The state of Washington is the first in the union to start “composting” dead human bodies as crop “fertilizer,” bringing to real life the fictitious scenario depicted in the famous dystopian film Soylent Green.
Bill 5001 will take effect on May 1, 2020, allowing for human corpses to undergo a process known as “liquid cremation,” whereby alkaline hydrolysis is used to turn rotting flesh and bones into an “organic fertilizer” sludge.
“I am very much in favor of the composting of human bodies!” declared Wes McMahan, a retired cardiovascular intensive-care nurse who recently testified in support of the bill.
“When I’m done with this body that served me very well for the past 64 years, do I want to poison it with formaldehyde and other embalming chemicals? No,” he added. “Burned? Not my first choice. But what about all the bacteria I’ve worked with so long in this body – do I want to give them a chance to do what they do naturally? I believe in doing things as naturally as possible.”
Katrina Spade, the founder and CEO of a company known as Recompose that aspires to be the first “natural organic reduction” funeral home in the United States, is also excited about the bill, which she says fulfills “a longtime hope” of hers to create “an urban, soil-based, ecologically friendly death-care option.” More
Methylmercury is an organic and highly toxic form of mercury. When people suffer from mercury poisoning, it is usually from ingesting large amounts of methylmercury. One source of methylmercury is seafood.
Many fish are exposed to methylmercury through their diet. Algae and other forms of aquatic life at the bottom of the food chain absorb organic methylmercury. Fish and other aquatic organisms that consume algae absorb this poison and then, when larger fish at the top of the food chain eat those fish, they continue to accumulate methylmercury.
What the Health is the groundbreaking follow-up film from the creators of the award-winning documentary Cowspiracy. The film exposes the collusion and corruption in government and big business that is costing us trillions of healthcare dollars, and keeping us sick.
What The Health is a surprising, and at times hilarious, investigative documentary that will be an eye-opener for everyone concerned about our nation’s health and how big business influences it.
You can watch “What the Health”HERE. This documentary is also on Netflix.
Pans with a non-stick coating are convenient but new research suggests that the chemical used for the coating is extremely toxic and exposure on any level could prove dangerous to brain health, the reproductive system, and immune system.
This is a REALLY important message. Tomorrow is a big day as we release episode 1 of our new, free-to-view docu-series: GMOs Revealed.
Because of your interest in Vaccines Revealed, I know you will want to see this too. The fact that we are being poisoned and being lied to about it
makes this absolutely vital, ‘need-to-know’ information.
Through the journey of creating GMOs Revealed, I was stunned by what I uncovered. I thought
I understood the GMO issue pretty well… I was wrong.
However, I also discovered many actions I could take for myself and my family to ‘undo’ the horrible health effects of GMOs and the toxic chemicals sprayed on them. So there is an empowering and positive side to the series. And I have to say, our experts were sensational.
The truth is starting to come out and you need to know about it.
You can register now for GMOs Revealed and see the entire 9-part docu-series for no cost at all.
There is no doubt that the GMO agenda has caused the biggest environmental catastrophe in history.
You need to know the facts and you also need to know what actions you can take to safeguard yourself and loved ones.
I made it my passionate mission to bring all of this to you with unbridled truth.
And can I ask you to please share this by forwarding this email to friends and family and other loved ones?
According to many health care experts, it’s getting increasingly difficult to stay healthy due to the types of foods we continue to consume as a society.
Food additives such as Aspartame and MSG (Monosodium glutamate) are believed by many to cause irreparable harm to human beings. Despite the large number of warnings coming from scientists and doctors, large corporations continue to oversee the lacing of our foodstuffs with harmful chemicals.
Aspartame, a controversial artificial sweetener, has been classified by some doctors and medical researchers as a neuro-excitotoxin capable of causing harmful lesions within the human nervous system. Russell Blaylock, a retired neurosurgeon and former professor at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, is one of the physicians that has publicly stated his views about the dangers of this product.
Aspartame was introduced into food products and soft drinks, around the world, by the pharmaceutical company, G.D. Searle during the same time frame that Donald Rumsfeld, former Defense Secretary of the United States, was the company’s acting CEO. Later, Searle was taken over by Monsanto, a corporation believed by many to have very close ties to the CIA.
Living in a rural agricultural community, I have witnessed first hand the devastation to the land and water from industrialized agriculture. The other thing I have noticed over the years, is the dwindling numbers and kinds of wildlife, both large and small. It is not uncommon to see major fish kills in rivers, lakes and streams, dead birds and small animals in large numbers around the fields of gmo crops. The continual spraying of toxic chemicals to grow what is widely recognized as crops not fit for human consumption, is not to be stopped.
It only gets worse from here
Having done several Whistleblower’s episodes on my blogtalk channel “TS Radio”, the news that Sonny Perdue will most likely be the new Secretary of Agriculture does not come as good news. Perdue, who is funded and backed by major bio-piracy companies most notably Monsanto, and others who are in the process of overtaking agriculture for profit, should come as no surprise. More
Now biotech companies want local residents to pay the costs of clean-up! Action Alert!
Over a decade ago, Scotts partnered with Monsanto to market a GM bentgrass resistant to glyphosate (Roundup). It was planted next to the Malheur National Forest in test plots ostensibly controlled by Oregon State University. Unbeknownst to most people, it was also planted all over the US—in California, Iowa, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and seventeen other states.
It was supposed to be confined and controlled, but it very quickly escaped and spread out of the test plots in Oregon into Idaho, and crossbred with natural grasses to create new breeds that were also resistant to glyphosate. It clogged up irrigation ditches, threatening food crops and contaminating pasture-raised cattle with GMOs. In addition to the immediate threats to farmers and ranchers, grass seed—which is among Oregon’s top five commodities—is now under threat.
Initially, Scotts-Monsanto tried to stop the spread and clean up the contamination. But it was unable to do so because the original bentgrass (and now the other grasses it cross-pollinated with) are glyphosate-resistant. More toxic herbicides have been brought in to try to keep irrigation ditches clear, and to stop the grasses from clogging and eventually killing waterways important to wildlife and humans.
Now, according to The Oregonian, Scotts-Monsanto is walking away from the monster it created, leaving farmers, ranchers, wildlife, and eventually the fishing industry (if it spreads to the Columbia River) to deal with it. The current conundrum is that herbicides necessary to kill the invasive GM grasses are toxic to aquatic life, including fish. Soon the grasses will become resistant to even the most toxic chemicals, and nothing will eradicate the invasive grasses but heavy equipment.
Worst of all, the effects of GM products replacing natural grasses and plants on wildlife were completely predictable.
Scotts-Monsanto was fined $500,000, the maximum penalty under the Plant Protection Act, and agreed never to sell GM bentgrass. In addition, the companies were ordered to eradicate the GM nuisance in irrigation districts so farmers could continue farming.
But the federal government is apparently stepping in to help Scotts-Monsanto avoid liability. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently deregulated the GM grass, a move that shifts the burden of controlling GM bentgrass from Scotts-Monsanto to local landowners and American taxpayers.
The law is clear: if a plant poses a risk, the USDA is not to deregulate it. Scotts-Monsanto has already signed an agreement not to sell the product. So why is the USDA violating the law and deregulating GM bentgrass? Why would Scotts-Monsanto ask that it be deregulated when it has agreed not to sell it? It may be because GM bentgrass has been planted all over the United States, and when it’s discovered that the Oregon scenario is happening in every state, Scotts-Monsanto can pin it on the government and the taxpayers avoiding responsibility for costly clean-ups.
There are precedents for farmers and consumers holding biotech companies legally accountable in these scenarios. Midwestern corn growers filed a class-action lawsuit against Syngenta last year, claiming the company’s GM corn contaminated their crops and cost them billions in international sales. In 2011, Bayer paid $750 million to Southern rice growers in a similar scenario.
