noworldsystem.com


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

 



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

 



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

 



EPA Says Co2 is Deadly, But Fuel is Good to Drink!

EPA HYPOCRISY

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

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
December 8, 2009

While the EPA declares the gas that we exhale to be a deadly poison, as protesters at Copenhagen decry the suffering of polar bears as their population figures increase to record levels, and as delegates in the Danish capital warn of the dastardly peril of cows farting, a New York Times report confirming that U.S. drinking water contains dangerous levels of arsenic, uranium and other radioactive substances barely gets noticed.

Furthermore, the new study shows that the Environmental Protection Agency knew that water systems all over the United States were contaminated with dangerous levels of numerous toxic substances, yet failed to punish the vast majority of water authorities involved.

Since the environmental movement was completely hijacked by globalists hell bent on world government and devastating carbon taxes, real environmental problems have been swept aside as the contrived scam of man-made global warming swallows up all the attention.

Our drinking water is contaminated with toxic waste, our food supply is poisoned by genetically modified garbage, and our consumer products are laced with cancer-causing chemicals, but who cares right? Surely all this pales in comparison to the effort to stop the world warming by a percentage of a degree over the next 100 years?

    More than 20 percent of the nation’s water treatment systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.

    That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often found in sewage.

But unlike the mammoth threat posed by the life-giving gas carbon dioxide, which the EPA yesterday classified as a health threat to the same humans that exhale it, the Environmental Protection Agency is noticeably less concerned about the fact that our water is filled with contaminants that are “linked to millions of instances of illness within the United States each year.”

Indeed, records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water systems that broke the law were ever punished or fined by the EPA.

“In some instances, drinking water violations were one-time events, and probably posed little risk. But for hundreds of other systems, illegal contamination persisted for years, records show,” according to the article.

The Senate Environment and Public Works committee will question a high-ranking E.P.A. official about why they allowed water companies to continue such contamination without punishment at a hearing today.

According to the study, not only were water systems contaminated with radioactive substances like uranium as well as arsenic, but they were also found to contain cancer-causing solvents and illegal amounts of bacteria.

“The amount of radium detected in drinking water was 2,000 percent higher than the legal limit,” adds the report. Radium is described as “extremely radioactive” and has a half-life of 1602 years. People exposed to radium suffer serious health effects including sores, anemia and bone cancer. The use of radium in paints as late as the 1950’s was eventually halted after many deaths were attributed to exposure to the chemical.

True to form, the NY Times chooses to characterize water which contains deadly radioactive chemicals as “dirty” in its headline!

Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show – oh its just a bit of dirt you know! Cancer-causing radioactive toxins and poisonous arsenic – its just a little dirty!

“The problem, say current and former government officials, is that enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act has not been a federal priority,” reports the Times, adding that current and former EPA officials who attempted to make the agency enforce the drinking water law were targeted.

“I proposed drinking water cases, but they got shut down so fast that I’ve pretty much stopped even looking at the violations,” said one longtime E.P.A. enforcement official who, like others, requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. “The top people want big headlines and million-dollar settlements. That’s not drinking-water cases.”

So there you have it – according to the EPA – breathing is a threat to human health – but drinking water laced with arsenic, cancerous carcinogens, and radioactive chemicals is perfectly nutritious!

So pour a fresh glass of toxic tap water, drink up and say cheers to the fact that the government really cares about our health and the real environmental issues – before you drop dead.

Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show

Court strikes down EPA’s plan on mercury

EPA: American lives less valuable

EPA won’t remove rocket fuel from drinking water

41 Million Americans Have 56 Types of Drugs in Tap Water

 



GMO hormones in milk promotes cancer

Genetically engineered hormones used by dairy industry promote cancer

E. Huff
Natural News
November 17, 2009

An industry report claiming that the genetically-engineered hormone Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin (rBST) is safe has received criticism from the Cancer Prevention Coalition (CPC) for its dubious findings. Funded by producers of rBST, the report was conducted entirely by industry-paid consultants rather than by independent, credible scientists, indicating it is fallacious.

Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, chairman of the CPC, lambasted the report for failing to recognize the grave, scientifically-proven dangers imposed by rBST. Author of the 2006 book What’s In Your Milk?, Dr. Epstein stated the report was “blatantly false”.

One of the primary effects of rBST on cows is that is causes them to become seriously ill with various diseases including mastitis, an infection of the udder that ultimately contaminates milk with pus. Commonly branded as Posilac, rBST unnaturally increases milk production at the expense of the cow’s health, the repercussions of which are passed on to the consumer.

Monsanto, the original creator of rBST, was forced to reveal the truth that rBST induces roughly 20 toxic effects, all of which end up tainting the milk with disease. When farmers then treat these illnesses with antibiotics, those too end up in the milk that is eventually drunk by unsuspecting consumers.

Got milk hormones?

Research has also revealed that rBST-treated milk is both chemically and nutritionally different than natural milk and that traces of the hormone end up in the milk. Those who drink rBST-tainted milk readily absorb the hormone in their digestive tract which is then assimilated into the blood.

Milk from rBST-treated cows contains unnaturally high levels of natural growth factor (IGF-1) which inhibits the body’s natural defense mechanisms designed to fend off cancer. Well-documented scientific studies have implicated the hormone in precipitating prostate, breast, and colon cancer.

CPC has been working for decades to eliminate rBST from the milk supply. In 1990, the group issued a warning in conjunction with over 40 other organizations about the dangers of rBST. The warning fell upon deaf ears at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which continued to accept the flawed notion that rBST was safe in spite of its proven dangers.

