No Outsiders to be Allowed to Investigate Burma’s Rohingya Genocide*
Burma has refused entry to any members of the U.N. coming into their country to investigate the ongoing killing, abuse, and oppression that the Rohingya Muslims are facing, as an official has stated.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s government has stated that they will refuse to cooperate with a U.N. mission. Speaking to The Telegraph, permanent secretary at the ministry of foreign affairs Kyaw Zeya said:
“If they are going to send someone with regards to the fact-finding mission, then there’s no reason for us to let them come.” He also added that visas would not be issued to anyone coming into the country to work on the mission.
Based in the Rakhine State, there have been many claims and allegations that the Rohingya Muslims are victims of violence and genocide, however these have all been denied by the Burmese government who labelled the accusations as propaganda and fake news.
A report published by the U.N. in February found that babies and children were reportedly being slaughtered with knives during “area clearance operations”
Additionally, the report concluded that counter military operations carried out by security forces left Rohingya people subject to mass gang rape, ruthless beatings, and disappearances.
People in Burma view the Rohingya people as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and the Burmese leader, Ms. Suu Kyi, has been criticised many a time for not standing up and facing the Rohingyas, the population of whom exceeds one million.
After security operations carried out by the Burmese army last year, approximately 75,000 Rohingyas have fled the state of Rakhine and gone to Bangladesh. Allegations of abuse in the North of the country were looked into by the E.U., who called for a mission in March and appointed Indira Jaising, an advocate from the supreme court of India, in May, to lead said mission.
However, Burma insists that a domestic investigation led by the first vice president of Myanmar, Myint Swe, is sufficient and there is no need for any outsiders to get involved.
Last month, speaking in Brussels, Ms. Suu Kyi had a disagreement with the E.U. over the need and necessity to send an international fact-finding mission to Burma. She made clear her belief that this mission would not address the needs of the ground and that the country needs time more than anything else to recuperate from the distrust between these two communities.
She also believes that rather than making Rakhine a safe place for the Rohingyas, the U.N. resolution of having a mission like this would further increase the hostility between the two communities.
Canada to Provide a Whopping $241.5mn for Overseas Abortions, Contraception*
By Lianne Laurence
The Justin Trudeau Liberals will pour $241.5 million into providing and promoting contraception and abortion in developing nations — particularly in Africa — as part of their commitment to securing global access to “sexual and reproductive health and rights.”
International Development Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau made the announcement on Tuesday during the Family Planning Summit in London, England.
The money is part of the $650 million the Liberals pledged in March to promote global access to “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” as well the $840 million they’ve earmarked “for humanitarian assistance in response to the crises in Iraq and Syria,” according to a Liberal backgrounder.
About 65% of the $241.5 million targets Africa.
The backgrounder, entitled “Canada’s leadership on sexual and reproductive health and rights,” details that the Liberals will dole out money over five years to veteran abortion promoters.
These include the United Nations Population Fund, Marie Stopes, International Planned Parenthood Federation, and the World Bank.
The UNPF receives $45 million to provide “reproductive health and family planning services” in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan along with humanitarian aid.
The IPPF gets $5 million to promote abortion and provide contraception in South Sudan; Marie Stopes Tanzania $15 million to do the same in Tanzania; the Clinton Health Access Initiative $20 million to “improve access” to sexual and reproductive health choices through an “innovative approach” in Nigeria.
Pathfinder International gets $15 million to “support family planning and abortion services” in Mozambique, where abortion was legalized in December 2014.
Other African nations targeted are Ghana, Benin, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Burkina Faso.
But African pro-life advocates are slamming the Liberals for “arrogance,” “hypocrisy,” and “cultural colonialism.”
“The Liberal government, by offering what Africans neither want nor need, shows its hunger to inherit the infamous throne of the ‘world abortion champions’ which the United States has abdicated,” Archbishop Emmanuel Badejo of Oyo, Nigeria, told LifeSiteNews in an email.
Communications director for the African bishops, Badejo excoriated the Trudeau government for “hypocrisy” in “pushing an imperialist agenda that undermine religious and cultural sensibilities and demean the cherished African respect for the life of the unborn.”
That was echoed by Obianuju Ekeocha, founder of the U.K,-based Culture of Life Africa.
“This new breed of Western leaders who want to impose an abortion-friendly ideology, if you will, by all means in Africa, one thing about them that they all have in common is that they are not listening to us,” she told LifeSiteNews.
“Most of the African cultures across the different African countries consider abortion the destruction of human life, consider abortion as a way of death,” she said.
Moreover, Canada’s money will do a lot of damage in Africa when organizations such as Marie Stopes use it to lobby for abortion, Ekeocha said.
“In Africa, where there is a lot of corruption, some of it might go into bribery.”
And that will “involve terrible things,” Ekeocha said, because the “very fabric of that society is being shredded, put under pressure, first of all, by this kind of money, but also being shredded at the end of the day — by the time the money goes into buying favours, buying traditional rulers, buying community leaders, buying parliamentarians.”
The Liberals’ promotion of the sexual and reproductive rights agenda is “also terrible for the image of Canada,” hitherto highly regarded in Africa as “one of the few developed countries that was not a colonial master.”
Now under the Liberals, Canada in 2017 is “becoming a massive colonial master” as leader of what Ekeocha describes as the “neo-colonial” movement of the “reproductive rights agenda.”
Canada is not only “going and throwing all this money, it’s also trying to inspire other Western nations to do likewise,” she said.
“Even in their speeches, when you listen to them, you see that it’s kind of a clarion call, ‘we’re putting 650 million, what can you do, what would you do’,” she said.
“They’re looking at other countries, and winking at other Western countries.”
The Trudeau government “has put itself right at the forefront of this unfortunate movement that is trying to colonize an Africa that has been decolonized a long ago,” Ekeocha said.
“But they are trying to colonize it in the worst way ever, they’re trying to colonize us culturally and ideologically.”
EPA’s Silent Approval of Monsanto/Dow’s RNAi Corn*
By Sayer Ji
Without much more than a whisper from the mainstream media, Monsanto’s newest Frankenfood has received full EPA approval and will be arriving on dinner plates by the end of the decade. The implications of this are harrowing, to say the least.
While you may not have made up your mind on the dangers of GMOs, you likely feel entitled to know when you’re consuming a food that is the product of laboratory research. For this reason, I am reporting on Monsanto’s latest food technology, unfortunately, already in the pipeline. And quite silently so. I write this with a certain degree of solemnity, if not also a tinge of regret, because, for three years, I have heard rumblings of Monsanto’s next project – RNA interference technology.
It was actually the late Heidi Stevenson, my friend, colleague, and founder of the platform Gaia Health, who first alerted me to the dangers of RNA interference-based tinkering with our food supply when she reported on the near disastrous approval of GMO wheat using RNA interference technology in Australia. Thankfully a few brave scientists and informed public stood up and, together, averted the disaster. But since then, both the dangers and the breakneck speed of development of this technology have gone largely ignored, even among activists deep in the non-GMO movement. In order to truly appreciate the gravity of the situation, and why the EPA’s approval of RNAi corn intended for human consumption, is so concerning, it will first require a little background information on the fascinating topic of non-coding small RNAs, and their formidable relevance to our health.
How Non-Coding, Small RNAs Link Together the Entire Biosphere
One of the most important discoveries of our time is that all plants, including those we use for food and animal feed, contain a wide range of RNA molecules capable of inhibiting gene expression or translation. These non-coding RNA molecules neutralize targeted messenger RNA molecules (mRNAs), which prevents their translation into a protein, i.e. they “silence genes.”
Compelling research has surfaced suggesting that not only do these genome-regulating small RNA molecules exist in our foods, but that they are capable of surviving digestion, and being absorbed into our bodies fully intact where they alter, suppress or silence genes, post-transcriptionally. Moreover, some of these small RNAs — primarily microRNAs (miRNAs) and small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) — are believed to be cross-kingdom mediators of genetic information, making it possible for RNAs in one species impacting many others through both their active and passive exposure to them.
Food therefore is essentially an epigenetic modifier of gene expression, making it a form of information, and not only a source of bodily building blocks and caloric energy, as conventionally understood. As such, any significant changes to food or feed staples within our food chain could have powerful impacts on the physiological fate of those consuming them, essentially rewriting the functionality of our genomic hardware via software like changes in RNA profiles. The entire biosphere, therefore, is held together in a web-like fashion through these molecular RNA messengers, lending a plausible mechanism to the biotic aspect of Lovelock and Margulis’ Gaia theory of Earth as a self-regulating, meta-organism. You can learn more by reading my article Genetic Dark Matter, Return of the Goddess, and the Post-Science Era.
Monsanto and Co Capitalizing on RNA interference Technology
While this discovery will have profound implications for the field of nutrition and medicine, it has also created enormous interest among biotech and agricultural firms, namely, Monsanto and Dow, looking to capitalize on the design of proprietary products using interference (RNAi) technology.
In mid June, last month Monsanto received EPA approval for a type of corn genetically altered to produce an RNA-based pesticidal agent (aka, a plant-incorporated protectant (PIP)) which lethally targets a metabolic pathway within the corn rootworm, known within the industry as the “billion dollar bug.” Branded as Smartstax PRO, the newly minted GMO plant produces a small, double-stranded RNA known as DvSnf7 dsRNA which disrupts a critical gene within the rootworm, causing its death. This was added on top of four other “stacked” GMO traits, such as the ability to produce two other pesticidal proteins (Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2), as well as survive exposure to both glyphosate (aka Monsanto’s Roundup 2) and Glufosinate (aka Dow’s Libertylink), highly toxic herbicides.
The Atlantic, one of the only mainstream news outlets to report on the topic, pointed out how surprisingly low key the approval process was:
“The EPA’s decision attracted little attention from the press or even from environmental groups that reliably come out against new genetically modified crops.”
Bill Freese, The Center for Food Safety’s science policy analyst, told the Atlantic he was caught off guard by EPA’s decision to only allow 15 days of public comment, and the fact that it did not post its decision to the Federal Register, as it customary, especially considering how unprecedented the use of a RNAi insecticide in a plant intended for human consumption is. Monsanto anticipates the new corn will be on the market by the end of the decade.
One would imagine that such revolutionary technology would require short and long-term (decades) of safety testing before licensure. Instead, as is often the case with big-ticket market agendas, the product is being rushed to market. There are already significant biases in place within the EPA and USDA in regard to nucleic acids – assumptions that exempt them from cautionary considerations. RNA is considered Generally Accepted As Safe (GRAS), but this is because it is defined and perceived only as a physical substance rather than as the powerful signaling/informational molecule it is. The EPA’s approval of RNAi food crops ignores the fact that it takes a multi-generational timescale to understand the influence of epigenetic modifiers on the genome of a species, much less the human species, whose timescale is orders of magnitude beyond animal models used to establish much of the risk/benefit data used in pre-approval evaluations. RNAi interference technology promises specificity — one RNAi molecule change equals one gene suppressed — but ignores the virtually infinite possibility of unintended, adverse effects in what are incomprehensibly complex biological systems. Indeed, researchers have warned that RNAi can not only profoundly affect gene expression, but that the changes it induces can permanently alter a species through inherited traits:
“Once a silencing effect is initiated, the effect may be inherited. The biochemistry of this process varies depending on the organism and remains an area of active research with many unknown aspects. Nevertheless, it is known for example that human cells can maintain the modifications necessary for TGS, creating actual or potential epigenetic inheritance within tissues and organisms (Hawkins et al., 2009). In some cases the dsRNA pathways induce RNA-dependent DNA methylation and chromatin changes (TGS) that persist through reproduction or cell division, and in other cases the cytoplasmic pathways remain active in descendants (Cogoni and Macino, 2000).”
GM Technology and Unintended Consequences
Indeed, critics of RNA interference technology make the point that RNAi technology aims to target the production of a specific protein by identifying the sequence in question. But two or more genes can have sequence homologies. This means, as applies to the use of RNA interference in medicine, a gene that is targeted to turn off a “disease-causing gene” could have a number of off-target effects, one of which would be turning off a gene that is essential to health and vitality.
This is, in fact, what happened October of last year, when Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, a leading developer of RNAi drugs, announced it had decided to discontinue revusiran, its lead drug candidate, after an excess of deaths occurred in the experimental drug group versus placebo. This sent shockwaves throughout the overly exuberant RNAi drug industry, reducing their stock 6% on average.
