Government Prepares for Meteor Storm (VIDEO)

As Conspiracy Corner is supposed to, “Highlight the week’s most significant and under-reported news events throughout the world, focusing on special preparation for the difficult times ahead for all mankind”, one of the most apropos fulfillment of this mantra, will be this story . . .

If you follow the alternative media, then you are more likely to have heard, in some part, of the events I will discuss. Though some of these occurrences may have been casually mentioned by the Mainstream Media in order to appear as if they are reporting actual events from time to time, the problem is, when these topics are briefly discussed by the Corporate Propaganda Press, they deliberately fail to give their audience the important overview of what the pieces of the puzzle really mean, once you put them all together. When you painstakingly group the pieces into one, as I have done, to see the complete revealing picture, as the media is supposed to do for the public they falsely claim to “serve”, it reveals a most alarming image.

On Tuesday, October 4, 2016, a “fireball” (an asteroid falling to earth as a meteor) was reported over northeastern Canada and the United States. On Monday, September 26, 2016, another meteor was seen over eastern Australia. On Thursday, June 2, 2016, a meteor was spotted over Arizona.

Just as it often “sprinkles” a little bit before it rains a downpour, the same could be said of meteor storms. While most are harmless and merely “light up the sky”, the meteor which exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia on Friday, February 15, 2013, had the explosive power of 29 Hiroshima atomic bombs . . . and this was just one, not several at the same time, as a meteor storm would inevitably bring.

Fortunately, this powerful meteor over Russia never reached the ground. If it did, it is likely that thousands would have been killed, tens to hundreds of thousands had the meteor hit a populated area. All four of these aforementioned meteors were not “officially” discovered in advance, in that, if the governments of the world had foreknowledge of these asteroids (and they may not have), they kept the information to themselves, “to not cause public panic”, as would have likely been the arrogant-selfish excuse.

Above is a picture of the Russian meteor.

As you can see, the natural track of a meteor is a straight line, normally perceived at about a forty-five degree angle from the point of view of the observer.

Above is a picture of the Arizona meteor.

(Likewise, falling in a straight line.)

Because the Arizona meteor occurred just before sunrise, a local photographer took a picture of the “aftermath” in the sky, just as the day was dawning.

Above is the “aftermath” of the Arizona meteor.

The Lying Corporate Media claimed that this irregular zigzag pattern in the sky was caused by “upper atmosphere wind”, as no “swamp gas” was available to blame.

Above are two pictures of a rocket trail from a launched missile.

(Zigzagging as it adjusts, mid-air, to reach its moving target.)

Again – Above the “aftermath” of the Arizona meteor.

Obviously, a missile was fired at the Arizona meteor.

The Arizona meteor was not of such a size nor in such a location that it posed any threat to life or property . . . Why then was a missile fired at it?

To Practice.

To practice for what?

An Upcoming Meteor Storm.

I will keep reminding us of the following point until it hits home . . .

On Tuesday, August 27, 2013, outgoing “Homeland Security” director Janet Napolitano said . . .

“A natural disaster . . .

the likes of which the nation has never seen . . .

is likely on its way.”

Napolitano then implied that she was resigning so that she would not have to deal with this foretold calamity (although she did not say exactly what it was), even joking that her successor would “Need a big bottle of Tylenol” to deal with the coming event.

Just as President Eisenhower, on the last day of his presidency, gave his final and ominous warning about the “shadow government”, which was subverting the will of the congress and the people, Napolitano also issued a personalized “farewell warning” of her own, though sworn to secrecy as to not specifically reveal the details thereof, rather doing so in such a way as to longingly clear the conscious of her duplicit mind, not actually warning her countrymen, as she swore to do as “Homeland Security” director, protecting instead confidential corporate and government interests, as ordered by her unscrupulous superiors.  (These destinations alone will be the only locations they choose to protect in the very near future, hence the practice missile in Arizona, with which to do so.)

Nevertheless, she left three clues as to the upcoming event to which she was really referring.

1)  The impending calamity is NATURAL.

2)  A disaster which the USA has NEVER BEFORE SEEN.

3)  A catastrophe PREDICTABLE YEARS IN ADVANCE.

 Hummm . . .

There is only ONE type of event that I know of which fits . . .

all THREE categories . . .

