Ban Ki-moon – A Record Of Failure And Betrayal – by Stephen Lendman – 20th September 2011

The UN Charter’s Preamble states: “WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED — to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and — to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and — to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and — to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom….” The body affirms international support for tolerance, peace and security, and resolve to promote universal economic and social advancement.

However, since its 1945 founding, it’s failed on all counts, even though some of its agencies (like UNICEF, WFP, UNHCR and UNESCO) at times provide aid in areas of health, education, food assistance, refugees, social development and more. It’s never enough though, timely, or with resolve to support troubled people adequately in times of need. Moreover, global wars raged every year post-WW II to the present. The UN’s been unable or disinterested in stopping them. One of its fatal flaws is structure, hamstrung by its dominant member, America. It can and does veto measures other member states support, notably when contrary to its imperial interests. As a result, no action was taken when Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975. Hundreds of thousands were slaughtered in a secretly US-authorized aggression. Its TNI forces were armed, funded and supported by Washington. In 1999, it was impotent again after East Timor voted for independence, after which TNI forces attacked and slaughtered thousands more. During South Africa’s border wars and invasion of Namibia in the 1960s and 70s, it was sidelined, as well as during a 36-year Guatemala state-sponsored genocide against its indigenous Mayan majority, following the CIA’s ouster of democratically elected Jacobo Arbenz Guzman. Dozens of other examples reveal a dismal record of failure and betrayal of its high-sounding principles and mandate to enforce them. It didn’t earlier or now, including by deploying Blue Helmets as peacekeepers. In fact, they’re hostile occupiers, serving imperial interests in Haiti, South Lebanon, Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia, DRC Congo, Sudan, Somalia, various other countries, and its initial UN Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) since 1948, failing to bring peace to Palestine. Yet it’s still there, performing no active role, opposing the interests of people they’re sworn to protect. During his tenure as Secretary-General, Kofi Annan (January 1, 1997 – December 31, 2006) was little more than an imperial tool, never achieving or working for peace anywhere. He never condemned or acted to end the devastating economic sanctions against Iraqis that killed up to 1.5 million defenseless men, women and children. He didn’t use his mandate to denounce Washington’s lawless 2003 war. No matter that it’s based on lies to permit slaughtering hundreds of thousands more and be able to plunder another occupied country. He was silent while war raged in Afghanistan and still does without end. He backed or failed to act against Israel’s illegal occupation, its worst crimes against Palestine, and its illegal 2006 Lebanon war. He took no action to denounce Washington’s failed attempts to oust Hugo Chavez, and showed a disturbing indifference to the pain and suffering of his own people throughout the continent of his birth. Instead, he dutifully served Washington, other dominant powers, and corporate predation of Africa’s riches and elsewhere. His entire tenure was a testimony to failure and betrayal. So is Ban Ki-moon’s since becoming Secretary-General on January 1, 2007. Ever since, he’s been a co-conspirator in war crimes and other abuses. In fact, one of his first acts was to reverse the UN’s longstanding opposition to capital punishment. It’s a barbaric practice often sentencing innocent people to death, notably in America. At the time, he dismissively said whether or not to enforce it “is for each and every member State to decide,” instead of forthrightly condemning it. Nor did his restructuring plan address the Security Council’s illegitimate veto power, giving one nation like America authority over all others. It’s abused the practice ever since.

