BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!
WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google
F. William Engdahl’s Seeds of Destruction
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Stephen Lendman
RINF Alternative News
Bill Engdahl is a leading researcher, economist and analyst of the New World Order who’s written on issues of energy, politics and economics for over 30 years. He contributes regularly to publications like Japan’s Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Foresight magazine, Grant’s Investor.com, European Banker and Business Banker International. He’s also a frequent speaker at geopolitical, economic and energy related international conferences and is a distinguished Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization where he’s a regular contributor.
Engdahl also wrote two important books - “A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order” in 2004. It’s an essential history of geopolitics and the importance of oil. Engdahl explains that America’s post-WW II dominance rests on two pillars and one commodity - unchallengeable military power and the dollar as the world’s reserve currency combined with the quest to control global oil and other energy resources.
Engdahl’s newest book is just out from the Centre for Research on Globalization. It’s a sequel to his first one called “Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation” and subject of this review. It’s the diabolical story of how Washington and four Anglo-American agribusiness giants plan world domination by patenting life forms to gain worldwide control of our food supply and why that prospect is chilling. The book’s compelling contents are reviewed below in-depth so readers will know the type future Henry Kissinger had in mind in 1970 when he said: “Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.”
Remember also, this cabal is one of many interconnected ones with fearsome power and ruthless intent to use it - Big Banks controlling the Federal Reserve and our money, Big Oil our world energy resources, Big Media our information, Big Pharma our health, Big Technology our state-of-the-art everything and watching us, Big Defense our wars, Big Pentagon waging them, and other corporate predators exploiting our lives for profit. Engdahl’s book focuses brilliantly on one of them. To fully cover its vital contents, this review will be in three parts for more detail and to make it easily digestible.
Part I of “Seeds of Destruction”
In 2003, Jeffrey Smith’s “Seeds of Deception” was published. It exposed the dangers of untested and unregulated genetically engineered foods most people eat every day with no knowledge of the potential health risks. Efforts to inform the public have been quashed, reliable science has been buried, and consider what happened to two distinguished scientists.
One was Ignatio Chapela, a microbial ecologist at the University of California, Berkeley. In September, 2001, he was invited to a carefully staged meeting with Fernando Ortiz Monasterio, Mexico’s Director of the Commission of Biosafety in Mexico City. The experience left Chapela shaken and angry as he explained. Monasterio attacked him for over an hour. “First he trashed me. He let me know how damaging to the country and how problematic my information was to be.”
Chapela referred to what he and a UC Berkeley graduate student, David Quist, discovered in 2000 about genetically engineered contamination of Mexican corn in violation of a government ban on these crops in 1998. Corn is sacred in Mexico, the country is home to hundreds of indigenous varieties that crossbreed naturally, and GM contamination is permanent and unthinkable - but it happened by design.
Chapela and Quist tested corn varieties in more than a dozen state of Oaxaca communities and discovered 6% of the plants contaminated with GM corn. Oaxaca is in the country’s far South so Chapela knew if contamination spread there, it was widespread throughout Mexico. It’s unavoidable because NAFTA allows imported US corn with 30% of it at the time genetically modified. Now it’s heading for nearly double that amount, and if not contained, it soon could be all of it.
The prestigious journal Nature agreed to publish Chapela’s findings, Monasterio wanted them quashed, but Chapela refused to comply. As a result, he was intimidated not to do it and threatened with being held responsible for all damages to Mexican agriculture and its economy.
He went ahead, nonetheless, and when his article appeared in the publication on November 29, 2001 the smear campaign against him began and intensified. It was later learned that Monsanto was behind it, and the Washington-based Bivings Group PR firm was hired to discredit his findings and get them retracted.
It worked because the campaign didn’t focus on Chapela’s contamination discovery, but on a second research conclusion even more serious. He learned the contaminated GM corn had as many as eight fragments of the CaMV promoter that creates an unstable “hotspot.” It can cause plant genes to fragment, scatter throughout the plant’s genome, and, if proved conclusively, would wreck efforts to introduce GM crops in the country. Without further evidence, there was still room for doubt if the second finding was valid, however, and the anti-Chapela campaign hammered him on it.
Because of the pressure, Nature took an unprecedented action in its 133 year history. It upheld Chapela’s central finding but retracted the other one. That was all it took, and the major media pounced on it. They denounced Chapela’s incompetence and tried to discredit everything he learned including his verified findings. They weren’t reported, his vilification was highlighted, and Monsanto and the Mexican government scored a big victory.
Ironically, on April 18, 2002, two weeks after Nature’s partial retraction, the Mexican government announced there was massive genetic contamination of traditional corn varieties in Oaxaca and the neighboring state of Puebla. It was horrifying as up to 95% of tested crops were genetically polluted and “at a speed never before predicted.” The news made headlines in Europe and Mexico. It was ignored in the US and Canada.