A Disaster from Outer Space.

A Comet, Asteroid, Meteor Storm, or “Rouge Planet”, which can cause all of these, is a natural disaster, it has never before happened in the USA, and it can be predicted years in advance, due to the calculable geometrical pathways by which the heavenly bodies move.

The fact that there is a sudden increase in meteors, is a bad sign for mankind. The fact that the Arizona meteor was fired upon by a government missile as a “test” and kept a secret, is a bad sign for mankind. The fact that our own government leaders, sworn to protect us, refuse to give the citizens under their alleged care specific details about such a coming disaster so that they can be best prepared for it, is also a very bad sign.

Apparently the “Elite” want to depopulate us “useless eaters” from the surface of the earth, without going down in history as the next genocidal maniac. Thusly, by not properly warning the public of this coming catastrophe, they intend to let “mother nature” do the dirty work of “depopulation” for them, which all of their rich world leaders are continually talking about being a “good thing” for planet Earth. (Since when is it good for billions of people to die?)

If you are a Believer in Divine Prophecy, that is, the ability to Spiritually Discern global events hundreds, if not thousands, of years in advance, then you may take note of this . . .

“People fainting from terror . . .

as to what is coming upon the world . . .

for the HEAVENLY BODIES will be shaken.”

Luke 21:26

And this . . .

“The stars of heaven fell upon the earth . . .

Kings and Rich Men hiding inside of mountains.”

Revelation 6:13-15

You might also wish to note that “Cheyenne Mountain”, a Department of Defense “Cold War” bunker, inside of a mountain, is admittedly being re-stocked at this hour . . . for the “Kings” (word leaders) and the “Rich Men” (the “Elite” who own the media, and who for their own selfish motives, are not informing the public enough in advance to save them from the coming cataclysm.)

Yet now, you few out there, have been warned.

What will you do about it?

If you are a Believer, then do not be mistaken to think that the Creator Himself will deliver your daily food and water during this coming trail for which you have been warned, if you do not act upon the warning which you received.

“My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge.”

Hosea 4:6

Perhaps this is why the “Rich Elite” like owning ALL of the mainstream media . . . so that they can limit this SAVING KNOWLEDGE for themselves and their kindred alone.

It has been said that the older testimonies in the Scriptures, which were suffered by the Patriarchs locally, are examples to us in the Last Days WORLDWIDE, to warn us that the same suffering which they endured regionally will be experienced GLOBALLY in the Last Days, so that we may follow their past prudent example . . . NOW.

If you read Genesis 41:25-37 , you will see that during the Seven Years of “Tribulation” (famine) that our forefathers (Joseph) suffered, it was not survived by them because the Creator personally dropped food from the sky every day, rather they endured this crisis by adhering to a Divine Prophetic Warning, which was given to them in advance, “to those with ears that hear”, and thusly they were saved by preparing for the coming calamity about which they were warned.

I will discuss all this, and much more, in this week’s episode of Conspiracy Corner News.

Just click on the Youtube link BELOW to watch . . .

 –Brother Bart-

 Donate

Shop on Amazon by Clicking on the Button Below

Bart Sibrel is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com

When you want to Shop on Amazon, please come back to this page and Click on the Large Button above to visit the Amazon Homepage, or Copy and Paste the following url into your Browser’s Bookmarks as “Amazon” to Save for Future Shopping Use (http://amzn.to/2bvcs9I).

Thank you!

References

See Scripture Chapters . . .

Matthew 24 – Mark 13 – Luke 21 – Ezekiel 7 – Isaiah 13 – Isaiah 24 – Revelation 6

Meteor over Canada and NE United States

Video of Canadian/US Meteor

World Astronomers Overlook Another Earth Hitting Asteroid

Geological Effect if Meteor Storm or Comet Hit Earth 

Social Effect if Meteor Storm or Comet Hit Earth

Scientists Warn Government to Protect Citizens from Asteroids

Government Sends Probes to Asteroids to Prepare for Them

Government Practices Shooting Down Arizona Meteor

Proof of Missile Trail with Meteor

Meteor Storm Defined

Pentagon Re-opens Bunker in Mountain

Planet X  Article

The post Government Prepares for Meteor Storm (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

A CRISPR Future New Form of Eugenics?

