The Festering Fraud behind Food Safety Reform

By Nicole Johnson

“The general public must recognize that only after the demystification of U.S. agriculture will family farmers, labor, and consumers see beyond corporate agribusiness’ manipulations to the point where they will recognize that both their mutual interests and the future of agriculture can be best decided through a system that not only practices political democracy, but economic democracy as well.” – Ingolf Voegler

Introduction

Readers of the New York Times were recently treated to a rarely glimpsed view of how the globally-sourced industrial food complex assembles the raw ingredients of the omnipresent hamburger. In his startling expose entitled “E. Coli Path Shows Flaws in Ground Beef Inspection,” Michael Moss provides a window from which to witness well-hidden meat industry practices that most people, judging from some six hundred comments left on the New York Times website within 24 hours of the article’s publication, find thoroughly repulsive.[1]

Moss’s article tracing the processing history of the E.coli-contaminated hamburger consumed by Stephanie Smith, which left her body ravaged and permanently disabled, has much to commend it. While detailing how Cargill shaves costs by scraping together its “American Chef’s Selection Angus Beef Patties” from trimmings and mash-like products sold to it by no less than four suppliers, Moss uncovers how the company failed to follow its own safety plans without facing any interference from the USDA until some one got very, very sick.

However, the article leaves out critical information from its analysis that would help us understand why so much is wrong with the meat inspection process today. Filling in these gaps is important if we want to take the correct measures improve the safety of our meat supply. Furthermore, if we don’t gain a fuller understanding of how and why the meat industry’s inspection process became an essentially unregulated, privatized affair, we are likely to repeat the same mistake and allow Congress to pass food “safety” legislation that will serve to make the world a safer place for the cartels controlling the global produce trade but do nothing at all for the safety of our food supply.

The vested interests behind the creation of the 2009 Food Safety Enhancement Act and its Senate companion bill S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, are the same vested interests who were behind the earlier deregulation of the meat and poultry inspection process. They aim to minimize the regulatory obstacles faced by transnational corporations engaged in international trade, which is increasingly becoming the movement of goods from one subsidiary affiliate to another subsidiary affiliate. And they’re using the issue of food safety to con us into consenting to their wishes.

To read more ....

The Battle to Save the Polish Countryside

We're facing the same thing here with S 510 which, in fact, is meant to "harmonize" with laws in the EU already decimating farmers. S 510 also relies on onerous, vicious and false hygiene or food safety standards as part of an WTO plan to eliminate farmers and take control over world food and over farmers' land.

Poland ’s peasant farmers are the true trustees of its countryside

by Sir Julian Rose

Poland is accustomed to fighting rearguard actions to throw off unwelcome invaders. Throughout the 19th century period of “The Partitians” - occupation by Russia and then Austria – the Poles kept in their hearts a longing for a day when they could be freed from the yoke of repression and find genuine independence. After finally succeeding in 1918 to rid themselves of the invaders, they were soon engulfed in conflict again, this time with the invading Nazi Germany. They responded with the 1939-45 resistance movement that sprouted up in the fields, small towns and main cities.

As many will know, the Poles fought alongside the British throughout the Second World War - a time when Poland’s government in exile had its head quarters in London. I remember quite well when I was a boy a Polish exile who lived in our village (Whitchurch-on-Thames) coming regularly to my family home and diligently cleaning the chimneys. He spoke little, but did a very thorough job.

It was only in 1989 that Poland finally threw off the last repressive regime of occupation in their land, the Russian communists. So, the last nineteen years of freedom have been been the longest historical period of non-occupation in a very long time.

The Nobel prize winning author Thomas Mann, who fled Nazi Germany before World War Two, was reported to have remarked just before his death in 1969 that although the Nazis had been defeated, he feared that fascism had not: “I am concerned about the weak position of freedom in post world war Europe and North America,” he said.

We can surely identify with his concern. ‘The weak position of freedom’ is evident throughout our increasingly pacified Orwellian society, and has recently come to undermine the long standing traditions of the Polish countryside, particularly the independence of the peasant and family farms, and the huge biodiversity of the Polish countryside of which they are the prime trustees.

The communists failed to quell the small Polish peasant farmers into submission during their period of occupation, which left the Country with a rich, if rather confusing, legacy of approximately one and a half million small scale family farms (average size 18 acres) dotted around the Polish Provinces, but particularly prevalent in the south and east.

“The European Union is simply not interested in small farms”

When I was first invited in November 2000 by Jadwiga Lopata, founder of The International Coalition to Protect the Polish Countryside, to come to Poland as a co-director of this newly established non governmental organisation, the Country was preparing itself, or more correctly, being prepared for entry into the European Union. Opinions were strongly divided concerning the merits of such an action and those most against included the farmers.

One of our first tasks, as I saw it, was to warn the Poles just what ‘joining the EU’ would mean for the farming population, for rural communities and for the renowned biodiversity of the countryside.

Through the auspices of a senior civil servant in Warsaw, Jadwiga and I were able to address a meeting with the Brussels-based committee responsible for negotiating Poland’s agricultural terms of entry into the EU. It proved to be an ominous foretaste of things to come.

The first thing that struck us was the fact that out of the twelve people sitting in the room at the European Commission, not one was Polish. I explained to the attendant body that in a Country where 22 percent of the working population are involved in agriculture, and the majority on small farms, it would not be a good idea to follow the same regime as had been operated in the UK and other EU member countries, in which ‘restructuring’ agriculture had involved throwing the best farmers off the land and amalgamating their farms into large scale monocultural operations designed to supply the predatory supermarket chains. You could have heard a pin drop.

To read more ....

History, HACCP and the Food Safety Con Job

[This article applies to S 510 or whatever "food safety" bills they may at the last minute, insert.]

By Nicole Johnson

“The vested interests – if we explain the situation by their influence – can only get the public to act as they wish by manipulating public opinion, by playing upon the public’s indifference, confusions, prejudices, pugnacities or fears. And the only way in which the power of the interests can be undermined and their maneuvers defeated is by bringing home to the public its indifference, the absurdity of its prejudices, or the hollowness of its fears; by showing that it is indifferent to dangers where real danger exists; frightened by dangers which are nonexistent.”

– Sir Norman Angell (1872 – 1967)

Introduction

Vested interest groups have orchestrated a legislative lullaby to hush the public’s growing unease with the safety of its food supply. Their enablers in the mainstream corporate controlled media amplify a chorus of government officials and non-governmental organizations admonishing that the public must be confident that the food it buys is safe. But having confidence our food is safe is not the same as having food that is safe and wholesome to eat.

The American public has a great and unmet need to understand the true impacts (that is, the predictable consequences) of the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009, before the Senates passes its version of this dangerous bill. The US Congress has a long, tragic history of passing legislation that promotes the industrialization of our food supply, effectively implementing the wishes — both stated and unstated — of agribusiness, and it’s about to do it again.

Using the pretext of food safety, those behind the Food Safety Enhancement Act seek to institute changes the American public would not condone if it understood what is at stake. The country is being duped into believing that the pseudo-scientific measures prescribed by the bill will prevent new outbreaks of food-borne illnesses when in reality FSEA will usher in a number of undesirable outcomes, none of which do a thing to improve food safety. On the contrary, these measures will permit large processors to become an essentially unregulated segment of the industry by privatizing the inspection process, and — at the same time — the new regulations will constitute a cost-prohibitive barrier for small players to remain in business, making them easy targets for indiscriminant enforcement and greater market consolidation.

To read more ....

Monsanto's Baby: S 510

The 2009 Food ‘Safety’ Bills Harmonize

Agribusiness Practices in Service of

Corporate Global Governance

By Nicole Johnson

“I think it’s time to de-professionalize the public debate on matters that vitally affect the lives of ordinary people. It’s time to snatch our futures back from the “experts.” Time to ask, in ordinary language, the public question and to demand, in ordinary language, the public answer.” – Arundhati Roy, Power Politics

It’s enough to make you so queasy you lose your lunch. HR 875, the “Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009,” is a head-spinning piece of legislation that would radically change the structure of the US government’s regulatory agencies, usurping states rights to federalize food inspection and determine what agricultural practices are permissible. Considerable concern has been voiced about what this bill would mean for small and medium sized farmers, organic farming, the future of conventional and organic seeds, the food localization movement, and even home gardens. HR 875 would give regulators the power to enter private property, which is conveniently redefined as “premises,” and impose enormous fines for noncompliance. Though not discussed in the corporate media, numerous articles about it appear on the internet, launching a debate about whether or not Monsanto is behind the bill.

In response to these articles, Brad Mitchell, a member of Monsanto’s public relations staff who writes for the company’s new blog — a less-than-stealth effort to counter the public’s deep distrust of the predatory corporation — has gone on record stating that Monsanto has absolutely nothing at all to do with the bill.

Brad’s assurances aside, experience dictates that taking Monsanto at its word is patently foolish.

To read more ....

Canadian Lessons That Apply to S 510 Here

Canadians rallied and stopped C-51

The Latest News on Bill C-51 as of September 1

September 2008 Features

by Helke Ferrie

In April, the federal government informed Canadians that they were going to protect the nation’s children, and the rest of us, against unimaginable harm and potential fraud, in exchange for the loss of our most basic Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms. Towards this end Prime Minister Harper introduced legislation that would effectively outlaw natural health products and give the food, drug, and chemical industries license to saturate our food, medicines, air, water, and soil with as much poison as their cost-benefit calculations might suggest are profitably manageable. Unfortunately, this is no exaggeration.

The Harper government’s proposed Bills C-51 (to amend the Food and Drugs Act) and C-52 (to amend the Hazardous Products Act) appear to have been crafted very carefully along the lines of Hitler’s prescient observation that people are more likely to believe a Big Lie than little ones. Fortunately, unlike Germany in the 1930’s, Canadians have a century and a half of experience with democracy and almost eight hundred years of ancestral memory of Common Law.

For me, as a medical science writer used to analyzing the cognitive dissonance between verifiable scientific facts and government and industry obfuscation of those facts, C-51 and C-52 are so far the lowest of all low points I have encountered.

To read more ....

In Poland, 'green' fields besieged

By Elisabeth Rosenthal

Published: Thursday, April 3, 2008

• SIGN IN TO RECOMMEND
• TWITTER
• SIGN IN TO E-MAIL
• PRINT
• SINGLE PAGE
• SHARECLOSE

STRYSZOW, Poland — Depending on your point of view, Szczepan Master is either an incorrigible Luddite or a visionary. A small farmer, proud of his pure, high-quality products, he works his land the way Polish farmers have for centuries.

He keeps his livestock in a straw-floored "barn" that is part of his house, entered through a kitchen door. He slaughters his own pigs. His wife milks cows by hand. He rejects genetically modified seeds. Instead of spraying his crops, he turns his fields in winter, preferring a workhorse to a tractor, to let the frost kill off pests residing there.

While traditional farms like his could be dismissed as a nostalgic throwback, they are also increasingly seen as the future - if only they can survive.

Master's way of farming - his way of life - has been badly threatened in the two years since Poland joined the European Union, a victim of sanitary laws and mandates to encourage efficiency and competition that favor mechanized commercial farms, farmers here say.

To read more ...

In the US, the "sanitary laws" come in the form of S 510, and like in Poland, it is based on transparent absurdity, is a threat to the existence of farmers safely providing local food people desire, and is being driven by corporations intent on global control over food.

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.  

http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/05/food-safety-bills-more-dangerous-than_08.html

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.
http://www.grain.org/briefings/?id=202

b.  It's the Kissinger plan, "control food, control people."
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message540769/pg1

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

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Seeds--How-to-criminalize-by-Linn-Cohen-Cole-090319-579.html

 

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.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/savePolishCountryside.php

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/03/europe/poland.php?page=2

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

 http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/05/codex-inside-food-safety-bills-will.html

YouTube - Codex Alimentarius: Food Lies "They" Don't Want You ...
	8 min - Apr 2, 2008 -  From 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).

http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/04/jam-and-water-watch.html

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
http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/04/central-food-patriot-act-hr-875.html

 

g.  Monsanto's Taylor was involved in designing the bills. 

http://farmwars.info/?p=594

 

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?

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." 

With gratitude to  http://www.ahealedplanet.net/mdaq.htm

 

(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.