We hope justice is done in Oregon, and the parties responsible for this mess are forced to clean it up.
Action Alert! Tell the USDA to stop offering legal liability protection to biotech companies. Please send your message immediately.
You can also listen to the show on your phone by calling (917) 388-4520.
You can call in with questions during the 2nd half hour, by dialing (917) 388-4520, then pressing 1.
This show will be archived so you can listen to it anytime.
Nancy Watson on the Mall in Washington D.C.
Our guest tonight is Nancy Watson, President of SAFE Food SAFE Horses Coalition, representing 1.75 million members in support of the Safeguard American Food Exports (SAFE) Act from coalition partners. Nancy was raised in a Standardbred racing family, and immersed herself in advocating for a ban on horse slaughter after she learned that the fiscal budget had been altered to allow for USDA inspections of horse slaughter facilities in the U.S. in 2011. More
You can also listen to the show on your phone by calling (917) 388-4520.
You can call in with questions during the 2nd half hour, by dialing (917) 388-4520, then pressing 1.
This show will be archived so you can listen to it anytime.
________________________________________
Gene Baur has been hailed as “the conscience of the food movement” by Time magazine. For more than 25 years he has traveled extensively around the country, campaigning to raise awareness about the abuses of industrialized factory farming and our current food system.
A pioneer in the field of undercover investigations, Gene has visited hundreds of farms, stockyards, and slaughterhouses documenting their deplorable conditions. His pictures and videos exposing factory farming cruelties have aired nationally and internationally, educating millions about the plight of modern farm animals.
Gene has also testified in courts and before local, state, and federal legislative bodies, advocating for better conditions for farm animals. His most important achievements include winning the first-ever cruelty conviction at a U.S. stockyard and introducing the first U.S. laws to prohibit cruel farming confinement methods in Florida, Arizona, and California. His efforts have been covered by top news organizations, including The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and The Wall Street Journal. In 2008, Gene’s book, Farm Sanctuary: Changing Hearts and Minds About Animals and Food, became a national bestseller.
To support my ability to continue making videos like this, check out my Patreon at http://patreon.com/erinjanus or directly donate here https://paypal.me/erinjanus All contributions are much appreciated and make my independent videos, projects and productions like this possible! ♥
Activists from all across the nation are converging in Denver, Colorado this October for the Stop the Frack Attack National Summit. At the summit, anti-fracking activists and front line communities will come together to build our movement and discuss how we are going to put an end to fracking nationwide. There will be numerous workshops on organizing, outreach, non-violent direct action, community rights building, fundraising, and much more.
The Stop the Frack Attack National Summit is being held in Denver, Colorado from October 3rd – 5th. For more information and to RSVP, please visit: http://bitly.com/FrackingSummit
This summit will also be the first non-violent direct action training opportunity for Californians who have taken the Pledge of Resistance. If you haven’t already taken the pledge to resist extreme oil & gas extraction in California, please sign on here: http://bitly.com/ResistFracking.
There are scholarships still available for folks who can’t afford some of the costs, so if you are free during the first weekend of October, please consider joining us in Colorado! If you have any questions, please feel free to email me at damienluzzo33@gmail.com.
Yesterday, 275 members (see vote tally here) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll462.xml of the U.S. House of Representatives voted in favor of H.R. 1599, the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act. By voting for the DARK Act, these politicians voted against truth and transparency, against science, against the more than century-old right of states to legislate on matters relating to food safety and labeling.
They voted against the 90-percent of Americans who are in favor of mandatory labeling of GMOs. They voted against the producers of non-GMO foods.
They voted against you.
Now that the DARK Act has been approved by the House, we’ll have to stop it in the Senate. We have to move fast—because Monsanto is desperate to pass a bill that preempts mandatory GMO labeling laws at the state and federal levels, before Vermont’s GMO labeling law takes effect next year.
H.R. 1599 was sold to Congress via multi-million dollar public relations and lobbying campaigns built on lies and deception. The bill’s sole purpose is to support an industry—Monsanto’s poison-peddling industry—that was founded on lies and deception from the get-go.
Were the Congress members who voted against you fooled by Monsanto’s slick, deceitful packaging of this so-called “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act”? Or did they simply vote with their wallets, stuffed full of biotech and junk food industry cash?
We don’t know. But we know this: We can’t let this bill get through the U.S. Senate.
This clip is from a March 24, 2015 Nebraska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission hearing on an out-of-state company’s application to export its toxic fracking wastewater into Nebraska, moving 80 truckloads carrying 10,000 barrels per day of pollution destined to be dumped into a disposal well in Sioux County — transferring all the risk onto Nebraska farmers and ranchers.
James Osborn, who commented below, is my new hero. – Debbie
SIGN the PETITION to the Nebraska Oil & Gas Commission “DON’T FRACK OUR WATER” HERE.
These bills will do two things: 1) Create another monolithic, uncontrollable secretive agency that will work in favor of globalism and against American food producers, and 2) it will be used to redefine vitamins and supplements as a medicine so that this market sector can be monopolized by big pharma.
Its unfortunate that Dick Durbin and Rosa DeLauro express no concern over the injuries and deaths caused by pharmaceuticals and vaccines. These two items represent tens of thousands of deaths and permanent injuries each and every year. Instead, these two political sell-outs are working at a feverish pace to sequester the supplement industry and put it not only under control of some huge new bureaucracy, but squarely in the hands of big pharmaceutical companies.
Just imagine for a moment, if a supplement was advertised on your TV and the manufacturer said the supplement could cause homicidal, suicidal ideation. What if they went on to say the supplement could cause an increase in the likelihood of heart attack or stroke? Brain bleeds? Paralysis? Tremors? What if they admitted that the medication would cause damage to the brain? To internal organs? What if they said it could cause high blood pressure and diabetes? What if they said it could also cause death?
How long do you think that supplement would be on the market? Yet medications and vaccines are advertised hundreds of times a day; advertisements that admit the products are dangerous to take, if not outright deadly.
Michael Moss’ powerful New York Times’ investigation into the United States Department of Agriculture’s Meat Animal Research Center (“U.S. Research Lab Lets Livestock Suffer In Quest For Profit”) predictably outraged readers. The collective angst came not just because of the center’s ghoulish and inept experimentation; not just because the research animals suffered to boost profits in the livestock industry; but because the public learned that taxpayers had footed the bill — and had been doing so — for fifty years.
Compare that discovery to the recent media attention given to a very similar program, one involving even more animals, conducted to boost livestock industry profits, costing even more taxpayer dollars, and degrading millions of acres of public rangelands in the American West: The Bureau of Land Management’s Wild Horse and Burros Program (WHB).
The news media regularly covers this program. Articles about wild horses appear daily, in fact. So why is the public incensed over the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Meat Animal Research Center while the WHB program goes ignored?
The difference is in the reporting. Coverage of the Meat Animal Research Center (which we review here) was initiated by government whistleblowers within the research facility. An experienced investigative reporter subsequently spent a year researching the claims, largely through Freedom of Information Act requests. Federal and corporate perspectives were handled with appropriate suspicion.
Coverage of the WHB program, on the other hand, is typically sourced almost entirely from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the industries benefiting economically from wild horse roundups: notably, private ranchers holding public grazing permits (though mining and energy development companies profit, too).
If Moss, in his reporting on the Meat Animal Research Center, had turned to the USDA’s web site and livestock producers to ask about doing research to boost industry profits, would anyone ever know about “easy-care sheep” and lambs left to perish in rainstorms courtesy of unknowing taxpayers? Of course not.
Non-industry sources comprise less than 8 percent of the articles’ collective text. The other 92 percent is all industry boilerplate. Enders’ loyalty to the ranchers’ perspective even creeps into her word choices. Notably, she uses rancher lingo to refer to wild horses, calling them “feral.” Her point of view is clear, and it’s 92% bull.
This kind of source bias would be understandable coming from a reporter for a beef industry trade publication. But Enders is a reporter for a major media outlet.
An over-reliance on federal and industry sources is problematic not just for animals, but for the consumers who eat them (and care about their welfare). Enders’ piece notably fails to answer the two questions posed in her own headline: a) why you should eat horse meat, and b) why you can’t.
One reason why you can’t eat horse meat is that some states ban it outright. The larger reason is that Congress passed an amendment banning inspections in horse slaughter plants, preventing them from opening. These facts are well documented in the media, as this January 17, 2014 NPR article exemplifies.
A bipartisan majority supported this amendment because the drugs horses routinely take are banned in food animals. Furthermore, there is no proper system in place to track these drugs, making it impossible to keep tainted horse meat out of the food chain. As a reporter, Enders should have known these facts. And reported them.
Enders’ suggestion that wild horses would be suitable alternatives is equally misinformed. For one thing, wild horses in BLM holding facilities are wormed and vaccinated (therefore not free of drugs banned in meat animals). For another, Congress prohibits the slaughter of wild horses. As a reporter, Enders should have known that, too.
Why did she not? Simple: industry, whom she relied on for her reporting, doesn’t offer this information. The only place you’ll learn about the intricacies of horse slaughter (and wild horse round-ups) is from advocacy groups: the very people Enders and Philipps gave one word of text to for every eleven it handed to ranchers and the BLM.
Again, sources matter. Consider, as a final point, the dramatic photo in Enders’ piece showing wild horses fighting, one with its teeth bared and the caption, “Overcrowding on the frontiers of the American west could lead to a depletion of natural resources for wild horses.”
The photo confirms the article’s bias. The problem is that it doesn’t depict wild horses fighting over depleted natural resources in the American West at all. Rather, it was taken in Sabucedo, Spain during a 400-year-old “horse festival” called rapa das bestas, a macabre ritual in which wild horses are driven down from the mountains, wrestled to the ground to have their manes and tails trimmed, and “corralled into a village where they face aloitadores or fighters in this man vs. animal challenge – minus weapons, just bare hands and hooves.”
There’s a reason why complex topics — such as Moss’ investigation into the Meat Animal Research Center and wild horses rounded up by the BLM — require thoughtful digging and reporting. The alternative — an easy reliance on self-interested federal and industry sources — keeps the public in the dark about the inept, incomprehensible and inhumane things that the government is doing with its money. Journalists should not be abetting that corruption. They should be exposing it.
“The USDA added, however, that due to “cost concerns,” it did not test for residues of glyphosate. Let’s repeat that: they never tested for the active ingredient in the most widely used herbicide in the world. “Cost concerns”? How absurd—unless they mean it will cost them too much in terms of the special relationship between the USDA and Monsanto.”
___________________________________________
Why? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food. (This is what I have been warning about for a couple of years now and 30,000 supermarket items contain it. Worse yet (?) is the projected cancer increase in most of the population in the next two decades from the impeccable French studies on lab rats who ate our GMO corn.. Sadly most of the big money is all for GMO, regardless of what it does – over $100 Million was spent to defeat citizen proposals to require food to be labelled if GMO in just California, Oregon and Washington State in 2012 – 2014 and be sure to take a close look at the chart at the bottom of the article…R)
For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. (1). In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health. More
I repeat, wild horses being driven to extinction by the BLM is the canary in the coal mine of what is happening on America’s public lands and to America’s water. – Debbie Coffey
In a time when California faces an historic drought, the NBC Bay Area Investigative Unit has uncovered that state officials allowed oil and gas companies to pump billions of gallons of waste water into protected aquifers. Investigative Reporter Stephen Stock reports in a story that aired on November 14, 2014.