By Dr. Mercola

Gene editing was once a very imprecise and expensive process, but today, thanks to the development of CRISPR, or Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat, scientists can go into your DNA and essentially cut and paste it at specified places. Progress is being made in tackling genetic diseases such as sickle-cell anemia and certain forms of blindness and muscular dystrophy.

A CRISPR clinical trial in people with cancer is already underway in China, and the technology has been used to edit human embryos made from sperm from men carrying inherited disease mutations. The researchers successfully altered the DNA in a way that would eliminate or correct the genes causing the inherited disease.¹

If the embryos were implanted into a womb and allowed to grow, the process, which is known as germline engineering, would result in the first genetically modified children — and any engineered changes would be passed on to their own children. The technology is moving so fast that innovations like this are occurring before their full implications are known or fully understood.

“Some critics say germline experiments could open the floodgates to a brave new world of ‘designer babies’ engineered with genetic enhancements,” Technology Review reported, bringing up questions of ethics and eugenics.²

Does the Elimination of Down Syndrome in Iceland Point to a Dark Future for CRISPR?

It’s recently been reported that, in Iceland, Down syndrome births are becoming increasingly rare, with just one or two children born with the condition each year. In essence, Down syndrome is disappearing, but not by nature or happenstance. In Iceland, up to 85 percent of pregnant women receive prenatal screening tests to detect chromosome abnormalities, including Down syndrome. Close to 100 percent of women who receive a positive result end up terminating their pregnancy, CBS News reported.³

Other countries also have high termination rates for fetuses with Down syndrome: 67 percent in the U.S.; 77 percent in France; and 98 percent in Denmark, for instance. As for why so many women terminate their Down syndrome pregnancies in Iceland, geneticist Kari Stefansson told CBS News, “It reflects a relatively heavy-handed genetic counseling. And I don’t think that heavy-handed genetic counseling is desirable … You’re having impact on decisions that are not medical, in a way.”⁴

Writing in The Nation, journalist and historian — and father to a young son with Down syndrome — David Perry noted that “we’re failing our test run for the age of CRISPR.”⁵ He points out that today children with Down syndrome can lead long, happy and productive lives, but many expectant parents aren’t informed of this reality.

Prenatal testing companies market heavily to physicians but provide little information on the conditions being tested for. As a result, some parents are receiving wrong information about their would-be child’s prognosis. Perry writes:⁶

“What does all this have to do with CRISPR? Right now, we’re still in a liminal state when it comes to predicting genetic outcomes for fetuses. Our tools, from amniocentesis (developed in the 1950s and ’60s) to contemporary screenings that locate fetal blood cells in the mother’s bloodstream, are reactive and postconception.

Soon, they’ll shift to preconception and proactive. What will the tens of thousands of clinicians tell would-be parents as they get flooded with messaging from companies eager to sell their high-tech CRISPR product lines?”

As it stands, access to information, or lack thereof, may result in physicians providing outdated or biased genetic counseling to patients. As CRISPR moves ahead, access to accurate and neutral data will be essential. Difficult questions — such as, “When does abortion become eugenics?” as posed by The Atlantic⁷ — must be asked, and answered. The time has come when parents can choose to abort a fetus based on a disability, but soon this may extend into sex, race or even, one day, sexual orientation.

Even now, Miami-based radiologist Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie pointed out that “eugenics and equality can’t mix,” explaining in U.S. News & World Report, “When we do everything in our power to detect the existence of a baby with a special need with the sole purpose of terminating him or her, we create a discriminatory culture, where only perfect humans may apply for entrance.

This is a powerful obstacle against equality and acceptance of the disabled, which a just society must set as its first goal.”⁸ Perry also notes that access to unbiased, up-to-date information is crucial in an age of genetic testing and CRISPR:⁹

“Preventing this potentially dystopian future where altered genes separate the haves from the have-nots starts by shifting discourse. A pro-information approach demands that everyone involved in genetic counseling have access to the best data and presents it in a value-neutral way. We must build systems now that grow as our tools evolve. If we do not, genetic diversity will gradually become code for poverty, and new stigmas will run all the way to the DNA.”

