activistpost--2020-02-10--OPCW Tries To Discredit Whistleblowers in Response to Douma Leaks

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons ( OPCW ) released a short report on their investigation into the many leaks that have come out since the release of their final report on a chemical attack that allegedly took place in Douma , Syria on April 7th 2018 .
The alleged attack was blamed on the Syrian government and resulted in an airstrike against government targets by the US , UK , and France .
The report titled “ Report of the Investigation into Possible Breaches of Confidentiality ” does not address the substance of the leaks or the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it focuses on confidentiality issues and tries to discredit the two former OPCW employees .
The OPCW also released a statement by Director-General Fernando Arias on the investigation where he says the two sources “ are not whistleblowers .
They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence.
” The OPCW released its final report on the alleged Douma chemical attack in March 2019 , which concluded a chlorine gas attack likely occurred .
Since that report came out , two whistleblowers have come forward , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ OPCW suppressed the findings of its experts that were on the ground in Douma to fit the narrative that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the alleged attack .
Two cylinders found at two separate locations in Douma were said to be the source of the chlorine gas .
The idea that these cylinders were dropped from an aircraft is central to the allegation that the Syrian government was responsible , since Jaysh al-Islam , the group that controlled Douma at the time , did not have access to an aircraft .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syria , Propaganda and Media published an unreleased OPCW engineering assessment on the two cylinders that were found in Douma .
This assessment concluded that there is a “ higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft.
” This conclusion was left out of the OPCW ’ s final report .
The unreleased engineering assessment was prepared by Ian Henderson , who the OPCW refers to as “ Inspector A ” in the new report on the leaks .
According to the OPCW @ @ @ @ @ @ @ June 1997 to December 2005 , eventually being promoted to Team Leader .
He was rehired at a lower level in June 2016 and worked at the OPCW until May 2019.
” Henderson may have been hired back at a lower level , but an OPCW document from February 2018 describes him as an “ OPCW Inspection Team Leader.
” Since Henderson ’ s assessment was published , the OPCW has denied that he was a member of the Fact-Finding Mission ( FFM ) that deployed to Douma .
Earlier leaks and Henderson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows there are two groups that can be considered the FFM .
One group that deployed to Douma and another group that only deployed to Turkey known as the FFM “ Core Team.
” The OPCW ’ s report on the leaks says that Henderson was not a member of the FFM .
But the report also confirms that Henderson went to Douma “ in support ” of the FFM because he was stationed at the organization ’ s command post in Damascus .
The report says Henderson “ accompanied the FFM to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assisted in taking environmental samples at a hospital and in taking measurements at one location .
He also assisted in processing the cylinders .
He was later assigned to conduct an inventory of the Highly Protected information collected on the cylinders and to determine what information was needed to carry out further studies.
” There may be some controversy over whether or not Henderson was part of the FFM by the OPCW ’ s definition of the term , but it is now confirmed that Henderson did deploy to Douma and was involved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ main issue with the OPCW ’ s final report was that it ignored the findings of the FFM that went to Douma and was mostly prepared by the FFM “ Core Team ” that only went to Turkey .
According to the OPCW , in July 2018 , Henderson began contacting third parties about conducting an engineering study of the two cylinders without proper authorization .
The basic idea of the OPCW ’ s new report with regards to Henderson is that he took it upon himself to prepare the engineering assessment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ document .
These allegations against Henderson are consistent with a leaked memorandum released by WikiLeaks in December 2019 .
In the leaked memo dated March 14th 2019 , Henderson explains to OPCW Director-General Fernando Arias that upon his return from the FFM deployment to Douma , Henderson was assigned “ the task of analysis and assessment of the ballistics of the two cylinders.
” Henderson said he undertook the task with the understanding that he was most qualified because of his expertise in metallurgy , chemical engineering , and artillery .
Henderson goes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks I found that I was being excluded from the work , for reasons not made clear.
” Henderson explains in the memo that he reported his exclusion to senior OPCW management and says , “ I made clear that I would complete the work and submit my report to the FFM.
” The allegations against Henderson are also consistent with Henderson ’ s recent comments to the UN .
Henderson said in January , “ The main concern relates to the announcement in July 2018 of a new concept , the so-called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resulted in the dismissal of all of the inspectors who had been on the team deployed to locations in Douma and had been following up with their findings and analysis.
” It is not clear if Henderson was ever officially assigned to the task of analyzing the cylinders .
The OPCW report on the leaks says , “ In late 2018 , the FFM consulted three independent experts in mechanical engineering , ballistics , and metallurgy , who utilized specialized computer modeling techniques .
The FFM continued to collect and analyze facts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ February 2019.
” The idea is that Henderson was not involved in further research that these three independent experts conducted , so his report did not use all the evidence .
But this begs the questions , why did the OPCW use outside experts that never went to Douma instead of using their own that was deployed there ?
Henderson denies being the source of the leak to the Working Group , but told OPCW management that he was happy his engineering assessment came out .
The OPCW report says , “ There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Inspector A disseminated his assessment to the ( Working Group ) website.
” The OPCW is still accusing Henderson of giving confidential information to people who did not have a need to know such information .
The report says Henderson enlisted the help of professors from an unnamed university and shared confidential information with them , although Henderson says he only gave them open-source information .
In October 2019 , the Courage Foundation hosted a panel in Brussels that heard testimony from an OPCW whistleblower .
Among the members of the panel was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bustani , who was ousted from his position in 2002 by the Bush Administration for the sin of negotiating with the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein .
After hearing testimony from the whistleblower , Bustani said , “ The convincing evidence of irregular behavior in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirms doubts and suspicions I already had .
I could make no sense of what I was reading in the international press .
Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at best .
The picture is certainly clearer now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ became known as “ Alex ” after Jonathan Steele used that pseudonym for him in a story published by Counterpunch in November 2019 .
Alex said he was a member of the Douma FFM and accused the OPCW of suppressing evidence found by the team .
Alex ’ s comments corroborated the conclusion reached in Henderson ’ s leaked engineering assessment .
Steele wrote , “ Assessing the damage to the cylinder casings and to the roofs , the inspectors considered the hypothesis that the cylinders had been dropped from Syrian government helicopters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but one member of the team concurred with Henderson in concluding that there was a higher probability that the cylinders had been placed manually.
” In the OPCW ’ s new report on the leaks , they refer to Alex as “ Inspector B.
” The report says , “ Inspector B first worked for the OPCW from July 1998 to December 2011 , eventually being promoted to Team Leader .
He was rehired at a lower level in September 2015 and worked at the OPCW until August 2018.
” This puts Alex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 15 years , which is even longer than Henderson ’ s .
The OPCW claims Alex was a member of the FFM , but stayed at the OPCW command post in Damascus .
The report reads , “ Having been selected to be a member of the FFM for the first time , Inspector B traveled to the Syrian Arab Republic in April 2018 .
However , he never left the command post in Damascus because he had not completed the training required to deploy to the field.
” It may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sites in Douma with the FFM , but it looks like he was considered a member of the team .
And remember , Henderson ’ s main issue with the OPCW ’ s final report on Douma was that it was written by people who never even went to Syria to investigate , let alone Douma .
Both Steele ’ s story and an email published by WikiLeaks show that Alex took great issue with the way the OPCW altered a draft interim report that was prepared by the Douma FFM .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report drafted by the Douma FFM and the highly altered redacted version for comparison .
The redacted version excluded most of the scientific work and drew a vastly different conclusion .
For example , the original interim report drafted by the FFM says , “ Although the cylinders might have been the sources of the suspected chemical release , there is insufficient evidence to affirm this.
” The redacted version that Alex took issue with in his email says , “ The team has sufficient evidence at this time to determine that chlorine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was likely released from cylinders.
” This conclusive language was removed from the final interim report that was eventually published on July 6th 2018 , but most of the Douma FFM ’ s work remained excluded .
A line in the interim report that was Alex ’ s main concern says , “ Various chlorinated organic chemicals were found.
” According to Alex , chlorinated organic chemicals ( COCs ) are found naturally in any environment .
Samples needed to be taken at the locations where the cylinders were found , other parts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the street to properly analyze the COCs .
Alex told Steele , “ if the finding of these chemicals at the alleged site is to be used as an indicator that chlorine gas was present in the atmosphere , they should at least be shown to be present at levels significantly higher than what is present in the environment already.
” According to Steele ’ s article , the results of the samples were not shared with most of the Douma FFM .
But Alex said one inspector did get to see the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than he would expect to see in environmental samples .
Now back to the OPCW ’ s report on the leaks .
The report reads , “ Inspector B ( Alex ) was involved in the drafting of the interim report on the Douma incident .
After having voiced some initial concerns about the draft interim report , he expressly confirmed in writing that he—as well as the other members of the FFM who were involved in drafting the report—had agreed on the interim report that was released.
” The OPCW claims Alex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the version of the interim that was published .
Steele ’ s article says that after the request to publish the full interim report drafted by the FFM was denied , Sami Barrek , the Douma FFM team leader , was put in charge of replacing the doctored version .
Steele writes , “ During the editing four of the Douma inspectors , including Ian Henderson , the engineering expert , had managed to get Barrek to agree that the low levels of COCs should be mentioned .
On the day before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they found that the levels were again being omitted.
” WikiLeaks published a series of emails in December 2019 .
One of those emails , dated July 5th 2018 , was from Barrek to multiple recipients that said , “ After reflecting on the second to last sentence in par 2.5 , I decided to remove the detail we discussed 2 days ago about the concentration.
” Barrek ’ s email seemed to trouble its recipients .
The first response to Barrek reads , “ Isn ’ t there a danger that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is going to allow some readers to arrive at a simplistic conclusion .
Presence of chlorine/chlorides ‘ therefore it was an attack.
’ ” One of the more dramatic emails asks , “ Can we take it then that you are unilaterally deciding to remove this fact from the report against the recommendations of the team ?
” So , it is possible that Alex reluctantly agreed to the version of the interim report that was published on July 6th 2018 .
Or , the version that the OPCW says Alex agreed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that was agreed upon a few days before , the one that included the COCs levels .
Either way , the media latched onto the line in the interim report that says , “ Various chlorinated organic chemicals were found ” as proof that a chemical attack happened in Douma .
The OPCW ’ s main allegation against Alex in the new report is that he left the organization in August 2018 , but still continued to pester OPCW employees about the Douma investigation and disclosed confidential information .
The report reads , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alex ’ s ) separation from the Organization and his agreement with the interim report , he continued to approach members of the Secretariat to discuss confidential information regarding the Douma investigation that was classified as Highly Protected at the time it was disclosed .
Some of these staff members did not have a need to know the confidential information that Inspector B disclosed to them.
” The OPCW alludes to the idea that Alex might be the source of Henderson ’ s engineering assessment to the Working Group on Syria , Propaganda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ A month before Inspector A ’ s ( Henderson ’ s ) assessment appeared on the ( Working Group ’ s ) website , Inspector B ( Alex ) referred a staff member to an article critical of the OPCW ’ s final report on Douma that was published on the same website.
” But the report ultimately concludes , “ There is insufficient evidential basis to find that Inspector B ( Alex ) disseminated Inspector A ’ s assessment to the website.
” After summarizing the OPCW ’ s report on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Firstly , Inspectors A and B are not whistleblowers .
They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence .
When their view could not gain traction , they took matters into their own hands and committed a breach of their obligations to the Organization .
“ Their behavior is made even more egregious by the fact that they had manifestly incomplete information on the Douma investigation .
This is due to the fact that they both had no involvement in the last six months of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the analytical work took place .
As could be expected , their conclusions are erroneous , uninformed , and wrong.
” Like the report , Arias ’ statement does nothing to dispute either Alex ’ s or Henderson ’ s claims or the substance of the leaks .
The fact that they were not included in the last six months of the FFM investigation is Henderson ’ s whole point .
With Arias stating that Henderson and Alex are not whistleblowers , it may cost them whatever sort of whistleblower protection they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ OPCW itself .
The report says , “ Inspectors A and B both signed secrecy agreements with the OPCW and were therefore aware of their confidentiality obligations.
” The secrecy agreements apply “ for the duration of employment and remain in effect following separation from service.
” The legal action the two whistleblowers may face shows what a great risk they took .
Both Henderson and Alex are OPCW veterans who could have just moved on to their next assignment , but instead , bravely spoke out .
If what they say is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FFM agree with their conclusions , more leaks will likely come out , and it will be harder for OPCW management to explain away this potentially enormous scandal .