In 2007, CPC sent a petition to the FDA entitled “Seeking Withdrawal of the New Animal Drug application for rBST”, which was endorsed by several farmer and consumer protection groups. Citing Congressional concerns about the hormone that date back to the 1980s, as well as countless studies illustrating the toxicity of rBST, these groups labored to reform the FDA’s flawed position. Unfortunately, the FDA ignored the facts and continues to keep the interests of industry as its priority at the expense of consumer protection.

Dr. Epstein’s recommendation, especially for children who are most susceptible to cancer-causing additives like rBST, is to choose organic milk if they are going to drink milk at all. Organic milk is not allowed to contain rBST or any artificial hormones and is the best alternative to conventional milk that may be tainted with rBST.

Organic, raw milk is the most preferable option as it is a whole, living food rich in beneficial enzymes, probiotics, and other nutrients that get destroyed during pasteurization and homogenization. Many believe raw milk is a perfect food rich in essential vitamins and high in protein.

GMO foods are changing the DNA of humans

 



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’

 

 



Obama Puts Monsanto Lobbyist In Charge Of Food Safety

Obama Puts Monsanto Lobbyist In Charge Of Food Safety

Organic Consumers Association
July 24, 2009

Genetically modified foods are not safe. The only reason they’re in our food supply is because government bureaucrats with ties to industry suppressed or manipulated scientific research and deprived consumers of the information they need to make informed choices about whether or not to eat genetically modified foods.

Now, the Obama Administration is putting two notorious biotech bullies in charge of food safety! Former Monsanto lobbyist Michael Taylor has been appointed as a senior adviser to the Food and Drug Administration Commissioner on food safety. And, rBGH-using dairy farmer and Pennsylvania Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff is rumored to be President Obama’s choice for Under-Secretary of Agriculture for Food Safety. Wolfe spearheaded anti-consumer legislation in Pennsylvania that would have taken away the rights of consumers to know whether their milk and dairy products were contaminated with Monsanto’s (now Eli Lilly’s) genetically engineered Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH).

Please click here to send a message to President Obama, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (oversees FDA) demanding Michael Taylor’s resignation, and letting them know that you oppose Dennis Wolff’s appointment.



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

 



Obama Will Declare CO2 a “Dangerous Pollutant”

If Elected Obama Will Declare CO2 a “Dangerous Pollutant”

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
October 17, 2008

In an interview with Bloomberg’s Jim Efstathiou Jr., Barack Obama’s energy adviser, Jason Grumet, said if elected Obama will classify carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant. Obama will tell the Environmental Protection Agency that it may use the 1990 Clean Air Act to set emissions limits, according to Grumet, and he will likely do this immediately upon taking office, David Bookbinder, chief climate counsel for the Sierra Club told Bloomberg.

“The U.S. has to move quickly domestically so we can get back in the game internationally,” Grumet said. In other words, an Obama administration would impose draconian carbon emission regulations on the American people and “help clear the deadlock in talks on an international agreement to slow global warming,” according to Rajendra Pachauri, head of a United Nation panel of climate-change scientists. Negotiators from almost 200 countries will meet in December in Poznan, Poland, to discuss ways to limit CO2, that is to say they will work on a global carbon taxation structure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVmk3lUYdPA

A global carbon tax is not so much about limiting CO2 as it is a scheme designed to pay for world government and corporate globalization. “The Climate Change Control Bill strongly supported by Obama calls for an international governing regime to monitor and regulate carbon dioxide and ‘carbon footprints’ from discovery, to production, to consumption at a cost of $50 trillion globally and at a cost of $8 trillion for US taxpayers, all to be paid for by a global tax, whose monies will be used to establish a world government body,” writes Patrick Briley.

Obama has worked closely on this global taxation and world government scam under the cover of environmentalism with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Al Gore, and former communist leader Mikhail Gorbachev, an advocate of the so-called Earth Charter and the author of Manifesto for Earth. Brzezinski co-founded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller in 1973. Rockefeller and fellow globalist Maurice Strong of Canada were instrumental in the creation of the Earth Charter. As noted above, the Sierra Club will play a decisive role in Obama’s administration. The organization takes money from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and is closely aligned with the United Nations Environmental Program. Strong was UNEP’s first executive director.

It is a well documented fact the environmental movement receives huge disbursements from chartered institutions such as the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, W. Alton Jones Foundation, Turner Foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, the Alfred W. Mellon Foundation, and others, including Bill and Melinda Gates, the Heinz family and the Carnegie Corporation. It is no mistake foundation funded environmental groups are now calling for a global carbon tax structure and an international governing regime to monitor and regulate carbon dioxide, as this serves the plan of their masters well.

An Obama administration will kick this scheme into warp drive and hasten the implementation of a world government of the sort members of the global elite have worked toward for many years. A phony environmental crisis, with carbon emissions playing the role as chief villain, is a perfect storm for the global elite. “We are on the verge of a global transformation,” David Rockefeller once quipped. “All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

 

France: Turmoil Must Not Affect Climate Change Bill

AP
October 21, 2008

France and Germany urged smaller European Union economies not to use the world financial meltdown as an excuse to gut legislation that aims to combat global warming with deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

French Environment Minister Jean-Louis Borloo said at an EU environment ministers’ meeting that “the European Union must keep its leadership role” in climate change to nudge the United States and others into a global deal on slashing emissions.

The bill, which aims to cut EU greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by 2020, is to be adopted in December. The EU hopes it will lead to a deal that month at UN climate negotiations in Poznan, Poland.

“We cannot afford to delay,” German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel said.

In last-minute objections, Italy said the bill would hurt its industries because Chinese and US competitors face no equivalent emission burdens. Italian officials pushed for a clause that would force the European Commission to do a new cost analysis of the climate change bill in 2009.

Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia say they have already made great cuts in carbon emissions since emerging from communism.

