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.
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.
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! ♥
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.
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
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
Sue Wallis recently released talking points for supporters to use with their legislators. Talking points should be concise but more importantly, accurate. Apparently, Sue Wallis did not get the memo on the latter. Not only are they inaccurate but she can’t keep her lies straight, particularly when it comes to numbers. It is not wise to disprove your own statements. She not only shoots herself in the foot but continues reloading and shooting over and over again.
Take special note that once again, the issue of food safety is completely ignored. Feel free to share this in your conversations with legislators! My apologies for a plain document in comparison to the slick PDF from Wallis. I thought content was more important than esthetics.
Today, more than 300,000 horses in America have no where to go, living out the last of their days to die painful death of starvation and thirst.
There are no statistics to substantiate this outrageous claim. And even if it were true, less than 115,000 horses are slaughtered each year so there would still be almost 200,000 horses that “have nowhere to go”. The foreign meat business only buys the number of horses needed to fill the demand, not the number of available horses. This point is worthless and a clear message that horse slaughter will not solve any problems that may exist. Slaughter is for food production and not the place to send horses “that have nowhere to go”. Note to self Sue, don’t refute your own arguments in the same statement.
The Government Accounting Office (GAO) report of June 2011 indicates that any U.S. appropriation riders and bills that seek to eliminate humane horse processing in the U.S. offer ZERO solutions.
Horse slaughter hasn’t provided any solutions and is confirmed with your first talking point. So you now have two talking points that say nothing and offer nothing. The GAO report also recommended banning horse slaughter. More
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
Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
_________________________________
“One should not forget however that NAIS still exists, just with an exciting new name : Animal Disease Traceability Framework or whatever it is being called this week.”
_________________________________________________
In what has to be one of the most laughable complaints to emerge from the UK in the past month (besides the “hat wars” at the Royal Wedding of course Dahling), there is “dismay” from the National Farm Union over a program remarkably similar to the now defunct National Animal Identification System.
The British equivalent of The Farm Bureau here Stateside, not so long ago words emerged from the leadership as to the effect of EID on the Brit’s Livestock Industry. Livestock Board Chairman Mackintosh says:
“As a sheep producer myself I fully understand the threat to our industry that EID poses. The Board and I will do everything within our powers to delay implementation of EID until a workable and crucially a cost effective solution can be found taking into account decisions already made at an EU level,” he said.
Oh complaints have been made over the years before the implementation, but the EU continued to “encourage” participation while ensuring that all the concerns would be taken into consideration. Of course small-scale livestock producers have been fighting since 2003 against this program (see here a short synopsis), but now the “Big Boys” are a bit miffed. One wonders why?
Well first look at the little list of what must be done to “comply”:
Tag facts
• All sheep born or first tagged from 1 January 2010 (new sheep) must be identified with two identifiers bearing the same number
• Sheep still do not have to be tagged until they are nine months old or until they are being moved off the holding, whichever is the sooner The colour of the new EID tags and the matching conventional tags is yellow, but sheep producers may choose a different colour for the matching conventional tag if useful for on-farm management purposes
• Older sheep don’t have to be upgraded to EID if they don’t leave the holding and carry at least one old green tag More
Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved
_________________________________________
‘A problem arises as a result of family farmers and ranchers not having the bags of cash needed to dump into USDA and FDA to buy access as the bio-pirates do.”
___________________________________________
While Homeland Security continues to claim that we must not centralize agricultural production because some terrorist might then poison vast quantities of our food supply, the USDA and FDA continue to rig the system in favor of corporate agricultural producers who are doing that very thing. Maybe they get away with this because what these global corporations are producing can’t really be classified as food, or at least not as food we would recognize as fit for human consumption.
Let me make this perfectly clear: there is no unnamed terrorist in a cave on the other side of the world salivating over the idea of contaminating a corn field in Iowa. We know who the terrorists are, and they all have the word, “Corporation” attached to their names. And they aren’t in caves either; many have very nice and spacious offices right inside the USDA and FDA.
While biotechnology is touted as being the answer to the world’s food requirements, no one has stopped to ask why all this tampering with, mother nature was necessary in the first place. Biotechnology has not caused an increase in food supplies as the bio-pirates claimed it would. In fact, supposedly a world-wide food crisis is building and a larger percentage of people around the world suffer from hunger and starvation. Now, one of two things has to be true here if there is actually a food shortage.
Biotechnology does not increase production as claimed or,
Food is being intentionally withheld from various populations.
Neither thought bodes well for the bio-pirates. More
Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
The riveting 345 page Government Accounting Office bestseller is hot off the presses!
For those of us who wonder what S510 was really for in the first place, don’t worry – there is no mention of “harmonizing” the entire food system under one “super-stellar ultra-powerful” (SSUP) governmental organization to starve the little people into submission – the proposal presented is just to save money!
“… the study provides additional evidence for the need to consolidate food safety oversight into one independent agency.