State officials allowed oil and gas companies to pump nearly three billion gallons of waste water into underground aquifers that could have been used for drinking water or irrigation.
Those aquifers are supposed to be off-limits to that kind of activity, protected by the EPA.
“It’s inexcusable,” said Hollin Kretzmann, at the Center for Biological Diversity in San Francisco. “At (a) time when California is experiencing one of the worst droughts in history, we’re allowing oil companies to contaminate what could otherwise be very useful ground water resources for irrigation and for drinking. It’s possible these aquifers are now contaminated irreparably.”
California’s Department of Conservation’s Chief Deputy Director, Jason Marshall, told NBC Bay Area, “In multiple different places of the permitting process an error could have been made.”
“There have been past issues where permits were issued to operators that they shouldn’t be injecting into those zones and so we’re fixing that,” Marshall added.
In “fracking” or hydraulic fracturing operations, oil and gas companies use massive amounts of water to force the release of underground fossil fuels. The practice produces large amounts of waste water that must then be disposed of. More
Worldwide sentiment is shifting against Monsanto and GMO food crops. And China is making major moves.
At sustainablepulse.com, we have this May 14, 2014, article: “Chinese Army Bans All GMO Grains and Oil from Supply Stations”:
“The Chinese army has ordered all military supply stations to only allow the purchase of non-GMO grain and food oil due to health safety concerns over GMOs.
“This move by the Chinese army is being seen as yet another step towards the Chinese government’s expected ban on the import of all GMO grains and oilseeds within the next 2 years, due to growing public concern over GMOs. The expected ban would be a huge blow to the Biotech industry worldwide.
“The Hubei Province Xiangyang City Grain Bureau’s website announced on May 6, 2014:
“‘During recent years, as China’s grain and oil market has continuously developed, certain GMO grain and GMO food oil products have entered the market. In view that the safety concerns about GMO grain and oil products in China at present has not yet been determined, in order to overall assure the health of military members residing in our city and safety of their drinks and food, in accordance to the request from the Guangzhou Military Command Joint Logistics Department and the Provincial Military Grain & Food Oil Supply Center, from this date all military supply stations are allowed to only purchase non-GMO grain and food oil products from the designated processing enterprises. It is forbidden to supply GMO grain and food oil products to military units within their administration areas. More
Tom Mysiewicz is a biotechnologist. In this article he shares with us his conclusions about the dangers of GMO crops.
By Tom Mysiewicz
Recently, an NGO (non-governmental organization) in Russia—the National Association for Genetic Safety–began working closely with the Russian Duma to enact a set of laws criminalizing the introduction of harmful genetically-modified crops (GM or GMO crops) as well as withholding information on harmful effects of such crops. Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated he will sign such legislation, saying Russia can grow enough food for itself without genetic engineering it.
“If Americans like to eat such foods, they can eat them,” Putin is reported to have said. But with GMO companies in the U.S. massively campaigning to hide GMO content—do Americans really know what they are eating?
I believe Russia and, increasingly, countries elsewhere, are on the right track in this regard. And I base this belief on my first-hand observations from the inception of GMO crops—and the original promises made and assurances given for this technology—to the much different reality I see today.
As founder and editor of the weekly biotechnology newsletter–BioEngineering News–I covered GMOs and ag-biotech from 1980 through 1993 and was the first journalist allowed (under a secrecy agreement) to cover a Gordon Research Conference. This groundbreaking conference, on Plant Genetic Engineering, was at U.C. Davis in the early 1980s. I have also had hands-on research experience, including lab courses on plant tissue culture in which I cloned a variety of plants from jojoba to redwood.
The original promise of genetic engineering was that crops could be grown without fertilizer or pesticides, in salt water if fresh water was scarce, and that the nutritional content could be altered at will by the addition of genes for amino acids (the building blocks of protein) such as L-lysine and genes coding for vitamins, such as vitamin A. In this “brave new world” hunger and malnutrition would be eliminated by massively higher crop yields. And there would be no down side: We were assured that there would be no actual or consequential harmful effects from such alterations.