Instead, it’s high time the body reflected majority rule, giving all nations equal say on issues affecting everyone. Ban’s overall silence, inaction, and support for wrong over right speak volumes. In fact, despite its own often deplorable record, Human Rights Watch (HRW) acknowledged Ban’s shamelessness. Its “World Report 2011: A Facade of Action” included criticism of his “quiet diplomacy facade of (in)action” for not taking forceful steps when needed. HRW’s executive director Kenneth Roth criticized his “use of dialogue and cooperation in lieu of public pressure….on abusive governments,” notably America and its imperial partners. In fact, said Roth, “(f)ar from condemning repression, Ban sometimes (goes) out of his way to portray repressive governments in a positive light.” He meant third world despots, not the world’s leading human rights abuser, waging lawless imperial wars and engaging in other scandalous actions. In response, Ban’s office disagreed, despite clear evidence of his complicity in grievous crimes of war and against humanity by indifference, silence, and support for Western aggression. Putting lipstick on that pig doesn’t wash. Nor have his spineless measures protected whistleblowers or prevented peacekeeper killings, rape, sexual exploitation, corruption and other crimes. In addition, he hasn’t defended human rights or condemned violations against them, notably by Western countries. Nor has he denounced aggressive wars and other lawless acts. How can he when he supports them, including Washington’s ouster of democratically elected Honduran President Manuel Zelaya on June 28, 2009. Or the Obama administration’s militarization of Haiti and complicity in rigging the electoral process to install stealth Duvalierist Michel (“Sweet Micky) Martelly, an anti-populist former Kompa singer supporter of powerful corrupt corporatist interests. Moreover, Ban backed regime change in Ivory Coast. He authorized a lawless French-backed military operation against Ivorian President Laurent Gbagbo, killing hundreds of civilians. He also echoed Washington’s call for Gaddafi’s ouster, saying he lost all legitimacy. At the same time, he backs cutthroat rebel paramilitaries, and supports lawless air strikes. They’ve laid waste to large parts of Libya and still do, killing and injuring tens of thousands. They also transformed Libya into a charnel house human rights disaster. Instead of condemning, stopping, or preventing wars, he authorized and cheerled them, betraying his mandate to support peace and human rights. Shamelessly serving Israel, not Palestine, he caused great harm in the process, including besieged Gaza denied flotilla aid from arriving. He even petitioned world leaders to back Israel’s demand to direct what it permits “through legitimate crossings and established channels” to prevent vital aid getting through or enough of it. By appointing his own commission to investigate Israel’s May 2010 Mavi Marmara massacre, he tried to whitewash his own Human Rights Council’s condemnation, as well as independent ones denouncing Israel’s cold-blooded murder of nine civilians and injuring dozens more in international waters. These were high crimes – piracy he should have forthrightly condemned, but he didn’t. Instead, he dutifully paid homage to Israel as he always does.

Despite representing 193 member states, Ban only serves Washington, Israel, and other dominant powers. He thumbs his nose at the rest, including majority General Assembly positions on numerous human rights and other vital issues. In other words, in derogation of his sworn mandate, he solely represents dominant interests. Notably they’re those of Washington, Israel, and their imperial partners, ravaging targeted countries to carve up their corpses for profit. As a result, he shares culpability with lawless predator states, harming billions worldwide by his contempt for human rights. In fact, the very notion’s not in his vocabulary, let alone concern for people in dire need. They’re on their own because Ban won’t observe his sworn mandate to help them. It’s a testimony to his deplorable record. It’s appalling enough to have earned him a second term last June, representing wealth and power for another five years at the expense of billions worldwide he scorns. It’s the mettle of a failed Secretary-General, a legacy history won’t let him forget or expunge. Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Many points brought up but :

1) In fact, one of his first acts was to reverse the UN’s longstanding opposition to capital punishment. It’s a barbaric practice often sentencing innocent people to death, notably in America. t the time, he dismissively said whether or not to enforce it “is for each and every member State to decide,” instead of forthrightly condemning it. Again with the hegelian dialectic. UN’s long standing opposition sounds like you said it was a majority thing. In the case that your intention was that ‘UN’s longstanding opposition’ in anyway meant ‘majority’ (I get that impression this is pitching majority mob-rule makes right – apologies if wrong), Spirit of Law should NEVER be considered the same as democratic MOB-rule. If the majority said that people had to all become Muslim, would that be democratic? Democracy does not mean majority. Democracy ALSO needs to consider Spirit of Law and Spirit of Justice. If the majority think in a way that is abusive or affects self determinism, it is still not democratic and thus inapplicable.

Hence it is not about who is wrong or right, it is Self Determinism rather than deadweight Majority that is politically correct. We are not in the feudal era, people are individuals and so too are states. But in this case killing criminals is against Spirit of Justice and thus wrong. The legal system is supposed to rehabilitate criminals, AND at the criminal’s free willed voilition. To cite majority as reason to impose, deny expression is wrong. What Ban Ki Moon said as individual rights of nations to decide on capital punishment, he was wrong as it is not in true Spirit of Justice to kill criminals who need to relearn who they are, in many cases they were forced by circumstances to be who they were.

2) Shamelessly serving Israel, not Palestine, he caused great harm in the process, including besieged Gaza denied flotilla aid from arriving. He’s not supposed to serve anyone. But he has not treated the Israel-Palestinian issue properly so far.

Are you afflicted by pro-Palestian (Muslim?!?) neurotech?

3) Nor have his spineless measures protected whistleblowers or prevented peacekeeper killings, rape, sexual exploitation, corruption and other crimes.

All these are too ‘micro-issue’ to address by Ban alone, but I am sure that he is familiar enough with the Korean peninsular to take down a government or 2 there. Parochial looking South Korea, and Phillipines or Vietnam look like a terrible hotbed of corruption from an unfamiliar person’s viewpoint. As for North Korea, IMHO, Kim Jong Il should relinquish all political power, entirely democratise, and open the nation and declare himself a Constitutional Monarch to receive a modest stipend at most, with UN and NAM and BRICs overseeing the transition from Junta to Constitutional Monarchy. If Gaddafi had done this very same action, Libya could very well have averted the chaos it is suffering now. Again as suggested for Korea, any transitional government for Libya should have not just UN oversight but NAM and BRICS oversight as well. 4) In addition, he hasn’t defended human rights or condemned violations against them, notably by Western countries.

Nor has (the Eminent Ban, one step above lots of not-too Excellent Presidents  . . . ) Ban denounced aggressive wars and other lawless acts. . . . As a result, he shares culpability with lawless predator states, harming billions worldwide by his contempt for human rights. In fact, the very notion’s not in his vocabulary, let alone concern for people in dire need. The stage is yours Ban. Speak to end wars and prove this accusation false. Or tell them to stick to conventional warfare at very least.

3 Articles on GMO danger, Ecology and Illegal Monopolies on Nature’s Gifts – various sources – Late September 2011

ARTICLE 1

Hybrid rice output hits record high – CCTV – 20th September 2011 CHANGSHA, Sept. 19

(Xinhua) — The yield of China’s hybrid rice breed, which is known as super rice, has exceeded 900 kg per mu (0.067 hectare), setting a new world record in rice output. The rice breed, DH2525 (Y two superior No. 2), produced a harvest of 926.6 kg per mu during its trial plantation in Longhui County in central China’s Hunan Province, according to the provincial academy of agriculture at a press conference on Monday. To ensure the accuracy of the yield, a team of experts under the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) randomly selected three out of the 107.9 mu trial field’s 18 plots and supervised the harvest on Sunday. However, the breeding can not be deemed a success until the new breed produces the targeted yield of over 900 kg per mu on at least 100 mu of farmland for two consecutive years, said the team’s leader Cheng Shihua. “We have another year to go,” he said. DH2525 was developed by Yuan Longping, known as the “father of hybrid rice,” who started developing hybrid rice in the 1960s. His research team reached the target unit yield of 700 kg per mu and 800 kg per mu in 1999 and 2005, respectively, setting world records both times. With skills honed by his team over several decades, Chinese farmers are estimated to have harvested 300 billion kilograms more in aggregate output. Their hybrid rice, therefore, has become known as super rice. Wang Huayong, a farmer who contracted the trial field, said the field had a yielded 841.6 and 872 kg of rice per mu over the past two years, respectively, and the yield finally exceeded 900 kg per mu this year. “The seed was further upgraded, new manure was used, and we also received the guidance of Mr. Yuan himself,” Wang said. Eighty-one-year-old Yuan visited the field in early September and checked the growth situation. “He issued a clear instruction on water management in the field,” said Wang.

Dr. Yuan Longping Food Prize Laureate, known as the “father of hybrid rice”, speaks at the press conference of Hunan Academy of Agriculture, in Changsha, capital of central China’s Hunan Province, Sept. 19, 2011. The yield of China’s hybrid rice breed, which is known as super rice, has exceeded 900 kg per mu (0.067 hectare), setting a new world record in rice output. The rice breed, DH2525 (Y two superior No. 2), produced a harvest of 926.6 kg per mu during its trial plantation in Longhui County of Hunan Province, according to the provincial academy of agriculture at a press conference on Monday. To ensure the accuracy of the yield, a team of experts under the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) randomly selected three out of the 107.9 mu trial field’s 18 plots and supervised the harvest on Sunday. (Xinhua/Zhao Zhongzhi) ] Yuan Longping(L), known as the “father of hybrid rice”, speaks at the press conference of Hunan Academy of Agriculture, in Changsha, capital of central China’s Hunan Province, Sept. 19, 2011. The yield of China’s hybrid rice breed, which is known as super rice, has exceeded 900 kg per mu (0.067 hectare), setting a new world record in rice output. The rice breed, DH2525 (Y two superior No. 2), produced a harvest of 926.6 kg per mu during its trial plantation in Longhui County of Hunan Province, according to the provincial academy of agriculture at a press conference on Monday. To ensure the accuracy of the yield, a team of experts under the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) randomly selected three out of the 107.9 mu trial field’s 18 plots and supervised the harvest on Sunday. (Xinhua/Zhao Zhongzhi)

ARTICLE 2

Monsanto Denies Superinsect Science — by Tom Philpott – 8th September 2011

Superinsect problem? Show me the evidence! As the summer growing season draws to a close, 2011 is emerging as the year of the superinsect—the year pests officially developed resistance to Monsanto’s genetically engineered (ostensibly) bug-killing corn. While the revelation has given rise to alarming headlines, neither Monsanto nor the EPA, which regulates pesticides and pesticide-infused crops, can credibly claim surprise. Scientists have been warning that the EPA’s rules for planting the crop were too lax to prevent resistance since before the agency approved the crop in 2003. And in 2008, research funded by Monsanto itself showed that resistance was an obvious danger. And now those unheeded warnings are proving prescient. In late July, as I reported recently, scientists in Iowa documented the existence of corn rootworms (a ravenous pest that attacks the roots of corn plants) that can happily devour corn plants that were genetically tweaked specifically to kill them. Monsanto’s corn, engineered to express a toxic gene from a bacterial insecticide called Bt, now accounts for 65 percent of the corn planted in the US. The superinsect scourge has also arisen in Illinois and Minnesota. “Monsanto Co. (MON)’s insect-killing corn is toppling over in northwestern Illinois fields, a sign that rootworms outside of Iowa may have developed resistance to the genetically modified crop,” reports Bloomberg.

In southern Minnesota, adds Minnesota Public Radio, an entomologist has found corn rootworms thriving, Bt corn plants drooping, in fields. Monsanto, for its part, is reacting to the news with a hearty “move along—nothing to see here!” “Our [Bt corn] is effective,” Monsanto scientist Dusty Post insisted in an interview with The St. Louis Post-Dispatch. “We don’t have any demonstrated field resistance,” he added, pretending away the Iowa study, to speak nothing those corn fields that are “toppling over” in Illinois and and Minnesota. But the company’s denials ring hollow for another reason, too. Bill Freese, science policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety, alerted me to this 2008 study, conducted by University of Missouri researchers and published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on this precise question of Bt corn and rootworms. The first thing to notice about the study is that Monsanto is listed in the acknowledgements as one of the “supporters.” So this is Monsanto-funded research, meaning that he company would be hard-pressed to deny knowledge of it. The researchers found that within three generations, rootworms munching Monsanto’s Bt corn survived at the same rate as rootworms munching pesticide-free corn—meaning that complete resistance had been achieved. Takeaway message: rootworms are capable of evolving resistance to Monsanto’s corn in “rapid” fashion. But such concerns were nothing new by 2008. From the early days of Bt-based GMOs in the ’90s, everyone—Monsanto, the EPA, independent scientists—agreed that farmers would have to plant a portion of their fields in non-Bt corn to control resistance. The idea was that, as bugs in the Bt portion of the field began to develop resistance, they would mate with non-resistant bugs from the so-called “refuge” patch, and the resistant trait would be kept recessive within the larger bug population and thus under control. The contentious point involved how large these refuge patches would have to be. Monsanto insisted that 20 percent was adequate—that farmers could plant 80 percent of their corn crop with Bt seeds, and 20 percent in non-Bt seeds, and in so doing, avoid resistance. But the majority of a panel of scientists convened by the EPA countered that the refuge requirement should be 50 percent—which would have, of course, eaten into Monsanto’s profits by limiting its market. The reason for the scientists’ concern, Freese explained, was that the corn plants express the Bt protein toxic to root worms at a low dose, meaning that a large portion of the rootworms survive contact with the plants, leaving them to pass on resistance to the next generation. With just 20 percent of fields planted in non-Bt crops, the scientists warned, resistant rootworms would eventually swamp non-resistant ones, and we’d have corn fields toppling over in the Midwest. The minutes (PDF) of the committee’s Nov. 6, 2002, meeting on the topic documents their concerns. The majority of the committee’s members, the minutes state, “concluded that there was no practical or scientific justification for establishing a precedent for a 20 percent refuge at this time.” I asked Freese why Monsanto didn’t simply engineer a high-dose version of its rootworm-targeted corn, since that would have lowered resistance pressure and thus addressed the panel’s concerns.

