Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Don't let Henry Waxman kill you

This arrived by email in Waxman's district today from CREDO.  Who are they? 

"Don't let your food kill you."

"Your member of Congress, Rep. Henry Waxman, sits on the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee. That committee will consider crucial food safety legislation on Wednesday. You need to let Rep. Henry Waxman know today that you expect him to stand with his constituents — not big industrial food companies — when it comes to food safety. ...

"Thankfully, Congress is now paying attention." 

Thankfully?  The same Congress run by lobbyists?  Paying attention to what?  Surely not us.  

The Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 represents a good basis for reform ...

Who designed this email?    

and would be first major update of food safety legislation in decades.
But big food industry players are fighting tooth and nail to weaken the bill — 

Stop, please.  This is unbearable.  The "big food industry players" are the very ones who wrote the bill.  For sure no consumers wrote the bill or sent out the message.  Where are they fighting "tooth and nail to weaken it"?  Give one instance.  Just one. 

The only people opposing these bills are regular people because the bills "scare the hell out of [them]."  

"All in all, I haven't seen a more devastating attempt at infringement on an individual's personal way of life than the USA PATRIOT act. This must be stopped... at all costs."

The "big food industry players" are creating this smoke and mirrors game where they want people to push for exactly what industry wants.  How?   By telling us  that "big bad industry" is "fighting tooth and nail" to weaken it.  What industry wants is as much power behind this bill as possible.

it's up to us to tell Congress to strengthen and pass a bill that really protects our food supply.

Protecting our food system would mean decentralizing it and getting it entirely out of the hands of the industries who wrote these bills and into our farmers' hands and our own.  These bills would do the opposite, getting rid of farmers and even requiring licensing and monitoring and surveillance and warrantless entry of our gardens.

Go see Food, Inc.  Realize that all the companies being indicted by the movie are the very ones whom Waxman is supporting.  They wrote Waxman's bill.  They are the corporations sending out this lying email, trying to get people to push for Waxman's truly traitorous bill as though they would be pushing against corporations.  

Waxman's bill takes the worst parts of the other dangerous "anti-food safety" bills out there now and makes a kind of frankenstein version.  Waxman's monster

1.  ends US sovereignty over its own food supply, gutting our Constitutional control over our food supply and transferring it to the hands of multinationals like Monsanto, Tysons, Cargills, etc.  


2.  sets up a giant agency to control the entire US food supply with Monsanto in charge of it.  Yes, Monsanto.  http://www.postcarbon.org/monsanto_planting_seeds_white_house  Google "most evil corporation on the planet" and it will come up.  Watch "The World According to Monsanto" for an inkling of the insanity of having them control our food supply to say nothing of the astounding corruption and betrayal of our very existence that Obama is okaying this.

3. takes control of all seed, making us as dependent as Iraq now is on corporations' whim and all GM-food for our survival.

a.  Monsanto is doing this worldwide.

b.  It's the Kissinger plan, "control food, control people."

c.  Here is how easily it can be done, using "food safety" as the means.

4. sets up NAIS, the national animal identification system which will wipe out what is left of our real farmers and take all US farmland.

a.  All the bills contain a reference to "tracing" which triggers NAIS, the National Animal Identification System.  Inside NAIS (bad enough that it will wipe out farmers financially which is the intent) is something called "Premises" ID.

b.  Anyone raising even a single animal or any plants would be forced onto NAIS and thus onto "premises" (supposedly about registering where your property is in case of an animal disease outbreak - notice how swine flu is out there now?).

c.  "Premises," however, is not "property" which is protected under the US Constitution, but an international term, quite different from property and one that says the person is a mere stake holder in their land.  The USDA would not change the term to "property" or answer whether this was theft of land.  Nor would they answer, if everyone becomes mere stake holders in the land, for whom are they holding the stake (all US farmland)?  [Speculation.  For what possible purpose?  Collateral on the bailout?  http://www.newswithviews.com/brownfield/brownfield59.htm
Did Hillary Clinton really make promises to the Chinese that they can come with troops to claim what is theirs if we default? 
http://thegreendragon.ning.com/forum/topics/govt-gives-china-eminent ]

5.  includes a hidden Codex, a plan devised by Nazi-related German pharmaceutical companies http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/PHARMACEUTICAL_BUSINESS/history_of_the_pharmaceutical_industry.htm  which is considered world fascism and is expected to kill millions. http://www.iahf.com/world/980622i.html


YouTube - Codex Alimentarius: Food Lies "They" Don't Want You ...

8 min - Apr 2, 2008 - 

Rated 4.8 out of 5.0

http://www.thebestofrawfood.com/Listen to Brian Clement's raw food speech ... Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhApQ3QkG0Q - 

6.  creates a police state.

a.  the bills give "the Administrator" power over every person in the country who "holds" food (everyone).

b.   set up a division for this that is independently funded so no congressional oversight.

c.  includes massive punishments (million dollar a day fines and up to ten years in prison) but these punishments are not exclusive of anything more that may be available (leaving the door open to ... anything.  Torture?).  http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/04/food-safety-as-totalitarian-weapon.html

d.  is expected to be run by Monsanto lawyer Michael Taylor - http://www.postcarbon.org/monsanto_planting_seeds_white_house) so Monsanto, considered the evilest corporation in the world and the greatest threat to food and nature, will have power over the entire US food supply, including over decisions on punishments.

e.  with no judicial review over even the appropriateness and validity of punishments for as yet unstated "crimes."  So, they could apply this to anyone, to anything at all, and it doesn't have to have any relation whatever to food ... and it is not subject to review.  A police state. 

f.  and this is all on top of surveillance, monitoring, warrantless entry, no due process, taking of all records, etc. included in the bills
g.  Monsanto's Taylor was involved in designing the bills. 

The twisted email urges us to 

Tell Rep. Waxman — a member of the powerful House Energy & Commerce Committee — to pass food safety legislation with teeth. 

Teeth?  The very last thing we need for Waxman to give these massive and grossly corrupt corporations he is pandering to is teeth.  Teeth?  The better to kill us with CAFOs and pesticides and antibiotics and GMOs and loss of our farmers and seed and our own gardens?

The bills to be stopped entirely.

The question is why is Waxman doing this?  What is wrong with him?  Why is he killing us?

Saturday, June 6, 2009

Chemical companies bring "food safety" bills

While we are all staring highly controversial "food safety" bills in the face brought to us by huge chemical companies like Monsanto and  the Nazi-connected German pharmaceutical/chemical corporations that designed CODEX Alimentarius, it might be useful to pause and look at a basic part of everyone's diet - water - and think.  

Think about chemicals and about promises of health and about government agencies and about power and about industrialization of normal things and about profits and  and about media and about fear and about influence and about bias about the corporate use of the words "safe" and "science." 

(In)"1916...that grand old pioneer of advancement in dentistry, G.V. Black...presented his epoch making studies on the role of fluorine in producing mottled enamel....The studies...by...the US Public Health Service (USPHS) led to a nationwide effort to eliminate...excessive fluorine in the drinking water (by) the USPHS..."

"...our knowledge of the subject certainly does not warrant the introduction of fluorine in community water supplies generally."

"Sodium Fluoride is a highly toxic substance..., it may be definitely harmful."

"...the potentialities for harm far outweigh those for good. - Editorial Dept., Journal of American Dental Association. L.P. Anthony, DDS, Editor, Oct. 1, 1944.

"Don't drink fluoridated water...Fluoride is a corrosive poison which will produce harm on a long term basis." - AMA President, Dr. Charles Heyd.


"I am a former state health director...It is disturbing to me when the men in the Public Health Service (PHS), who, as late as 1950, were not ready to endorse the universal use of fluorine, have now (1952), almost to a man, come out for the endorsement."

"It is difficult for me to understand how high officials in the PHS could change their mind, over a three-month period, and completely reverse the field.  Where once they advocated the go-slow sign on the use of fluorides, they now apparently have gone overboard, and put out large amounts of propaganda favoring the fluoridation of water.  I am certain that the dental profession merely echoes and endorses the opinions of the PHS."

"...I cannot find any public evidence...that the AMA, the ADA (Dental), or several other health agencies, now recommending the fluoridation of water, had done any original ("experimental") work of their own.  These groups were simply endorsing each other's opinions."

"You will note that all of the experts grounded in the science of bio-chemistry have advocated the go-slow sign on the use of fluorides in drinking water.  I believe that the dental profession and other public-minded individuals. like myself, have been misled by the PHS, because all of the facts have not been made available upon this subject."...