Many Americans are not aware that the system of clinical trials and double-blind studies for new drugs means that it can cost $30- to $60-million to get a single new drug through FDA-mandated clinical trials. And, still, how many horror stories have we heard of dangerous drug side effects? Imagine if NO clinical trials were required for new drugs and only some rudimentary safety testing was necessary? Would you feel safe taking a new drug?
GM-biohazard Help us put an end to this underhanded end-run around the courts once and for all. Urgent Action Alert!
As you know, last March, what the world has been calling the “Monsanto Protection Act” was inserted at the last minute into a “must-pass” funding bill to keep the government running through the use of a congressional tool known as a Continuing Resolution (CR). The so-called Farmer Assurance Provision—misnamed because, frankly, the only ones who are assured about anything are GMO manufacturers like Monsanto—actually strips federal courts of the authority to halt the sale and planting of potentially hazardous genetically engineered crops while USDA is performing an environmental impact statement. It’s a huge blow to the justice system, completely overriding judicial safeguards that protect both farmers and the public. More
The USDA which has become nothing more than a domestic threat to rural America never does anything remotely considered to be family, independent, rural, USA friendly unless of course you happen to be one of those Big Ag and the Bio-Pirates, corporate partners.
The idea that USDA is closing domestic offices while leaving massive numbers of foreign offices open for business is alarming on the one hand and yet, somehow comforting to think the staffs of what has become known as a domestic terrorist organization might be out of work. Not so fast Gretel! What you need to be asking yourself is……what is going to replace it? You know they aren’t just going to leave our family farmers and ranchers alone. There is something else most definitely in the works and the notice below might just be the tip off to what that something is and what might be on the horizon.
The fact that the infamous FDA was part of this meeting should have us all running screaming for cover. More
Shortly after “Dirty Harry” Reid passed the fake food safety bill in here in the US, with his one unanimous vote, C-36 passed two weeks later in Canada. Both bills were an outright attack on individual rights and property rights as both governments claim they now have the authority to unilaterally decide who can grow, process and sell foods and under what conditions. And, just as here in the US, those lawmakers responsible for this attack on liberty claimed they did so because that was what the public demanded and was begging for.
Actually, in both countries just the opposite was true; the public was demanding that these bills not be passed. Dirty Harry claimed that more than 10,000 people had begged him to pass the bill while never mentioning that more than a million had objected. But in neither case was food safety and security the real intent of the legislation. Both the US and Canada were handing agricultural production in all its forms, over to international organizations and multi-national corporations.
– abolishing protection from trespass, a court-ordered warrant, and the need for court-supervised search and seizure;
– on ONLY suspicion, health inspectors with the aid of police can invade any location in the country, seize and confiscate goods deemed unsafe (i.e. health supplements) and violate all constitutional rights of all parties involved
– it bypasses existing laws on privacy and confidentiality and explicitly exempts the Minister of Health and government inspectors from any kind of third-party oversight and accountability;
**Note: In the US the Secretary of Health & Human Services and any of her delegates were given the same immunity, and US citizens were denied their right to access the courts for redress.
– the need to publish regulations governing the activities of the inspectors is abolished, too; More
It comes as no surprise that the fake food safety bill passed here in the US in what was clearly a staged event that required the complicity of the other 99 Senators who voluntarily vacated the US Senate chamber to allow “Dirty Harry” to cast the only vote as “unanimous” is being mirrored, replicated and implemented in many other countries. Canada passed its C-36 bill shortly after “Dirty Harry” completed his task here in the US, and now it appears New Zealand food rights are on the chopping block too.