Criticisms of RNAi in the agricultural sector are long-standing among the highly informed. For instance, Jonathan Latham, Ph.D. and Allison Wilson, Ph.D., wrote a seminal paper on the topic over a decade ago titled “Off-target effects of plant transgenic RNAi: three mechanisms lead to distinct toxicological and environmental hazards,” wherein 3 of the primary safety concerns are addressed: 1) Off target effects leading to non-specific down-regulation of plant RNAs 2) Off target effects affecting non-target invertebrates feeding on plant material 3) potential effects on mammals. In mammals, long (>30 bp) perfectly duplexed RNAs (such as are typically produced by plant RNAi transgenes) are Pathogen Associated Molecular Patterns (PAMPS) and are consequently highly potent triggers of innate anti-viral defences. The effects of long dsRNAs on mammalian cellular functions are typically profound and extend to complete inhibition of protein translation and cell death. Nevertheless, the implications of such molecules in the mammalian diet have hardly been tested.
That’s quite a serious list of concerns. As you can see, concern #3 includes the possibility that these dsRNAs may lead to protein translation and cell death. Clearly if the EPA has declared Monsanto and Dow’s new RNAi corn safe for human consumption, they would need to prove this a non-issue.
Monsanto Falling On Their Own ‘Peer-Reviewed’ Sword
Surprisingly, Monsanto itself has produced one of the most damning papers on the topic yet. Several years ago I stumbled upon a study funded by Monsanto that raised a number of red flags for me. Titled, “Endogenous small RNAs in grain: Semi-quantification and sequence homology to human and animal genes,” researchers employed by Monsanto in their St. Louis, MO, laboratory analyzed the presence of endogenous small RNAs in common food and feed staples — soybeans, corn, rice — discovering that hundreds of these plant RNAs had a perfect 100% complementary match to human genes as well as other mammals.
Why is this significant? Endogenous small RNAs, such as small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) and microRNAs (miRNAs), are effector molecules of RNA interference (RNAi), which is a gene suppression mechanism found in plants, mammals, and other eukaryotes. The implication, therefore, of Monsanto’s finding is that plant RNAs — were they capable of surviving digestion and accumulating in target tissues to physiologically relevant concentrations — are capable of epigenetically silencing hundreds of genes within the human body. Below you will find a list of the RNA/gene matches between rice and the human genome:
Despite the abundance of perfect 100% complementarity matches listed above, Monsanto’s conclusion was a conveniently pollyannish dismissal of the safety implications of these findings, stating that:
“The abundance of endogenous small RNA molecules in grain from safely consumed food and feed crops such as soybean, corn, and rice and the homology of a number of these dietary small RNAs to human and animal genomes and transcriptomes establishes a history of safe consumption for dietary small RNAs.”
While this may be true for traditionally used plants, it does not follow that genetically modified organisms would necessarily be safe because non-GMO versions are. [The pseudo-scientific conceptual ploy of “substantial equivalency“ behind traditional and GMO cultivars has been the basis for the approval of GMOs since their inception.] Monsanto’s conclusion relates to the fact that it has invested a great amount of resources into developing proprietary RNAi-based organisms which help it to maintain and further expand its monopolizing control on the global food supply.
Additionally, one of their primary justifications for concluding the safety of endogenous plant RNAs on human health was that: “…there does not appear to be any evidence in the scientific literature suggesting that intact RNA is absorbed following ingestion.” This bold claim has been disproven. The Monsanto paper was written in 2008, 3 years before the groundbreaking discovery of Zhang et al published in the Cell Research, entitled,” Exogenous plant MIR168a specifically targets mammalian LDLRAP1: evidence of cross-kingdom regulation by microRNA,” wherein it was demonstrated that human subjects fed rice containing the microRNA MIR168a have measurable amounts of it present in their blood and tissue, and that it binds to the lipoprotein receptor adapter protein in the liver. More succinctly:
“These findings demonstrate that exogenous plant miRNAs in food can regulate the expression of target genes in mammals.”
Since then, a hotly contested debate has ensued, which is understandable, given the increasingly politicized and financially-motivated nature of scientific debate and findings.
Here’s Monsanto’s conclusion about the safety of RNAi-based food technology:
“Based on this evidence it can be concluded that RNAi-mediated regulation of gene expression in biotechnology-derived crops is as safe for food and feed use as conventional crops that harness RNAi-based gene regulation as one of several ways to achieve new plant traits. The safety of future crops generated through applications of RNAi should thus be evaluated for safety using the existing comparative safety assessment paradigm, which has been developed for biotechnology-derived Crops.”
First of all, the “evidence” they are referring to is based on an axiomatic absurdity: equating the absence of evidence with evidence of absence. In other words, you can’t prove this negative: “that a hazard does not exist” because positivistic proof of anything requires that you demonstrating something, not nothing.
Let’s also not overlook the conflict of interest statement at the end of their paper: “All authors are employees of the Monsanto Company. The Monsanto Company is an agricultural company that produces,” which speaks to Monsanto’s long history of funding science that denies safety risks of their products, such as the Roundup-Cancer link, which now even the California EPA accepts as fact.
The Heart of the Problem
In a seminal paper published in 2016 in Trends in Microbiology, entitled, “How Our Other Genome Controls Our Epi-Genome,” it is proposed that the very RNAs biotech/agrochemical companies like Monsanto and Dow are tinkering with in our food should be reconsidered as part of the definition of our species versus the conventional view that it is just something informationally inert that we eat and exists “out there.” Using a revised version of Da Vinci’s Vitruvian man, as pictured below, they propose that there are 4 inseparable parts of our species: 1) human cells 2) human microbiota and other bacteria 3) Fungi and Viruses 4) Food.
As you can see, because of the interconnectivity and “social networking” functionalities of RNAs packaged in microvesicles called exosomes, all four parts of this new definition of man become united in an indivisible whole. Because these RNAs packed in edible exosomesepigenetically active, the food we eat “literally talks to our mRNA and DNA,” as I have explained in greater detail here: “Amazing Food Science Discovery: Edible Plants ‘Talk’ To Animal Cells, Promote Healing.”
As we have seen in Monsanto’s own paper on the topic, foods contain hundreds of small RNAs whose 100% complementarity match with human genes imply they can directly impact, and even silence those genes. This silencing is not necessarily “bad,” but it is clear that we are tinkering with a design that we are only just beginning to understand, much less know how to ascertain the risks of and properly regulate. But, considering that Monsanto’s research reveals how intricately connected the human and the food genomes are are — and furthermore, that post-2008 research has surfaced showing Monsanto was wrong and plant RNAs from food do have direct impacts on human genome/epigenome expression — it is highly irresponsible for them to continue to claim that food manipulation technologies will not have unintended, adverse effects in principle. Sadly, with the EPAs approval of four new RNAi forms of corn already completed, and likely many more on the way, we may be stuck with secondary and much slower forms of recourse: post-marketing, epidemiological surveillance of exposed populations, where patterns of disease can take decades if not generations to surface — and then with so many confounding factors at play, not with any certainty.