“Well, from the start, the EPA pushed for a higher dose for the toxin,” he said. “My sense is that Monsanto came up with the best they could in terms of dose.” Freese stressed that industry rhetoric to the side, the genetic modification of crops turns out to be a rather crude process: The companies can’t always make the genes behave exactly as they want them to. Nevertheless, the EPA registered the rootworm-targeted corn in 2003—and defied the scientific panel it had convened by putting the refuge requirement right where Monsanto wanted it: at 20 percent. Jilted panel members, along with other prominent entomologists who hadn’t been consulted by the EPA, greeted the decision with anger and disbelief, as this May 2003 Nature article (behind a pay wall but available here) shows.”The EPA is calling for science-based regulation, but here that does not appear to be the case,” one scientist who served on the panel told Nature. Another added: “This is like the FDA approving a drug with flimsy science and saying to then do the safety testing… I don’t think that’s how you do science.” Eight years later, Monsanto and the EPA have been proven wrong, and their scientific critics have been vindicated. Monsanto, meanwhile, booked robust profits selling its corn seeds without the burden of a 50 percent refuge requirement—and continues to do so today even as the tehnology fails. http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2011/09/monsanto-denies-superinsect-science

ARTICLE 3

Scientists to Create a “Artificial Volcano” in an Attempt to Geoengineer Our Climate -by Paul Joseph Watson – 20th September 2011 (Infowars.com)

Despite the pseudo-science of global warming being discredited with each passing day, scientists are preparing to field test an “artificial volcano” which is eventually intended to lead to mammoth geoengineering programs which will inject sulfur particles in to the atmosphere at high altitudes, a process that other scientists have warned will cause widespread droughts and other drastic consequences. “Next month, researchers in the U.K. will start to pump water nearly a kilometer up into the atmosphere, by way of a suspended hose,” reports Scientific American. “The experiment is the first major test of a piping system that could one day spew sulfate particles into the stratosphere at an altitude of 20 kilometers, supported by a stadium-size hydrogen balloon. The goal is geoengineering, or the “deliberate, large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment” in the words of the Royal Society of London, which provides scientific advice to policymakers. In this case, researchers are attempting to re-create the effects of volcanic eruptions to artificially cool Earth.” Never mind the fact that the science behind global warming is only becoming more contentious, with Norwegian physicist and Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever this week quitting the American Physical Society because of its advocacy of the man-made climate change thesis, allowing scientists driven by the political agenda that global warming alarmism has become to conduct such dangerous experiments with the eco-system on such a massive scale is nothing short of insane. ARTICLE 4 Case Update: 270,000 Organic Farmers Sue Monsanto – 19th September 2011 This is an update to legal proceedings which has been released by the Organic Seed Growers & Trade Association (OSGATA). If you have not read our initial posting on this court case you can read all about it here The 83 family farmers, small and family owned seed businesses, and agricultural organizations challenging Monsanto’s patents on genetically modified seed filed papers in federal court (13th August 2011) defending their right to seek legal protection from the threat of being sued by Monsanto for patent infringement should they ever become contaminated by Monsanto’s genetically modified seed. The Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) represents the plaintiffs in the suit, titled Organic Seed Growers & Trade Association (OSGATA), et al. v. Monsanto and pending in the Southern District of New York. The August 13 filings respond to a motion filed by Monsanto in mid-July to have the case dismissed. In support of the plantiffs’ right to bring the case, 12 agricultural organizations also filed a friend-of-the-court amici brief. “Rather than give a straight forward answer on whether they would sue our clients for patent infringement if they are ever contaminated by Monsanto’s transgenic seed, Monsanto has instead chosen to try to deny our clients the right to receive legal protection from the courts,” said Dan Ravicher, PUBPAT’s Executive Director. “Filings include sworn statements by several of the plaintiffs themselves explaining to the court how the risk of contamination by transgenic seed is real and why they cannot trust Monsanto to not use an occurrence of contamination as a basis to accuse them of patent infringement.” It is now virtually impossible for a U.S. farmer to grow crops of their choosing (corn, soybeans, canola, etc.) and remain GMO-free because of the numerous biological and human means by which seeds can spread. “Given the difficulties in minimizing GM contamination farmers must make numerous decisions about which steps are worthwhile for them and which steps are not. They are not able to make these decisions based on their own and their customers‘ interests, but must instead make these decisions with the threat of litigation from a giant corporation looming over their head,” Spiegel writes in the amici brief. “The constant threat of a patent infringement suit by Monsanto creates significant, unquantifiable costs for Plaintiff farmers and similarly situated farmers.” The plaintiffs can do everything possible to maintain non-contaminated seeds, and will very likely still become contaminated, and be placed under the threat of a lawsuit. As Monsanto’s domination of the seed industry grows, and the winds continue to disperse pollen from their GMO laced crops, the likelihood of contamination and lawsuits only increases.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