What are the chances that New Zealand Retailers Association would come up with what appears to be a line of propaganda nearly identical to the crap foisted on the American public as their rights to produce and consume foods of their choice were attacked relentlessly by Big AG and the bio-pirates along with other corporate interests who stand to profit immensely at the expense of the public? These are the same interested party’s and stakeholders who rammed C-36 through Canada’s parliament.
And here we see the same limp arguments coming out of New Zealand, promoted by yet another retailers association intent on convincing New Zealanders that their food supply and production, needs “modernization”. Modernization with regards to food can be easily defined as centralization of food production and supply to provide market monopolies to multi-national corporations. The greatest threat to food supply chains around the world is industrialized food which provides neither safe food, nor nutritious food. Progress on the food bill:More
_______________________________________________________
On August 20th, 2010, the FDA issued a recall and alert of an estimated 300 million (or was it billion?) eggs that were produced at Wright County Egg in Galt, Iowa. Far from being the first time this egg company had been sited for unsanitary conditions or other FDA violations, the FDA subsequent to the latest infractions which affected consumers in many states, issued a warning letter (yet again) to the company. No one from Wright Egg Company was arrested; no product was seized or destroyed and not one person associated with Wright Egg was taken to court or charged with any crimes. What did follow was a letter of warning.
The letter states: “Failure to take prompt corrective action may result in regulatory action being initiated by the Food and Drug Administration without further notice. These actions include, but are not limited to, seizure and/or injunction.”
No seizure or injunction occurred. In fact,Wright County Egg really never missed a day of production, or was penalized in any meaningful way for their ongoing disregard of FDA standards.
“The FDAis in ongoing communications with Wright County Egg to ensure that appropriate preventive measures are put in place to reduce the risk of recurrence.”
I bet they were really shakin’ in their shoes! (sarc) More
Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
The great thing about “banning” food items is the ease in which it is completed these days. For instance:
Raw-milk dairy closes as costs rise
But the owners of Greenwood Farms, Holly and Steve Atkinson, say their numbers just weren’t working. The equipment, chemical and labor costs of producing raw milk were simply too high, despite growing demand from consumers willing to pay $10 or more a gallon.
Because there is no “Free Market” competition as a result of huge milk subsidies, the smaller producer is pushed out. In this case by their own responsible choice to protect the safety of their customers. Don’t forget the “barrier to entry” that exists to even start-up a small dairy.
To survive financially, Atkinson said, the farm would have to scale up — and that would come only at the expense of safety.
“We would’ve had to double the number of cows and work 80 hours a week,” she said. “If we had grown the dairy to where we could make a profit, I don’t think we could’ve produced safe raw milk because once you get that big, you get into the factory mentality.”
If the artificial dairy market was not boosted by $74.1 Million last year through governmental interference, having to compete with small dairies would force Agri-dairy to be more responsible.
For more information on “the dairy world” from a really great site, visit johnbuntingsjournal.
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
“As a result of their continuing protection of, and approval of, untested medications and vaccines producers, is it any wonder the FDA Food & Drug Administration) is now openly referred to by the public as the “Federal Death Administration”?
Even as the FDA has for decades routinely given a seal of approval to toxic and deadly medications and vaccines, claiming they are safe, and as hundreds and thousands of people, if not millions, have died or have been permanently injured as a result of their incompetence and gross dereliction of duty, this agency continues its assault on natural remedies and aids claiming they need to be regulated by FDA.
While one toxic and deadly medication, such as Vioxx can claim 70,000 lives, the manufacturer is never shut down by the FDA. Merck Pharmaceuticals never pays any fines or penalties. While they may be sued in court for wrongful death, this is only AFTER they have sold enough of their toxin to exceed any long term risk assessment costs.
In other words: Merck knows its product is lethal. It weighs the long term risk. The questions are never those of public safety, possible harm or death from using their product, but rather:
Can we sell enough of Vioxx fast enough and at levels high enough to offset what we estimate will be the costs of lawsuits for the people we killed or permanently injured and still make a hefty profit?” More