Dave DeCamp is assistant editor at Antiwar.com and a freelance journalist based in Brooklyn NY , focusing on US foreign policy and wars .
He is on Twitter at @ decampdave .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Dave DeCamp
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) released a short report on their investigation into the many leaks that have come out since the release of their final report on a chemical attack that allegedly took place in Douma, Syria on April 7th 2018. The alleged attack was blamed on the Syrian government and resulted in an airstrike against government targets by the US, UK, and France.
The report titled “Report of the Investigation into Possible Breaches of Confidentiality” does not address the substance of the leaks or the two whistleblower’s claims. Instead, it focuses on confidentiality issues and tries to discredit the two former OPCW employees. The OPCW also released a statement by Director-General Fernando Arias on the investigation where he says the two sources “are not whistleblowers. They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence.”
The OPCW released its final report on the alleged Douma chemical attack in March 2019, which concluded a chlorine gas attack likely occurred. Since that report came out, two whistleblowers have come forward, their comments and leaks suggest that the OPCW suppressed the findings of its experts that were on the ground in Douma to fit the narrative that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the alleged attack.
Inspector A – Ian Henderson
Two cylinders found at two separate locations in Douma were said to be the source of the chlorine gas. The idea that these cylinders were dropped from an aircraft is central to the allegation that the Syrian government was responsible, since Jaysh al-Islam, the group that controlled Douma at the time, did not have access to an aircraft.
In May 2019 the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media published an unreleased OPCW engineering assessment on the two cylinders that were found in Douma. This assessment concluded that there is a “higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft.” This conclusion was left out of the OPCW’s final report.
The unreleased engineering assessment was prepared by Ian Henderson, who the OPCW refers to as “Inspector A” in the new report on the leaks. According to the OPCW, Henderson worked with them “from June 1997 to December 2005, eventually being promoted to Team Leader. He was rehired at a lower level in June 2016 and worked at the OPCW until May 2019.” Henderson may have been hired back at a lower level, but an OPCW document from February 2018 describes him as an “OPCW Inspection Team Leader.”
Since Henderson’s assessment was published, the OPCW has denied that he was a member of the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) that deployed to Douma. Earlier leaks and Henderson’s recent statement to the UN shows there are two groups that can be considered the FFM. One group that deployed to Douma and another group that only deployed to Turkey known as the FFM “Core Team.”
The OPCW’s report on the leaks says that Henderson was not a member of the FFM. But the report also confirms that Henderson went to Douma “in support” of the FFM because he was stationed at the organization’s command post in Damascus.
The report says Henderson “accompanied the FFM to certain sites of interest” and “assisted in taking environmental samples at a hospital and in taking measurements at one location. He also assisted in processing the cylinders. He was later assigned to conduct an inventory of the Highly Protected information collected on the cylinders and to determine what information was needed to carry out further studies.”
There may be some controversy over whether or not Henderson was part of the FFM by the OPCW’s definition of the term, but it is now confirmed that Henderson did deploy to Douma and was involved in FFM activities. Henderson’s main issue with the OPCW’s final report was that it ignored the findings of the FFM that went to Douma and was mostly prepared by the FFM “Core Team” that only went to Turkey.
According to the OPCW, in July 2018, Henderson began contacting third parties about conducting an engineering study of the two cylinders without proper authorization. The basic idea of the OPCW’s new report with regards to Henderson is that he took it upon himself to prepare the engineering assessment, and it is not an official OPCW document.
These allegations against Henderson are consistent with a leaked memorandum released by WikiLeaks in December 2019. In the leaked memo dated March 14th 2019, Henderson explains to OPCW Director-General Fernando Arias that upon his return from the FFM deployment to Douma, Henderson was assigned “the task of analysis and assessment of the ballistics of the two cylinders.” Henderson said he undertook the task with the understanding that he was most qualified because of his expertise in metallurgy, chemical engineering, and artillery.
Henderson goes on to say, “In subsequent weeks I found that I was being excluded from the work, for reasons not made clear.” Henderson explains in the memo that he reported his exclusion to senior OPCW management and says, “I made clear that I would complete the work and submit my report to the FFM.”
The allegations against Henderson are also consistent with Henderson’s recent comments to the UN. Henderson said in January, “The main concern relates to the announcement in July 2018 of a new concept, the so-called FFM ‘Core Team’, which resulted in the dismissal of all of the inspectors who had been on the team deployed to locations in Douma and had been following up with their findings and analysis.”
It is not clear if Henderson was ever officially assigned to the task of analyzing the cylinders. The OPCW report on the leaks says, “In late 2018, the FFM consulted three independent experts in mechanical engineering, ballistics, and metallurgy, who utilized specialized computer modeling techniques. The FFM continued to collect and analyze facts and evidence related to the Douma incident through February 2019.” The idea is that Henderson was not involved in further research that these three independent experts conducted, so his report did not use all the evidence. But this begs the questions, why did the OPCW use outside experts that never went to Douma instead of using their own that was deployed there?
Henderson denies being the source of the leak to the Working Group, but told OPCW management that he was happy his engineering assessment came out. The OPCW report says, “There is insufficient evidential basis to find that Inspector A disseminated his assessment to the (Working Group) website.” The OPCW is still accusing Henderson of giving confidential information to people who did not have a need to know such information. The report says Henderson enlisted the help of professors from an unnamed university and shared confidential information with them, although Henderson says he only gave them open-source information.
Inspector B – “Alex”
In October 2019, the Courage Foundation hosted a panel in Brussels that heard testimony from an OPCW whistleblower. Among the members of the panel was the OPCW’s first Director-General Jose Bustani, who was ousted from his position in 2002 by the Bush Administration for the sin of negotiating with the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein.
After hearing testimony from the whistleblower, Bustani said, “The convincing evidence of irregular behavior in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirms doubts and suspicions I already had. I could make no sense of what I was reading in the international press. Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at best. The picture is certainly clearer now, although very disturbing.”
This whistleblower became known as “Alex” after Jonathan Steele used that pseudonym for him in a story published by Counterpunch in November 2019. Alex said he was a member of the Douma FFM and accused the OPCW of suppressing evidence found by the team. Alex’s comments corroborated the conclusion reached in Henderson’s leaked engineering assessment. Steele wrote, “Assessing the damage to the cylinder casings and to the roofs, the inspectors considered the hypothesis that the cylinders had been dropped from Syrian government helicopters, as the rebels claimed. All but one member of the team concurred with Henderson in concluding that there was a higher probability that the cylinders had been placed manually.”
In the OPCW’s new report on the leaks, they refer to Alex as “Inspector B.” The report says, “Inspector B first worked for the OPCW from July 1998 to December 2011, eventually being promoted to Team Leader. He was rehired at a lower level in September 2015 and worked at the OPCW until August 2018.” This puts Alex’s service to the OPCW at about 15 years, which is even longer than Henderson’s.
The OPCW claims Alex was a member of the FFM, but stayed at the OPCW command post in Damascus. The report reads, “Having been selected to be a member of the FFM for the first time, Inspector B traveled to the Syrian Arab Republic in April 2018. However, he never left the command post in Damascus because he had not completed the training required to deploy to the field.” It may be true that Alex did not visit the sites in Douma with the FFM, but it looks like he was considered a member of the team. And remember, Henderson’s main issue with the OPCW’s final report on Douma was that it was written by people who never even went to Syria to investigate, let alone Douma.
Both Steele’s story and an email published by WikiLeaks show that Alex took great issue with the way the OPCW altered a draft interim report that was prepared by the Douma FFM. In December 2019, WikiLeaks published the interim report drafted by the Douma FFM and the highly altered redacted version for comparison. The redacted version excluded most of the scientific work and drew a vastly different conclusion.
For example, the original interim report drafted by the FFM says, “Although the cylinders might have been the sources of the suspected chemical release, there is insufficient evidence to affirm this.” The redacted version that Alex took issue with in his email says, “The team has sufficient evidence at this time to determine that chlorine, or another reactive chlorine-containing chemical, was likely released from cylinders.” This conclusive language was removed from the final interim report that was eventually published on July 6th 2018, but most of the Douma FFM’s work remained excluded.
A line in the interim report that was Alex’s main concern says, “Various chlorinated organic chemicals were found.” According to Alex, chlorinated organic chemicals (COCs) are found naturally in any environment. Samples needed to be taken at the locations where the cylinders were found, other parts of the buildings, and out in the street to properly analyze the COCs.
Alex told Steele, “if the finding of these chemicals at the alleged site is to be used as an indicator that chlorine gas was present in the atmosphere, they should at least be shown to be present at levels significantly higher than what is present in the environment already.”
According to Steele’s article, the results of the samples were not shared with most of the Douma FFM. But Alex said one inspector did get to see the results and found the COCs were lower than he would expect to see in environmental samples.
Now back to the OPCW’s report on the leaks. The report reads, “Inspector B (Alex) was involved in the drafting of the interim report on the Douma incident. After having voiced some initial concerns about the draft interim report, he expressly confirmed in writing that he—as well as the other members of the FFM who were involved in drafting the report—had agreed on the interim report that was released.”
The OPCW claims Alex and other members of the FFM agreed on the version of the interim that was published. Steele’s article says that after the request to publish the full interim report drafted by the FFM was denied, Sami Barrek, the Douma FFM team leader, was put in charge of replacing the doctored version.
Steele writes, “During the editing four of the Douma inspectors, including Ian Henderson, the engineering expert, had managed to get Barrek to agree that the low levels of COCs should be mentioned. On the day before the new publication date, July 6, they found that the levels were again being omitted.”
WikiLeaks published a series of emails in December 2019. One of those emails, dated July 5th 2018, was from Barrek to multiple recipients that said, “After reflecting on the second to last sentence in par 2.5, I decided to remove the detail we discussed 2 days ago about the concentration.”
Barrek’s email seemed to trouble its recipients. The first response to Barrek reads, “Isn’t there a danger that leaving out the reference to concentration, is going to allow some readers to arrive at a simplistic conclusion. Presence of chlorine/chlorides ‘therefore it was an attack.’” One of the more dramatic emails asks, “Can we take it then that you are unilaterally deciding to remove this fact from the report against the recommendations of the team?”
So, it is possible that Alex reluctantly agreed to the version of the interim report that was published on July 6th 2018. Or, the version that the OPCW says Alex agreed to in writing could have been the version that was agreed upon a few days before, the one that included the COCs levels. Either way, the media latched onto the line in the interim report that says, “Various chlorinated organic chemicals were found” as proof that a chemical attack happened in Douma.
The OPCW’s main allegation against Alex in the new report is that he left the organization in August 2018, but still continued to pester OPCW employees about the Douma investigation and disclosed confidential information. The report reads, “Despite Inspector B’s (Alex’s) separation from the Organization and his agreement with the interim report, he continued to approach members of the Secretariat to discuss confidential information regarding the Douma investigation that was classified as Highly Protected at the time it was disclosed. Some of these staff members did not have a need to know the confidential information that Inspector B disclosed to them.”
The OPCW alludes to the idea that Alex might be the source of Henderson’s engineering assessment to the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media. The report says, “A month before Inspector A’s (Henderson’s) assessment appeared on the (Working Group’s) website, Inspector B (Alex) referred a staff member to an article critical of the OPCW’s final report on Douma that was published on the same website.” But the report ultimately concludes, “There is insufficient evidential basis to find that Inspector B (Alex) disseminated Inspector A’s assessment to the website.”
OPCW Director-General’s Statement
After summarizing the OPCW’s report on the leaks, Director-General Arias says, “Firstly, Inspectors A and B are not whistleblowers. They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence. When their view could not gain traction, they took matters into their own hands and committed a breach of their obligations to the Organization.
“Their behavior is made even more egregious by the fact that they had manifestly incomplete information on the Douma investigation. This is due to the fact that they both had no involvement in the last six months of the FFM investigation, when most of the analytical work took place. As could be expected, their conclusions are erroneous, uninformed, and wrong.”
Like the report, Arias’ statement does nothing to dispute either Alex’s or Henderson’s claims or the substance of the leaks. The fact that they were not included in the last six months of the FFM investigation is Henderson’s whole point.
With Arias stating that Henderson and Alex are not whistleblowers, it may cost them whatever sort of whistleblower protection they would have under international law or within the OPCW itself. The report says, “Inspectors A and B both signed secrecy agreements with the OPCW and were therefore aware of their confidentiality obligations.” The secrecy agreements apply “for the duration of employment and remain in effect following separation from service.”
The legal action the two whistleblowers may face shows what a great risk they took. Both Henderson and Alex are OPCW veterans who could have just moved on to their next assignment, but instead, bravely spoke out. If what they say is true and most members of the Douma FFM agree with their conclusions, more leaks will likely come out, and it will be harder for OPCW management to explain away this potentially enormous scandal.
Article source: Antiwar.com
Dave DeCamp is assistant editor at Antiwar.com and a freelance journalist based in Brooklyn NY, focusing on US foreign policy and wars. He is on Twitter at @decampdave.
Image: Anthony Freda Art
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-10--DECAY IS OVER: Silver Chart Revealing – BREAKOUT ALERT!