Borloo said “there was a very strong willingness” to work toward a deal by December.” But, he added, “the financial markets crisis must not delay this. The EU must keep its leadership role or there will be no point in going to Poznan.”

The financial turmoil has triggered fears of a global recession that would make governments less eager to get major polluters such as energy generators, steel makers and cement producers to pay billions into a cap-and-trade emissions scheme.

The EU cap-and-trade program could impose up to 50 billion euros ($68.8 billion) a year in polluter fees.

EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said critics exaggerated the costs.

“Approving the EU bill in December will be consistent with tackling the financial crisis,” because it will promote investments in clean energy, creating jobs and easing the EU’s dependence on oil imports, he said.

The European Commission estimates the cost of the climate change bill at 0.5 percent of the bloc’s gross national product by 2020.

 

Eco-Surveillance Agents To Scan Homes

London Guardian
October 23, 2008

Essential surveillance kit for the new green police: the Energy Saving Partnership has taken out a patent on Heatseekers, thermo-imaging vehicles which, at full potential, have the capacity to identify 1,000 properties an hour, or 5,000 properties a night, that are leaking carbon.

“Once the property has been scanned, a dedicated team of energy advisers will visit householders to show them the thermal image scan of their homes,” says Inspector Knock-on-the-Door.

That’ll go down well after midnight.

Hidden Carbon Tax Provisions in Paulson’s Bailout 2.0
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthe..vision-paulson-s-bailout-2-0

Eco bulbs emit skin-damaging UV radiation, health experts warn
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/..V-radiation-health-experts-warn.html

Dim Bulbs: Those Squiggly “Green” Light Bulbs Could Hurt the Environment, Study Says
http://blogs.wsj.com/environm..hurt-the-environment-study-says/

Global Warming? Blizzards forecast as temperature set to drop lower than Siberia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/..iberia–wonder-swans-staying-there.html

Record Low Temperatures Hit America
http://www.prisonplanet.com/..-low-temperatures-hit-america.html

WWF Resorts To Deception In Climate Fearmongering
http://www.prisonplanet.co..eption-in-climate-fearmongering.html

Spotless Sun: Blankest Year of the Space Age
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/30sep_blankyear.htm?list878321

Traditional lightbulbs banned by EU
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world..-banned-by-EU.html

Global Cooling: Alaskan Glaciers Grow For First Time In 250 Years
http://www.prisonplanet.com/global-cooling-a..n-250-years.html

Global Warming Hoax Archive

 



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?

 



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

 



Dangerous HPV Vaccine Mandatory For Immigrants

Genetically Engineered Merck Cancer Vaccine Made Mandatory For Immigrants
Controversial shot now required if you want to live the American dream

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
September 16, 2008

Immigrants seeking permanent legal residency in the U.S. are now mandated to take an expensive and controversial vaccine that has been linked with thousands of serious complaints and several deaths.

The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine — known as Gardasil — is one of five the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services recently added to the required list, reports Fox 8 News.

A press release from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency confirms that the requirements for the vaccine went into effect on July 1, 2008.

The regulation represents a total dismissal of the recommendation of Dr. Jon Abramson, chairman of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s advisory committee on immunization practices. In February 2007, Abramson said that he and the 15-member panel at the CDC opposed making Gardasil mandatory because the sexually transmitted HPV is not a contagious disease like measles or chicken pox.

At $162 per dose, the three-dose vaccine is set to make millions in profits for Gardasil manufacturer Merck, a company that has a history of both lobbying intensely for state mandates and entering into crony deals to hoodwink Americans into believing HPV vaccinations are compulsory.

Merck were unable to sell the “benefits” of the vaccine to make enough profit out of it, so instead they turned to state legislature and attempted to pay off Governors and other officials to curry favor and force eleven year old girls (and in other states children as young as eight) who aren’t even sexually active to take the shot.

However, the pharmaceutical giant agreed to stop lobbying state legislatures to make it mandatory for schoolgirls to be inoculated with Gardasil after a fierce backlash from concerned parents and religious organizations.

We previously exposed Merck’s role one such crony deal with Texas Governor Rick Perry which saw a resulting media campaign fool parents into thinking that the HPV vaccine had been made compulsory by law for all young girls.

Without consulting and doctors, scientists or medical experts, Perry, who has various close ties to Merck, issued an executive order requiring girls to be vaccinated against HPV. Several Texas lawmakers subsequently petitioned for a reversal of the decision without success.

Almost immediately following Perry’s announcement, newspapers and TV stations began to report that it was “the law” that parents had to have their child vaccinated. This reflects a national and international hoax that is repeatedly being perpetrated shortly before school terms begin each year.

There is no law in America, aside from those applying to medical workers, that says any citizen or their children have to take any vaccine whatsoever, no matter what any executive order, requirement, mandate or policy dictates.

As in the case of all other vaccines, Perry’s executive order merely stated that the vaccine is “recommended,” yet the mass media drumbeat constantly conditions people to believe that if they don’t take their shots they will be kicked out of school, arrested and thrown in jail.

Last November we reported on a case in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where parents of more than 1600 children were told they could be put in jail for failing to get their kids vaccinated. At the time a local Fox News affiliate reported, “A new law was passed last year requiring children from 5th through to 10th grade to have the vaccine,” which was a total lie.

The non-complying parents were not charged not under vaccination laws (because there aren’t any) but under truancy, neglect or child in need of supervision laws, which state that the parent is culpable after 30 days of a child’s unexplained absence from school.

The school itself triggered the truancy violation by unfairly kicking the kids out of school, and failing to inform parents about vaccine waiver forms. A state prosecutor involved in the case then admitted that there is no law that mandates any vaccine.

This trick will continue to hoodwink Americans into taking all manner of dangerous and untested vaccines, the number of which rises every year, until they realize that there is no law that forces them to take any vaccine.

Until this is drilled home with parents we will also keep seeing relatively unchallenged moves to pass legislation to make mandatory all vaccines recommended by the CDC for all children, including infants and toddlers.

As we have previously seen with other controversial schemes such as Real ID, immigrant populations provide a prime testing ground to quietly introduce policies that may later be subject to efforts to make them mandatory for all American citizens.

So what is actually in the HPV vaccine?

Live genetically engineered cancer virus. As the vaccine spreads in use, reports of horrible side effects are already starting to proliferate.

“Negative side effects of Gardasil, a new Merck vaccine to prevent the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, are being reported in the District of Columbia and 20 states, including Virginia. The reactions range from loss of consciousness to seizures,” reported the Washington Times.

“Young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision and some girls have lost consciousness during what appear to be seizures,” said Vicky Debold, health policy analyst for the National Vaccine Information Center, a nonprofit watchdog organization that was created in the early 1980s to prevent vaccine injuries.”

The report quotes physicians who debunk the claim that the HPV vaccine even prevents cervical cancer, as is claimed by Merck and the FDA.

“There is no proof Gardasil will stop cervical cancer,” said Clayton Young, an obstetrician/gynecologist in Texas, “They haven’t been studying it long enough to make that claim.”

Non-profit, public interest group Judicial Watch, released a report at the end of June this year which revealed that there had been 9,749 adverse reactions and 21 reported deaths related to Gardasil in the last two years.

According to the report, there have been 78 severe outbreaks of genital warts, six cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome and at least 10 miscarriages reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) since the approval of Gardasil. However, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine found that clinicians, patients and drug companies report only about 10 percent of side effects to VAERS, so the actual number of Gardasil side effects could be much higher.

The CDC subsequently released a statement on July 22 which stated “Based on ongoing assessments of vaccine safety information, the FDA and CDC continue to find that Gardasil is a safe and effective vaccine… The benefits continue to outweigh the risks.”

Merck also issued a statement in response to the data, saying it “believes that no safety issue related to the vaccine has been identified. These types of events are events that could also be seen in the general population, even in the absence of vaccination.”

The CDC plans to release a study in October that it says will help determine whether a true linkage between Gardasil and the reported adverse reactions exists.

The U.S. distributed 2.2 million doses of the vaccine in 2006 and 11.3 million in 2007.

 

Alex Jones Show – (8/14/2008) With Vaccine Expert Barbara Lowe Fisher

Flashback: Hepatitis B Vaccine Linked to Diabetes

Vaccinated girl new victim of polio
http://www.dawn.com/2008/09/18/top17.htm

Group With Big Pharma Ties Wants to Shut Down Vaccine “Conspiracy Theories”
http://www.prisonplanet.com/group-..-vaccine-conspiracy-theories.html

Ministers ignored parents’ fears over cervical cancer jab
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politi..ervical-cancer-jab-921704.html

Deadly Vaccine News Archive

 



U.S. May Have Created ‘Weaponized’ Avian Flu

U.S. May Have Created ‘Weaponized’ Avian Flu

Global Research
August 15, 2008

There is alarming evidence accumulated by serious scientific sources that the US Government is about to or already has ‘weaponized’ Avian Flu. If the reports are accurate, this could unleash a new pandemic on the planet that could be more devastating than the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic which killed an estimated 30 million people worldwide before it eventually died out. Pentagon and NIH experiments with remains in frozen state of the 1918 virus are the height of scientific folly. Is the United States about to unleash a new racially selective pandemic through the process of mandatory vaccination with an alleged vaccine “against” Avian Flu?

There is reason to believe that sections of the international pharmaceutical industry cartel are acting in concert with the US Government to develop a genetically modified H5N1 virus substance that could unleash a man-made pandemic, perhaps more deadly than the 1918 ‘Spanish Influenza’ pandemic claiming up to 30 million lives.1

Rima E. Laibow, MD, head of the Natural Solutions Foundation, a citizen watchdog group monitoring the pharmaceutical industry states, “Our best intelligence estimate is that pandemic Avian Flu has already been created through genetic engineering in the United States, fusing the deadly genome of the 1918 Pandemic, misnamed the ‘Spanish Flu’, with the DNA of the innocuous H5N1 virus in a growth medium of human kidney cells, according to the National Institutes of Health and the vaccine’s manufacturer. Some virologists believe that this would insure that the man-made mutant virus recognizes human cells and knows how to invade them.” 2

If true, as Laibow points out, “A basic virological fact that the public has not been told is that it is impossible to make a vaccine against a virus that does not yet exist. Public relations efforts to the contrary, IF a vaccine is being made against the Avian Flu virus in its pandemic form, that means that the pandemic virus must already exist, period, end of discussion.”3

Read Full Article Here

 



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

 



Massive U.S. Naval Armada Heads For Iran

Massive U.S. Naval Armada Heads For Iran

Europe Business
August 7, 2008

Operation Brimstone ended only one week ago. This was the joint US/UK/French naval war games in the Atlantic Ocean preparing for a naval blockade of Iran and the likely resulting war in the Persian Gulf area. The massive war games included a US Navy supercarrier battle group, an US Navy expeditionary carrier battle group, a Royal Navy carrier battle group, a French nuclear hunter-killer submarine plus a large number of US Navy cruisers, destroyers and frigates playing the “enemy force”.

The lead American ship in these war games, the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN71) and its Carrier Strike Group Two (CCSG-2) are now headed towards Iran along with the USS Ronald Reagon (CVN76) and its Carrier Strike Group Seven (CCSG-7) coming from Japan.

They are joining two existing USN battle groups in the Gulf area: the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN72) with its Carrier Strike Group Nine (CCSG-9); and the USS Peleliu (LHA-5) with its expeditionary strike group.

Likely also under way towards the Persian Gulf is the USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) and its expeditionary strike group, the UK Royal Navy HMS Ark Royal (R07) carrier battle group, assorted French naval assets including the nuclear hunter-killer submarine Amethyste and French Naval Rafale fighter jets on-board the USS Theodore Roosevelt. These ships took part in the just completed Operation Brimstone.

The build up of naval forces in the Gulf will be one of the largest multi-national naval armadas since the First and Second Gulf Wars. The intent is to create a US/EU naval blockade (which is an Act of War under international law) around Iran (with supporting air and land elements) to prevent the shipment of benzene and certain other refined oil products headed to Iranian ports. Iran has limited domestic oil refining capacity and imports 40% of its benzene. Cutting off benzene and other key products would cripple the Iranian economy. The neo-cons are counting on such a blockade launching a war with Iran.

The US Naval forces being assembled include the following:

Carrier Strike Group Nine
USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN72) nuclear powered supercarrier
with its Carrier Air Wing Two
Destroyer Squadron Nine:
USS Mobile Bay (CG53) guided missile cruiser
USS Russell (DDG59) guided missile destroyer
USS Momsen (DDG92) guided missile destroyer
USS Shoup (DDG86) guided missile destroyer
USS Ford (FFG54) guided missile frigate
USS Ingraham (FFG61) guided missile frigate
USS Rodney M. Davis (FFG60) guided missile frigate
USS Curts (FFG38) guided missile frigate
Plus one or more nuclear hunter-killer submarines

Peleliu Expeditionary Strike Group
USS Peleliu (LHA-5) a Tarawa-class amphibious assault carrier
USS Pearl Harbor (LSD52) assult ship
USS Dubuque (LPD8) assult ship/landing dock
USS Cape St. George (CG71) guided missile cruiser
USS Halsey (DDG97) guided missile destroyer
USS Benfold (DDG65) guided missile destroyer

Carrier Strike Group Two
USS Theodore Roosevelt (DVN71) nuclear powered supercarrier
with its Carrier Air Wing Eight
Destroyer Squadron 22
USS Monterey (CG61) guided missile cruiser
USS Mason (DDG87) guided missile destroyer
USS Nitze (DDG94) guided missile destroyer
USS Sullivans (DDG68) guided missile destroyer

USS Springfield (SSN761) nuclear powered hunter-killer submarine

IWO ESG ~ Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group
USS Iwo Jima (LHD7) amphibious assault carrier
with its Amphibious Squadron Four
and with its 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit
USS San Antonio (LPD17) assault ship
USS Velia Gulf (CG72) guided missile cruiser
USS Ramage (DDG61) guided missile destroyer
USS Carter Hall (LSD50) assault ship
USS Roosevelt (DDG80) guided missile destroyer

USS Hartfore (SSN768) nuclear powered hunter-killer submarine

Carrier Strike Group Seven
USS Ronald Reagan (CVN76) nuclear powered supercarrier
with its Carrier Air Wing 14
Destroyer Squadron 7
USS Chancellorsville (CG62) guided missile cruiser
USS Howard (DDG83) guided missile destroyer
USS Gridley (DDG101) guided missile destroyer
USS Decatur (DDG73) guided missile destroyer
USS Thach (FFG43) guided missile frigate
USNS Rainier (T-AOE-7) fast combat support ship

Also likely to join the battle armada:

UK Royal Navy HMS Ark Royal Carrier Strike Group with assorted guided missile destroyers and frigates, nuclear hunter-killer submarines and support ships

French Navy nuclear powered hunter-killer submarines (likely the Amethyste and perhaps others), plus French Naval Rafale fighter jets operating off of the USS Theodore Roosevelt as the French Carrier Charles de Gaulle is in dry dock, and assorted surface warships

Various other US Navy warships and submarines and support ships. The following USN ships took part (as the “enemy” forces) in Operation Brimstone and several may join in:

USS San Jacinto (CG56) guided missile cruiser
USS Anzio (CG68) guided missile cruiser
USS Normandy (CG60) guided missile cruiser
USS Carney (DDG64) guided missile destroyer
USS Oscar Austin (DDG79) guided missile destroyer
USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG81) guided missile destroyer
USS Carr (FFG52) guided missile frigate

The USS Iwo Jima and USS Peleliu Expeditionary Strike Groups have USMC Harrier jump jets and an assortment of assault and attack helicopters. The Expeditionary Strike Groups have powerful USMC Expeditionary Units with amphibious armor and ground forces trained for operating in shallow waters and in seizures of land assets, such as Qeshm Island (a 50 mile long island off of Bandar Abbas in the Gulf of Hormuz and headquarters of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps).

The large and very advanced nature of the US Naval warships is not only directed at Iran. There is a great fear that Russia and China may oppose the naval and air/land blockade of Iran. If Russian and perhaps Chinese naval warships escort commercial tankers to Iran in violation of the blockade it could be the most dangerous at-sea confrontation since the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US and allied Navies, by front loading a Naval blockade force with very powerful guided missile warships and strike carriers is attempting to have a force so powerful that Russia and China will not be tempted to mess with. This is a most serious game of military brinkmanship with major nuclear armed powers that have profound objections to the neo-con grand strategy and to western control of all of the Middle East’s oil supply.

The Russian Navy this spring sent a major battle fleet into the Mediterranean headed by the modern aircraft carrier the Admiral Kuznetsov and the flagship of its Black Sea Fleet, the Guided Missile Heavy Cruiser Moskva. This powerful fleet has at least 11 surface ships and unknown numbers of subs and can use the Russian naval facility at Syria’s Tartous port for resupply. The Admiral Kuznetsov carries approximately 47 warplanes and 10 helicopters. The warplanes are mostly the powerful Su-33, a naval version (with mid-air refueling capability) of the Su-27 family. While the Su-33 is a very powerful warplane it lacks the power of the stealth USAF F-22. However, the Russians insist that they have developed a plasma based system that allows them to stealth any aircraft and a recent incident where Russian fighters were able to appear unannounced over a US Navy carrier battle group tends to confirm their claims. The Su-33 can be armed with the 3M82 Moskit sea-skimming missile (NATO code name SS-N-22 Sunburn) and the even more powerful P-800 Oniks (also named Yakhonts; NATO code name SS-N-26 Onyx). Both missiles are designed to kill US Navy supercarriers by getting past the cruiser/destroyer screen and the USN point-defense Phalanx system by using high supersonic speeds and violent end maneuvers. Russian subs currently use the underwater rocket VA-111 Shkval (Squall), which is fired from standard 533mm torpedo tubes and reaches a speed of 360kph (230mph) underwater. There is no effective countermeasures to this system and no western counterpart.

A strategic diversion has been created for Russia. The Republic of Georgia, with US backing, is actively preparing for war on South Ossetia. The South Ossetia capital has been shelled and a large Georgian tank force has been heading towards the border. Russia has stated that it will not sit by and allow the Georgians to attack South Ossetia. The Russians are great chess players and this game may not turn out so well for the neo-cons.

Kuwait has activated its “Emergency War Plan” as it and other Gulf nations prepare for the likelihood of a major regional war in the Middle East involving weapons of mass destruction.

The two-ton elephant in the living room of the neo-con strategy is the advanced biowar (ABW) that Iran, and to a lessor extent Syria, has. This places the motherlands of the major neo-con nations (America, France, the United Kingdom), as well as Israel, in grave danger. When the Soviet Union fell the Iranians hired as many out-of-work former Soviet advanced biowar experts as possible. In the last 15 or so years they have helped to develop a truly world class ABW program utilizing recombination DNA genetic engineering technology to create a large number of man made killer viruses. This form of weapon system does not require high tech military delivery systems. The viruses are sub-microscopic and once seeded in a population use the population itself as vectors. Seeding can be done without notice in shopping malls, churches, and other public places. The only real defense to an advanced global strategic biowar attack is to lock down the population as rapidly as possible and let those infected die off.

Unless the public gets it act together and forces the neo-cons to stop the march to yet another war in the Middle East we are apt to see a truly horrific nightmare unfold in OUR COUNTRIES.

 

United States was once ally of Iran for the “War On Terror”

Condoleezza Rice gives the nod to israeli action against Iran
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1009504.html

US threatens Iran with ‘punitive’ measures
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2370594,00.html

Israel Building Up Strike Capabilities Against Iran
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/07/isr..e-capabilities-against-iran/

Iran submits nuclear letter, no mention of freeze
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3578123,00.html

U.S.: Iranian Response On Nukes Unacceptable
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92C9MC81&show_article=1

Kadhafi warns ‘arrogant’ Iran of military humiliation
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080805155712.qouscvqz.html

 



Cloned Beef Has Already Entered U.S. Food Supply

Cloned Beef Has Already Entered U.S. Food Supply, Even Before FDA Nod

Natural News
July 29, 2008

The major cattle cloning companies in the United States have admitted that they have not bothered to try and keep meat from the offspring of clones out of the U.S. food supply, in spite of a request by the FDA several years ago.

“This is a fairy tale that this technology is not being used and is not already in the food chain,” said Donald Coover, who owns a specialty cattle semen business. “Anyone who tells you otherwise either doesn’t know what they’re talking about, or they’re not being honest.”

Coover admitted that for several years, he has been openly selling semen from cloned bulls. He is sure, he added, that others are doing the same.

The revelation came as the FDA approved cloned beef as safe for human consumption but the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) asked farmers to keep it out of the food supply anyway.

The USDA’s primary concern is that if cloned beef enters the U.S. food supply, other countries might refuse to purchase beef from the United States. Similar problems have emerged in the past with genetically modified U.S. crops being rejected, particularly in Europe but also in parts of Africa, Asia and the Americas. Insiders from agencies such as the USDA and Office of the U.S. Trade Representative noted that a product that no other country wants to buy might do the United States more harm than good.

The USDA’s request for a moratorium on cloned beef is meant to give time for “an acceptance process” that will be needed “given the emotional nature of this issue.”

A survey by the International Food Information Council Foundation found that 22 percent of U.S. residents surveyed had a favorable impression of cloned meat in 2007, as opposed to 16 percent in 2006. Approximately 50 percent had a negative impression of such food.

The FDA has rejected calls to require the labeling of food produced from cloned animals.

 



Bird Flu Virus in Flu-Mist Vaccine

Bird Flu Virus in Flu-Mist Vaccine

Homeless Die After Bird Flu Vaccine Trial
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/po..-after-bid-flu-vaccine-trial-in-Poland.html

U.S. Government Ignores Flu Vaccine Death
http://v.mercola.com/blogs/public_..Vaccine-Death-65121.aspx

HPV Vaccine Gardasil Kills 2 More Girls
http://www.naturalnews.com/023419.html

Doctor: AIDS Created For Eugenics Experiments
http://noworldsystem.com/2008/04..r-eugenics-experiments/

 



Nanotech: Why Something So Small Can Be So Dangerous

Nanotech: Why Something So Small Can Be So Dangerous

Alternet
June 23, 2008

“It’s green, it’s clean, it’s never seen — that’s nanotechnology!”

That exuberant motto, used by an executive at a trade group for nanotech entrepreneurs, reflects the buoyant enthusiasm for nanotechnology in some business and scientific circles.

Part of the slogan is indisputably true: nanotechnology — which involves creating and manipulating common substances at the scale of the nanometer, or one billionth of a meter — is invisible to the human eye.

But the rest of the motto is open for debate. Nanotech does hold clean and green potential, especially for supplying cheap renewable energy and safe drinking water. But nanomaterials also pose possible serious risks to the environment and human health — risks that researchers have barely begun to probe, and regulators have barely begun to regulate.

What’s more, the potential damage could take years or even decades to surface. So these tiny particles could soon become the next big thing — only to turn into the next big disaster.

Nano enthusiasts see it as the next “platform technology” — one that will, like electricity or micro-computing, change the way we do almost everything. While that prediction is still unproven, there’s no question that nanotech is booming. Universities, industry, and governments around the globe are pouring billions into creating and developing nanoproducts and applications. A range of nanotechnologies is already used in more than 600 consumer products — from electronics to toothpaste — with global sales projected to soar to $2.6 trillion by 2014.

Environmentalists, scientists, and policymakers increasingly worry that nanotech development is outrunning our understanding of how to use it safely. Consider these examples from last month alone:

  • An animal study from the United Kingdom found that certain carbon nanotubes can cause the same kind of lung damage as asbestos. Carbon nanotubes are among the most widely used nanomaterials.
  • A coalition of consumer groups petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to ban the sale of products that contain germ-killing nanosilver particles, from stuffed animals to clothing, arguing that the silver could harm human health, poison aquatic life, and contribute to the rise of antibiotic resistance.
  • Researchers in Singapore reported that nanosilver caused severe developmental problems in zebrafish embryos — bolstering worries about what happens when those antimicrobial products, like soap and clothing, leak silver into the waste stream.
  • The U.S. Department of Defense, in an internal memo, acknowledged that nanomaterials may “present… risks that are different than those for comparable material at a larger scale.” That’s an overarching risk with nanomaterials: Their tiny size and high surface area make them more chemically reactive and cause them to behave in unpredictable ways. So a substance that’s safe at a normal size can become toxic at the nanoscale.
  • Australian farmers proposed new standards that would exclude nanotechnology from organic products.
  • The European Union announced that it will require full health and safety testing for carbon and graphite under its strict new chemicals law, known as REACH (for Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemical Substances). Carbon and graphite were previously exempt, because they’re considered safe in their normal forms. But the U.K. study comparing carbon nanotubes to asbestos, along with a similar report from Japan, raised new alarms about these seemingly

Old Materials, New Risks

The EU’s move is a critical step toward recognizing nanomaterials as a potential new hazard that requires new rules and new information.

The raw materials of nanotechnology are familiar. Carbon, silver, and metals like iron and titanium are among the most common. But at the nanoscale, these well-known substances take on new and unpredictable properties. That’s what makes them so versatile and valuable. It also makes them potentially dangerous in ways that their larger-scale counterparts are not.

Read Full Article Here

 



UK: 104 Products Contain Toxic ’Grey Goo’

UK: 104 Products Contain Toxic ’Grey Goo’

Daily Mail
March 11, 2008

Some skin creams use nano particles but many are now concerned about the use of the technology in foods

Potentially toxic chemicals are being incorporated into food, packaging, health supplements and other products by stealth, it is claimed.

Manufacturers boast that nanoparticles can deliver drugs or vitamins more effectively, kill harmful bugs in food or create self-cleaning windows.

But scientists, consumer groups and green campaigners fear the technology is being introduced into the diet, body and environment without proper safety checks.

Nanoparticles are 80,000 times thinner than a human hair – so small they can cross membranes protecting the brain or a baby in the womb.

Critics say it is not known how such tiny particles will interact with the body and organs in the long term, whether they are toxic or how long they will persist in the body.

Doom-mongers have warned that nanoparticles could mutate and reproduce out of control, consuming all life on earth, a scenario often referred to as “grey goo”.

Yesterday a report by Friends of the Earth said current regulations are “ill-equipped” to deal with the unique properties of nanoparticles.

It said: “Despite concerns about the toxicity risks of nanomaterials, consumers are unknowingly ingesting them because regulators are struggling to keep pace with their rapidly expanding use.”

The study found at least 104 food and agricultural products available in Europe, including the UK, which use nanotech particles or technology.

This includes some nutritional supplements under the Solgar brand, cling wrap and containers, antibacterial kitchenware, processed meats, chocolate drinks, baby food and chemicals used in agriculture.

Friends of the Earth’s food and farming spokesman, Helen Holder, said: “Europeans should not be exposed to potentially toxic materials in their food and food packaging until proper regulations are in place to ensure their safety.

“In the absence of proper safety regulations or mandatory labelling, consumers are being left in the dark about the products they consume and are unknowingly putting their health and the environment at risk.”

A Government sponsored report, published before Christmas, said a shortage of money for research had created an absence of basic information about nanoparticle toxicology.

It said research into how long these tiny particles persist in the body is urgently needed.

The consumer group Which? has called on the Government to set up a task force to take immediate steps to establish how nanotechnologies are being used in the UK and to urgently address gaps in current regulations.

 



Koreans Clone Glow In The Dark Kittens
December 13, 2007, 4:35 pm
Filed under: genetically modified, GM, Science and technology, south korea, strange news

Koreans Clone Glow In The Dark Kittens

AFP
December 12, 2007

South Korean scientists have cloned cats by manipulating a fluorescent protein gene, a procedure which could help develop treatments for human genetic diseases, officials said Wednesday.

In a side-effect, the cloned cats glow in the dark when exposed to ultraviolet beams.