Many Countries Have Already Banned Genetic Engineering of Human Embryos, Germ-Line Modification

Whether or not the creation of “designer babies” with a certain eye color or increased intelligence is inevitable remains to be seen, but some regions are not willing to take a wait-and-see approach. About 40 countries have already banned the genetic engineering of human embryos and 15 of 22 European countries prohibit germ line modification.¹⁰ Time reported:¹¹

“Using CRISPR on humans is still hugely controversial, in part because it’s so easy. The fact that it allows scientists to efficiently edit any gene — for some cancers, but also potentially for a predisposition for red hair, for being overweight, for being good at math — worries ethicists because of what could happen if it gets into the wrong hands.

… As CRISPR goes mainstream in medicine and agriculture, profound moral and ethical questions will arise. Few would argue against using CRISPR to treat terminal cancer patients, but what about treating chronic diseases? Or disabilities? If sickle-cell anemia can be corrected with CRISPR, should obesity, which drives so many life-threatening illnesses? Who decides where that line ought to be drawn?”

Correcting embryonic DNA to eliminate genetic defects associated with inheritable diseases currently has the greatest support, but some scientists argue that using germ-line gene editing to eliminate genetic disease is unnecessary, since the technology to test and choose embryos free of genetic disease already exists and is regularly used in IVF clinics.

The alteration of genes to protect a person against future disease or diseases is another area of ongoing research, while genetic enhancement, in which genes are installed or modified to change a person’s appearance, or physical or mental potential is most controversial. A top U.S. intelligence official even added gene-editing to a list of potential weapons of mass destruction that pose a threat to national safety.¹²

As complex and futuristic as it seems, gene editing is inexpensive and easy to do. Killer mosquitoes, agricultural plagues and DNA-targeting viruses have all been suggested as potential bioweapons should CRISPR or other gene-editing tools fall into the wrong hands.¹³

Gene editing has become so mainstream there are classes on the topic available at community colleges and DIY kits you can order online. Even middle school students may learn the basics of gene editing in science class, with some comparing the new technology to computer coding a few decades ago.

CRISPR May Cause Unexpected Mutations

Gene-editing technology has gotten much more precise over the years, particularly with the invention of CRISPR-Cas9.¹⁴ By modifying an enzyme called Cas9, the gene-editing capabilities are significantly improved, in some cases reducing the error rate to “undetectable levels.” It’s not perfect, however, and may accidently hit other parts of the genome.

A recent study searched for unintended mutations, based on a separate study that used CRISPR-Cas9 to restore sight in blind mice by correcting a genetic mutation. The researchers sequenced the entire genome of the CRISPR-edited mice to search for mutations. In addition to the intended genetic edit, they found more than 100 additional deletions and insertions along with more than 1,500 single-nucleotide mutations. Study co-author Dr. Stephen Tsang, of Columbia University Medical Center, told Scienmag:¹⁵

“We feel it’s critical that the scientific community consider the potential hazards of all off-target mutations caused by CRISPR, including single nucleotide mutations and mutations in non-coding regions of the genome … Researchers who aren’t using whole genome sequencing to find off-target effects may be missing potentially important mutations. Even a single nucleotide change can have a huge impact.”

It’s too soon to say whether the mutations are a cause for alarm. However, in the recent study in which researchers used CRISPR to edit human embryos, altering the DNA to prevent inherited disease, they claim to have developed a better technique that avoids off-target effects, as well as mosaicism, in which the DNA changes are taken up by some of the embryo’s cells instead of all of them.¹⁶

Meanwhile, a February 2017 report issued by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences (NAS) basically set the stage for allowing research on germline modification and CRISPR, but only for the purpose of eliminating serious diseases — not for “enhancing traits or abilities beyond ordinary health.” The latter would raise concerns “about whether the benefits can outweigh the risks, and about fairness if available only to some people,” NAS noted.¹⁷

According to Technology Review, however, “Despite such barriers, the creation of a gene-edited person could be attempted at any moment, including by IVF clinics operating facilities in countries where there are no such legal restrictions.”¹⁸

With the technology becoming increasingly accessible to anyone with an interest, it’s probably going to be a matter of when, not if, this boundary is crossed, with unknown consequences. While gene-editing technology has the potential to be great, it could also be easily, and seriously, misused and abused.

– Sources and References

A CRISPR Future New Form of Eugenics?