We Bring You This Critical Alert , Contributed By WealthResearchGroup.com and Their Founder , Lior Gantz , Who Our Staff Looks At For Accurate Economic Forecasting .
Silver has been the worst-performing precious metal for years .
In fact , since 1971 ’ s Nixon Gold Shock , gold has performed much better as a savings vehicle .
The fact that governments , central banks , and large funds only have gold in their portfolios has allowed silver to stay cheap and become integral in industrial uses .
Today , silver is literally used in thousands of applications ; the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It has far less usage as money than ever before .
Ever since it was first mined and dug from the ground , civilizations have enjoyed its natural properties and relatively lower value than gold in order to conduct everyday transactions that gold was too expensive to be used with .
Since both gold and silver are forms of payment in the 21st century and are much more used as alternatives to cash , silver ’ s advantage as “ poor man ’ s gold ” has diminished GREATLY .
All of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rallying from $ 9/ounce in 2009 to $ 49/ounce in 2011 .
In other words , when silver mania occurs , the RETURNS are pretty outrageous .
Silver is much more volatile than gold , which means that as a TRADER , its upside is much greater .
Therefore , I ’ ve devised what I refer to as the BEST OF BOTH WORLDS : Optimal Precious Metals Strategy , which is my overall policy on how to become a successful investor in this sector .
My first rule is that I want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ savings ASSET .
An ounce of gold will always be just that , as Buffett rightly says , but a $ 100 bill will also always be that : both are non-performing cash variations .
The big difference is that gold is a commodity , while the dollar is an American invention that is FLAWED .
Had Warren Buffett routinely converted half of Berkshire Hathaway ’ s cash into gold eagles , he would , in all likelihood , personally be worth over $ 500 billion .
Hating on gold has cost Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in my estimation .
Here ’ s where my radical approach differs from many others .
Owning physical gold makes it so that owning silver doesn ’ t add much value .
Therefore , I own 90 % physical gold and only 10 % in physical silver .
That strategy has resulted in MASSIVE outperformance over traditional diversified portfolios .
Secondly , my next rule is that I convert discretionary income into physical gold until my total value covers my annual lifestyle requirements TWICE OVER .
Said differently , my mission was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cover 24 months of expenses for my family .
If you reach that milestone , which would mean that you should own north of $ 72,000 in physical gold ( $ 3,000 * 24 ) , then your next milestone should be to MAKE SURE that your cash-flowing assets outweigh this position by 9:1 .
Put another way , for every $ 1 held in gold , $ 9 should be invested in the S & P 500/dividend blue-chip stocks/rental real estate/REITs/private lending segments .
Rarely has anyone ever outperformed the compounded growth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gold at all if stocks BEAT it so handily , Buffett always argues , and the answer is clear : unlike Berkshire Hathaway ’ s stock , which has fallen by 50 % on more than 10 OCCASIONS in Buffett ’ s lifetime , most people must have the OPTION to take profits when they need the money most .
If you were a retiree in 2008 , an event like that , where the index crashes by 47 % , would postpone your retirement by 4-5 years if you were lucky and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gold is inversely-correlated with most asset classes , which makes it ideal for retirees .
With 2008 underway , one that held physical gold could have sold some of it to fund their lifestyle and not stress over the crash .
There ’ s much more to this strategy of capitalizing on the BEST OF BOTH WORLDS ( gold and silver ) – STAY TUNED !