That said, I believe education and the awareness it generates is our best bet at countermanding the widespread acceptance of this highly experimental and obviously dangerous form of genetic engineering. As has been the case recently with glyphosate being classified as a carcinogen by the California EPA, and a growing mainstream movement to fight the forced feeding of non-labeled GMO laden products (March Against Monsanto), the tides are turning. Please help us spread this information far and wide.
New 5G Cell Towers and Smart Meters to Increase Microwave Radiation – Invade Privacy, Destroy Health*
Telecom Companies are Going Green, but Their Version of Green will cause Illness and Death
By John P. Thomas
When the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) approved the use of 5-G microwave communication technology in 2016 and approved the use of microwave frequencies in the 30 Ghz range, they opened the door to even higher levels of human illness and severe disability for American children and adults.
Microwave radiation such as that currently being used in cell phones, Wi-Fi routers, and smart meters has already been linked to numerous health effects.
The introduction of even more intense levels of microwave exposure at higher frequencies will push many people into life-threatening chronic illness. High frequency microwave radiation is often overlooked as a causative factor in illness, because most conventional healthcare providers, government regulators, telecom companies, and electric utilities believe microwave radiation used in communication technology is harmless.
Despite the warnings being raised by scientists, well informed healthcare providers, and grassroots organizations about existing and future microwave hazards, telecom companies are planning to implement 5G technology throughout every urban area in America. They are already testing this new generation wireless telecommunication infrastructure in Boston, Austin, Palo Alto, and Mountain View California.
In a January 2017 announcement, AT&T described their plan for future technology deployment. The announcement stated:
“Our 5G Evolution plans will pave the way to the next-generation of higher speeds for customers. We’re not waiting until the final standards are set to lay the foundation for our evolution to 5G. We’re executing now,” said John Donovan, chief strategy officer and group president, Technology and Operations. [8] [emphasis added]”
The Battle to Implement 5G has begun in California
Proposed legislation in California would permit telecom companies to erect 50,000 new microwave antennas in residential and commercial areas without municipal approval.
The 5G microwave antennas would be placed on top of existing utility poles or on public infrastructure such as schools, libraries, bus shelters, and in public parks. The placement of this equipment will be at the discretion of the telecom companies.
Health Dangers of Microwave Radiation have been Well Documented
The symptoms of microwave radiation exposure include fatigue, headaches, heart palpitations, high pitched ringing in the ears, dizziness, disturbed sleep at night, sleepiness in daytime, moodiness, irritability, unsociability, feelings of fear, anxiety, nervous tension, mental depression, memory impairment, pain in muscles, pain in the region of the heart, and breathing difficulties, to name a few.
Inflammation (caused by excess histamine in the blood), oxidative stress, autoimmune responses, reduced blood flow to the region of the thalamus, pathologic leakage of the blood-brain barrier, and a deficit in melatonin metabolic availability have all been observed.
There is evidence that existing and new frequencies of microwave radiation are associated with cancer, heart disease, neurological dysfunction, immune system suppression, cataracts of the eyes, and sperm malformation.
5G Microwaves have Harmful Biological Effects
In her testimony before the California legislature, Dr. Ann Lee, M.D., indicated that there are 20,000 well established scientific studies on the bio-effects of radio frequency radiation.
She confirmed that microwave radiation such as that from the proposed 5G wireless facilities that would be deployed in California has been shown to cause neurological damage, cardiac dysfunction, reproductive harm, immune compromises, and cancer.
Dr. Ronald Powell, Ph.D., expands upon these concerns. Dr. Powell received his doctorate in Applied Physics from Harvard University in 1975, and has worked for the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards on energy policy research and R&D program evaluation.
He is uniquely qualified to interpret the junction between the physics of electromagnetic fields and the biological effects these fields produce.
In a letter to the FCC, Dr. Ronald Powell stated:
“It would greatly extend FCC’s current policy of the mandatory irradiation of the public without adequate prior study of the potential health impact and assurance of safety. It would irradiate everyone, including the most vulnerable to harm from radio frequency radiation: pregnant women, unborn children, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill.”
AT&T: Let Us Install Microwave Transmitter on Your Home or Lose Service
Now that more than 50% of homes are wireless, telecom companies plan to abandon copper phone lines used for their phone service and create a wireless phone system. For example, Michigan has passed a law permitting this, and AT&T is working with all 21 states in its service territory to bring this about.
As an alternative to the wired system, telecom companies plan to install wireless microwave transmitters on homes as a method of providing traditional phone service. In the case of AT&T customers, the only way you will be able to prevent them from installing such devices on your home is to remove AT&T as your service provider.
In addition, telecom companies plan to install microwave antennas on top of electrical power poles near homes and businesses, and on top of public buildings throughout every urban area and in every neighborhood.
California Legislators Consider Bill to Allow More Microwave Radiation
But this is not just about offensive looking antennas!
Nina Beety described the situation in the article she wrote for StopSmartMeters.org. She is the moderator of the Wireless Radiation Alert Network and distributes her research about the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields and the dangers of smart meters on her website, SmartMeterHarm.org.
Nina Beety stated:
“Spaced approximately every 10-20 homes, cell antennas will hang in one or more clusters on utility or light poles. Equipment cabinets the size of refrigerators, with cooling fans and back-up generators, will sit on sidewalks. Towers will be located in the public right of way a few feet from bedroom windows, offices, schools, hospitals and nursing homes.
Called “small cells,” there is little difference in size for many of these antennas; the chief difference is the location on utility poles versus large towers. Measurements of these cell towers recently taken in Palo Alto found high levels of radiation on the sidewalk below them — levels higher than those associated in research with breaches in the blood-brain barrier, free radical formation, DNA damage, cancer and tumors, and heart rhythm disturbances.”
Nina Beety is specifically describing the proposed system that would be implemented in California if the telecom companies get their way. Currently, a bill permitting the establishment of the 5G system has been passed by the California Senate. A legislative committee will be considering the bill on July 12, 2017. A rally at the State House in Sacramento is planned for July 12th. Please see the following urgent call for action and related links for the details.