By Dr. Mercola

Gene editing was once a very imprecise and expensive process, but today, thanks to the development of CRISPR, or Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat, scientists can go into your DNA and essentially cut and paste it at specified places. Progress is being made in tackling genetic diseases such as sickle-cell anemia and certain forms of blindness and muscular dystrophy.

A CRISPR clinical trial in people with cancer is already underway in China, and the technology has been used to edit human embryos made from sperm from men carrying inherited disease mutations. The researchers successfully altered the DNA in a way that would eliminate or correct the genes causing the inherited disease.¹

If the embryos were implanted into a womb and allowed to grow, the process, which is known as germline engineering, would result in the first genetically modified children — and any engineered changes would be passed on to their own children. The technology is moving so fast that innovations like this are occurring before their full implications are known or fully understood.

“Some critics say germline experiments could open the floodgates to a brave new world of ‘designer babies’ engineered with genetic enhancements,” Technology Review reported, bringing up questions of ethics and eugenics.²

Does the Elimination of Down Syndrome in Iceland Point to a Dark Future for CRISPR?

It’s recently been reported that, in Iceland, Down syndrome births are becoming increasingly rare, with just one or two children born with the condition each year. In essence, Down syndrome is disappearing, but not by nature or happenstance. In Iceland, up to 85 percent of pregnant women receive prenatal screening tests to detect chromosome abnormalities, including Down syndrome. Close to 100 percent of women who receive a positive result end up terminating their pregnancy, CBS News reported.³

Other countries also have high termination rates for fetuses with Down syndrome: 67 percent in the U.S.; 77 percent in France; and 98 percent in Denmark, for instance. As for why so many women terminate their Down syndrome pregnancies in Iceland, geneticist Kari Stefansson told CBS News, “It reflects a relatively heavy-handed genetic counseling. And I don’t think that heavy-handed genetic counseling is desirable … You’re having impact on decisions that are not medical, in a way.”⁴

Writing in The Nation, journalist and historian — and father to a young son with Down syndrome — David Perry noted that “we’re failing our test run for the age of CRISPR.”⁵ He points out that today children with Down syndrome can lead long, happy and productive lives, but many expectant parents aren’t informed of this reality.

Prenatal testing companies market heavily to physicians but provide little information on the conditions being tested for. As a result, some parents are receiving wrong information about their would-be child’s prognosis. Perry writes:⁶

“What does all this have to do with CRISPR? Right now, we’re still in a liminal state when it comes to predicting genetic outcomes for fetuses. Our tools, from amniocentesis (developed in the 1950s and ’60s) to contemporary screenings that locate fetal blood cells in the mother’s bloodstream, are reactive and postconception.

Soon, they’ll shift to preconception and proactive. What will the tens of thousands of clinicians tell would-be parents as they get flooded with messaging from companies eager to sell their high-tech CRISPR product lines?”

As it stands, access to information, or lack thereof, may result in physicians providing outdated or biased genetic counseling to patients. As CRISPR moves ahead, access to accurate and neutral data will be essential. Difficult questions — such as, “When does abortion become eugenics?” as posed by The Atlantic⁷ — must be asked, and answered. The time has come when parents can choose to abort a fetus based on a disability, but soon this may extend into sex, race or even, one day, sexual orientation.

Even now, Miami-based radiologist Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie pointed out that “eugenics and equality can’t mix,” explaining in U.S. News & World Report, “When we do everything in our power to detect the existence of a baby with a special need with the sole purpose of terminating him or her, we create a discriminatory culture, where only perfect humans may apply for entrance.

This is a powerful obstacle against equality and acceptance of the disabled, which a just society must set as its first goal.”⁸ Perry also notes that access to unbiased, up-to-date information is crucial in an age of genetic testing and CRISPR:⁹

“Preventing this potentially dystopian future where altered genes separate the haves from the have-nots starts by shifting discourse. A pro-information approach demands that everyone involved in genetic counseling have access to the best data and presents it in a value-neutral way. We must build systems now that grow as our tools evolve. If we do not, genetic diversity will gradually become code for poverty, and new stigmas will run all the way to the DNA.”