We Bring You This Critical Alert, Contributed By WealthResearchGroup.com and Their Founder, Lior Gantz, Who Our Staff Looks At For Accurate Economic Forecasting.
Silver has been the worst-performing precious metal for years. In fact, since 1971’s Nixon Gold Shock, gold has performed much better as a savings vehicle.
The fact that governments, central banks, and large funds only have gold in their portfolios has allowed silver to stay cheap and become integral in industrial uses.
Today, silver is literally used in thousands of applications; the list is too large to even mention. It has far less usage as money than ever before. Ever since it was first mined and dug from the ground, civilizations have enjoyed its natural properties and relatively lower value than gold in order to conduct everyday transactions that gold was too expensive to be used with.
Since both gold and silver are forms of payment in the 21st century and are much more used as alternatives to cash, silver’s advantage as “poor man’s gold” has diminished GREATLY.
All of this hasn’t stopped it from rallying from $9/ounce in 2009 to $49/ounce in 2011. In other words, when silver mania occurs, the RETURNS are pretty outrageous.
Silver is much more volatile than gold, which means that as a TRADER, its upside is much greater.
Therefore, I’ve devised what I refer to as the BEST OF BOTH WORLDS: Optimal Precious Metals Strategy, which is my overall policy on how to become a successful investor in this sector.
My first rule is that I want to own physical gold as a superior savings ASSET.
An ounce of gold will always be just that, as Buffett rightly says, but a $100 bill will also always be that: both are non-performing cash variations. The big difference is that gold is a commodity, while the dollar is an American invention that is FLAWED.
Had Warren Buffett routinely converted half of Berkshire Hathaway’s cash into gold eagles, he would, in all likelihood, personally be worth over $500 billion.
Hating on gold has cost Warren and his shareholders over $1 trillion, in my estimation.
Here’s where my radical approach differs from many others. Owning physical gold makes it so that owning silver doesn’t add much value. Therefore, I own 90% physical gold and only 10% in physical silver.
That strategy has resulted in MASSIVE outperformance over traditional diversified portfolios.
Secondly, my next rule is that I convert discretionary income into physical gold until my total value covers my annual lifestyle requirements TWICE OVER. Said differently, my mission was completed when I owned enough ounces to cover 24 months of expenses for my family.
If you reach that milestone, which would mean that you should own north of $72,000 in physical gold ($3,000 * 24), then your next milestone should be to MAKE SURE that your cash-flowing assets outweigh this position by 9:1.
Put another way, for every $1 held in gold, $9 should be invested in the S&P 500/dividend blue-chip stocks/rental real estate/REITs/private lending segments.
Rarely has anyone ever outperformed the compounded growth rate of cash flow!
Take a look:
Why own gold at all if stocks BEAT it so handily, Buffett always argues, and the answer is clear: unlike Berkshire Hathaway’s stock, which has fallen by 50% on more than 10 OCCASIONS in Buffett’s lifetime, most people must have the OPTION to take profits when they need the money most.
If you were a retiree in 2008, an event like that, where the index crashes by 47%, would postpone your retirement by 4-5 years if you were lucky and had the SENSE to hold tight.
Gold is inversely-correlated with most asset classes, which makes it ideal for retirees.
With 2008 underway, one that held physical gold could have sold some of it to fund their lifestyle and not stress over the crash.
There’s much more to this strategy of capitalizing on the BEST OF BOTH WORLDS (gold and silver) – STAY TUNED!


activistpost--2020-02-10--I Watch The Super Bowl Commercials (2020) – Propaganda Watch

So I guess there was some kind of American football game recently that people watched ?
I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ only interested in CFL myself .
But boy do people get excited about the commercials @ @ @ @ @ last , Broc West subjects me to Super Bowl commercial propaganda for your schadenfreude and @ @ @ @ @ # 3 – The Amazing Things 5G Won ’ t Do – Super Bowl 2020 @ @ @ @ @ | Verizon Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
@ @ @ @ @ for as little as $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on SoMee @ @ @ @ @ Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming @ @ @ @ @ of Counter Markets today .

By corbettreport
So I guess there was some kind of American football game recently that people watched? I don’t know, I’m only interested in CFL myself. But boy do people get excited about the commercials!
This year, like last, Broc West subjects me to Super Bowl commercial propaganda for your schadenfreude and edification. Enjoy?
SHOW NOTES:
I Watch The Super Bowl Commercials (2019)
COMMERCIAL #1 – Whassup Again | Budweiser Canada 2020 Super Bowl Commercial
COMMERCIAL #2 – Loretta | Google Super Bowl Commercial 2020
COMMERCIAL #3 – The Amazing Things 5G Won’t Do – Super Bowl 2020 Commercial | 5G Built Right | Verizon

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-10--Taxpayers Shell Out $1M After Officers Force Mom to Give Birth into a Toilet, Letting Baby Die