“I have introduced legislation that would establish such an agency since 1999 and believe that this is a critical step toward preventing foodborne illnesses and protecting public health,”
If one should choose to waste a few hours perusing this interesting PDf entitled “Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue,” (ORPDGPSTDER) (alternate Text option here) look for such stirring passages as: More
Lynn Swearingen (c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved
_______________________________________________
I read with interest this morning a little article (1). It might be hard to miss this little gem, but not for me apparently. My inbox overflowith with the link. Queries, questions, and disbelief. After re-reading the article, a curious question crossed my mind. What exactly is the process of introducing ammonia going to do to me? So of course I started looking…..
The first tinge of alarm came from a 2004 article discussing Mr. Roth’s receipt of the FoodQuality award (2):
“….and the patented method became a federally deemed “generally regarded as safe” (GRAS) process.”
Oh my. That sounds, uhm – tasty. What exactly is “generally recognized as safe” and who decides that? (3):
“A GRAS designation typically exists in one of three forms: More
Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved
Originally published in August 2009
Greetings:
Consider this a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to all members of the Senate, all members of the House, and to President Obama. I am sure you are fully aware of the intent and implications of MOUs, as each of you, in one way or another, uses them to establish the outlining of agreements between yourselves, collectively or individually, concerning the agreements you have made with individuals acting as state’s representatives or agencies; generally to avoid Constitutional prohibitions on your intended actions and in avoidance of the Constitution. I am using it in quite another fashion as you will see in the following text. More
How many times does Congress have to stick it to us before we realize that this body politic has no other function than to obey its corporate masters? If you think that you are being represented by these crooks, liars and thieves, then think again. The “Food Safety” bill is alive and has taken so many twists and turns to end up on the verge of becoming law of the land that nobody in his or her right mind could possibly believe that they are not going to cram this garbage down our collective throat no matter what.
And if you thought that good old Sen. Tom Coburn, who had been blocking the legislation would ultimately hold onto what little integrity he could muster and save the day by rescuing us from impending Food Safety doom, think no more. “He lifted his objection at the final moment” (Alexander Bolton), and this travesty of justice was passed in the Senate by unanimous consent.
So, I present to you, unequivocally, the final straw that broke the camel’s back for any sane person relying on Congress to be anything other than what it is; and that is a reeking cesspool of corruption and deceit. It would seem that the only thing to do now is bend over and…well, you know the rest. The House will, quite possibly place the final nail in the coffin on Tuesday.
December 19, 2010 8:39 PM [S.510] A major food safety bill that had almost been given up for dead was suddenly revived in the Senate late on Sunday evening, and may be ready for House approval as early as Tuesday.
In a parliamentary move laid out on the Senate floor by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just after 7pm, the Senate took the food safety language that was passed as part of a stop-gap budget plan by the House, attached it to another House-passed bill and approved that by unanimous consent. More
S 510 moved through its Senate processes raising hoopla amongst the masses, misdirected from arguing the facts pursuant to substantive and procedural law by countless organizations and their respected attorneys. Whining and pouting were the order of the day, when I tendered the following; it was first edited by the unknowing and eventually deleted from the alert.
“ S 510 violates the substantive and procedural rights of natural persons by allowing illegal search and seizure without due process of law, requiring self incriminating recordkeeping in direct contrast to the provision of “being secure in your person and papers”. It allows arrest without warrant for mere resistance of compliance officials.”
The claim was made that no one would understand it, a clear indication that none had read the bill, an act unperformed by many as it has finally come to light that in HR 2749 the fee schedule had been removed and reinstated in § 107 of S 510. More
“We have no commodity reserves, no grain reserves; no back up supplies to feed the US as this global food shortage grows and food prices skyrocket. Yet this bill, marketed as “food safety”, promoted by hyping food borne illnesses that resulted from the failure of FDA/USDA to operate effectively even on a minimal level, is set to export absolutely every food crop or livestock product out of the country for profit. ” More
Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved
_______________________________________________
Why is “free trade at any expense” reserved only for multi-national corporations? Why is every other sector of the economy supposed to be allowed to engage in a free-for-all at the entire countries expense, but when it comes to family and independent agriculture there are literally hundreds of thousands of regulations, limitations, rules, and requirements, licensing, and forfeiture of rights, spanning multiple agencies who spend the bulk of their funding on “enforcement” of what usually amounts to nothing less than an interference in trade, profit and viability and which many times constitute an open assault on Constitutionally protected property and individual rights.
_______________________________________________
I can only imagine the salivating occurring behind the scenes in the District of Criminals, as the corporations and interested parties including the World Trade Organization, Codex Committees and other vested stakeholders anticipate the passage of S.510, the fake food safety bill. Should this bill pass, we as a country will be officially divested not only of our sovereignty but of our independence. No country in the history of the world has survived for long without a strong and independent agricultural sector. Take that away, and the fall of the country soon follows. No nation that cannot, or will not, feed its own people, ever survives. Independent agriculture is and always has been the backbone and the underlying support for economic stability and security. It is this support and security that S.510 seeks to destroy.