Many Countries Have Already Banned Genetic Engineering of Human Embryos, Germ-Line Modification

Whether or not the creation of “designer babies” with a certain eye color or increased intelligence is inevitable remains to be seen, but some regions are not willing to take a wait-and-see approach. About 40 countries have already banned the genetic engineering of human embryos and 15 of 22 European countries prohibit germ line modification.¹⁰ Time reported:¹¹

“Using CRISPR on humans is still hugely controversial, in part because it’s so easy. The fact that it allows scientists to efficiently edit any gene — for some cancers, but also potentially for a predisposition for red hair, for being overweight, for being good at math — worries ethicists because of what could happen if it gets into the wrong hands.

… As CRISPR goes mainstream in medicine and agriculture, profound moral and ethical questions will arise. Few would argue against using CRISPR to treat terminal cancer patients, but what about treating chronic diseases? Or disabilities? If sickle-cell anemia can be corrected with CRISPR, should obesity, which drives so many life-threatening illnesses? Who decides where that line ought to be drawn?”

Correcting embryonic DNA to eliminate genetic defects associated with inheritable diseases currently has the greatest support, but some scientists argue that using germ-line gene editing to eliminate genetic disease is unnecessary, since the technology to test and choose embryos free of genetic disease already exists and is regularly used in IVF clinics.

The alteration of genes to protect a person against future disease or diseases is another area of ongoing research, while genetic enhancement, in which genes are installed or modified to change a person’s appearance, or physical or mental potential is most controversial. A top U.S. intelligence official even added gene-editing to a list of potential weapons of mass destruction that pose a threat to national safety.¹²

As complex and futuristic as it seems, gene editing is inexpensive and easy to do. Killer mosquitoes, agricultural plagues and DNA-targeting viruses have all been suggested as potential bioweapons should CRISPR or other gene-editing tools fall into the wrong hands.¹³

Gene editing has become so mainstream there are classes on the topic available at community colleges and DIY kits you can order online. Even middle school students may learn the basics of gene editing in science class, with some comparing the new technology to computer coding a few decades ago.

CRISPR May Cause Unexpected Mutations

Gene-editing technology has gotten much more precise over the years, particularly with the invention of CRISPR-Cas9.¹⁴ By modifying an enzyme called Cas9, the gene-editing capabilities are significantly improved, in some cases reducing the error rate to “undetectable levels.” It’s not perfect, however, and may accidently hit other parts of the genome.

A recent study searched for unintended mutations, based on a separate study that used CRISPR-Cas9 to restore sight in blind mice by correcting a genetic mutation. The researchers sequenced the entire genome of the CRISPR-edited mice to search for mutations. In addition to the intended genetic edit, they found more than 100 additional deletions and insertions along with more than 1,500 single-nucleotide mutations. Study co-author Dr. Stephen Tsang, of Columbia University Medical Center, told Scienmag:¹⁵

“We feel it’s critical that the scientific community consider the potential hazards of all off-target mutations caused by CRISPR, including single nucleotide mutations and mutations in non-coding regions of the genome … Researchers who aren’t using whole genome sequencing to find off-target effects may be missing potentially important mutations. Even a single nucleotide change can have a huge impact.”

It’s too soon to say whether the mutations are a cause for alarm. However, in the recent study in which researchers used CRISPR to edit human embryos, altering the DNA to prevent inherited disease, they claim to have developed a better technique that avoids off-target effects, as well as mosaicism, in which the DNA changes are taken up by some of the embryo’s cells instead of all of them.¹⁶

Meanwhile, a February 2017 report issued by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences (NAS) basically set the stage for allowing research on germline modification and CRISPR, but only for the purpose of eliminating serious diseases — not for “enhancing traits or abilities beyond ordinary health.” The latter would raise concerns “about whether the benefits can outweigh the risks, and about fairness if available only to some people,” NAS noted.¹⁷

According to Technology Review, however, “Despite such barriers, the creation of a gene-edited person could be attempted at any moment, including by IVF clinics operating facilities in countries where there are no such legal restrictions.”¹⁸

With the technology becoming increasingly accessible to anyone with an interest, it’s probably going to be a matter of when, not if, this boundary is crossed, with unknown consequences. While gene-editing technology has the potential to be great, it could also be easily, and seriously, misused and abused.