Urgent Call to Action for Californians
The announcement from StopSmartMeters.org states:
The Assembly Local Government Committee voted 6-1 to approve SB 649 on Wednesday June 28th (even after hearing the below testimony). It goes next to the Communications and Conveyance Committee at 1:30pm on July 12th. People are coming from all over the state to be there on this day to speak out against SB 649, including mayors, and regular people opposed to the bill. Will you be one of them?”
More details about SB 649 and the rally in Sacramento can be found here.
Dr. Ann Lee, M.D., testifies about the Dangers of the Proposed 5G Network:
10-Year Old Child Testifies about how Wireless Communications Equipment Affects His Heart:
Nina Beety’s Testimony about the Proposed 5G System from the Perspective of an EMF Disabled Person:
Why do Telecom Companies Want a 5G Network? The Merging of Telecommunications with Electric Utilities
Telecom giants plan to take their 5G technology nationwide. It is part of a long-term plan to integrate telecom activities with electrical service providers. A 2015 white paper written by telecom companies, electric utilities, and technology developers published in the European Union describes their vision for the future.
As I interpret the images that these European visionaries are creating, I believe they are foreseeing a day when electrical power production and distribution will be controlled by the 5G network.
In this future vision, large-scale power production facilities will be replaced by hundreds of thousands of small power producers, which could even include personal power production in our homes from solar and wind.
Centralized Power and Control
Wireless technology allows you more control of your home, but at what cost?
The 5G system will monitor not just consumption of power, but will monitor and control the redistribution of electrical power across the entire electrical grid.
The 5G network will be the nerves and sense organs of a massive organism that has a central brain somewhere, which controls all forms of information exchange and electric utilization/production.
Electricity will be used for all aspects of household and business activities, and the 5G network and its centralized brain will control everything.
In the beginning, the speed of the 5G network will be marketed to consumers and businesses who want super-fast internet service. This will allow for instant access to videos and webpages with as little as a 5-millisecond delay from the moment a start button is pressed.
Transmission speeds will be hundreds of times faster than current internet connections. It will be so fast that it will be able to instantaneously project images on the lenses of smart enabled eye glasses to create virtual reality images that blend with the environment.
People will be able to watch videos or even read email simply by looking through the lenses of their glasses. The speed will be so phenomenal that it will make available self-driving cars, which can safely drive passengers to their destinations.
Ultimately, the greatest benefit of the 5G system will be for utility companies. It will give them the ability to take total control of electric production, distribution, and consumption.
Smart Meters and Smart Appliances: Your Home is no Longer Private
New Smart Meters
The smart meters that electric utilities are now installing throughout the U.S. are the nerve endings for what will become a highly complex centrally controlled information and energy exchange system.
The 5G network will use the smart meter system (being implemented throughout the U.S.) and the new generation of smart appliances to reach into our homes and make decisions for us.
Current smart meter technology enables electric utilities to read electric meters without sending a human being to physically read the meters.
Electric providers have been quietly installing these smart meters throughout the U.S. They insist that these meters are harmless even though they broadcast intense bursts of high frequency microwave radiation several times per minute 24-hours per day every day.
Currently, smart meters record electric consumption and transmit the information to the utility company for billing and electric distribution purposes.
The bursts of microwaves are used to communicate with other smart meters in the neighborhood and with wireless routers mounted on top of electric poles. The routers send even more powerful microwave signals several thousand times per hour to the utility company.
Smart appliances such as heating/cooling equipment, washers/dryers, refrigerators/freezers, stoves/microwave ovens, dishwashers, hot water heaters, and even electric coffee makers will each be able to broadcast and receive microwave signals.
These appliances and our smart meters will constantly communicate with one another all day long and all night long – they will never stop transmitting microwave radiation.
Everything that uses electricity will be potentially monitored and controlled by the power companies.
If desired, the electric providers can even independently turn off any appliance they wish whenever they wish to conserve energy consumption.
The need for smart appliances will be a boon for appliance manufacturers and microwave technology producers. The fusion of 5G with the electrical grid will require everyone to buy new appliances that are smart meter enabled or have our existing appliances retrofitted with microwave transmitters.
Is it Green or Just a Way for Corporations to Make More Money and Control Our Lives?
The 5G system goes hand-in-hand with the smart meter system. Together, these systems will be used to create “smart cities.”
These cities will be blanketed in high frequency microwave radiation and will provide the means for enabling a wide variety of new technology.
It is considered to be part of the green revolution. It is part of national technology priorities that were established at the beginning of the first Obama administration.
It is green, because the technology will allow utility providers to closely control energy usage and implement billing systems that will benefit those who reduce energy consumption.
During times of peak energy usage, they will be able to control our appliances and even cut off certain appliances, so that available energy can be directed to high priority uses.
Such a system would supposedly prevent the need for building additional power production facilities, thus avoiding additional fossil fuel emissions or the creation of additional nuclear waste.
It is green, because telecom companies will no longer need to maintain thousands of miles of copper phone lines and switching equipment. Even though the telecom companies will discontinue the network of copper wire, they will still be using fiber optics for some activities.
There are Serious Health Risks Beyond the 5G Hype
As exciting as a future of blended telecommunications and electrical service technology might be for corporations and some consumers, there are very serious health risks, which the FDA and corporations are ignoring.
They believe that microwave technology used for communication does not affect human health. They believe that it doesn’t matter how much microwave radiation is put into the air and what frequencies are used to transmit information.
It doesn’t matter, because the single criterion that they use to judge safety is not affected by the new 5G system.
The criterion that is of interest to regulators is heating. Does the technology cause the human body to heat up and is that heating excessive?
Almost anyone who has spoken on a cell phone pressed against their ear for a long phone call will notice that their ear and even the side of their head will feel warm by the time they end the call.
This is the heating effect of microwaves. This is why iPhones come with a warning to keep the phone 15 mm away from the body.
Microwave Radiation Produces Cellular Disruption Even if it is Not Felt
At the beginning of this article, I mentioned a long list of health effects, medical conditions, and chronic illnesses that are associated with microwave exposure.
I plan to look at this research in more detail in my next article. I will address the effect of microwave radiation on heart function and nerve function, and examine the reality of electromagnetic hypersensitivity, which is already disabling hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. even before the 5G network is implemented.
At this point, I want to finish up with a powerful quote from a recent article on anxiety disorders prepared by Dr. Joseph Mercola, D.O.