I’d stick to traditional/unmodified/ancient non-hybrid and non-GMO low yield strains and keep all lines separate as certain genetically ‘healing’ values of original strains may be lost when their purity is diluted through heavy interbreeding. Unnatural selection may lead to unnatural evolution and inedible or undigestible or non-healing rice in time to come. While the rest of the world is changing entire breeds of food and thus affecting human brain structrures, I really hope that the PRC will retain at least several working fields of original strains that may be re-propagated in the even heavy reliance on a specific ‘popular’ strain opens the same strain to bio-terrorism threats or natural (who knows GMO pests?) pests. The frinal article could be applied in the greening of the arid Western Regions in China or the Middle Eastern, Sub-Saharan and African dry land areas, though the sulphur content could be replaced with entirely natural organic fertilisers instead.

2 ARTICLES ON NEUROTECH – Mid January 2012

ARTICLE 1

The cyborgs are coming! Living brains implanted with electronic chips to replace ‘faulty’ parts by Rob Waugh Last updated at 3:20 PM on 17th January 2012

The Terminator

The Terminator: Real cyborgs will be less scary – the researchers think that the technology could help people suffering from brain malfunctions such as Parkinson’s disease – by replacing damaged or malfunctioning tissue with chips. Faulty parts of living brains have been replaced by electronic chips, in an astonishing and controversial scientific breakthrough. It’s a move that has been anticipated many times in science fiction, with creatures such as The Terminator, a ‘cyborg’ hybrid of flesh and machinery.

But now, researchers at Tel Aviv University have successfully created circuits that can replace motor functions – such as blinking – and implanted them into brains.

They hope the technology could in the future help people suffering from brain malfunctions such as Parkinson’s disease – by replacing damaged or malfunctioning tissue with chips that perform the same function.

‘Imagine there’s a small area in the brain that is malfunctioning, and imagine that we understand the architecture of this damaged area,’ said Professor Matti Mintz, a psychobiologist, speaking to the BBC.

‘So we try to replicate this part of the brain with electronics.’

Mintz has already successfully implanted a robotic cerebellum into the skull of a rodent with brain damage, restoring its capacity for movement. However, anti-vivisection campaigners have described the experiments as ‘grotesque’.

‘Imagine there’s a small area in the brain that is malfunctioning, and imagine that we understand how it works. We try to replicate this part of the brain with electronics,’ said

The cerebellum is responsible for co-ordinating movement, says Mintz. When wired to the brain, his ‘robo-cerebellum’ receives, interprets, and transmits sensory information from the brain stem, facilitating communication between the brain and the body. To test this robotic interface between body and brain, the researchers taught a brain-damaged rat to blink whenever they sounded a particular tone. The rat could only perform the behavior when its robotic cerebellum was functional. According to the researcher, the chip is designed to mimic natural neuronal activity.

‘It’s a proof of the concept that we can record information from the brain, analyze it in a way similar to the biological network, and then return it to the brain,’ says Prof. Mintz, who recently presented his research at the Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence meeting in Cambridge, UK.