– Sources and References

Bill Gates’ New Population Control Microchip Due for Launch in 2018

Bill Gates is due to launch his new population control microchip in 2018
[image: Neon Nettle]

By: Jay Greenberg, Neon Nettle | 

Multi-billionaire Bill Gates has developed a new microchip, along with researchers at MIT, that will allow for adjustments to be made to a person’s hormone levels via remote control, in a bid to reduce the planet’s population.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been working in conjunction with a small Massachusetts startup to develop the “digital pill” that will enable women’s fertility to be switched on or off, remotely, with the touch of a button.

The new “digital version of the contraceptive” pill will be tested in Africa this year where the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has spent years developing vaccination and family planning programs.

Following testing, the microchips are due to be rolled out globally in 2018 with “every woman in America” replacing their regular contraceptive pill with the new remote-controlled chips, according to Gates.

According to the Guardian, the chip is implanted under the skin and releases small doses of the contraceptive hormone levonorgestrel on a daily basis, with enough capacity to last 16 years.

About the same size as a Scrabble tile, it houses a series of micro-reservoirs covered by an ultra-thin titanium and platinum seal.The hormone is released by passing a small electric current from an internal battery through the seal, which melts it temporarily, allowing a 30 microgram dose of levonorgestrel to seep out each day. And it can be simply switched off by a wireless remote, avoiding the clinical procedures needed to deactivate other contraceptive implants.

“The ability to turn the device on and off provides a certain convenience factor for those who are planning their family,” says MIT’s Dr. Robert Farra, adding that “the idea of using a thin membrane like an electric fuse was the most challenging and the most creative problem we had to solve.”

But just as hackers can spoof wifi remotes to operate neighbors’ garage doors and flip their TV channels, could a remote-controlled contraceptive open the floodgates for a new form of ovarian hacking?“Someone across the room cannot reprogramme your implant,” says Farra.

“Communication with the implant has to occur at skin contact-level distance. Then we have secure encryption. That prevents someone from trying to interpret or intervene between the communications.”

The idea for micro-dispensing chips was first developed in the 1990s by Professor Robert Langer at MIT, the founder of innumerable biotech companies and holder of more than 800 patents, known in the industry as “the most cited engineer in history”. His lab caught the attention of Bill Gates in 2012, during his search for a revolution in birth control (which has already spawned plans for a graphene condom), and Langer subsequently leased the technology to Microchips, a company already working on a micro-dosing implant for osteoporosis.

Langer says that the implant will be available by 2018, once the coming trials are complete, and that the device will be “competitively priced” in a bid to ensure it replaces conventional contraception.

Bill Gates recently caused controversy after he spoke out about the immigration crisis in Europe saying that the continent will be “devastated by African refugees” unless severe and immediate action is taken to reduce the population in Africa.

This has left many questioning Gates’ motives behind his vaccination programs after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had previously been accused of secretly sterilizing millions of women in Africa by doctors in Kenya after abortion drugs were discovered in Tetanus vaccines.

The program, which is funded by Bill Gates, has been accused of conducting a mass depopulation experiment on the people of Kenya without their consent.

Read more at: http://www.neonnettle.com/features/1046-bill-gates-new-population-control-microchip-due-for-launch-in-2018
© Neon Nettle

There Are Population Control Centers All Over America – They Are Called ‘Planned Parenthood Clinics’

The phrase “family planning” is just a more palatable way of saying “population control”. In the United States today, Planned Parenthood operates 650 “health centers” that work tirelessly to promote abortion and other “family planning measures”. Planned Parenthood says that approximately 2.5 million people visit their “health centers” each year, and somewhere around 60 million people visit their website. If you are pregnant and you visit one of their clinics, abortion will be pushed very hard. In fact, former Planned Parenthood workers have told us that they actually have abortion sales quotas, and workers that meet those quotas are rewarded with pizza parties and other incentives. Of course making money is one of the primary goals, but Planned Parenthood has also always had a very deep connection to eugenics and population control.