In part, the article mentioned microwave exposure as being a potential contributing factor for anxiety disorders. These comments offer additional evidence that the health effects of microwave exposure are profound and are being completely overlooked by regulators.
Dr. Mercola’s article stated:
“Due to the pioneering work of Dr. Martin Pall, we know that voltage gated calcium channels are over 7 million times more sensitive to microwave radiation than the charged particles inside and outside our cells. This means that the safety standards for this exposure are off by a factor of 7 million.
When the EMF from the above listed devices [cellphones and cordless phones, Wi-Fi routers, baby monitors, smart meters and cellphone towers] hit your voltage gated calcium channels, nearly 1 million calcium ions per second are released into the cell, which then causes the cell to release excessive nitric oxide that then combines with superoxide to form peroxynitrate, which then forms the dangerous hydroxyl free radical that causes massive mitochondrial dysfunction.
Guess which tissues have the greatest density of voltage gated calcium channels? Your nerves and tissues, like the pacemaker in your heart and, of course, your brain. When the channels in the brain are activated, it causes a major disruption in neurotransmitter and hormonal balance that can radically increase the risk for not only anxiety and depression but arrhythmias, autism and Alzheimer’s.”
Final Question: Is the Technology Worth the Harm to Our Health and Loss of Privacy?
There is a very basic question that we must all consider.
Are the dreams of mega-corporations to create smart cities saturated in high frequency microwave electromagnetic fields worth the harm that this technology will create for the people who live in those cities?
In smart cities, no one will be exempt from microwave exposure. We won’t be able to opt out, because the 5G microwave system is designed to reach every space in a city.
Those who experience microwave related illness and disability will have few options. They will either stay in the smart city and stay sick or they will need to try to find a place to live in some sparsely populated off the grid location where the 5G system does not reach.
Which future do you want for America? Super-fast internet and corporate control of every aspect of your life, or good health and longevity?
Bill Gates: We Must Depopulate Africa to Save Europe* You realize here, they are talking about Africa’s wealth…
By Jay Greenberg
Billionaire Bill Gates has spoken out about the immigration crisis in Europe saying that the continent will be “devastated by African refugees” unless severe and immediate action is taken.
In an interview with German newspaper, Welt am Sonntag, Gates suggested that European nations must work together to reduce the population growth in Africa by committing more in overseas aid. In a total backtrack of his usual New World Order style open border policies, Gates is now suggesting that the mass influx of migrants into Europe from Africa is threatening to overwhelm countries like Germany who have welcomed globalism. Bill Gates recently caused a huge controversy in Africa when the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was accused of secretly sterilizing millions of women in Africa by doctors in Kenya after abortion drugs were discovered in Tetanus vaccines. Could this have been a test for his proposed depopulation program?
In a total backtrack of his usual New World Order style open border policies, Gates is now suggesting that the mass influx of migrants into Europe from Africa is threatening to overwhelm countries like Germany who have welcomed globalism.
Bill Gates recently caused a huge controversy in Africa when the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was accused of secretly sterilizing millions of women in Africa by doctors in Kenya after abortion drugs were discovered in Tetanus vaccines. Could this have been a test for his proposed depopulation program? Zero Hedge reports: According to Gates, the combination of explosive population growth in Africa combined with Europe’s notoriously generous open-border migrant welfare programs – as illustrated by the ‘German attitude to refugees’ have incentivised migrants to flood into Europe.
Comment:Not the secret war on Africa by the West
“On the one hand you want to demonstrate generosity and take in refugees, but the more generous you are, the more word gets around about this – which in turn motivates more people to leave Africa.”
While Germany has been one of the pioneers of the open door policy, it cannot
“take in the huge, massive number of people who are wanting to make their way to Europe.”
Thus Gates advised European nations to take action in order to make it “more difficult for Africans to reach the continent via the current transit routes.” –Bill Gates
How to stop them?
Gates, whose third world vaccination programs have contributed to Africa’s population explosion, suggested that heaping tons of money onto Africa while taking steps to prevent transit into Europe is the best solution. After calling Germany’s commitment to allocate 0.7% of GDP towards foreign aid “phenomenal,” Gates encouraged “other European nations to follow its example.” (Because Africa is of course known for efficiently managing billions in foreign aid without corruption to ensure that their people are taken care of. Surely Europe’s donations will create an Africa that rivals downtown Hamburg.) Italy Gates’ comments come as European leaders discuss the surge of Africans washing up on Italy’s shores every week, with Rome calling on other E.U. nations to accept more refugees.
On Sunday, Italy’s interior minister Marco Minniti begged for help – telling an E.U. summit in Tallinn “We are under enormous pressure”S “If the only ports where refugees are taken to are Italian, something is not working. This is the heart of the question” –Marco Minniti Italy has taken in over 82,000 migrants in the first six months of 2017, 19% more than the same period last year. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the rescue organization SOS Mediterranee which runs an aid vessel along with Doctors Without Borders said that it would be logistically difficult to redirect migrants to other European ports. If the order came “we would have no choice, we would obey. But it would be completely impossible with more than 1,000 people on board,” Mathilde Auvillain told AFP.
So there you have it
After years of liberal open-border policies predictably resulted in a flood of North African (economic) migrants into Europe, the E.U. is panicking. And the solution to preventing millions of migrants from upgrading their lifestyle by picking up sticks and moving is to throw more money at Africa… However, as SHTFplan’s Mac Slavo asks, does this represent a major shift in the way globalists view immigration? And if so, why would this shift occur? If I were to guess, it has nothing to do with the fact that mass migration is ruining Europe and Western civilization. The globalists have always advocated for the disintegration of Western values and borders. It has to do with the indirect results of mass immigration. The refugee crisis is what has spurred the most resistance to globalism in recent years. It has ignited countless nationalistic political parties in Europe. It has contributed to Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, and the slow motion fracturing of the E.U. What Bill Gates is saying, is a sign that the globalist may have realized that they’ve made a fatal mistake. By promoting open borders, they’ve sown the seeds for their own destruction. Their decision to allow millions of refugees into Europe has solidified populist conservative movements across the West that threatens to dethrone them. Now they’re trying to close this can of worms. Unfortunately for them and us, it may be too late.
The U.S. has been targeting civilians for a long time but pretending that all such deaths are accidental, aka “collateral damage”.