In the future, this robo-cerebellum could lead to electronic implants that replace damaged tissues in the human brain.

‘This type of research raises enormous ethical concerns, let alone the poor animals whose lives are wasted on dubious and ego-driven experiments,’ Jan Creamer, CEO of the National Anti-Vivisection Society, in an interview with the BBC.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2087843/Living-cyborg-brains-created-laboratory–electrical-chips-replacing-missing-parts.html

 
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Please help those who did not consent (like dissidents and activists which likely is the reason why some repressive regimes are now letting prisoners out), by restoring all natural lab regrown cerebellums or portions. This is the most cruel thing that can be done to any person who did not give consent or had any desire to be altered in a non-organic manner. Cyborgs are for children who do not know the implications or military warriors on a suicide wish . . . some of us though would prefer to set up families and not become mechanical pariahs. Combined with cellphone or satellite activation, the likelihood of Orwellian levels of mind control becomes very likely. COmbined with psychiatric medication, control becomes absolute.

ARTICLE 2

High-speed brain mapping will ‘let us understand autism and schizophrenia’ By Anna Edwards Last updated at 1:43 PM on 16th January 2012

Neuroscientists have developed a brand new way of making detailed images of whole brains.

A team at Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory have transformed the way the images can be made, normally the preserve of highly specialised research groups who have to go through a painstakingly slow process.

They have created a mechanical system of taking sections of brain samples, taking images of them one after the other and at precise angles in two-photon microscopes.
Exciting discovery: The new brain mapping will allow scientists to study diseases without a painfully slow wait

Led by Associate Professor Pavel Osten, the group of scientists from New have revolutionised whole-brain mapping, after performing experiments on mouse brains.

Prof. Osten says what is truly exciting is that now, using the new technology, researchers can study schizophrenia and autism.

The new technology, developed in concert with TissueVision of Cambridge, Massachusetts and reported on in the laboratory’s website, is called Serial Two-Photon Tomography, or STP tomography.

Tomography refers to any process – like CAT scans – that images an object section by section, by shooting penetrating waves through it.

Breakthrough: After experimenting mice brains, the scientists have discovered a way to take images and place them together to make a 3D image

Using computers the results produce a three-dimensional image, while two-photon imaging can be used to highlight specific cell types, allowing deeper optical penetration.

Prof Osten’s team reported on CSHL’s website that the new technology is much more sensitive and has many uses and already mature enough to be used in projects.

They tested the tool at different levels of resolution and claim they can get a full set of data about the brain they are studying within 6.5 to 8.5 hours, a huge improvement on current waiting times.

‘The technology is a practical one that can be used for scanning at various levels of resolution, ranging from 1 to 2 microns to less than a micron,’ Prof Osten said.

Scans at the highest resolution level take about 24 hours to collect. Using methods currently in use, it would take an experienced technician about a week to collect a set of whole-brain images at high resolution, he noted.

‘What is most exciting about this tool is its application in the study of mouse models of human illness, which we are already doing in my lab,’ Osten says in the report.

The team can begin to study ‘susceptibility genes’ that appear in brains with schizophrenia and autism, paving the way for improved study into the devastating conditions.

Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

There are gross physical brain changes in mental illnesses, such as hippocampal atrophy and ventricular enlargement seen in the negative syndrome of schizophrenia. Hopefully, this advance will be able to pinpoint physical changes at the level of individual cells, such as the GABAergic Purkinje cell losses seen in autism. I have Asperger’s syndrome and have studied the pathogenesis of non-communicable diseases for many years, including schizophrenia and autism. This research has produced many interrelated novel hypotheses regarding causation.

– William Davidson, Strathaven, UK, 17/1/2012 10:55

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2087316/High-speed-brain-mapping-let-understand-autism-schizophrenia.html

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

By reports and corroboration of events, strongly believe that this technology is already being used in 3rd world countries. Dissidents and activists are typical targets. Effects as reported can range from strokes to heart attacks to any other effects – with the drawback that bio-spiritual feedback occurs whenever this is used. The physical body of all people are linked to the ether and astral, and unnatural effects caused in implants result in corresponding effects in the bio-mind/earth consciousness network that all humans are linked to. In other words, spiritual effects from implants affects more than that single person. Implants are not holistic and thus very dangerous to mankind’s collective consciousness or – the akhasic.