A team of scientists led by Kong Il-keun, a cloning expert at Gyeongsang National University, produced three cats possessing altered fluorescence protein (RFP) genes, the Ministry of Science and Technology said.

“It marked the first time in the world that cats with RFP genes have been cloned,” the ministry said in a statement.

“The ability to produce cloned cats with the manipulated genes is significant as it could be used for developing treatments for genetic diseases and for reproducing model (cloned) animals suffering from the same diseases as humans,” it added.

The cats were born in January and February. One was stillborn while two others grew to become adult Turkish Angoras, weighing 3.0 kilogrammes (6.6 pounds) and 3.5 kilogrammes.

“This technology can be applied to clone animals suffering from the same diseases as humans,” the leading scientist, Kong, told AFP.

“It will also help develop stemcell treatments,” he said, noting that cats have some 250 kinds of genetic diseases that affect humans, too.

The technology can also help clone endangered animals like tigers, leopards and wildcats, Kong said.

South Korea’s bio-engineering industry suffered a setback after a much-touted achievement by cloning expert Hwang Woo-Suk turned out to have been faked.

The government banned Hwang from research using human eggs after his claims that he created the first human stem cells through cloning were ruled last year to be bogus.

Hwang is standing trial on charges of fraud and embezzlement.

South Korean Cloned Cats Glow Red In The Dark
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/l…page_id=1965&ito=1490

 



Police tear-gas farmers in clash over French GM crops
August 30, 2007, 8:01 am
Filed under: France, genetically modified, GM, gm food, MON810, Monsanto

Police tear-gas farmers in clash over French GM crops

Independent
August 27, 2007

Growing tensions in France between opponents and supporters of genetically modified crops have led to violent confrontations.

Gendarmes used tear gas and batons to prevent pro-GM farmers from invading a picnic for militant opponents of genetically modified maize at the town of Verdun-sur-Garonne in south-west France over the weekend.

Hardly a day has gone by this summer without opponents of GM maize – both environmental campaigners and small farmers – invading fields and trampling or cutting down crops. The protesters, led by the small- farmers’ leader, José Bové, claim a citizens’ right to destroy crops which, they say, threaten ecological calamity and the subjection of farmers to the whims of agro-industrial, multinational companies.

Tempers have risen to boiling point since the suicide earlier this month of a farmer in the Lot département who had agreed to plant a small section of GM maize. He took his life a few days after he had been warned that anti-GM protesters planned to hold a picnic on his fields.

The largest French farmers’ federation, the FNSEA, called for Saturday’s demonstration to protest against attacks on crops and alleged government inaction. Gendarmes used tear gas to prevent the farmers from crossing a bridge to the site of the anti-GM picnic, which was addressed by the extravagantly moustachioed M. Bové.

“If Bové keeps on cutting down our crops, we’re going to shave his moustache,” said one protester.

Michel Masson, head of the FNSEA in the central area of France, said: “There has already been one death and I can tell you that many farmers, rather than hang themselves from a tree, are now ready to take their rifles off the wall.”

The confrontation is partly between town and country. It is also a confrontation between two different approaches to agriculture. The FNSEA supports a “scientific” and highly productive approach to agriculture. M. Bové and his supporters argue for a traditional, small-scale approach.

Successive governments have shied away from legislating clearly on GM crops. Most types are banned but farmers have been allowed to plant, experimentally, a variety of maize called MON810, developed by the US company, Monsanto, which is said to be immune to insect attack.

 



FDA Says No Label For Nanotechnology
August 4, 2007, 2:25 pm
Filed under: fda, genetically modified, GM, gm food, nanotechnology

FDA Says No Label For Nanotechnology

Reuters
August 3, 2007

Fbiiraqisbein_mn

CHICAGO (Reuters) – The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday said the rising number of cosmetics, drugs and other products made using nanotechnology do not require special regulations or labeling.

The recommendations come as the agency looks at the oversight of products that employ the design and use of particles as small as one-billionth of a meter. There are fears by consumer groups and others that these tiny particles are unpredictable, could be toxic and therefore have unforeseen health impacts.

A task force within the FDA concluded that although nano-sized materials may have completely different properties than their bigger counterparts, there is no evidence that they pose any major safety risks at this time.

“We believe we do not have scientific evidence about nano-sized materials posing safety questions that merit being mentioned on the label,” said Dr. Randall Lutter, FDA’s associate commissioner for policy and planning, during a briefing with reporters.

As least 300 consumers products, including sunscreen, toothpaste and shampoo are now made using nanotechnology, according to a Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars report.

The technology is also being used in medicine, where scientists are developing tiny sensors that detect disease markers in the body, and in the food industry, which is using it to extend shelf life in food packaging.

The FDA now treats products made with nanotechnology the same way it handles all products — requiring companies to prove safety and efficacy before their product can come to market.

But some product categories, such as cosmetics, foods and dietary supplements are not subject to FDA oversight before they are sold, which already worries some advocates. Producing them with nanotechnology adds another layer of concern.

The International Center for Technology Assessment, a nonprofit policy group that is suing the FDA calling for more oversight over the technology, said the recommendations lack teeth.

“Nano means more than just tiny. It means these materials can be fundamentally different, exhibiting chemical and physical properties that are drastically different,” said George Kimbrell, staff attorney at the group. “The consumer is being made the guinea pig.”

The group sites studies showing certain types of the particles can cause inflammatory and immune system responses in animals as an example of possible dangers.

The FDA said it will soon issue guidance documents for industries using nanotechnology, which include pharmaceutical companies, medical device makers and consumer products firms.

Lutter said the task force concluded that nanotechnology is not substantially different from earlier emerging technologies such as biotechnology or irradiation.