By Peter Van Buren
‘Napalm Girl’ What America Did To Vietnamese Children
U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis said, “civilian casualties are a fact of life in this sort of situation,” referring to America’s war against the Islamic State. And yet the fighting now in Mosul and Raqqa is destroying civilians and their homes on a medieval scale. How can America in clear conscience continue to kill civilians across the Middle East? It’s easy. Ask Grandpa what he did in the Good War. Civilian deaths in WWII weren’t dressed up as “collateral damage”, they were deliberate policy.
Following the institution of what some claim are looser rules of engagement under the Trump administration, U.S.-led coalition airstrikes in Iraq and Syria killed 1,484 civilians in March 2017 alone. Altogether some 3,100 civilians have been killed from the air since the U.S. launched its coalition war against Islamic State, according to the NGO Airwars. Drone strikes outside of the ISIS fight killed 3,674 other civilians. In 2015 the U.S. destroyed an entire hospital in Afghanistan, along with doctors and patients inside. Whole neighbourhoods in Raqqa are being systematically levelled.
That all adds up to a lot of accidents – accidents created in part by the use of Hellfire missiles designed to destroy tanks employed against individual people, and 500 pound bombs that can clear a football-field sized area dropped inside densely inhabited areas. The policy of swatting flies with sledgehammers, surgical strikes with blunt instruments, does indeed seem to lead to civilian deaths, deaths that mock the definition of “accident.”
Yet despite the numbers killed, the watchword in modern war is that civilians are never targeted on purpose, at least by our side. Americans would never intentionally kill innocents.
Except we have.
The good guys in World War II oversaw the rapid development of new weapons to meet the changing needs of killing entire cities’ worth of innocents. For example, in Europe, brick and stone construction lent itself to the use of conventional explosives to destroy cities. In Japan, however, given the prominence of wood construction, standard explosives tended to simply scatter structures over a limited area. The answer was incendiary devices.
To fine-tune their use, the U.S. Army Air Force built a full-size Japanese village in Utah. They questioned American architects who had worked in Japan, consulted a furniture importer, and installed tatami straw floor mats taken from Japanese-Americans sent off to internment camps. Among the insights gained was the need for incendiary devices to be made much heavier than originally thought. Japanese homes typically had tile roofs. The early devices tended to bounce right off. A heavier device would break through the tile and ignite inside the structure, creating a much more effective fire.
Far from accidental, firebombing Japan had been planned in War Plan Orange, written long before Pearl Harbor. As far back as the 1920s, U.S. General Billy Mitchell had said Japan’s paper and wood cities would be “the greatest aerial targets the world had ever seen.” Following the outline in War Plan Orange, the efforts were lead by Curtis “Bombs Away” LeMay, who expressed his goal as “Japan will eventually be a nation without cities, a nomadic people.
LD notes: A correspondent writes to me:
“If the Japanese people were aware of all the evils inflicted upon them by the U.S., they would stop sucking up to America and aping its sexual degeneracy and Cultural Marxist mores. After South Korea, Japan happens to have the second highest per capita consumption of pornography in the world. Makes you wonder: why South Korea ad Japan? I’ll tell you why. Both South Korea and Japan are U.S.-occupied territories, like Germany. American bases scattered around everywhere, local women constantly being raped by U.S. troops, brothels galore catering to American tastes. The Japanese would do well, IMHO, to align themselves with China and Russia against the common Judeo-American enemy.”
Sobering words. But will the Japanese read them and take remedial action? [LD]
LeMay also helped run the U.S. bombing campaign against North Korea during that war, claiming that American efforts killed some 20 percent of the civilian population. The man many call the architect of the Vietnam War, Robert McNamara, worked for LeMay during the WWII firebombing campaign. McNamara as Secretary of Defense went on to order the use of napalm in Vietnam, often against undefended civilian targets. The accidents of civilian deaths in war turn inside tight circles.
The skill with which America tuned its WWII firebombing into an exquisite way to destroy civilians reached its peak on March 10, 1945, when three hundred American B-29 bombers flew virtually unopposed over Tokyo’s most densely populated residential area. They dropped enough incendiary bombs to create a firestorm, a conflagration that burned the oxygen out of the air itself.
What was accomplished? One hundred thousand dead, a million people made homeless. The raid remains the single most destructive act of war ever committed, even after Hiroshima.
TOKYO FIRESTORM, 9 MARCH 1945 The charred body of a woman who was carrying a child on her back
LD: Here is an instructive quote which paints a graphic picture of what firebombing an entire city entails:
“The fire spread so swiftly that windstorms twirled around swirling vortexes that sucked people, homes, debris into the flames. Flames spread so fast that even when there was a way to run where there was no fire, it was often too late. Clothes burst into flames and so did any packages people held. People who jumped into waterways often boiled alive. People on the bridges jumped into the water as the steel grew hot. It’s important to remember that death estimates range from 80,000 to 200,000 dead Japanese citizens, and most of them were innocent bystanders.”
The general public, lulled into apathy by government propaganda using euphemisms like “collateral damage”, would be horrified if they knew the chilling truth about the mass murders committed in their name. [LD]
The problem, however, for the U.S. with such raids was their inefficiency in killing civilians. The logistics of sending off 300 planes were daunting, especially when an hour or two of unexpected wind or rain could negate much of effort. There was no question firestorms were the very thing to systematically commit genocide in Japan. But what was needed was a tool to create those firestorms efficiently, and to make them weather-proof.
It would only take science a few more months after the Tokyo firebombing to provide that tool.
A single atomic bomb meant one plane could do the work of 300. And the bomb would create a fire so powerful and large and hot that weather would have no effect; it was fool proof. There could be no better weapon for destroying whole cities and all of the people in them, and it has only been used by one nation — the United States.
They used the atom bomb twice, because the 85,000 killed in Hiroshima were not enough.
These were tactics of vengeance matched with weapons designed to carry them out as horribly as possible. They worked well: the firebombing campaign over Japan, including the atomic bombings, purposely killed more than one million civilians in just five months in 1945.
Burned Alive At Hiroshima
It was only after WWII ended, when accurate descriptions from Hiroshima began finding their way back to America that the idea of firebombing as a way to shorten the war, to spare lives in the long game, came into full flower. The myth, that the atomic bomb was in fact a reluctant instrument of mercy, not terror, was first published in Harper’s Magazine in February 1947 under the name of Secretary of War Henry Stimson. The actual writing was done by McGeorge Bundy, who later as National Security Adviser helped promote the American war in Vietnam that took several million civilian lives.
