rights are protected.”

The OMA appeared before the the committee urging it adopt conscience rights protection, as did the Catholic Civil Rights League, the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario, and Cardinal Thomas Collins, who spoke on behalf of the Coalition for HealthCARE and Conscience.

The Concerned Ontario Doctors, which represents 20,000 physicians, also came out backing conscience rights at an April 11 press conference.

But the “Wynne government is determined to move forward with this globally unprecedented effective referral protocol,” McNaughton said.

In doing so, the Liberals are

stripping a basic freedom from these doctors and health care practitioners, that is freedom of conscience.”

Worthen said the committee passed an amendment to set up a care coordination service, which is patient-accessed and connects a patient seeking euthanasia with a doctor who is willing to kill him or her.

However, “until the requirement for effective referral is struck down that doesn’t really help us in terms of protecting conscience,” he said.

The Coalition is now focused on the legal challenge to the CPSO policy that will be heard in Ontario’s divisional court June 13 to 15 in Toronto.

Five Christian doctors and three groups are arguing that the CPSO policy violates a physician’s Charter protected rights of religion and conscience.

The doctors are co-plaintiffs with the Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada, Canadian Physicians for Life, and the Canadian Federation of Catholic Physicians’ Societies

The Liberal government is intervening on behalf of the CPSO.

Meanwhile, MPP Yurek (Elgin-Middlesex-London) will table a private member’s bill on conscience rights on May 11.

Yurek’s amendments to Bill 84 would have protected doctors from civil liability and discipline by the CPSO.

Those amendments clarified that doctors with conscientious objections would not block patients’ access to euthanasia.

The amendments clarified that objecting doctors would provide, on request, information “about services that can provide access” to euthanasia; patient medical records, and would communicate “to the appropriate person in authority a patient’s request for a complete transfer of care so that the person in authority can facilitate the transfer.”

Worthen told the Catholic Register that the Coalition for Conscience backed Yurek’s amendments, which provided access to euthanasia “without negatively affecting conscience rights.”

“It’s important that people realize that we’re not trying to block patients from accessing this,” he told the Register. “What we’re trying to do is not be morally implicated in their decision.”

Source*

Related Topics:

Sex Abuse Victim Allowed Euthanasia as mental health problems Considered ‘INCURABLE’*

When Euthanasia Crosses the Line into Murder*

Canada’s Surgeons Harvesting Organs from Euthanised Patients*

VIDEO: Bioethics, Eugenics and the “after-birth abortion” of newborns

 

Newly Released Documents Show Black Lives Matter Infiltrated by NYPD*

Newly Released Documents Show Black Lives Matter Infiltrated by NYPD*

By Alek Hidell

Documents uncovered as part of a Freedom of Information Act request have revealed that the NYPD’s surveillance of the Black Lives Matter movement went much farther than anyone could have anticipated. The records uncovered by a New York law firm have painted a picture of overreach and mass surveillance directed toward the BLM movement

Most of the documents uncovered were emails. The emails showed that not only had the NYPD been on a mission to infiltrate the BLM movement, but it had in fact succeeded. The emails also revealed that undercover officers had gained enough trust in the organization to be actively included in planning meetings, and even took part in demonstrations.

Many of the communications documented the activities of members to include times and places of planned demonstrations. According to Elsa Waithe, a Black Lives Matter organizer, she confirmed that the NYPD was in fact in possession of information that was only distributed among management.

“The text loop was definitely just for organizers, I don’t know how that got out. Someone had to have told someone how to get on it, probably trusting someone they had seen a few times in good faith. We clearly compromised ourselves,” Waithe said.

The suggestion is that NYPD undercover operatives were able to infiltrate the organization in its early stages and those undercover officers were able to rise in the organization. Keegan Stephan, who has been involved with the BLM movement and was familiar with the organizational structure, agrees.

“I feel like the undercover was somebody who was or is very much a part of the group, and has access to information we only give to people we trust.”

According to Joseph Giacalone, a former NYPD detective and consultant to the Guardian, it would have been difficult for undercover agents to infiltrate and get so close to leadership in such a short period of time. When asked about why the NYPD would go to such lengths to spy on the organization, Giacalone stated,

“If you take out the biggest mouth, everybody just withers away, so you concentrate on the ones you believe are your organizers. Once you identify that person, you can run computer checks on them to see if they have a warrant out or any summons failures, then you can drag them in before they go out to speak or rile up the crowd, as long as you have reasonable cause to do so.”

Lawyers are now examining the emails to see if the NYPD broke any laws while undergoing their surveillance. Typically, surveillance this intrusive has to be authorized by a special committee within the NYPD, however, in this instance there is no criminal justification for spying on a civil rights group. Spying on civil rights groups was done by the federal government in the 1950’s and 60s to quash uprisings. In this case, the NYPD may have overstepped its boundary.

The emails only tell a part of the story, which left BLM and their attorneys wondering if the NYPD has withheld additional documents which would clarify their actions. Requests have already been submitted for any relevant documents that were not produced. The outcome, whether intended or not, was to undermine the trust that members had in the BLM organization. The knowledge that an undercover cop may have held a leadership position in the group has left many within wondering who at the top they can trust.

Source*

Related Topics:

Hacked messages of #BlackLivesMatter leader reveal Obama admin’s plan for ‘summer of chaos’ and martial law

Black NYPD Officers Sue the Department, Were Pressured to Meet Quotas of Black Arrests*

New Settlement Aims to Protect Muslims from Discriminatory NYPD Surveillance*

NYPD Officials, Prominent Jewish Business Men in Bribery Corruption Scandal*

NYPD a Law unto Themselves Forces Photographer Shaun Thomas into a Psych Ward Again*

#Arabs4BlackPower Releases Movement for Black Lives Solidarity Statement*

Jewish Anti-Occupation Activists Stand With Black Lives Matter*

Why were the Black Lives Matter protesters at London City Airport all White?*

A Black Lives Protest Just Turned Into a Barbecue Event with Police*