Columbia , SC — Taxpayers in South Carolina will not only be left with the optics of having an inmate give birth in her jail cell and whose baby died in the toilet , but they ’ re also on the hook for the $ 1.15 million dollar lawsuit the woman just won against the state .
The State of South Carolina and two healthcare companies responsible for the former inmate ’ s healthcare while in prison will be paying up for what seems to be the grossest of negligence : allowing a baby to die in jail .
Sinetra @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state Department of Corrections and $ 200,000 from both Medustrial and MedFirst , healthcare providers for South Carolina ’ s prisons .
Johnson reportedly found out she was pregnant for the first time just two days before getting sentenced to two years in prison for a simple parole violation .
At six and a half months , she gave birth to twins while imprisoned in Camille Griffin Graham Correctional Institution located in South Carolina ’ s capital of Columbia .
Johnson says both she and the prison system knew she was pregnant with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when Johnson started having contractions she wasn ’ t quite due .
In fact the babies were more than a month early .
After having alerted the guards to her belief she was in labor , she gave birth to her first baby in a prison toilet after being ignored .
The second baby was born in the appropriate medical unit , but an autopsy confirmed the first baby could have been saved had Johnson been given adequate care and attention .
The State newspaper interviewed Johnson who says she did not get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ twins .
She said no ultrasound nor vaginal medical exam was ever conducted on her .
So when the twins were being born Johnson says she knew something wasn ’ t right .
Born at 11:15 pm , Karmin was delivered into a prison toilet .
She was still inside her amniotic sack filled with fluid but was suffocating because she was not breathing oxygen .
The baby should have been removed from the sack and allowed to breathe air but guards , when they eventually arrived , ordered the other inmates not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it inside the toilet .
Karmin stayed inside the toilet until midnight and eventually passed away .
Johnson ’ s son was successfully born inside the medical unit but nothing could be done for his female twin , Karmin , who died most likely because prison guards would not allow her any medical attention .
Johnson recalled how hard it was for her following her release from prison .
Since her release from prison , the eloquent former prison inmate commented on the entire ordeal saying : Johnson now lives with Kamryn who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must share the settlement with the deceased baby ’ s father .
That ’ s right America , average pregnant citizens , not career criminals , end up in prison and are forced to give birth in the same facilities housing the nation ’ s criminal elements of society , who often display more compassion than the stoic prison guards who supposedly are paid to protect and serve them .
No one was ever charged with criminal negligence in the death of Johnson ’ s baby girl .
Jack Burns is an educator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advocate of natural medicine .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on SoMee , Flote , Minds , Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Jack Burns
Columbia, SC — Taxpayers in South Carolina will not only be left with the optics of having an inmate give birth in her jail cell and whose baby died in the toilet, but they’re also on the hook for the $1.15 million dollar lawsuit the woman just won against the state. The State of South Carolina and two healthcare companies responsible for the former inmate’s healthcare while in prison will be paying up for what seems to be the grossest of negligence: allowing a baby to die in jail.
Sinetra Johnson will get $750,000 from the state Department of Corrections and $200,000 from both Medustrial and MedFirst, healthcare providers for South Carolina’s prisons. Johnson reportedly found out she was pregnant for the first time just two days before getting sentenced to two years in prison for a simple parole violation.
At six and a half months, she gave birth to twins while imprisoned in Camille Griffin Graham Correctional Institution located in South Carolina’s capital of Columbia.
Johnson says both she and the prison system knew she was pregnant with more than one child. However, when Johnson started having contractions she wasn’t quite due. In fact the babies were more than a month early.
After having alerted the guards to her belief she was in labor, she gave birth to her first baby in a prison toilet after being ignored. The second baby was born in the appropriate medical unit, but an autopsy confirmed the first baby could have been saved had Johnson been given adequate care and attention.
The State newspaper interviewed Johnson who says she did not get adequate medical care for herself or her twins. She said no ultrasound nor vaginal medical exam was ever conducted on her. So when the twins were being born Johnson says she knew something wasn’t right.
I knew something was wrong…It just wasn’t the normal feeling that I had during the 25 weeks prior.
Born at 11:15 pm, Karmin was delivered into a prison toilet. She was still inside her amniotic sack filled with fluid but was suffocating because she was not breathing oxygen. The baby should have been removed from the sack and allowed to breathe air but guards, when they eventually arrived, ordered the other inmates not to touch the baby and to leave it inside the toilet.
Karmin stayed inside the toilet until midnight and eventually passed away. Johnson’s son was successfully born inside the medical unit but nothing could be done for his female twin, Karmin, who died most likely because prison guards would not allow her any medical attention. Johnson recalled how hard it was for her following her release from prison.
In the beginning, it was really hard…I couldn’t go into clothing stores. I would avoid the little girl’s section all together. I would see people with twins and I would just … break down. I became angry inside. Angry at myself. Angry at the situation. At the way things happened.
Since her release from prison, the eloquent former prison inmate commented on the entire ordeal saying:
(This) shouldn’t have to happen. Inmate or not, we’re still people. The same medical treatment you would get on the outside, ultimately, that’s what taxpayers are paying for.
Johnson now lives with Kamryn who is nearly 8 years old. She must share the settlement with the deceased baby’s father.
That’s right America, average pregnant citizens, not career criminals, end up in prison and are forced to give birth in the same facilities housing the nation’s criminal elements of society, who often display more compassion than the stoic prison guards who supposedly are paid to protect and serve them. No one was ever charged with criminal negligence in the death of Johnson’s baby girl.
Article source: The Free Thought Project
Jack Burns is an educator, journalist, investigative reporter, and advocate of natural medicine.
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-11--Coronavirus Outbreak Alert: Food Prices SKYROCKET In China

Food prices have skyrocketed in China amidst the ongoing coronavirus outbreak plaguing the country .
Food prices are soaring more than 20 % according to government statistics released Monday .
China ’ s consumer price index ( CPI ) spiked 5.4 % compared to this time last year , the country ’ s state-run media organization Xinhua reported , citing the National Bureau of Statistics data released Monday .
The CPI is the main barometer for inflation levels .
All of this could easily spiral out of control especially if this outbreak continues its rapid spread and begins to impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to food with large enough people making a run on grocery stores ( like the United States . )
It could get really ugly really quickly .
Food prices climbed more than 20 % compared to this time last year — up more than 17 % from December , according to Xinhua .
Pork prices rose a staggering 116 % compared to last year , and vegetable prices more than 17 % .
Many attribute the soaring pork costs also in part to the outbreak of an African swine fever in China that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A Carrefour supermarket in Shanghai was fined last week by city regulators for price-gouging after its lettuce surged to nearly eight times its regular prices amid the outbreak , the Wall Street Journal reported .
–ABC News It probably wasn ’ t price-gouging either , but supply and demand that ’ s at play here .
Food supply is low due to decreased production during the outbreak , meaning scarcity makes it more valuable and therefore more expensive .
The rising food costs in China come as its National Health Commission said Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is more than 40,000 , and the number of deaths from the disease in mainland China is more than 900 .
As productivity continues to diminish in the face of the raging outbreak , the price will continue to go up .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on SoMee , Flote , Minds , Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Counter Markets today .

By Mac Slavo
Food prices have skyrocketed in China amidst the ongoing coronavirus outbreak plaguing the country. Food prices are soaring more than 20% according to government statistics released Monday.
China’s consumer price index (CPI) spiked 5.4% compared to this time last year, the country’s state-run media organization Xinhua reported, citing the National Bureau of Statistics data released Monday. The CPI is the main barometer for inflation levels.
All of this could easily spiral out of control especially if this outbreak continues its rapid spread and begins to impact other countries. Imagine a country addicted to food with large enough people making a run on grocery stores (like the United States.) It could get really ugly really quickly.
Food prices climbed more than 20% compared to this time last year — up more than 17% from December, according to Xinhua. Pork prices rose a staggering 116% compared to last year, and vegetable prices more than 17%. Many attribute the soaring pork costs also in part to the outbreak of an African swine fever in China that disrupted the pork industry in 2019. A Carrefour supermarket in Shanghai was fined last week by city regulators for price-gouging after its lettuce surged to nearly eight times its regular prices amid the outbreak, the Wall Street Journal reported. –ABC News
It probably wasn’t price-gouging either, but supply and demand that’s at play here. Food supply is low due to decreased production during the outbreak, meaning scarcity makes it more valuable and therefore more expensive.
The rising food costs in China come as its National Health Commission said Monday that the number of confirmed coronavirus cases is more than 40,000, and the number of deaths from the disease in mainland China is more than 900. As productivity continues to diminish in the face of the raging outbreak, the price will continue to go up.
Article source: SHTFPlan.com
Image: Pixabay
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-10--A Stunning Admission on the So-called Population Crisis

It ’ s kind of insane to be living through this time where the admissions of what used to be considered “ crazy conspiracy theories ” are just rolling out in the headlines like it ’ s nothing .
When we were talking about this a decade ago , tin foil hat jokes were not only made but expected .
Now , mainstream “ authoritative ” publications like The New York Times ( albeit the “ international edition ” with a label of “ opinion ” ) are printing stories on the front page not only acknowledging a “ global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control evils like China ’ s horrific one-child policy weren ’ t just imposed by the state but were dreamed up , funded , and promoted by Western technocrats… But to what end ?
Aaron & Melissa Dykes are the founders of TruthstreamMedia.com , Subscribe to them on BitChute , like on Facebook , follow on Twitter , support on Patreon .
Watch their mini-documentary Obsolete here and their full-length documentary THE MINDS OF MEN here .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Become an Activist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on SoMee , Flote , Minds , Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Truthstream Media
It’s kind of insane to be living through this time where the admissions of what used to be considered “crazy conspiracy theories” are just rolling out in the headlines like it’s nothing.
When we were talking about this a decade ago, tin foil hat jokes were not only made but expected. Now, mainstream “authoritative” publications like The New York Times (albeit the “international edition” with a label of “opinion”) are printing stories on the front page not only acknowledging a “global fertility crisis” but actually admitting population control evils like China’s horrific one-child policy weren’t just imposed by the state but were dreamed up, funded, and promoted by Western technocrats…
But to what end?

Aaron & Melissa Dykes are the founders of TruthstreamMedia.com, Subscribe to them on BitChute, like on Facebook, follow on Twitter, support on Patreon.
Watch their mini-documentary Obsolete here and their full-length documentary THE MINDS OF MEN here.
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-10--Journalist Abby Martin Sues State of Georgia Over Law Requiring Pledge of Allegiance to Israel

After refusing to sign a pledge of allegiance to the state of Israel , the state of Georgia shut down a media literacy conference featuring journalist and filmmaker Abby Martin at Georgia Southern University .
Martin had recently released a documentary critical of the Israeli government called Gaza Fights for Freedom .
Now she is suing the state , claiming the decision is a violation of the First Amendment .
Along with the Council on American-Islamic Relations ( CAIR ) and the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund ( PCJF ) , today she filed a federal free speech lawsuit against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was dismayed by the university ’ s decision : “ This censorship of my talk based on forced compliance to anti-BDS laws in Georgia is just one level of a nationwide campaign to protect Israel from grassroots pressure .
We must stand firmly opposed to these efforts and not cower in fear to these blatant violations of free speech , ” she said .
Twenty-eight states have already mandated loyalty pledges to Israel as a means to outlaw dissent .
But in December , President Trump passed legislation effectively criminalizing the Boycott Divestments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aims to put pressure on the Jewish state through economic action , along the lines of the anti-Apartheid struggle in South Africa .
The law mandates that any public institution would be subject to losing all funding if the government deems that they are not doing enough to stamp out anti-Semitism , which , it explicitly states , includes any criticism of the Israeli government .
In December , MintPress reported that the British government under Boris Johnson is planning to introduce similar legislation .
“ The hyperbolic notion that conservatives are the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made blatant censorship campaigns against people for criticism of Israel , or other progressive protests , go completely ignored , ” Martin wrote .
The PCJF likened the BDS movement to the boycotts of the civil rights movement in the mid-twentieth century , its Executive Director Mara Verheyden-Hilliard described the laws as “ extraordinary , outrageous , illegal and unconstitutional.
” In 1956 Martin Luther King and his movement were criminalized for carrying out boycotts , as Southern states passed legislation to penalize their behavior , only for it to be later struck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what Martin and the alliance of non-governmental organizations is hoping will happen here too .
Why should I have to “ contractually pledge loyalty to a foreign country ?
” she asked at her press conference today .
In 2016 , Georgia Governor Nathan Deal signed a law requiring any person or organization entering into a contract with the state worth at least $ 1,000 sign an oath promising that they would not oppose the Israeli government in any fashion .
CAIR has reason to believe they could overturn the law its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , called “ blatantly and hilariously unconstitutional.
” In 2018 , Bahia Amawi , a Houston-based children ’ s speech pathologist who worked with autistic , speech-impaired and other developmentally disabled children , lost her job after she refused to sign a similar document .
Amawi had been at her job for nine years previously without a problem .
CAIR took up Amawi ’ s case and managed to overturn every Texas boycott law on the grounds of their unconstitutionality and she is now free to return to work .
They appear confident @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Martin began as a citizen journalist covering the Occupy movement in her native California .
From 2012 to 2015 she hosted the show Breaking the Set on RT .
In the famous D.N.I .
report into alleged Russian interference into the 2016 election , the U.S. government accused her of “ promoting radical discontent ” in America , something she appears to wear as a badge of honor .
Her current documentary series , Empire Files , is broadcast on TeleSUR English .
However , due to sanctions against the Venezuelan government , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She is also the host of Media Roots Radio .
Feature photo | Journalist Abby Martin announces a federal free speech lawsuit to overturn Georgia ’ s unconstitutional Israel boycott in partnership with CAIR and the Partnership for Justice Fund .
Photo | Facebook Screenshot Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on SoMee , Flote , Minds , Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Alan Macleod
After refusing to sign a pledge of allegiance to the state of Israel, the state of Georgia shut down a media literacy conference featuring journalist and filmmaker Abby Martin at Georgia Southern University. Martin had recently released a documentary critical of the Israeli government called Gaza Fights for Freedom. Now she is suing the state, claiming the decision is a violation of the First Amendment. Along with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF), today she filed a federal free speech lawsuit against the university system of Georgia.
Martin was dismayed by the university’s decision: “This censorship of my talk based on forced compliance to anti-BDS laws in Georgia is just one level of a nationwide campaign to protect Israel from grassroots pressure. We must stand firmly opposed to these efforts and not cower in fear to these blatant violations of free speech,” she said.
Twenty-eight states have already mandated loyalty pledges to Israel as a means to outlaw dissent. But in December, President Trump passed legislation effectively criminalizing the Boycott Divestments and Sanctions (BDS) movement that aims to put pressure on the Jewish state through economic action, along the lines of the anti-Apartheid struggle in South Africa. The law mandates that any public institution would be subject to losing all funding if the government deems that they are not doing enough to stamp out anti-Semitism, which, it explicitly states, includes any criticism of the Israeli government. In December, MintPress reported that the British government under Boris Johnson is planning to introduce similar legislation.
“The hyperbolic notion that conservatives are the ones being persecuted on college campuses has made blatant censorship campaigns against people for criticism of Israel, or other progressive protests, go completely ignored,” Martin wrote.
CAIR’s Legal Defense Fund Senior Litigation Attorney Gadeir Abbas said,
There is no place where free speech is more important than on campus. And this attempt to suppress Abby’s views – denying students, academics, and others from hearing her lecture – is as brazen as it is illegal. In adopting this anti-BDS law, Georgia has prioritized the policy preferences of a foreign country over the free speech rights of Americans, like Abby, who speak on this state’s college campuses.”
The PCJF likened the BDS movement to the boycotts of the civil rights movement in the mid-twentieth century, its Executive Director Mara Verheyden-Hilliard described the laws as “extraordinary, outrageous, illegal and unconstitutional.” In 1956 Martin Luther King and his movement were criminalized for carrying out boycotts, as Southern states passed legislation to penalize their behavior, only for it to be later struck down by the Supreme Court. This is what Martin and the alliance of non-governmental organizations is hoping will happen here too. Why should I have to “contractually pledge loyalty to a foreign country?” she asked at her press conference today.
In 2016, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal signed a law requiring any person or organization entering into a contract with the state worth at least $1,000 sign an oath promising that they would not oppose the Israeli government in any fashion. CAIR has reason to believe they could overturn the law its Georgia Executive Director, Edward Ahmed Mitchell, called “blatantly and hilariously unconstitutional.”
In 2018, Bahia Amawi, a Houston-based children’s speech pathologist who worked with autistic, speech-impaired and other developmentally disabled children, lost her job after she refused to sign a similar document. Amawi had been at her job for nine years previously without a problem. CAIR took up Amawi’s case and managed to overturn every Texas boycott law on the grounds of their unconstitutionality and she is now free to return to work. They appear confident of a similar victory in Georgia.
Martin began as a citizen journalist covering the Occupy movement in her native California. From 2012 to 2015 she hosted the show Breaking the Set on RT. In the famous D.N.I. report into alleged Russian interference into the 2016 election, the U.S. government accused her of “promoting radical discontent” in America, something she appears to wear as a badge of honor. Her current documentary series, Empire Files, is broadcast on TeleSUR English. However, due to sanctions against the Venezuelan government, Gaza Fights for Freedom was crowdfunded. She is also the host of Media Roots Radio.
Article source: MintPress News
Feature photo | Journalist Abby Martin announces a federal free speech lawsuit to overturn Georgia’s unconstitutional Israel boycott in partnership with CAIR and the Partnership for Justice Fund. Photo | Facebook Screenshot
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-10--iPhone 11 Pro Exceeds FCC Radiation Limit. Exposure Linked to Increased Cancer Risk, Other Health Is

iPhone 11 Pro Exceeds FCC Radiation Limit. Exposure Linked to Increased Cancer Risk, Other Health Issues