The majority of Americans, recovering their consciences post-war, were thus nudged into seeing what was actually a continuation of long-standing policy of civilian genocide in Japan as an unfortunate but necessary step toward Japan’s surrender, and thus saved innumerable lives that would have been lost had the war dragged on. This thinking lives on today on politically correct ground under the banner of great powers having to reluctantly put aside what is moral in peace for what is expedient in war. A “fact of life,” according to the U.S. Secretary of Defense.
So look deeper into history if you want to understand the morality-free rise in civilian deaths across America’s battlefields in the Middle East. We don’t like to think of ourselves as the kind of people who willfully kill innocents, but we were pleased by it only a skip back in history; your grandfather flew missions over Japan to burn children to death. Accidents of course happen in war, but there is a dark history of policy that demands scepticism each time such claims are made.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki
“Your grandfather flew missions over Japan to burn children to death.”
‘Terrorists, Thugs’ Must Be Eradicated in West Africa: Macron*
The terrorism that France takes a personal interest in is the fight for independence against the FrancAfrique grip on African countries whose resources finance the failing state of France = colonialism
On Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron, in his second visit to Mali since taking office in May, met with his counterpart, Malian President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita, at a security summit in Bamako. While speaking at the event Macron noted that he had come to the region to garner support to “wipe out Islamist militants in the volatile Sahel region.”
“Every day we must combat terrorists, thugs, murderers (…) who we must steadfastly and with determination eradicate together,” Macron said.
Reuters reported that the meeting was attended by leaders of the G5 Sahel, (Mali, Burkina Faso, Muritania, Niger and Chad) all of whom are expected to launch a new multi-national force aimed at combating al-Qaida, Boko Haram, and other terrorist groups in the immense arid region.
Responding to French newspaper Le Monde, French Foreign Minister, Yves Le Drian, stated, “this force is first going to secure the borders, particularly in the areas where terrorist groups have developed.”
He explained that accompanying the new G5 military detail would be a priority for Operation Barkhane – France’s ongoing Chad-based anti-jihad mission for the region.
The joint initiative, which would entail the deployment of 5,000 regional troops, has been fervently supported by Macron. While the E.U. has agreed to contribute roughly US$57 million to the military force, Macron has sought additional support from Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and the United States.
In 2013, some 5,100 French troops led Operation Serval to oust Islamic militants from the north of Mali.
However, France’s historic, colonial role in the West African region, have been criticized as undermining stability and sovereignty of countries in the region.
When Sekou Toure, the first President of Guinea, rallied against colonial rule in 1958, the French counterattacked by “taking all their property and destroying anything that which could not be moved: schools, nurseries, public administration buildings were crumbled; cars, books, medicine, research institute instruments, tractors were crushed and sabotaged; horses, cows in the farms were killed, and food in warehouses were burned or poisoned.”
France has also been accused of orchestrating violent coups against Sylvanus Olympio (Togo), David Dacko (Central African Republic), Maurice Yameogo (Republic of Upper Volta, now Burkina Faso), Hubert Mago (Benin).
Also, in 2015, an investigative magistrate from a military tribunal began an official probe into the 1987 assassination of former Burkina Faso President, Thomas Sankara. The judge, according to Quartz, has requested that France declassify military files on Sankara’s killing to determine whether France “played a role” in the assassination. The request, to date, has gone ignored.
According to Serge Michailof, a researcher at the Paris-based IRIS Institute, scoffed at the E.U.’s promise of financial support for a new military force in the Sahel. Considering the 28 member states’ “deep pockets,” he said the US$57 million dollar budget is a “joke.”
“This force is going to cost $300-400 million (262-350 million euros) at the very least,” he told AFP.
Court Rules Baby Must Die, Even Though Parents Can Pay Out of Pocket*
Over 83,000 people have contributed £1.3 million in an effort to save a 10-month-old boy who has been sentenced to “die with dignity” by his government.
By Rachel Blevins
When the parents of 10-month-old Charlie Gard raised more than £1.3 million in an attempt to save their critically ill son, they had no idea that the European Court of Human Rights would be the only thing standing in the way of pursuing further treatment.
Gard suffers from mitochondrial depletion syndrome, a rare genetic condition that has caused serious brain damage. After British doctors determined that he was beyond saving and should “die with dignity,” Gard’s parents appealed to both the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court and the ECHR in France, and received the same answer.
Chris Gard and Connie Yates set up a GoFundMe account for their son, in which they explained that because Charlie is the 16th person in the world to have ever been diagnosed with the condition, they have found an experimental treatment that is only available in the United States.
“Charlies condition is caused by a disruption in the mitochondria, the part of the cell that provides energy to his muscles, kidneys and brain. There is a new treatment available which is a nucleoside bypass therapy, which could potentially repair Charlie’s mtDNA and help it synthase again by giving him the naturally occurring compounds that his body isn’t able to produce. It’s oral medication so nothing invasive or harmful. We are running out of precious time with our baby, he can’t have this treatment in the U.K. so our only hope now is to get Charlie to America.”
Despite the fact that Charlie Gard’s parents succeeded in raising more than the £1.3 million they were seeking, in an attempt to pay out of pocket for their son to receive treatment in the U.S., the U.K.’s healthcare system left the ultimate decision up to the government.
The European Court of Human Rights released a statement that not only rejected the appeal to let Gard’s parents seek out additional treatment independent of state-funded healthcare, but also stated that it is lawful for Gard’s doctors to take him off of life support when they choose.
“The decision is final,” The statement said.
“The domestic courts concluded that it would be lawful for the hospital to withdraw life sustaining treatment because it was likely that Charlie would suffer significant harm if his present suffering was prolonged without any realistic prospect of improvement, and the experimental therapy would be of no effective benefit.”
During the U.K. Supreme Court hearing, Gard family lawyer Richard Gordon QC raised the question of the level of involvement the government should have in determining a child’s right to live, as well as the rights of parents to seek alternative treatment that could save their child.
“The issue is whether the state has the power to intrude on decisions the parents have made in order to mandate that child’s death before it might come to an end,” Gordon said.
“These are model parents trying to do all they possibly can for the benefit of their child. Their view on what is best for Charlie differs from the court.”
The fact that the final decision comes at the hands of a court under the name of “Human Rights,” serves as a reminder that government involvement is never the answer, and in this case, it is in opposition to over 83,000 people who have pledged in support of a giving a baby boy the opportunity to have a second chance.
_810_500_55_s_c1.jpg)
Hwaairfan's Blog 