"I sometimes wonder if (a major aluminum company) might not have a deep interest in getting rid of the waste products from the manufacture of aluminum, because these products contain a large amount of fluoride.  In this connection it is interesting to know that (a bureaucrat), who now heads up the Federal Security Administration (precursor to the US Public Health Service), and the firm of attorneys he was with...represents (that aluminum company)." - US Congressman, Dr. A.L. Miller, Chairman, Special Committee on Chemicals in Foods, "Fluoridation of Water, Extension of Remarks., Congressional Record, 1952.


(As of 1983)"Belgium, West Germany, and Sweden have abandoned their pilot fluoridation experiments on human populations, and are not fluoridating any public water supplies.  Sweden, Denmark, and Holland have banned it completely.  Many other countries, such as France, Italy, and Norway have never fluoridated their drinking water.  Only about 2% of the population of Europe is living in a fluoridated area;" - John Yiamouyiannis, PhD, bio-chemistry, BS, U of Chicago; President, Safe Water Foundation, Fluoride: The Aging Factor.


"Within weeks after Dr. Yiamouyiannis next spoke out against fluoridation, he was put on probation, was told he would never receive a raise again, and was advised to find another job.  Dr. Yiamouyiannis was ultimately forced to resign." - John Yiamouyiannis, PhD, editor, Chemical Abstracts Service, American Chemical Society, Fluoride: The Aging Factor.


"The fluoride ion exerts its toxic effect by inhibiting the action of many enzyme systems." - Dr. L.P. Sumner, Cornell U. and Dr. H. Theorell; Uppsala U., Sweden, both Nobel Laureates, enzyme chemistry. (Sumner 1946, Chemistry, Theorell 1955, Medicine).


"Thus some some of the serious charges that are being laid at fluoride's door - genetic damage, cancer, birth defects, and allergy response - may arise from fluoride interference after all." - Journal of American Chemical Society, and New Scientist, both January 1981.


"It took almost six months to persuade the public library in ...to include the book, The American Fluoridation Experiment, by F.B. Exner, MD, and G.L. Walbott, MD.  Then, one year later it was found in the waste disposal container stamped 'Discarded...'" - Eden Ranch,Organic Consumer Report, 1978.


"Thus, under careful examination of original data, cross-examination under oath of scientific proponents, and critical follow up assessments of effects, neither the efficacy nor the safety of fluoridation has been demonstrated.  Nevertheless, it seems impossible to engage the scientific community or the public health authorities in any effort to examine the subject."

"The reexamination of subjects on which strong recommendations have been made challenge one's commitment to integrity.  If, as scientists and public health advisors, we can't muster the courage to meet those challenges, perhaps we should all take up a more honest profession such as used car sales or TV repair where at least the results of our services are unequivocal." - Frederick I. Scott, Editor(ial), American Laboratory, September 1980.


"The legislation...of...fluoridation..is unreasonable and a violation of the due process clause of the Illinois Constitution..."

"This record is barren of any credible and reputable, scientific epidemiological studies and/or analysis of statistical data, which would support the Illinois Legislature's determination that fluoridation of the public water supplies is both a safe and effective means of promoting public health.

"..(Fluoridation) is unconstitutional....(and)..an unreasonable exercise of police power..." - Judge Ronald Niemann, Circuit Court, Ill. Decree, Illinois Pure Water and Ruby Hale vs. Director of Public Health and Director of EPA, State of Illinois., Health Action, Feb, 1982.


"...The evidence that fluoridation of the public water supply at the rate of one part per million is carcinogenic is irrefutable."

"...Say somebody shot somebody....We...are so concerned about whether this evidence was admitted properly...(and) not recognize the intrusion into our sacred individuality that is being caused every time people turn on the faucet? ...I am astounded by how much untruth has been officially promulgated (pro fluoridation)." - Justice John Flaherty, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, address, June 7, 1981.


"Dr. Miller: 'The USDA made some examination...(and) recommended to the farmers that fluorine not be added to the water...of (pregnant) sows because it did something to the pigs that were unborn...Do you think it might be wise for the (US)PHS...to inquire what might happen to pregnant women and the unborn child...?'"

"Dr. Porterfield: 'No, sir; I think there is a difference....There is more money available for matters that have economic value than there is for health.'" - Chemicals in Foods and Cosmetics, Hearings, Select Committee, US House, 1952.