Last August the Chicago Tribune published a report that 11 smartphone models exceeded federal RF safety levels .
This led to Fegan Scott law firm starting a class action lawsuit .
Two lawsuits have also been filed against the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) because they refuse to provide adequate RF exposure safety guidelines , limits , and testing ( see 1 , 2 ) .
This puts us all at risk for exposure related conditions and illnesses ( see 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) – especially children ( see 1 , 2 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” level of cell phone radiation has still been scientifically determined for children or pregnant women .
Regardless , companies continue to make and market smartphones and other wireless devices to everyone – including children ( see 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ) – even though tech industry insiders tend to NOT give them to their own kids .
Adding insult to injury , telecom companies have been warning their shareholders for many years that they may eventually be held liable for harm from their devices and transmitters ( see 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for reporting more about this : The test , conducted by Penumbra , also highlights problems with the U.S. FCC ’ s wireless safety regulations Adapted from an article by Michael Koziol | Original IEEE Spectrum article here .
A test by Penumbra Brands to measure how much radiofrequency energy an iPhone 11 Pro gives off found that the phone emits more than twice the amount allowable by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission .
The FCC measures exposure to RF energy as the amount of wireless power a person absorbs for each kilogram @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this the specific absorption rate , or SAR .
For a cellphone , the FCC ’ s threshold of safe exposure is 1.6 watts per kilogram .
Penumbra ’ s test found that an iPhone 11 Pro emitted 3.8 W/kg .
Ryan McCaughey , Penumbra ’ s chief technology officer , said the test was a follow up to an investigation conducted by the Chicago Tribune last year .
The Tribune tested several generations of Apple , Samsung , and Motorola phones , and found that many exceeded the FCC ’ s limit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an independent , accredited SAR testing lab for the tests ( The Tribune also used the San Diego-based lab for its investigation ) .
Penumbra was conducting the test , which also included testing an iPhone 7 , to study its Alara phone cases , which the company says are designed to reduce RF exposure in a person .
McCaughey clarified that Penumbra supplied RF Exposure Labs with one iPhone 7 and one iPhone 11 Pro for the tests — phones the company had purchased off the shelf .
He attributed not testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple iPhones .
While the Tribune and Penumbra both used off-the-shelf phones , the FCC largely tested phones supplied by the manufacturers , including Apple .
S4WT Comment : Hmmmm .
.
.
why did Apple do that ?
Consumers buy their phones off the shelf .
Joel Moskowitz , a researcher at UC Berkeley who studies the health effects of wireless radiation , points to one of two possibilities .
According to him , one option could be that there ’ s a systematic problem with RF Exposure Lab ’ s testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when Apple provided phones to the FCC for the follow-up investigation , “ it would be easy to dummy the phone with a software update ” and ensure it didn ’ t put out enough power to exceed the SAR limit .
Apple declined to comment on the record for this story .
There may be uncertainty in which results carry weight , but McCaughey and Moskowitz both agree that the FCC ’ s RF exposure testing is woefully out of date .
McCaughey points out that the limits were set well before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what the FCC deemed safe 25 years ago .
“ The FCC limits are over 20 years old , ” says McCaughey .
“ Some might argue that the limit is antiquated at this point.
” The SAR limit is solely about a phone ’ s ability to heat tissue — essentially , the power is limited to 1.6 W/kg to ensure that no one is burned by using their phone .
S4WT Comment : Hmmmm .
.
.
we wonder why ?
SAR is Specific Absorption Rate ( in Watts ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not the total exposure over time , which is measured by SA or Specific Absorption ( in Watt-seconds ) .
No other toxin is evaluated by the rate of exposure .
Every other toxin considers the total dose of toxin .
Is measuring only the rate of exposure and not the total exposure to a toxin scientifically sound ?
No , it is not .
We are arguing about nonsense .
SAR is irrelevant nonsense .
Q : Why are SAR measurements not applicable to the live brain ?
Because the health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing to do with heat .
So it makes no sense to say , “ I have a really great way of measuring heat ” when the measurement of heat is irrelevant to understanding health hazards .
Any measurement that you make that has no connection with what you ’ re interested in is just a waste of time .
SAR can produce a lot of data and when the calculations of SAR are done they can produce beautiful pictures but the pictures are arbitrary and the measurements are meaningless .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case .
A phone ’ s SAR is determined by placing the phone between 5 and 15 millimeters from a tray of dummy fluid designed to approximate the consistency of the human body .
While the phone broadcasts , a probe on the end of a robotic arm moves across the fluid and pokes it at different points , measure the absorption rate at each location .
S4WT Comment : What ?
No solution of water , sugar and salt can say anything about the effects of pulsed , data-modulated , Radio-frequency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positive or negative ) on live tissue .
Think this through .
Just for testing thermal effects , the test may be inadequate .
“ The dummy fluid is homogenous , unlike the body , ” says Moskowitz .
The dummy fluid also doesn ’ t consider accessories like metal jewelry , which can affect how and where people absorb RF energy .
And by testing only for thermal effects , the FCC isn ’ t considering other potential health effects , like decreasing sperm counts .
More fundamentally , the SAR test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people interact with their phones .
Testing phones from 5 millimeters away from the body may seem close , but for anyone carrying their phone in a pocket , the distance is closer to 2 millimeters .
Because wireless power falls off exponentially with distance ( by the square of the distance ) , what might be a safe amount of RF exposure at 5 millimeters could be much higher at 2 millimeters .
S4WT Comment : What ?
But what if none of these RF-EMR exposure levels are safe ?
What then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phones nearly all the time and limit the Effective Radiated Power ( ERP ) or small Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ( sWTF ) infrastructure to that which provides phone service only ( Limit ERP to no higher than 0.1 Watts ERP , which provides voice calls and five bars on a cell phone up to ½-mile away ) .
McCaughey offers some best practices for anyone looking to decrease their RF exposure : Use wired headphones for calls , and don ’ t carry your phone in a pant pocket .
He also suggests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reception .
“ If you have one bar or something , it ’ s going to turn the power way up , ” he says .
Ultimately , however , what ’ s needed most is for more robust and comprehensive RF exposure testing from the FCC .
But don ’ t hold your breath for that to happen any time soon .
“ The matter of changing the limit is more complicated , ” says McCaughey .
“ It ’ s hard to define what ’ s a safe limit .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limits are.
” S4WT Comment : Display some basic courage and common-sense : limit the Effective Radiated Power ( ERP ) or small Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ( sWTF ) infrastructure to that which provides phone service only ( Limit ERP to no higher than 0.1 Watts ERP , which provides voice calls and five bars on a cell phone up to ½-mile away ) .
Activist Post reports regularly about biological and environmental risks associated with digital , electronic , and wireless technology .
For more information , visit our archives .
Subscribe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and freedom news .
Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $ 1 per month at Patreon .
Follow us on SoMee , Flote , Minds , Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By B.N. Frank
Last August the Chicago Tribune published a report that 11 smartphone models exceeded federal RF safety levels. This led to Fegan Scott law firm starting a class action lawsuit. Two lawsuits have also been filed against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) because they refuse to provide adequate RF exposure safety guidelines, limits, and testing (see 1, 2). This puts us all at risk for exposure related conditions and illnesses (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) – especially children (see 1, 2). In fact, no “safe” level of cell phone radiation has still been scientifically determined for children or pregnant women.
Regardless, companies continue to make and market smartphones and other wireless devices to everyone – including children (see 1, 2, 3, 4) – even though tech industry insiders tend to NOT give them to their own kids.
Adding insult to injury, telecom companies have been warning their shareholders for many years that they may eventually be held liable for harm from their devices and transmitters (see 1, 2).
Thanks to Scientists4WiredTech for reporting more about this:
RF-EMR Exposure Test: iPhone 11 Pro Exceeds FCC Limit
The test, conducted by Penumbra, also highlights problems with the U.S. FCC’s wireless safety regulations
Adapted from an article by Michael Koziol | Original IEEE Spectrum article here.
A test by Penumbra Brands to measure how much radiofrequency energy an iPhone 11 Pro gives off found that the phone emits more than twice the amount allowable by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission.
The FCC measures exposure to RF energy as the amount of wireless power a person absorbs for each kilogram of their body. The agency calls this the specific absorption rate, or SAR. For a cellphone, the FCC’s threshold of safe exposure is 1.6 watts per kilogram. Penumbra’s test found that an iPhone 11 Pro emitted 3.8 W/kg.
Ryan McCaughey, Penumbra’s chief technology officer, said the test was a follow up to an investigation conducted by the Chicago Tribune last year. The Tribune tested several generations of Apple, Samsung, and Motorola phones, and found that many exceeded the FCC’s limit.
Penumbra used RF Exposure Labs, an independent, accredited SAR testing lab for the tests (The Tribune also used the San Diego-based lab for its investigation). Penumbra was conducting the test, which also included testing an iPhone 7, to study its Alara phone cases, which the company says are designed to reduce RF exposure in a person.
McCaughey clarified that Penumbra supplied RF Exposure Labs with one iPhone 7 and one iPhone 11 Pro for the tests — phones the company had purchased off the shelf. He attributed not testing more phones to the cost of purchasing multiple iPhones. While the Tribune and Penumbra both used off-the-shelf phones, the FCC largely tested phones supplied by the manufacturers, including Apple.
S4WT Comment: Hmmmm . . . why did Apple do that? Consumers buy their phones off the shelf.
Joel Moskowitz, a researcher at UC Berkeley who studies the health effects of wireless radiation, points to one of two possibilities. According to him, one option could be that there’s a systematic problem with RF Exposure Lab’s testing methods. Alternatively, he says, when Apple provided phones to the FCC for the follow-up investigation, “it would be easy to dummy the phone with a software update” and ensure it didn’t put out enough power to exceed the SAR limit.
Apple declined to comment on the record for this story.
There may be uncertainty in which results carry weight, but McCaughey and Moskowitz both agree that the FCC’s RF exposure testing is woefully out of date. McCaughey points out that the limits were set well before the invention of smartphones, and reflect what the FCC deemed safe 25 years ago.
“The FCC limits are over 20 years old,” says McCaughey. “Some might argue that the limit is antiquated at this point.”
The SAR limit is solely about a phone’s ability to heat tissue — essentially, the power is limited to 1.6 W/kg to ensure that no one is burned by using their phone.
S4WT Comment: Hmmmm . . . we wonder why? SAR is Specific Absorption Rate (in Watts), which only evaluates the rate of exposure, not the total exposure over time, which is measured by SA or Specific Absorption (in Watt-seconds). No other toxin is evaluated by the rate of exposure. Every other toxin considers the total dose of toxin. Is measuring only the rate of exposure and not the total exposure to a toxin scientifically sound? No, it is not. We are arguing about nonsense. SAR is irrelevant nonsense.
Q: Why are SAR measurements not applicable to the live brain?
Dr. Andrew A. Marino —> https://youtu.be/a2PNFEdmYok?t=96
Because the health hazards associated with mobile phone fields have nothing to do with heat. So it makes no sense to say, “I have a really great way of measuring heat” when the measurement of heat is irrelevant to understanding health hazards. Any measurement that you make that has no connection with what you’re interested in is just a waste of time.
SAR can produce a lot of data and when the calculations of SAR are done they can produce beautiful pictures but the pictures are arbitrary and the measurements are meaningless. It’s quite clear that that’s the case.
A phone’s SAR is determined by placing the phone between 5 and 15 millimeters from a tray of dummy fluid designed to approximate the consistency of the human body. While the phone broadcasts, a probe on the end of a robotic arm moves across the fluid and pokes it at different points, measure the absorption rate at each location.
S4WT Comment: What? No solution of water, sugar and salt can say anything about the effects of pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) (positive or negative) on live tissue. Think this through.
Just for testing thermal effects, the test may be inadequate. “The dummy fluid is homogenous, unlike the body,” says Moskowitz. The dummy fluid also doesn’t consider accessories like metal jewelry, which can affect how and where people absorb RF energy. And by testing only for thermal effects, the FCC isn’t considering other potential health effects, like decreasing sperm counts.
More fundamentally, the SAR test doesn’t accurately replicate how most people interact with their phones. Testing phones from 5 millimeters away from the body may seem close, but for anyone carrying their phone in a pocket, the distance is closer to 2 millimeters. Because wireless power falls off exponentially with distance (by the square of the distance), what might be a safe amount of RF exposure at 5 millimeters could be much higher at 2 millimeters.
S4WT Comment: What? But what if none of these RF-EMR exposure levels are safe? What then? Turn off the antennas on smart phones nearly all the time and limit the Effective Radiated Power (ERP) or small Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTF) infrastructure to that which provides phone service only (Limit ERP to no higher than 0.1 Watts ERP, which provides voice calls and five bars on a cell phone up to ½-mile away).
McCaughey offers some best practices for anyone looking to decrease their RF exposure: Use wired headphones for calls, and don’t carry your phone in a pant pocket. He also suggests to be aware of places with poor reception. “If you have one bar or something, it’s going to turn the power way up,” he says.
Ultimately, however, what’s needed most is for more robust and comprehensive RF exposure testing from the FCC. But don’t hold your breath for that to happen any time soon. “The matter of changing the limit is more complicated,” says McCaughey. “It’s hard to define what’s a safe limit. There’s no consensus on what safe limits are.”
S4WT Comment: Display some basic courage and common-sense: limit the Effective Radiated Power (ERP) or small Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTF) infrastructure to that which provides phone service only (Limit ERP to no higher than 0.1 Watts ERP, which provides voice calls and five bars on a cell phone up to ½-mile away).
Activist Post reports regularly about biological and environmental risks associated with digital, electronic, and wireless technology. For more information, visit our archives.
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-02-10--In 2012 Bernie Sanders Endorsed Smart Meters Which Aren’t “Green” Or Beneficial to Customers — And N