S.510 is not about food safety; it is however the last lynchpin in the seizure of food production and supply that was begun under Bush the Lesser. Control the food; control the people.
This same model envisioned in S.510 was used in recent years in Poland. An estimated 60% of Polish farms are now gone. In India, more than 8 million farmers have left their farms as a result of similar systems implemented by the World Trade Organization on behalf of bio-pirates of all kinds. Here in the US an estimated 1/3 of all farms that existed in 2000, have now vanished. We are, according to farmaid.org , losing 3-500 farms and ranches every week as the industrialized corporate machine being driven by congress and its agencies rolls across our land. Food safety never was the issue. Food as a Weapon is another story. More
A reply to a consumer organization’s email soliciting ‘friends’ to contact their representatives in Washington and ask them to support S. 510, the Food “Safety” bill
_____________________________________________
You are either totally ignorant about the contents of S. 510, the food “safety” bill, or you are a shill.
Effective April 1, 2011, the selling of vitamins and nutritional supplements without a prescription will officially become illegal in Europe. The framework for this travesty is called the Codex Alimentarius, Napoleonic-era gibberish and brainchild of the World “Health” Organization, that was instituted to make the natural and organic health supplements go away—a three billion dollar a year competitive market that cuts into the profits of BigPharma’s prescription pill and vaccine factories.
Codex is being brought to humanity by these same wonderful folk—the World Health Organization and ‘associates’—who attempted to orchestrate a swine flu “pandemic” for the globe after hyping it four years—how does anyone know a “pandemic” is coming four years out?—so vax manufacturers could pre-sell governments their “vaccines” so they could “. . .be ready when it started.”
Which it didn’t. Sort of, they tried to throw a pandemic but no one came to the shot party. At least not nearly enough to use all the vaccine the governments had paid for. Then they tried giving it away. Still not enough takers.
One shipment of the vaccine that was sent to a European lab was “inadvertently” contaminated with the virus that could have started the pandemic in Europe had not the lab checked it before distributing the vaccine.
Imagine that.
America’s Food “Safety” bill, S. 510, also makes illegal backyard vegetable and fruit gardens, as well as products grown by large, wholesale, organic producers for organic outlets such as Whole Foods. The organic food market is the fastest growing market in the food industry today. It also cuts directly into the World Health/World Trade Organization’s scheme to control the world’s food through genetically modified seed and patents.
Are the players beginning to sound familiar? They’re the same players that manufactured genetically modified cotton seed. Want to know how the people who’ve grown cotton and food organically for thousands of years fared with this genetically modified cotton? Take a look:
Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2010 All rights Reserved
_____________________________________________
S..510 calls for the Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, to contact the governors of each state to determine which agencies within the state will contract on behalf of the state to administer the USDA/FDA federal plans for seizing control of food production and supply, handing it over to multi-national corporations and setting into motion the eradication of family and independent farms and ranches. These new “business plans” (which is what S.510 is, a business plan), require contracting with state agencies accompanied of course, by bags of USDA bribery money called “cooperative funding”.
_______________________________________________
The federal government, including Senator Reid, who is yet again pushing for a vote on S.510, the fake food safety bill, know they cannot pass any enforceable law on the federal level dealing with agriculture; it is not in the enumerated powers, and will exist only as a non-positive code and title. Because these “laws” are outside the scope of the federal government, they cannot be used to criminalize what was other wise your right to do without their interference. Non-positive code and title, in this case Title 7 USC, cannot be revised, codified and assigned a public law number as these corporate codes are outside the authority of the federal government. Should S.510 pass, it is null and void on its face, as if it never existed, but not one of your Senators or Representatives will tell you this.
In an effort to bypass congress and the president so that none of these illustrious individuals can be held directly accountable for this act of aggression, this selling out of America’s farms and ranches, this selling off of our national security regarding food under the threat of further contamination which these same agencies facilitated by their refusal to act in our defense as they contracted against us, the USDA and FDA have become the most clear and present danger to the US and, congress in both houses is enabling this threat.
USDA and FDA are sliding onto the Federal Register and attempting to expand their power and authority by claiming a “presumption” of authority which they were never intended to have. Every attempt is made to change the “rules” on the register and then claim they have this new power because no one objected and rebutted their assertions. When rebuttals, using law, are presented on the register which has been done FDA and USDA fall silent and just proceed on as if nothing happened. Of course, not one word from those Senators or Representatives about this; they were probably out to lunch with corporate donors.
It is expected, that failure to pass this assault on private agriculture and the intent to export as much of the US food supply as possible, President Obama will incrementally implement the provisions of S.510 using Executive Orders and using the Food Czar’s office to issue edicts and mandates that we, as citizens of the sovereign states will be told, we must comply with. No hell we don’t have to comply. More
Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Today we have two completely different stories. While not connected – the irony in both of these is priceless.
First of all you have the heinous act of producing too much food product in a world where apparently no one ever goes hungry.
Three EU member states have been ordered to pay a total of €19m in fines for exceeding milk quotas in 2009/2010, according to provisional figures published by the Commission. More
The PPJ Gazette 