Home

Nanotechnology: Tracking food from farm to fork…and you right along with it

21 Comments

Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved

______________________________________________

Noting “certain food-related ailments” this committee failed to ask the most obvious and relevant question: 

If these ailments are a result of the food we are eating…..what is the underlying problem with the food?  And why would finding a remedy for this increase in possibly deadly ailments include further contamination and adulteration of the food supply with nano-chips? 

_______________________________________________

I had come across an article in the Dairy Reporter last year, about the coming plans to insert nano-technology into food.  In the article from DR: Nanotechnology in food: What’s the big idea? By Caroline Scott-Thomas, 26-Jul-2010 this observation was made: 

“At IFT’s nanoscience conference last week, major industry players discussed how to avoid a rerun of the GMO debacle with consumers – with some saying that one solution could be to say nothing about introducing nanotechnology in foods and to do it anyway.”

We all have enough experience with today’s bio-pirates who are openly colluding with the USDA, FDA and anyone else in government, like “Dirty Harry” Reid NV (D), who single-handedly and unanimously cast the one vote needed to pass the fake food safety bill, to know that food safety and longer shelf life is most likely not what this technology is actually intended to do.  As it is, most products on the shelves of stores now are so chemically laden and contain so much gmo that I doubt spoilage is an option. After all….can chemicals, pesticides and herbicides actually rot?    More

Four To Eight Year Olds Searched For Weapons! (UPDATE)

Leave a comment

Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Interesting news.

The Rutherford Institute site explains exactly why the American People cannot question these searches:

A federal court has dismissed a Fourth Amendment lawsuit filed by The Rutherford Institute challenging the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) airport security screening policy of requiring air passengers to either submit to virtual strip searches involving advanced imaging technology (AIT), which exposes intimate details of a person’s body to government agents, or submit to highly invasive pat down searches during which TSA agents may go so far as to reach inside a traveler’s pants. U.S. District Court Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr., justified his dismissal by declaring that the court has no jurisdiction over the case, citing a secret order issued by the TSA which requires that the D.C. Court of Appeals hear any reviews of TSA orders. Insisting that it contains “sensitive security information,” the government has yet to make public the order embodying the TSA enhanced screening procedures.

Secret orders? More

%d bloggers like this: