noworldsystem.com


Obama Admin. Orders World Bank to Keep Third World in Poverty

Obama Admin. Orders World Bank to Keep Third World in Poverty

Paul Joseph Watson
prisonplanet.com
January 26, 2010

Under the provably fraudulent and completely corrupted justification of fighting global warming, the Obama administration has ordered the World Bank to keep “developing” countries underdeveloped by blocking them from building coal-fired power plants, ensuring that poorer countries remain in poverty as a result of energy demands not being met.

Even amidst the explosive revelations of the United Nations IPCC issuing reports on the Himalayan Glaciers and the Amazon rainforest littered with incorrect data, the U.S. government has “Stepped up pressure on the World Bank not to fund coal-fired power plants in developing countries,” reports the Times of India.

The order was made by U.S. Executive Director of the World Bank Whitney Debevoise, who represents the United States in considering all loans, investments, country assistance strategies, budgets, audits and business plans of the World Bank Group entities.

By preventing poor nations from becoming self-sufficient in blocking them from producing their own energy, the Obama administration is ensuring that millions more will die from starvation and lack of access to hospitals and medical treatment.

Not only does strangling the energy supply to poorer countries prevent adequate food distribution and lead to more starvation, but hospitals and health clinics in the third world are barely even able to operate as a result of the World Bank and other global bodies ordering them to be dependent on renewable energy supplies that are totally insufficient.

A prime example appeared in the documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, which highlighted how a Kenyan health clinic could not operate a medical refrigerator as well as the lights at the same time because the facility was restricted to just two solar panels.

“There’s somebody keen to kill the African dream. And the African dream is to develop,” said author and economist James Shikwati. “I don’t see how a solar panel is going to power a steel industry … We are being told, ‘Don’t touch your resources. Don’t touch your oil. Don’t touch your coal.’ That is suicide.”

The program labels the idea of restricting the world’s poorest people to alternative energy sources as “the most morally repugnant aspect of the global warming campaign.”

As we have previously highlighted, the implementation of policies arising out of fraudulent fearmongering and biased studies on global warming is already devastating the third world, with a doubling in food prices causing mass starvation and death.

Poor people around the world, “Are being killed in large numbers by starvation as a result of (climate change) policy,” climate skeptic Lord Monckton told the Alex Jones Show last month, due to huge areas of agricultural land being turned over to the growth of biofuels.

“Take Haiti where they live on mud pie with real mud costing 3 cents each….that’s what they’re living or rather what they’re dying on,” said Monckton, relating how when he gave a speech on this subject, a lady in the front row burst into tears and told him, “I’ve just come back from Haiti – now because of the doubling in world food prices, they can’t even afford the price of a mud pie and they’re dying of starvation all over the place.”

As a National Geographic Report confirmed, “With food prices rising, Haiti’s poorest can’t afford even a daily plate of rice, and some must take desperate measures to fill their bellies,” by “eating mud,” partly as a consequence of “increasing global demand for biofuels.”

In April 2008, World Bank President Robert Zoellick admitted that biofuels were a “significant contributor” to soaring food prices that have led to riots in countries such as Haiti, Egypt, the Philippines, and even Italy.

“We estimate that a doubling of food prices over the last three years could potentially push 100 million people in low-income countries deeper into poverty,” he stated.

Even if we are to accept that fact that overpopulation will be a continuing problem in the third world, the very means by which poorer countries would naturally lower their birth rates, by being allowed to develop their infrastructure, is being blocked by global institutions who craft policies designed to keep the third world in squalor and poverty.

This goes to the very heart of what the real agenda behind the global warming movement really is – a Malthusian drive to keep the slaves oppressed and prevent the most desperate people on the planet from pulling themselves out of destitution and despair.

UN Troops Pepper Spray Starving Haitians

Haiti earthquake – starving survivors reduced to eating grass

One quarter of US grain crops fed to cars – not people

Third World Under Attack From Genocidal Climate Change Policy

Food Shortages Or Globalist Depopulation Agenda?

 



GM Food Causes Liver and Kidney Damage

GM Food Causes Liver and Kidney Damage
Disturbing Fact: 75% of processed foods that Americans eat have genetically modified ingredients

Daily Mail
January 21, 2010

Fresh fears were raised over GM crops yesterday after a study showed they can cause liver and kidney damage.

According to the research, animals fed on three strains of genetically modified maize created by the U.S. biotech firm Monsanto suffered signs of organ damage after just three months.

The findings only came to light after Monsanto was forced to publish its raw data on safety tests by anti-GM campaigners.

They add to the evidence that GM crops may damage health as well as be harmful to the environment.

The figures released by Monsanto were examined by French researcher Dr Gilles-Eric Seralini, from the University of Caen.

Yesterday he called for more studies to check for long-term organ damage.

‘What we’ve shown is clearly not proof of toxicity, but signs of toxicity,’ he told New Scientist magazine. ‘I’m sure there’s no acute toxicity but who’s to say there are no chronic effects?’

The experiments were carried out by Monsanto researchers on three strains of GM maize. Two of the varieties contained genes for the Bt protein which protects the plant against the corn borer pest, while a third was genetically modified to be resistant to the weedkiller glyphosate. All three strains are widely grown in America, while one is the only GM crop grown in Europe, mostly in Spain.

Monsanto only released the raw data after a legal challenge from Greenpeace, the Swedish Board of Agriculture and French anti- GM campaigners.

Dr Seralini concluded that rats which ate the GM maize had ‘ statistically significant’ signs of liver and kidney damage. Each strain was linked to unusual concentrations of hormones in the blood and urine of rats fed the maize for three months, compared to rats given a non-GM diet.

The higher hormone levels suggest that animals’ livers and kidneys are not working properly.

Female rats fed one of the strains also had higher blood sugar levels and raised levels of fatty substances caused triglycerides, Dr Seralini reported in the International Journal of Microbiology.

The analysis concluded: ‘These substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown.’

Monsanto claimed the analysis of its data was ‘based on faulty analytical methods and reasoning, and does not call into question the safety findings for these products’.

GM corn causes organ damage

Monsanto named “Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine

GM foods are changing the DNA of humans

 



One quarter of US grain crops fed to cars – not people

One quarter of US grain crops fed to cars – not people


A grain elevator in Illinois, US. In 2009, 107m tonnes of grain was grown by US farmers to be blended with petrol. Photograph: AP

London Guardian
January 22, 2010

One-quarter of all the maize and other grain crops grown in the US now ends up as biofuel in cars rather than being used to feed people, according to new analysis which suggests that the biofuel revolution launched by former President George Bush in 2007 is impacting on world food supplies.

The 2009 figures from the US Department of Agriculture shows ethanol production rising to record levels driven by farm subsidies and laws which require vehicles to use increasing amounts of biofuels.

“The grain grown to produce fuel in the US [in 2009] was enough to feed 330 million people for one year at average world consumption levels,” said Lester Brown, the director of the Earth Policy Institute, a Washington thinktank ithat conducted the analysis.

Last year 107m tonnes of grain, mostly corn, was grown by US farmers to be blended with petrol. This was nearly twice as much as in 2007, when Bush challenged farmers to increase production by 500% by 2017 to save cut oil imports and reduce carbon emissions.

More than 80 new ethanol plants have been built since then, with more expected by 2015, by which time the US will need to produce a further 5bn gallons of ethanol if it is to meet its renewable fuel standard.

According to Brown, the growing demand for US ethanol derived from grains helped to push world grain prices to record highs between late 2006 and 2008. In 2008, the Guardian revealed a secret World Bank report that concluded that the drive for biofuels by American and European governments had pushed up food prices by 75%, in stark contrast to US claims that prices had risen only 2-3% as a result.

Since then, the number of hungry people in the world has increased to over 1 billion people, according to the UN’s World Food programme.

“Continuing to divert more food to fuel, as is now mandated by the US federal government in its renewable fuel standard, will likely only reinforce the disturbing rise in world hunger. By subsidising the production of ethanol to the tune of some $6bn each year, US taxpayers are in effect subsidising rising food bills at home and around the world,” said Brown.

“The worst economic crisis since the great depression has recently brought food prices down from their peak, but they still remain well above their long-term average levels.”

The US is by far the world’s leading grain exporter, exporting more than Argentina, Australia, Canada, and Russia combined. In 2008, the UN called for a comprehensive review of biofuel production from food crops.

“There is a direct link between biofuels and food prices. The needs of the hungry must come before the needs of cars,” said Meredith Alexander, biofuels campaigner at ActionAid in London. As well as the effect on food, campaigners also argue that many scientists question whether biofuels made from food crops actually save any greenhouse gas emissions.

But ethanol producers deny that their record production means less food. “Continued innovation in ethanol production and agricultural technology means that we don’t have to make a false choice between food and fuel. We can more than meet the demand for food and livestock feed while reducing our dependence on foreign oil through the production of homegrown renewable ethanol,” said Tom Buis, the chief executive of industry group Growth Energy.

Kissinger’s Plan For Food Control Genocide

Food Shortages in 2010

Biofuel Industry Destroying Amazon Rainforest

 



U.S. Helped to Break Haiti for Over 200 Years

U.S. Helped to Break Haiti for Over 200 Years

Common Dreams
January 17, 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLAstyeUIt0

Why does the US owe Haiti Billions? Colin Powell, former US Secretary of State, stated his foreign policy view as the “Pottery Barn rule.” That is – “if you break it, you own it.”

The US has worked to break Haiti for over 200 years. We owe Haiti. Not charity. We owe Haiti as a matter of justice. Reparations. And not the $100 million promised by President Obama either – that is Powerball money. The US owes Haiti Billions – with a big B.

The US has worked for centuries to break Haiti. The US has used Haiti like a plantation. The US helped bleed the country economically since it freed itself, repeatedly invaded the country militarily, supported dictators who abused the people, used the country as a dumping ground for our own economic advantage, ruined their roads and agriculture, and toppled popularly elected officials. The US has even used Haiti like the old plantation owner and slipped over there repeatedly for sexual recreation.

Here is the briefest history of some of the major US efforts to break Haiti.

In 1804, when Haiti achieved its freedom from France in the world’s first successful slave revolution, the United States refused to recognize the country. The US continued to refuse recognition to Haiti for 60 more years. Why? Because the US continued to enslave millions of its own citizens and feared recognizing Haiti would encourage slave revolution in the US.

After the 1804 revolution, Haiti was the subject of a crippling economic embargo by France and the US. US sanctions lasted until 1863. France ultimately used its military power to force Haiti to pay reparations for the slaves who were freed. The reparations were 150 million francs. (France sold the entire Louisiana territory to the US for 80 million francs!)

Haiti was forced to borrow money from banks in France and the US to pay reparations to France. A major loan from the US to pay off the French was finally paid off in 1947. The current value of the money Haiti was forced to pay to French and US banks? Over $20 Billion – with a big B.

The US occupied and ruled Haiti by force from 1915 to 1934. President n sent troops to invade in 1915. Revolts by Haitians were put down by US military – killing over 2000 in one skirmish alone. For the next nineteen years, the US controlled customs in Haiti, collected taxes, and ran many governmental institutions. How many billions were siphoned off by the US during these 19 years?

From 1957 to 1986 Haiti was forced to live under US backed dictators “Papa Doc” and “Baby Doc” Duvlaier. The US supported these dictators economically and militarily because they did what the US wanted and were politically “anti-communist” – now translatable as against human rights for their people. Duvalier stole millions from Haiti and ran up hundreds of millions in debt that Haiti still owes. Ten thousand Haitians lost their lives. Estimates say that Haiti owes $1.3 billion in external debt and that 40% of that debt was run up by the US-backed Duvaliers.

Thirty years ago Haiti imported no rice. Today Haiti imports nearly all its rice. Though Haiti was the sugar growing capital of the Caribbean, it now imports sugar as well. Why? The US and the US dominated world financial institutions – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank – forced Haiti to open its markets to the world. Then the US dumped millions of tons of US subsidized rice and sugar into Haiti – undercutting their farmers and ruining Haitian agriculture. By ruining Haitian agriculture, the US has forced Haiti into becoming the third largest world market for US rice. Good for US farmers, bad for Haiti.

In 2002, the US stopped hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to Haiti which were to be used for, among other public projects like education, roads. These are the same roads which relief teams are having so much trouble navigating now!

In 2004, the US again destroyed democracy in Haiti when they supported the coup against Haiti’s elected President Aristide.

Haiti is even used for sexual recreation just like the old time plantations. Check the news carefully and you will find numerous stories of abuse of minors by missionaries, soldiers and charity workers. Plus there are the frequent sexual vacations taken to Haiti by people from the US and elsewhere. What is owed for that? What value would you put on it if it was your sisters and brothers?

US based corporations have for years been teaming up with Haitian elite to run sweatshops teeming with tens of thousands of Haitians who earn less than $2 a day.

The Haitian people have resisted the economic and military power of the US and others ever since their independence. Like all of us, Haitians made their own mistakes as well. But US power has forced Haitians to pay great prices – deaths, debt and abuse.

It is time for the people of the US to join with Haitians and reverse the course of US-Haitian relations.

This brief history shows why the US owes Haiti Billions – with a big B. This is not charity. This is justice. This is reparations. The current crisis is an opportunity for people in the US to own up to our country’s history of dominating Haiti and to make a truly just response.

(For more on the history of exploitation of Haiti by the US see: Paul Farmer, The Uses of Haiti; Peter Hallward, Damming the Flood; and Randall Robinson, An Unbroken Agony)

 

Naomi Klein Issues Haiti Disaster Capitalism Alert

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsGDP-yfduo

Disgusting War Criminals Peddle “Humanitarian” Aid for Haiti

U.S. pouring 10,000 troops in Haiti

Clinton Bush Haiti Fund is a Scam

 



Is Monsanto’s Corn Destroying Your Internal Organs?

Is Monsanto’s Corn Destroying Your Internal Organs?

Sustainable Food
January 8, 2010

Yes, this is another story about Monsanto, the controversy-prone American agricultural giant that, according to Greenpeace, sells 90 percent of the world’s genetically modified seeds.

The company’s dominance is such that even the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating it for possible antitrust practices.

But the government has been a willing partner in marketing GMO crops, repeatedly refusing to require GMO foods to be labeled (as the E.U. does) and signing off on their alleged safety.

Funny thing about that: There’s hardly any research to back it up: The government hasn’t funded it and independent researchers can’t get a hold of the — patented — seeds.

What studies there are don’t look good. One Australian report suggests the GMO corn made by Monsanto causes significant fertility problems in mice (and, by implication, possibly humans).

And a new study — which had to resort to analyzing data sets produced by studies conducted by Monsanto and another biotech firm, Covance Laboratories, and submitted to European governments because researchers couldn’t get seeds — has found that Monsanto corn impairs rats’ kidneys and livers. The “data strongly suggests” that after just 90 days of eating GM corn, rats experienced kidney toxicity and showed effects to their hearts, adrenal glands, spleen and blood cells. (The study was published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences.)

The authors explain that their analysis of the data differed from Monsanto’s because the company overlooked different reactions in male and female rats. The ag giant continues to maintain that its GMO corn is safe.

So what happens to humans who eat GM corn products as well as animals who’ve been fed GM corn? That’s a darn good question, and one the U.S. government ought to have an answer to before waving these products into the food supply. (And if you think that just because humans and livestock aren’t dropping dead on the spot GMOs must be fine, read this very sane analysis.)

Take action and Get the FDA to Suspend Approval for Monsanto’s GMO corn.

Monsanto named “Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine

 



Food costs to soar as big freeze deepens

Food costs to soar as big freeze deepens

London Guardian
January 9, 2010


Satellite image of the UK covered in white

Britons have been warned to brace themselves for an increase in food prices as plunging temperatures leave farmers unable to harvest vegetables and hauliers struggle to distribute fresh produce.

Gordon Brown, who will chair a meeting of the Cobra emergency committee early this week to discuss the freeze, was today forced to reassure the country that it would not run out of gas or grit for its roads during the coldest weather in 30 years.

Police confirmed today that the weather-related death toll had risen to 26. A 90-year-old woman froze to death in her garden near Barnsley after falling in the snow. Widow Mary Priestland was discovered when her neighbour called round to make her tea. A 42-year-old Newcastle woman died after being found lying in the snow this morning. She had told her family she was going for a walk at 7pm on Friday.

Concerns have now switched to food supply. Sub-zero temperatures have made it impossible to extract some vegetables from the ground. Producers of brussels sprouts and cabbages are all reporting problems with harvesting. Cauliflowers are said to have turned to “mush” in the sustained frost, with the result that only imported ones are available – at more than £2 each.

“Food is selling fast and there is a problem with replenishing it,” said Stephen Alambritis of the Federation of Small Businesses. “One business I spoke to said it was like Christmas Eve, with people rushing to buy up food. This will inevitably have an impact on food prices.”

Food prices had already started to edge up after a sustained period of low inflation. Food inflation increased by 3.7% in December, up from 2.8% in November, said the British Retail Consortium.

In Ireland, 6,000 acres of potatoes remains unharvested and there are claims that up to three-quarters of the crop may be ruined. Potato growers in Northern Ireland say they are facing some of the biggest losses in recent history because of frost damage.

Meanwhile, greengrocers in some of the worst-hit areas are reporting shortages, with the price of carrots and parsnips reportedly rising by 30% in some small shops. A spokesman for the National Farmers’ Union said: “There are isolated examples of farms struggling to get milk supplies out, but so far the majority of farmers, although finding it difficult, are getting on with the job.” Milk suppliers in Somerset said they feared they may have to dump 100,000 litres of organic milk because tankers could not get through.

In a move that underscores the severity of the situation, on Monday the government will permit an emergency relaxation of European laws regulating the driving hours for hauliers involved in the distribution of animal feed. Under the temporary rules, the hauliers will be allowed to drive for 10 hours rather than the EU maximum of nine. There will also be a reduction in their mandatory daily rest requirements, from 11 to nine hours.

Today, the prime minister insisted gas supplies were not running out, despite record levels of demand. In a podcast from Downing Street, Brown said: “I can assure you: supplies are not running out. We’ve got plenty of gas in our own backyard – the North Sea – and we also have access to the large reserves in Norway and Netherlands.”

Last week, nearly 100 large businesses were forced to stop using gas in an attempt to conserve supplies.

Food Shortages in 2010

2010 Will Be Worse

 



Food Shortages in 2010

Food shortages THIS year! Want to know why the media is not covering this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tomIBiljQdA

2010 Food Crisis For Dummies

 



Monsanto named “Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine

Monsanto named “Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine

NoWorldSystem
January 7, 2010

Monsanto is named “2009 Company of the Year” by Forbes Magazine. This is just another slap in the face on the American people, just as devaluer-in-chief Ben Bernanke was nominated “Man of The Year” by Times Magazine, it’s completely absurd.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o4bFi4k0fg

 



USDA Approves Injecting Beef with Ammonia

U.S. Government Approves Treating Beef With Ammonia

NoWorldSystem
January 3, 2010

The New York Times forgot to mention that in the past, the USDA and FDA approved of injecting meat with carbon monoxide to keep rotten meat looking fresh, treating meat with viruses and even Oked the use of Mad Cow diseased beef into the food market just as long as it was mixed with 1% healthy beef.

The plan to inject ammonia into meat is just another toxic substance added to our daily intake that the government seems not to mind. The eugenicist elite that control the U.S. government know that stuff like this is bad for us and are purposely increasing the toxins in our environment. These are softkill methods of eugenics to cut the human population down by a ‘reasonable’ number, they use methods like; radiating us at airports, leaving drugs in the city water supply and using human sewage as fertilizer on major U.S. crops.

It should be painfully obvious now that the government doesn’t give a damn about you, the eugenicist elitists want you dead sooner than later because they look at ‘humans’ as a threat to the ‘ruling class’ clique, they consider us monsters that are unworthy of life. This is the real threat against humanity, not some patsy/terrorist crotch bomber. A decade from now we’ll all be wondering why people are dying at age 50 or 60.

New York Times
December 30, 2009

Eight years ago, federal officials were struggling to remove potentially deadly E. coli from hamburgers when an entrepreneurial company from South Dakota came up with a novel idea: injecting beef with ammonia.

The company, Beef Products Inc., had been looking to expand into the hamburger business with a product made from beef that included fatty trimmings the industry once relegated to pet food and cooking oil. The trimmings were particularly susceptible to contamination, but a study commissioned by the company showed that the ammonia process would kill E. coli as well as salmonella.

Officials at the United States Department of Agriculture endorsed the company’s ammonia treatment, and have said it destroys E. coli “to an undetectable level.” They decided it was so effective that in 2007, when the department began routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public, they exempted Beef Products.

With the U.S.D.A.’s stamp of approval, the company’s processed beef has become a mainstay in America’s hamburgers. McDonald’s, Burger King and other fast-food giants use it as a component in ground beef, as do grocery chains. The federal school lunch program used an estimated 5.5 million pounds of the processed beef last year alone.

But government and industry records obtained by The New York Times show that in testing for the school lunch program, E. coli and salmonella pathogens have been found dozens of times in Beef Products meat, challenging claims by the company and the U.S.D.A. about the effectiveness of the treatment. Since 2005, E. coli has been found 3 times and salmonella 48 times, including back-to-back incidents in August in which two 27,000-pound batches were found to be contaminated. The meat was caught before reaching lunch-rooms trays.

Carl S. Custer, a former U.S.D.A. microbiologist, said he and other scientists were concerned that the department had approved the treated beef for sale without obtaining independent validation of the potential safety risk. Another department microbiologist, Gerald Zirnstein, called the processed beef “pink slime” in a 2002 e-mail message to colleagues and said, “I do not consider the stuff to be ground beef, and I consider allowing it in ground beef to be a form of fraudulent labeling.”

One of the toughest hurdles for Beef Products was the Agricultural Marketing Service, the U.S.D.A. division that buys food for school lunches. Officials cited complaints about the odor, and wrote in a 2002 memorandum that they had “to determine if the addition of ammonia to the product is in the best interest to A.M.S. from a quality standpoint.”

“It is our contention,” the memo added, “that product should be labeled accordingly.”

Represented by Dennis R. Johnson, a top lawyer and lobbyist for the meat industry, Beef Products prevailed on the question of whether ammonia should be listed as an ingredient, arguing that the government had just decided against requiring another company to list a chemical used in treating poultry.

School lunch officials said they ultimately agreed to use the treated meat because it shaved about 3 cents off the cost of making a pound of ground beef.

Health Canada To Add Anti-Cancer Drugs To Junk Food

USDA serves pet food grade meat at public schools

FDA Is Urged to Ban Carbon-Monoxide-Treated Meat

FDA OKs bacteria-eating virus to treat meat

USDA Allows Mad Cow Diseased Beef to Market

 



U.S. wants farmers to use coal waste on fields

U.S. wants farmers to use coal waste on fields

Washington Post
December 23, 2009

The federal government is encouraging farmers to spread a chalky waste from coal-fired power plants on their fields to loosen and fertilize soil even as it considers regulating coal wastes for the first time.

The material is produced by power plant “scrubbers” that remove acid-rain-causing sulfur dioxide from plant emissions. A synthetic form of the mineral gypsum, it also contains mercury, arsenic, lead and other heavy metals.

The Environmental Protection Agency says those toxic metals occur in only tiny amounts that pose no threat to crops, surface water or people. But some environmentalists say too little is known about how the material affects crops, and ultimately human health, for the government to suggest that farmers use it.

“This is a leap into the unknown,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. “This stuff has materials in it that we’re trying to prevent entering the environment from coal-fired power plants, and then to turn around and smear it across ag lands raises some real questions.”

With wastes piling up around the coal-fired plants that produce half the nation’s power, the EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture began promoting what they call the wastes’ “beneficial uses” during the Bush administration.

Part of that push is to expand the use of synthetic gypsum — a whitish, calcium-rich material known as flue gas desulfurization gypsum, or FGD gypsum. The Obama administration has continued promoting FGD gypsum’s use in farming.

The administration is also drafting a regulatory rule for coal waste, in response to a spill from a coal ash pond near Knoxville, Tenn., one year ago Tuesday. Ash and water flooded 300 acres, damaging homes and killing fish. The cleanup is expected to cost about $1 billion.

The EPA is expected to announce its proposals for regulation early next year, setting the first federal standards for storage and disposal of coal wastes.

EPA officials declined to talk about the agency’s promotion of FGD gypsum before then and would not say whether the draft rule would cover it.

Field studies have shown that mercury, the main heavy metal of concern because it can harm nervous-system development, does not accumulate in crops or run off fields in surface water at “significant” levels, the EPA said.

“EPA believes that the use of FGD gypsum in agriculture is safe in appropriate soil and hydrogeologic conditions,” the statement said.

Eric Schaeffer, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, which advocates for more effective enforcement of environmental laws, said he is not overly worried about FGD gypsum’s use on fields because research shows it contains only tiny amounts of heavy metals. But he said federal limits on the amounts of heavy metals in FGD gypsum sold to farmers would help allay concerns.

“That would give them assurance that they’ve got clean FGD gypsum,” he said.

Since the EPA-USDA partnership began in 2001, farmers’ use of the material has more than tripled, from about 78,000 tons spread on fields in 2002 to nearly 279,000 tons last year, according to the American Coal Ash Association, a utility industry group.

About half of the 17.7 million tons of FGD gypsum produced in the United States last year was used to make drywall, said Thomas Adams, the association’s executive director. But he said it is important to find new uses for it and other coal wastes because the United States will probably rely on coal-fired power plants for decades to come.

“If we can find safe ways to recycle those materials, we’re a lot better off doing that than we are creating a whole bunch of new landfills,” Adams said.

EPA Approves Use of Human Sewage to Grow U.S. Food

 



Forest Trees Growing Like Crazy From CO2 Increase

Forest Trees Growing Like Crazy From CO2 Level Increase

Mike Adams
Natural News
December 21, 2009

Scientists from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Minnesota at Morris have found that increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide have led to the rapid growth of certain tree species. The quaking aspen, a popular North America deciduous tree, has seen a 50 percent acceleration in growth over the past 50 years due to increased CO2 levels.

Trees are necessary climate regulators since they process carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Humans process oxygen and give off carbon dioxide, working harmoniously with natural plant life to maintain proper atmospheric composition. Since natural forests represent about 30 percent of the earth’s surface, they are highly effective at segregating greenhouse gases.

The quaking aspen is a vibrant, dominant tree found in both Canada and the United States. It is considered to be a “foundation species”, meaning that it helps dictate the dynamics of the plant and animal communities that surround it. Roughly 42 million acres in Canada and 6.5 million acres in Wisconsin and Minnesota are composed of aspen trees.

Elevated levels of CO2 will naturally lead to increased plant growth since CO2 is a precursor to plant food. Tree-ring analyses verified that aspen trees have been growing at an increasingly accelerated pace over the years because of this phenomenon.

Because accelerated growth was not seen in other tree species like oak and pine, scientists admit they will have to further investigate the issue. Similarly, drier regions where the trees were found did not experience the same rapid growth rates as those found in the wetter regions.

Comments by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

An interesting side effect of increased carbon emissions by human activity is that plants will grow more quickly. CO2 is to plants as oxygen is to humans, so the more CO2 is in the atmosphere, the more quickly many plants can grow.

Of course, plants produce oxygen as the “waste” product of their respiration, and that’s a poison to other plants, so there’s a natural balancing effect that keeps oxygen and CO2 levels in balance over the long haul.

This is why greenhouse gases are called “greenhouse gases”, by the way — because they turn the planet into a really effective greenhouse where plants grow like crazy. Of course, the clear-cutting of rainforest in the Amazon (and elsewhere) kills any chance of those regions taking part in that accelerated plant growth. Even in a high-CO2 environment, human beings can destroy plant life with bulldozers.

It’s interesting that plants and humans breathe the same air but extract very different chemical elements from it: Humans need oxygen while plants need carbon dioxide. For both species to survive, the air needs to contain both chemicals in balance. Currently, the oxygen content of the air is roughly around 20% (and falling).

 

Carbon Dioxide: The Breath of Life

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2uKNQJjLn0

 

Dutch aubergine grower yields big after piping CO2 into greenhouses

Telegraph
December 14, 2009

Jan van Duijn, however, walks proudly through his greenhouse, a vast glass and metal structure spread out over five hectares (12.3 acres) where millions of aubergines are doing very nicely thank you.

He’s happy because thanks to a deal with a supplier, he’s getting hot water piped in from the factory, which produces ammonia, to maintain the temperature at a constant 68 degrees F (20C).

The chemical site, five kilometres (three miles away), also supplies carbon dioxide which helps his aubergines grow more abundantly.

“We’re pioneers in a way,” van Duijn said, while admitting that what drove him to try this business model was cost.

The water from the Yara factory, where it is used as a coolant, flows along underground pipes and into his greenhouse at a temperature of 90 degrees C.

There it is circulated in pipes between the rows of aubergines, sharing its heat among the beds of rockwool they grow in, before being pumped back to the factory as coolant again.

Similarly, CO2 released during the manufacture of ammonia is injected into the greenhouse to stimulate growth.

“It’s the basic principle of photosynthesis,” van Duijn said. Combined with water and light, the plants convert the carbon dioxide into organic compounds, releasing oxygen as a side product.

The level of CO2 inside is three times higher than outside, giving a crop yield that according to van Duijn is two to three times greater.

He reckons the project will produce 2.5 million kilogrammes (5.5 million pounds) of aubergines a year, adding to the millions he already cultivates under glass on his land in the southern Netherlands.

Read Full Article Here

EPA Calls CO2 a Deadly Pollutant, Seeks to Regulate Greenhouse Emissions

Destroying the Amazon Rainforest to Fight Global Warming

 



Toxic Sewage Sludge in Your Food

Toxic Sewage Sludge in Your Food

Mercola.com
December 16, 2009

The increasing use of sewage sludge as fertilizer for your food is an under-publicized and often hidden threat.

Sludge is the toxic mix that is created by our municipal wastewater treatment facilities. Just about anything that is flushed down toilets or that ends up in sewers is in this sludge; the pollutants in sludge come not just from household sewage, but also from every hospital, industrial plant, and stormwater drain.

For a long time, sludge was simply dumped in the oceans. Over time, it became apparent that this was an environmental and human health disaster. An alternative solution has been pushed since the 1980’s by the U.S. government. The EPA determined that a good way to dispose of treated sewage sludge was to legally distribute it as a cheap alternative to fertilizer.

Unsurprisingly, scientific analysis of the poisons in sewage sludge shows it’s the wrong, and dangerous, solution for U.S. farmers and communities. Unfortunately, many American farmers and gardeners are unknowingly using sludge-derived “compost,” which is given away free in many cities throughout the United States.

As a result, farms and homes across the country have been unknowingly spreading hazardous chemicals and heavy metals on their fields, lawns and gardens.

Meanwhile, Michael Mack, the chief executive of Syngenta, a Swiss agribusiness giant that makes pesticides, is waging war against the organic movement as a whole. He argues that, “Organic food is not only not better for the planet. It is categorically worse.”

“If the whole planet were to suddenly switch to organic farming tomorrow, it would be an ecological disaster,” he said. Pesticides, he argued, “have been proven safe and effective and absolutely not harmful to the environment or to humans.”
Of course, Mr. Mack dismissed the notion that Syngenta, a company that sold nearly $12-billion worth of “crop protection” technologies last year, felt threatened by the organic movement.

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

If you’re looking for a compelling reason to switch to a primarily organic diet, the fact that it is free from sewage sludge fertilizers is a very good one. Sewage sludge, or “biosolids” — as they’re referred to with a PR spin — began being “recycled” into food crops when, ironically, it was realized that dumping them into rivers, lakes and bays was an environmental disaster.

Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that about 50 percent of all biosolids are recycled to land. This sludge is what’s leftover after sewage is treated and processed.

Your first thought may be the “yuck factor” of human waste being used to fertilize your food, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Every time a paintbrush gets rinsed, an old bottle of medications flushed, or solvents are hosed off a factory floor, it ends up in the sewage system.

So it’s not surprising that a past analysis of sewage sludge by the Environmental Working Group found:

    *Over 100 synthetic organic compounds including phthalates, toluene, and chlorobenzene
    *Dioxins in sludge from 179 out of 208 systems (80%)
    *42 different pesticides — at least one in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per survey sample
    *Nine heavy metals, often at high concentrations

And it was sewage sludge that was partly blamed earlier this year for contaminating the White House lawn, and Michelle Obama’s organic vegetable garden, with lead.

This toxic sludge has been masterfully spun by PR masters into an acceptable, even “green,” fertilizer. Even San Francisco, arguably one of the “greenest” cities around, has been distributing toxic sewage sludge to homeowners and schoolyards and calling it “organic compost”! Nevermind that in 2008 its sludge was found to contain industrial chemicals, disinfectants, phenol, pesticides and solvents.

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) has recently petitioned San Francisco to stop this “compost” giveaway, lest it contaminate backyards and communities with toxic chemicals, but the sludge is still being widely used all across the United States.

If you want to get the real dirt on how this toxic sewage sludge has become such a popular fertilizer, I strongly encourage you to read Toxic Sludge is Good for You: Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry. It’s written by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, the authors of one of my favorite exposes on the PR industry, Trust Us, We’re Experts, and does not disappoin

What is Going On With the State of Agriculture in the United States?

They say truth is stranger than fiction, and the once respectable business of farming in the United States is a perfect example of how true this statement can be.

Gone are the days when farmers grew food according to the laws of nature, with a deserved respect for the Earth and its resources. Nowadays, with the exception of the small but growing movement of organic and sustainable farmers, it may surprise you to learn that farming — once the symbol of all that’s natural and wholesome — creates some of the worst pollution in the United States.

That’s because most “farming” today is nothing like the small farming of our ancestors. The Farm Sanctuary points out that farm animals produce 130 times more waste than humans. And agricultural runoff is the primary reason why 60 percent of U.S. rivers and streams are polluted.

Meanwhile, in areas where animal agriculture is most concentrated (Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, Illinois and Indiana round out the top five states with the most factory-farm pollution) bacteria known as pfiesteria is common in waterways. Not only does pfiesteria kill fish, it also causes nausea, memory loss, fatigue and disorientation in people!

Aside from the pollution, factory farms use vast quantities of resources. According to FactoryFarm.org, industrial milking centers that use manure flush cleaning and automatic cow washing systems, go through as much as 150 gallons of water per cow per day!

Energy costs are even steeper.

A 2002 study from the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that industrial farms use an average of three calories of energy to create one calorie of food. Grain-fed beef is at the top of the list of offenders, using 35 calories of energy to produce one calorie of food! And this does not even take into account the energy used to process and transport the foods, so the real toll is even larger.

The Agribusiness Giants are Getting Out of Control!

On top of the environmental assaults, you have agribusiness executives like Michael Mack, the chief executive of pesticide manufacturer Syngenta, making outrageous statements like “Organic food is not only not better for the planet, it is categorically worse.”

What?!

His entire argument was based on the premise that organic farming takes up more land than non-organic farming for the same yield.

He obviously must have missed the recent study that examined a global dataset of 293 farming examples, which found that in developing countries organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms. And a review of 286 projects in 57 countries found that farmers who used “resource-conserving” or ecological agriculture had increased agricultural productivity by an average of 79%!

    “It is clear that ecological agriculture is productive and has the potential to meet food security needs … Moreover, ecological agricultural approaches allow farmers to improve local food production with low-cost, readily available technologies and inputs, without causing environmental damage,” Lim Li Ching, the study’s author, writes.

Really, the question we should be asking ourselves shouldn’t be ‘Can organic or sustainable farming feed the world?’, but ‘How can food production possibly continue as it is?’

When I hear someone extolling the virtues of “modern” agriculture and wondering how “organic” or “sustainable” farming could possibly be the solution, I maintain that the fact we have come to accept inefficient, industrial practices, including dousing our food with chemical fertilizers and pesticides, as a viable way to grow food is the real wonder.

And then I always look at the source, which in this case is a pesticide giant CEO … which makes his motives very clear, indeed.

How Can You Find Safe Food for Your Family?

There are still safe food options out there, but it does take a bit of digging to find them. Your local grocery store is generally NOT going to be the best source for healthy, fresh food.

So, short of starting your own sustainable farm (which you can do on a small-scale in your own backyard), you can find safe food options by supporting sustainable agriculture movements in your area.

Make it a point to only buy food from a source you know and trust, one that uses safe and non-toxic farming methods. This will do your health a major favor and support the small family farms in your area. You’ll receive nutritious food from a source that you can trust, and you’ll be supporting the honest work of a real family farm instead of an agri-business corporation.

EPA: CO2 is a deadly gas, but uranium, mercury, arsenic, rocket-fuel and drugs in drinking water is perfectly safe.

 



Climate Change Policy Killing Third World Nations

Genocidal Climate Change Policy is Killing Third World Nations
Millions dying from starvation as a direct consequence of global warming fraud

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
December 10, 2009

The implementation of policies arising out of fraudulent fearmongering and biased studies on global warming is already devastating the third world, with a doubling in food prices causing mass starvation and death – a primary reason why the climategate crooks and their allies should be criminally investigated and hit with the strongest charges possible.

As Lord Monckton outlined in his recent Alex Jones Show appearance, climate change alarmism and implementation of global warming policies is a crime of the highest nature, because it is already having a genocidal impact in countries like Haiti, where the doubling of food prices is resulting in a substantial increase in starvation, poverty and death.

Poor people around the world, “Are being killed in large numbers by starvation as a result of (climate change) policy,” said Monckton, due to huge areas of agricultural land being turned over to the growth of biofuels.

“Take Haiti where they live on mud pie with real mud costing 3 cents each….that’s what they’re living or rather what they’re dying on,” said Monckton, relating how when he gave a speech on this subject, a lady in the front row burst into tears and told him, “I’ve just come back from Haiti – now because of the doubling in world food prices, they can’t even afford the price of a mud pie and they’re dying of starvation all over the place.”

As a National Geographic Report confirmed, “With food prices rising, Haiti’s poorest can’t afford even a daily plate of rice, and some must take desperate measures to fill their bellies,” by “eating mud,” partly as a consequence of “increasing global demand for biofuels.”

In April last year, World Bank President Robert Zoellick admitted that biofuels were a “significant contributor” to soaring food prices that have led to riots in countries such as Haiti, Egypt, the Philippines, and even Italy.

“We estimate that a doubling of food prices over the last three years could potentially push 100 million people in low-income countries deeper into poverty,” he stated.

“That’s how serious this is, these people, by their scientific fraud and financial fraud, they’re profiting enormously….while people die of starvation in a dozen regions of the world….it is a scandal of the worst proportion – our own fellow creatures are being killed by starvation because these people have lied and made up the science and hidden it so nobody else could check,” said Monckton.

If the measures currently being debated at the Copenhagen summit in the name of fighting global warming are passed, we can only expect a further assault on the already horrifying plight of the population of the third world.

In the leaked Copenhagen text that emerged earlier this week, leaders of third world countries were horrified to discover that developed nations would take on less of a burden than anticipated and that more would be demanded of poorer countries despite the fact that any further cuts in CO2 emissions would further cripple their flimsy economies and poverty-stricken people.

In addition, the leaked paper revealed that funds from climate financing, originally allocated to go to the UN and then be doled out piecemeal to third world nations, would instead be paid directly into the coffers of the World Bank and IMF, organizations that have made a habit out of looting poorer countries with crippling loans that cannot be paid back, forcing such countries to hand over their entire infrastructure to globalist loan sharks.

The fact that policies arising out of the contrived science of global warming are already killing people in vast numbers in the third world further illustrates the fact that the entire climate change movement is a Malthusian offshoot of the profusely stated goal on behalf of the global elite to eliminate a huge chunk of the global population via modern-day eugenics.

This agenda was vehemently argued for by President Obama’s top science advisor and one of the pre-eminent climate change ringleaders, John P. Holdren, in his 1977 book Ecoscience, in which he called for installing a “planetary regime” to enforce draconian population control measures such as forced abortion and mandatory sterilization through the water supply.

Watch the segment from the interview below where Monckton discusses how the climate crooks are deliberately devastating the third world with their lies about global warming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6bXxC1d_rE

UK Group Proposes Using Carbon Offsets to Stop Third World From Breeding

 



EPA to Bypass Congress to Regulate CO2

EPA to Bypass Congress to Regulate CO2

NoWorldSystem.com
December 8, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5At6a3c4eVE

The EPA declares itself the regulator of CO2 emissions, allowing itself to cut CO2 emissions without the approval of Congress, bypassing legislation that is currently stalled in the Senate.

Obama’s administration formally declared that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant and will “endanger the public health and welfare of the American people” empowering the EPA to regulate across the country under the law of the Clean Air Act that seeks emissions cut by roughly 17 percent by 2020.

The ruling was welcomed at the opening day of the talk in the Danish capital; “This is very significant in the sense that if…the Senate fails to adopt legislation (on emissions), then the administration will have the authority to regulate,” Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Climate Change Secretariat, told Reuters in Copenhagen.

But top congressional republican James Inhofe warned that EPA’s new “endangerment finding” will “lead to a wave of new regulations, new bureaucracy that will wreak havoc on the American economy and destroy millions of jobs and of course consumers to pay more for electricity and gasoline”. Many republicans are calling for the EPA to rebuke its claims that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81RaMybU1ug

Lisa Jackson, the EPA administrator said the move to declare CO2 a toxic pollutant “relied on decades of sound, peer-reviewed, extensively evaluated scientific data”. Jackson denied any manipulation was carried out by the ClimateGate scientists saying that there’s “nothing in the hacked emails that undermines the science upon which this decision is based”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj1goTq3-rk

President Barack Obama and Al Gore will be attending the Copenhagen conference late next week to further push the illusion that CO2 is a toxic gas. On the same day of the EPA’s announcement, Al Gore visited the White House.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Js8stuihg4M

The Copenhagen globalists including the EPA base their entire argument on the back of the UNIPCC’s CRU scientists which are involved in one of the greatest scandals in modern science, ClimateGate which consists of; Manipulation, Deception, Suppression of Evidence, including having AGW-skeptics fired and removed from the peer-reviewed process and of course breaking FOIA requests by deleting emails and urging other scientists to do so as well. [Source]

With that in mind, EPA’s decision to call CO2 a dangerous pollutant falls flat on its face. The entire Copenhagen summit is all about creating another bubble by the same crooks that gave us the dot-com bubble and the subprime mortgage crisis; Enron and Goldman Sachs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA6FSy6EKrM

From a massive cap-and-trade derivatives scheme, to a global carbon tax, this is all about plummeting what’s left of the U.S. economy and shutting down life on the planet by reducing CO2 in the atmosphere.

WITHOUT CO2 THERE IS NO LIFE!

“CO2 is not a pollutant. In simple terms, CO2 is plant food,” notes John R. Christy, professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Alabama. “The green world we see around us would disappear if not for atmospheric CO2. These plants largely evolved at a time when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was many times what it is today. Indeed, numerous studies indicate the present biosphere is being invigorated by the human-induced rise of CO2. In and of itself, therefore, the increasing concentration of CO2 does not pose a toxic risk to the planet.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPNiBVU2QIA

In fact, as S. Fred Singer, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia has noted, an increase in CO2 would raise GNP and therefore average income. “It’s axiomatic that bureaucracies always want to expand their scope of operations. This is especially true of EPA, which is primarily a regulatory agency,” writes Singer.

The EPA is may soon be tasked with regulating life in the United States at the behest of a coterie of globalists who are keen to limit economic and industrial activity and check the growth of the herd which they despise and want to scale back to 500 million, as they have proudly announced on the Georgia Guidestones. [Source]

 

Fox News Analysis: ClimateGate, EPA Ruling, Copenhagen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp9ABzPgC5g

 



The Dollar Bubble

MUST SEE
The Dollar Bubble

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZA0qNsf4m0

 



GMO foods are changing the DNA of humans

GMO foods are changing the DNA of humans

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o4bFi4k0fg

Why boys are turning into girls

Rich ‘may evolve into separate species’

 

 



Amish farmers lose court battle against RFID

Amish farmers lose court battle against RFID
Beasts must still be numbered, says court

The Register
July 31, 2009

Michigan farmers have failed in their attempt to block the introduction of RFID tags for cattle, despite arguments about the cost and the risk of upsetting an otherwise benevolent deity.

The case was bought by the catchily-named Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defence Fund (FTCLDF), representing small farmers in Michigan as well as a group of six Amish farmers: the former concerned about the cost of the tags, while the latter were more worried about eternal damnation brought on by applying numbers to God’s own cattle.

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) tried to get the case dismissed back in November last year, but only now has it managed to have the case thrown out on the basis that it is a Michigan ruling and thus subject to state laws, rather than part of any agenda being set by the USDA as part of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), against which the plaintiff’s case was based.

Even in Michigan the law is intended to be voluntary, but the plaintiffs clearly believe that the voluntary status is just a ruse under which a mandatory ruling can be later implemented, which would threaten their livelihoods, or eternal souls, as appropriate. It’s worth noting, as the Judge did, that even Amish cattle already have numbered metal ear studs, so the contention that numbering cattle is against God’s law was already in shaky ground.

As for the USDA agenda, RFID Journal covers the case in some detail including quotes from a Michigan representative explaining:

“We implemented this program nearly 10 years ago… This was done pre-NAIS. Michigan is the only state with a mandatory electronic animal-tracking program, but it is also the only state with documented bovine TB cases”

Electronic tracking, in this instance, doesn’t necessarily mean RFID tags. The same thing can be, and is, achieved using the existing metal studs, with the data gathered electronically whenever the cattle are moved. But such assurances aren’t going to dent a good conspiracy theory about federal control.

 

National Animal Identification System

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu9oKmqQpD4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgoVpgQm4fQ

The Spin Behind The “No Health Benefits To Organic Food” Scam

Insane Food Bill 2749 Passes House On 2nd Try. HR 2749: Totalitarian Control Of Our Food Supply

Tracking Humans: Big Brother’s All-Seeing Eye

FDA Approved Implantable Microchips in 2004

House approves bill on food safety


Capturing Rainwater is Illegal in the U.S.

Utah: Capturing Rainwater is Illegal

 

S.787 Would Regulate All Water Sources in the U.S.

Ching Lee
CFBF
June 24, 2009

Despite strong opposition from agricultural groups and private property rights advocates, a bill that would expand the federal reach of the Clean Water Act, and that could have sweeping effects on everyday farming activities, passed out of a key U.S. Senate committee last week.

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 12-7 to advance S. 787, also known as the Clean Water Restoration Act, which now faces consideration by the full Senate.

If adopted, the legislation would give the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers authority over nearly every wet area in the nation, including farm ponds, intermittent streams, ditches and, potentially, groundwater, said Elisa Noble, director of livestock, public lands and natural resources for the California Farm Bureau Federation.

Read Full Article Here

In Colorado, Rain Barrels Are Illegal (no bull)
http://www.groovygreen.com/groove/?p=3135

 



Indian farmers are committing suicide after using GM crops

The GM genocide: Thousands of Indian farmers are committing suicide after using genetically modified crops

Daily Mail

November 3, 2008

When Prince Charles claimed thousands of Indian farmers were killing themselves after using GM crops, he was branded a scaremonger. In fact, as this chilling dispatch reveals, it’s even WORSE than he feared.

The children were inconsolable. Mute with shock and fighting back tears, they huddled beside their mother as friends and neighbours prepared their father’s body for cremation on a blazing bonfire built on the cracked, barren fields near their home.

As flames consumed the corpse, Ganjanan, 12, and Kalpana, 14, faced a grim future. While Shankara Mandaukar had hoped his son and daughter would have a better life under India’s economic boom, they now face working as slave labour for a few pence a day. Landless and homeless, they will be the lowest of the low.

Shankara, respected farmer, loving husband and father, had taken his own life. Less than 24 hours earlier, facing the loss of his land due to debt, he drank a cupful of chemical insecticide.

Unable to pay back the equivalent of two years’ earnings, he was in despair. He could see no way out.

There were still marks in the dust where he had writhed in agony. Other villagers looked on – they knew from experience that any intervention was pointless – as he lay doubled up on the ground, crying out in pain and vomiting.

Moaning, he crawled on to a bench outside his simple home 100 miles from Nagpur in central India. An hour later, he stopped making any noise. Then he stopped breathing. At 5pm on Sunday, the life of Shankara Mandaukar came to an end.

As neighbours gathered to pray outside the family home, Nirmala Mandaukar, 50, told how she rushed back from the fields to find her husband dead. ’He was a loving and caring man,’ she said, weeping quietly.

’But he couldn’t take any more. The mental anguish was too much. We have lost everything.’

Shankara’s crop had failed – twice. Of course, famine and pestilence are part of India’s ancient story.

But the death of this respected farmer has been blamed on something far more modern and sinister: genetically modified crops.

Shankara, like millions of other Indian farmers, had been promised previously unheard of harvests and income if he switched from farming with traditional seeds to planting GM seeds instead.

Beguiled by the promise of future riches, he borrowed money in order to buy the GM seeds. But when the harvests failed, he was left with spiralling debts – and no income.

So Shankara became one of an estimated 125,000 farmers to take their own life as a result of the ruthless drive to use India as a testing ground for genetically modified crops.

The crisis, branded the ’GM Genocide’ by campaigners, was highlighted recently when Prince Charles claimed that the issue of GM had become a ’global moral question’ – and the time had come to end its unstoppable march.

Read Full Article Here

Euro Secret Plan To Boost GMO Production
http://www.independent.co.uk/..-production-973834.html

 



Some Halloween Candies May Contain Melamine, GM Sugar

Halloween Candy With Melamine on U.S. Store Shelves?

This Halloween, Say No To Candy Containing GM Sugar

Joanne Waldron
NaturalNews
October 27, 2008

Parents in Brazil are refusing to feed their children products made using genetically-modified sugar, according to an article at Food & Water Watch. Halloween is just around the corner, and unbeknownst to many American parents, foods like Kellogg’s cereal and Hershey’s chocolate may be made with sugar from genetically-modified sugar beets, warns Kisha Lewellyn Schlegel in a report at NewWest.net. There are many reasons that parents of American children need to be concerned.

Why Would They Use GM Sugar Beets?

Not surprisingly, it’s all about the money. These sugar beets have been genetically altered so that they can withstand regular applications of a weed killer made by Monsanto known as RoundUp. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently increased the allowable residue of the active ingredient of the weed killer (known as glyphosate) on beetroots by a whopping 5000%. Those scientists at the EPA are really doing their jobs protecting everyone, eh?

What’s The Trouble With Glyphosate?

So, what’s the trouble with the weed killer residue? Probably the biggest issue is that there have been studies linking glyphosate exposure to cancer and other health problems. Of course, there is also the Network of Concerned Farmers, a group of farmers who believe that glyphosate can create “super weeds” that are resistant to herbicides. Then, of course, there is a concern that these frankenfood crops may be responsible for the gene pollution of other crops and plants.

Monsanto Hires a Team of Lobbyists – Parents Must Take Action!

While the sugar industry is trying to keep their use of genetically-modified sugar beets quiet, Monsanto has hired a whole team of lobbyists to work on their behalf. This is why it is very important for concerned parents to make their views known before it is too late! Contact Nancy Pelosi at AmericanVoices@house.gov, and tell her that laws are needed to protect consumers from genetically-modified sugar beets. It is also important to send faxes to lawmakers. One can (at the time of this writing) send two free faxes per day at FaxZero.com right from any computer with an Internet connection (see terms and conditions at the site). Consumers should never have to worry about getting cancer from eating a piece of Halloween candy. (Even if parents are strict about what their children eat at home, it’s hard to police what they might be given at at class parties at school.) Why not send a free fax to two different lawmakers every single day? If enough people complain, lawmakers will have to listen. E-mail or fax this article to lawmakers today.

Don’t Support Child Slave Labor

Unfortunately, there is another reason to be concerned about the candy one purchases. According to an article by Dr. Edward Group, two of the companies that rule the chocolate industry (M&M/Mars and Hershey’s) purchase much of their cocoa from the Ivory Coast. Unfortunately, Ivory Coast cocoa farms use child slave labor to work their farms. Parents must consider whether they really want their children indulging in sweets made at the expense of other children.

Dr. Group: Put Your Money Where Your Health Is

Dr. Group believes parents can make their voices heard by voting with their dollars, by purchasing only organic chocolate and candy products. Dr Group asks parents to ask themselves if they would buy a chocolate bar if the label on the product said: “Consuming this candy bar may cause cancer – contains sugar from genetically engineered beets, cocoa harvested by child slaves, and harmful pesticides and fungicides.” Sounds much less appealing, doesn’t it?

 



FDA Approves Melamine In U.S. Food, Claims It’s Not Harmful

FDA Approves Melamine In U.S. Food, Claims It’s Not Harmful

AP
October 4, 2008

Eating a tiny bit of a melamine, the chemical responsible for a global food safety scare, is not harmful except when it’s in baby formula, U.S. food safety officials said Friday.

Melamine-tainted formula has sickened more than 54,000 children in China and is being blamed for the deaths of at least four tots. The chemical has also turned up in products sold across Asia, ranging from candies, to chocolates, to coffee drinks, that used dairy ingredients from China. Authorities in California and Connecticut have found melamine in White Rabbit candies imported from China.

Read Full Article Here

 

FDA Conspired with Chemical Industry to Declare Bisphenol-A Harmless

Mike Adams
Natural News
October 24, 2008

The FDA has been caught red-handed conspiring with the chemical industry to conclude that Bisphenol-A, the plastics chemical, is harmless to human health. As revealed by the Environmental Working Group (see below), the FDA based its evaluation of BPA on a report authored by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), a trade group that represents chemical companies and plastics manufacturers.

The FDA’s evaluation concluded that BPA was perfectly safe for consumers of any age, including infants. This conclusion stands in direct opposition to the Canadian government, which declared BPA to be a toxic chemical on Oct. 18 and moved towards banning the chemical in baby bottles.

Even the U.S. National Institutes of Health says BPA may be dangerous, admitting it is concerned about BPA’s “effects on development of the prostate gland and brain and for behavioral effects in fetuses, infants and children.”

How the FDA conspires with industry

The FDA, however, has never met a corporate-sponsored chemical it didn’t like. Thanks to industry pressure, the FDA has once again stepped to the tune of private industry while betraying the safety of the American consumer. This decision on BPA is the latest example of why the FDA has become an enormous threat to the health and safety of the American people.

Two days ago, NaturalNews reported the FDA’s masterminding of an extortion racket that targets small health supplement companies and threatens their owners with imprisonment if they don’t pay huge sums of money to FDA contractors (http://www.naturalnews.com/024567.html).

It is now clear to most independent observers that the FDA is operating a criminal protect racket that seeks to multiply the profits of drug companies and chemical companies while betraying the health and safety of the American people. FDA decision boards are routinely stacked with “experts” who are on the take from the corporations impacted by their decisions, and even while the FDA is giving the big thumbs up to deadly pharmaceuticals and cancer-causing chemicals, it is targeting health supplement companies with threats so severe they would be considered criminal if uttered by anyone else.

Thanks to the FDA, it remains illegal in the United States to even link to a scientific study on the health benefits of cherries if you happen to sell cherries. Telling the truth about anti-cancer herbs can land you in prison, and placing a customer testimonial on your health product website can earn you a visit from FDA agents accompanied by armed SWAT-style assault teams (http://www.naturalnews.com/021791.html).

The FDA, it seems, has turned reality upside down and is now telling us that all the poisons are safe while all the natural substances are dangerous. Consider this:

According to the FDA:

• Aspartame is perfectly safe, but stevia is too dangerous to use in foods

• Vioxx is perfectly safe, but cherries are too dangerous to treat arthritis pain

• Chemotherapy is safe enough for everyone, but anti-cancer herbs might poison you

• Vaccines are so safe that we should inject all our teenage girls with them, but Vitamin D has no biological benefit whatsoever and has no effect on preventing infections

• Bisphenol-A is safe enough for babies to drink, but human breast milk is dangerous and outlawed from being sold

The FDA: Harming babies for profit

The number of babies that have been harmed or killed by the FDA is beyond accounting. This agency, through its outright abandonment of its duty to protect the People, has established itself as the single most dangerous organization operating on U.S. soil, far exceeding the harm posed by criminal gangs, white-collar criminals or even terrorist cells.

Read Full Article Here

FDA Running Extortion Racket: Natural Supplement Companies Threatened with Arrest if They Don’t Pay Up
http://www.naturalnews.com/024567.html

FDA Covers-up Big Pharma’s Pills Contaminated With Machine Particles
http://www.naturalnews.com/024625.html

 



Sugar now coming from genetically modified sugar beets

Sugar now coming from genetically modified sugar beets

Mike Adams
NaturalNews
October 7, 2008

This year saw the first commercial planting of genetically modified (GM) sugar beets in the United States, with that sugar to hit the food supply soon after.

Farmers across the country will soon be planting Monsanto’s Roundup Ready sugar beet, genetically engineered for resistance to Monsanto’s herbicide glyphosate (marketed as Roundup). John Schorr, agriculture manager for Amalgamated Sugar, estimates that 95 percent of the sugar beet crop in Idaho will be of the new GM variety in 2008, or a total of 150,000 out of 167,000 acres.

Approximately 1.4 million acres of sugar beets are planted in the United States each year, primarily in Minnesota and North Dakota’s Red River Valley, as well as the Pacific Northwest, Great Plains and Great Lakes areas.

In response to the anticipated flood of GM sugar onto the food market, the consumer group Citizens for Health has launched an email campaign to pressure three major sugar and candy companies to refuse the new product. In 2001, American Crystal Sugar, Hershey’s and M&M Mars all promised that they would not use GM sugar; Citizens for Health is asking consumers to email those companies from the group’s Web site and urge them to keep that promise.

“Since half of the granulated sugar in the U.S. comes from sugar beets, the infiltration of GE sugar beets represents a significant alteration of our food supply,” Citizens for Health says on its Web site. “Unlike traditional breeding, genetic engineering creates new life forms that would never occur in nature, creating new and unpredictable health and environmental risks.”

In 1999, candy companies’ refusal to purchase GM sugar scuttled Monsanto’s first attempt to introduce Roundup Ready sugar beets.

On another front, a coalition of farmer and environmental groups is seeking to block the planting of the GM beets through a federal lawsuit. The plaintiffs in the case – the Center for Food Safety, High Mowing Organic Seeds, the Organic Seed Alliance and the Sierra Club – are represented by lawyers from the Center for Food Safety and Earthjustice.

In 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) changed the classification of Roundup Ready sugar beets from regulated to deregulated, meaning that the GM beets could be planted without a special permit. But the lawsuit alleges that the USDA failed to properly conduct an environmental review into the impacts of this deregulation.

“The law requires the government to take a hard look at the impact that deregulating Roundup Ready sugar beets will have on human health, agriculture and the environment,” said Greg Loarie of Earthjustice. “The government cannot simply ignore the fact that deregulation will harm organic farmers and consumers, and exacerbate the growing epidemic of herbicide resistant weeds.”

Critics point out that Roundup Ready crops encourage increased chemical use, with dangerous effects on both human health and the environment. In addition to contaminating soil and water, pesticides leave potentially dangerous residue on food plants themselves.

Citizens for Health says that this is a particular concern in light of the Environmental Protection Agency’s recent compliance with a Monsanto request to increase the allowable levels of glyphosate residue on sugar beet roots by 5000 percent.

“Sugar is extracted from the beet’s root, and the result is more glyphosate pesticide in our sugar,” the group said.

Another concern is that such plants encourage the development of “superweeds” that are resistant to Roundup.

“Just as overuse of antibiotics eventually breeds drug resistant bacteria, overuse of Roundup eventually breeds Roundup-resistant weeds,” said Kevin Golden of the Center for Food Safety. “When that happens, farmers are forced to rely on even more toxic herbicides to control those weeds.”

USDA data reveals that in the 10 years after the 1994 introduction of Roundup Ready crops, herbicide use increased by 15 times. This has led to a concurrent increase in superweeds. While no cases of Roundup-resistant weeds were known in the U.S. corn belt in 2000, this year the roster of such weeds includes marestail, common and giant ragweed, waterhemp, Palmer pigweed, Cocklebur, lambsquarters, morning glory and velvetleaf.

Ninety-nine percent of U.S. superweeds are resistant to Roundup.

GM crops may also cross-breed with non-GM plants of the same or closely related species. The primary seed-growing region for sugar beets – the Willamette Valley of Oregon – is also a major seed-growing area for the closely related organic chard and table beets. Since all these species are wind pollinated, the chances of contamination are very high.

“Contamination from genetically modified pollen is a major risk to both the conventional and organic seed farmers, who have a long history in the Willamette Valley,” said Matthew Dillon, director of advocacy for the Organic Seed Alliance. “The economic impact of contamination affects not only these seed farmers, but the beet and chard farmers who rely on the genetic integrity of their varieties.”

Crops contaminated by cross-pollination with GM varieties can no longer be certified organic.

Since corn syrup is an even more widely used sweetener than sugar and the majority of corn grown in the United States is also Roundup Ready, food safety advocates note that nearly all sweetened food in the United States will soon be GM. Because U.S. law does not require labeling of GM ingredients, consumers of products from candy to breakfast cereal will soon be unknowingly exposed to engineered sugar, with unknown health consequences.

“As a consumer, I’m very concerned about genetically engineered sugar making its way into the products I eat,” Neil Carman of the Sierra Club said.

 



More “Frankenfoods” heading toward American dinner tables

More “Frankenfoods” heading toward American dinner tables

Telegraph
September 18, 2008

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a proposed legal framework which is expected to open the market to meat and milk produced from modified animals, which detractors have already termed “Frankenfood”.

Such creatures, which could include new hen breeds capable of laying healthier eggs and cows that are immune to mad cow disease, have been developed already.

But producers have been discouraged from marketing their creations by the absence of clear rules governing such a controversial issue.

The government wants the guidelines to resolve questions such as as whether altered animals are safe for human consumption or whether they pose a risk to the environment.

“Genetic engineering of animals is here and has been here for some time,” said Larisa Rudenko, a science policy adviser with the FDA’s veterinary medicine centre.

“We intend to provide a rigorous, risk-based regulatory path for developers to follow to help ensure public health and the health of animals.”

Consumer groups welcomed plans to regulate the area but were alarmed by apparent gaps in the proposals.

They pointed out that the FDA does not, for example, plan to insist that all such meat, fish and poultry be labeled as genetically-engineered.

“They are talking about pigs that are going to have mouse genes in them, and this is not going to be labeled,” said Jean Halloran, director of food policy for Consumers Union. “We are close to speechless on this.”

The FDA has already ruled that cloned animals – which are not the same – are safe to eat.

The agency will continue to exempt genetically-altered animals that pose little risk, such as aquarium fish that were recently changed so they would glow in the dark.

Genetically-engineered animals, which are created by the insertion of a gene from one species of animal into the DNA of another, could fulfil a similar role in food production to GM plants.

Genetic engineering is already widely used in agriculture to produce higher-yielding or disease-resistant crops. However, all sides are aware that consumers may be rather more alarmed by the idea of eating GM meat.

Coming Soon to a Grocery Near You: Genetically Engineered Meat
http://blogs.discovermagazine.c..you-genetically-engineered-meat/

Monsanto’s Dangerous Herbicide Will Generate $1.8 Billion in Profits
http://v.mercola.com/b..rate–1-8-Billion-in-Profits-70015.aspx

 



Prince Charles Warns the Dangers of GM Crops

Prince Charles warns GM crops risk causing the biggest-ever environmental disaster

Telegraph
August 12, 2008

The mass development of genetically modified crops risks causing the world’s worst environmental disaster, The Prince of Wales has warned.

In his most outspoken intervention on the issue of GM food, the Prince said that multi-national companies were conducting an experiment with nature which had gone “seriously wrong”.

The Prince, in an exclusive interview with the Daily Telegraph, also expressed the fear that food would run out because of the damage being wreaked on the earth’s soil by scientists’ research.

He accused firms of conducting a “gigantic experiment I think with nature and the whole of humanity which has gone seriously wrong”.

Read Full Article Here

 



Capturing Rainwater Illegal in Utah

Capturing Rainwater Illegal in Utah

 



UK Supermarkets mull use of human sewage on food crops

UK Supermarkets mull use of human sewage on food crops

Mail on Sunday

July 29, 2008

Demand for the use of human waste as crop fertiliser is rising because the animal-based variety is so closely linked to the price of oil, a water company said today.

Treated human sewage, known as sludge or biosolids, is being spread on nearly 3,000 Midlands fields alone to grow crops such as corn and maize, said Severn Trent Water.

’Severn Trent Water supplies 600,000 wet tonnes of sludge to farmers every year and we have seen a 25% rise in demand for biosolids since the start of 2008,’ said press officer Sophie Jordan.

’The demand appears to have soared because of the increasing cost of other fertilisers.

’The cost of conventional fertiliser is closely linked to the price of oil, which has shot up over the past year. Farmers who are feeling the pinch might turn to biosolids to reduce costs.’

Supermarket chains are split on the use of the fertiliser for their products – a number say they have banned the controversial practice.

But Severn Trent said the use of treated human waste is safe.

’Recycling sewage sludge is a highly regulated process, with strict quality controls in place,’ said the company spokeswoman.

’The strict regulations in place give confidence that using biosolids in agriculture is safe. The ’Safe Sludge Matrix’ was developed by Water UK and the British Retail Consortium.

’The matrix ensures the highest possible standards of food safety and provides a framework that gives all food industry stakeholders confidence that biosolids can be safely used.’
At least three of the UK’s largest supermarket chains have differing policies on the use of sludge in agriculture.
A Tesco spokeswoman said: ’I can confirm we don’t use any human waste or untreated animals waste on our products.” She was unable to say why.

Sainsbury’s has no such ban on the use of biosolids.

A spokeswoman said: ’We have not got a ban or policy on it. We have hundreds of suppliers and I could not say who does and who doesn’t, but what I can say is that all our suppliers would follow the strict guidelines laid down by Defra.’

A Waitrose spokeswoman said: ’At Waitrose all our suppliers adhere to the Code of Practice for Agricultural use of Sewage Sludge published by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), but do not permit our suppliers of fruit, vegetables or salad to use sludge in their production.’

The use of biosolids has sparked controversy over its smell and fears of health risks.

But Water UK – which represents all UK water and wastewater service suppliers at national and European level – says biosolids have been used safely in agriculture in the UK and other parts of the world for more than 40 years.

The organisation said it was ’safe and sustainable’ and recognised as the ’best practical environment option’ in most circumstances by the European Commission and UK Government.

It said biosolids was the most researched of organic materials used on land and that it was subject to a strict European and UK regulatory framework.