In 2012 Bernie Sanders Endorsed Smart Meters Which Aren’t “Green” Or Beneficial to Customers — And Now?

Utility “ Smart ” Meters – electric , gas , and water – operate using wireless radiation which is biologically and environmentally harmful .
Humans , animals , and plants are all adversely affected from their emissions .
They have also been plagued with other problems including fires and explosions ( see 1 , 2 , 3 ) and the need for frequent replacement – both of which are NOT eco-friendly .
They continue to be costly AND problematic everywhere ( see 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elected officials have stepped in and stopped the “ rollout ” and forced installation of these horrible devices ( see 1 , 2 ) including Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear .
Unfortunately , many special interest groups , state utility commissions , and utility companies still promote and force them on individuals and communities anyway ( see 1 , 2 , 3 ) .
Many elected officials do as well despite increasing numbers of complaints and mishaps .
Most of us are aware that Bernie Sanders is running for president and he regularly expresses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question is , has he changed his tune about ecologically disastrous “ Smart ” Meters and Grids since endorsing them in 2012 ?
BURLINGTON , Vt. ( AP ) — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders says “ smart grid ” electrical technology offers real benefits for Vermont consumers and the environment .
Sanders and some Vermont environmental leaders said at a news conference on Monday that Vermont is a national leader in developing a smarter , stronger , more efficient and reliable electrical system .
Sanders says Vermont received $ 69 million in federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system .
As an example of the technology ’ s benefits , a representative of the Vermont Electric Cooperative said its near-universal smart meter coverage cut the outage response time in half after Tropical Storm Irene hit the state last year .
Activist Post reports regularly about “ Smart ” Meters and other unsafe technology .
For more information , visit our archives and the following websites : Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $ 1 per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SoMee , Flote , Minds , Twitter , and Steemit .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By B.N. Frank
Utility “Smart” Meters – electric, gas, and water – operate using wireless radiation which is biologically and environmentally harmful. Humans, animals, and plants are all adversely affected from their emissions. They have also been plagued with other problems including fires and explosions (see 1, 2, 3) and the need for frequent replacement – both of which are NOT eco-friendly. They continue to be costly AND problematic everywhere (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10). Fortunately, some American elected officials have stepped in and stopped the “rollout” and forced installation of these horrible devices (see 1, 2) including Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear.
Unfortunately, many special interest groups, state utility commissions, and utility companies still promote and force them on individuals and communities anyway (see 1, 2, 3). Many elected officials do as well despite increasing numbers of complaints and mishaps. Most of us are aware that Bernie Sanders is running for president and he regularly expresses deep concerns for the environment. The question is, has he changed his tune about ecologically disastrous “Smart” Meters and Grids since endorsing them in 2012?
From Yahoo:
US Sen. Sanders to talk Vt. ‘smart grid’ benefits Associated Press August 20, 2012 BURLINGTON, Vt. (AP) — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders says “smart grid” electrical technology offers real benefits for Vermont consumers and the environment. Sanders and some Vermont environmental leaders said at a news conference on Monday that Vermont is a national leader in developing a smarter, stronger, more efficient and reliable electrical system. Sanders says Vermont received $69 million in federal stimulus funds to modernize its electric transmission system. As an example of the technology’s benefits, a representative of the Vermont Electric Cooperative said its near-universal smart meter coverage cut the outage response time in half after Tropical Storm Irene hit the state last year.
Activist Post reports regularly about “Smart” Meters and other unsafe technology. For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.