Planned Parenthood was founded by a very strong proponent of eugenics named Margaret Sanger. In her writings she strongly denounced the “human weeds” and “reckless breeders” that she felt were bringing unfit children into this world that society would have to care for. And in a 1932 Senate hearing, she advocated a “rigid policy of sterilization and segregation” for those that were not of the right genetic stock…

“The main objectives of the[proposed] Population Congress is to…apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”

In other words, Sanger believed that some humans are far superior to others, and that everything possible should be done to keep the inferior humans from breeding. In fact, even NPR has admitted that Sanger strongly believed in the eugenics movement…

In reading her papers, it is clear Sanger had bought into the movement. She once wrote that “consequences of breeding from stock lacking human vitality always will give us social problems and perpetuate institutions of charity and crime.”

Of course Planned Parenthood continued to have strong ties to the eugenics movement long after Sanger died. In 1969, a plan to “reduce U.S. fertility” was outlined in a memo that was authored by Planned Parenthood Vice President Frederick Jaffe. The following comes from an article by Ann Olson…

In 1969, then Vice President of Planned Parenthood, Frederick Jaffe, sent a memo to the head of the Population Council, Bernard Berelson. It included a table of “Proposed Measures to Reduce U.S. Fertility.” The Jaffe/Berelson Memo was drawn up by Jaffe as a companion piece to Berelson’s paper, “Beyond Family Planning” published in the Population Council’s February 1969 issue of Studies in Family Planning.

This shocking memo makes suggestions for policy changes to be implemented in order to achieve population control:

• Restructure family

• Postpone or avoid marriage

• Alter image of ideal family size

• Compulsory education of children

• Encourage increased homosexuality

• Educate for family limitation

• Fertility control agents in water supply

• Encourage women to work and provide few child care facilities

• Compulsory abortion of out-of-wedlock pregnancies

• Compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three

• Confine childbearing to a limited number of adults

• Payments to encourage sterilization

• Payments to encourage contraception

• Payments to encourage abortion

• Abortion and sterilization on demand

Of course many of the things on that list have actually been implemented since that time.

The dramatic changes that we have seen in America regarding marriage, family and sexuality over the past several decades have not happened by accident. The enemies of our way of life have an agenda, and they have been working tirelessly to carry it out.

Since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, close to 60 million Americans have been murdered in our country’s abortion mills, and Planned Parenthood has been the biggest offender by far.

According to Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report, they performed 328,348 abortions during the year that concluded on September 30th, 2015.

During that same year, Planned Parenthood got 554.6 million dollars from the federal government. That accounts for more than 40 percent of their budget, and it is questionable if Planned Parenthood would be able to continue to exist without all of that funding.

By giving Planned Parenthood more than half a billion dollars a year, the U.S. government is placing a giant stamp of approval on what they are doing. This is a national disgrace, and it must end.

And just like their founder Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood seems to place a special emphasis on promoting “family planning” among minorities. In the United States today, African-American women are more than 5 times as likely to get an abortion as white women are. In 2010, African-American women accounted for approximately 6.6 percent of the U.S. population, but they got 35.7 percent of the abortions.

Planned Parenthood workers commonly stress what a financial burden a new baby will be to poor and minority women, and they are able to convince many of them that murdering their own children is the right thing to do.

When you go to a Planned Parenthood clinic, you are not going to get an objective viewpoint. They are in business to do abortions, and that is what is going to get pushed. According to Planned Parenthood’s latest report, Planned Parenthood does 1 adoption referral for every 114 abortions that it performs.

And most women that get abortions don’t even realize that the body parts of their babies are being harvested and sold off to the highest bidder.

Planned Parenthood is committing crimes against humanity on a daily basis, and our national leaders are doing nothing to stop this.

They should be deeply, deeply ashamed of themselves.

If I run for Congress in 2018, and I am very, very strongly considering that, I would promise to always vote against any bill that includes even a single penny of funding for Planned Parenthood.

And if we could get every Republican in the House of Representatives to pledge to never vote for funding for Planned Parenthood under any circumstances, we could finally ensure that Planned Parenthood would be defunded once and for all.

I am so sick and tired of these politicians that use the Pro-Life label to get our votes but then they continue to vote to fund Planned Parenthood time after time.

You cannot be Pro-Life and vote to fund Planned Parenthood, and any politician that wants to try to continue to play this game is not going to get our votes.

Nearly 60 million children have already died, and if we are not going to take a stand now when will we ever be ready to do it?

It is time to defund Planned Parenthood, and it is time to end abortion in America.

If we want to have any sort of a future as a nation, there are no other alternatives.