The fallout for Chapela was UC Berkeley denied him tenure in 2003 because of his article and for criticizing university ties to the biotech industry. He then filed suit in April, 2004 asking remuneration for lost wages, earnings and benefits, compensatory damages for humiliation, mental anguish, emotional distress and coverage of attorney fees and costs for his action. He won in May, 2005 but not in court when the university reversed its decision, granted him tenure and agreed to include retroactive pay back to 2003. The damage, however, was done and is an example of what’s at stake when anyone dares challenge a powerful company like Monsanto.
The other man attacked was the world’s leading lectins and plant genetic modification expert, UK-based Arpad Pusztai. He was vilified and fired from his research position at Scotland’s Rowett Research Institute for publishing industry-unfriendly data he was commissioned to produce on the safety of GMO foods.
His Rowett Research study was the first ever independent one conducted on them anywhere. He undertook it believing in their promise but became alarmed by his findings. The Clinton and Blair governments were determined to suppress them because Washington was spending billions promoting GMO crops and a future biotech revolution. It wasn’t about to let even the world’s foremost expert in the field derail the effort. His results were startling and consider the implications for humans eating genetically engineered foods.
Rats fed GMO potatoes had smaller livers, hearts, testicles and brains, damaged immune systems, and showed structural changes in their white blood cells making them more vulnerable to infection and disease compared to other rats fed non-GMO potatoes. It got worse. Thymus and spleen damage showed up; enlarged tissues, including the pancreas and intestines; and there were cases of liver atrophy as well as significant proliferation of stomach and intestines cells that could be a sign of greater future risk of cancer. Equally alarming - this all happened after 10 days of testing, and the changes persisted after 110 days that’s the human equivalent of 10 years.
GM foods today saturate our diet. Over 80% of all supermarket processed foods contain them. Others include grains like rice, corn and wheat; legumes like soybeans and soy products; vegetable oils; soft drinks; salad dressings; vegetables and fruits; dairy products including eggs; meat and other animal products; and even infant formula plus a vast array of hidden additives and ingredients in processed foods (like in tomato sauce, ice cream and peanut butter). They’re unrevealed to consumers because labeling is prohibited yet the more of them we eat, the greater the potential threat to our health.
Today, we’re all lab rats in an uncontrolled, unregulated mass human experiment the results of which are unknown. The risks from it are beyond measure, it will take many years to learn them, and when they’re finally revealed it will be too late to reverse the damage if it’s proved GM products harm human health as independent experts strongly believe. Once GM seeds are introduced to an area, the genie is out of the bottle for keeps.
Despite the enormous risks, however, Washington and growing numbers of governments around the world in parts of Europe, Asia, Latin America and Africa now allow these products to be grown in their soil or imported. They’re produced and sold to consumers because agribusiness giants like Monsanto, DuPont, Dow AgriSciences and Cargill have enormous clout to demand it and a potent partner supporting them - the US government and its agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture and State, FDA, EPA and even the defense establishment. World Trade Organization (WTO) Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) patent rules also back them along with industry-friendly WTO rulings like the February 7, 2006 one.
It favored a US challenge against European GMO regulatory policies in spite of strong consumer sentiment against these foods and ingredients on the continent. It also violated the Biosafety Protocol that should let nations regulate these products in the public interest, but it doesn’t because WTO trade rules sabotaged it. Nonetheless, anti-GMO activism persists, consumers still have a say, and there are hundreds of GMO-free zones around the world, including in the US. That and more is needed to take on the agribusiness giants that so far have everything going their way.
In “Seeds of Deception,” Jeffrey Smith did a masterful job explaining the dangers of GM foods and ingredients. Engdahl explains them as well but goes much further brilliantly in his blockbuster book on this topic. It’s the story of a powerful family and a “small socio-political American elite (that) seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival” - future life through the food we eat. The book’s introduction says it “reads (like) a crime story.” It’s also a nightmare but one that’s very real and threatening.
This review covers the book in-depth because of its importance. It’s an extraordinary work that “reveals a diabolical World of profit-driven political intrigue (and) government corruption and coercion” that’s part of a decades-long global scheme for total world dominance. The book deserves vast exposure and must be read in full for the whole disturbing story. It’s hoped the material below will encourage readers to do it in their own self-interest and to marshal mass consumer actions to place food safety above corporate profits.
Engdahl’s book supplies the ammunition to do it and is also a sequel to his earlier one on war, oil politics and The New World Order and follows naturally from it. It covers the roots of the strategy to control “global food security” that goes back to the 1930s and the plans of a handful of American families to preserve their wealth and power. But it centers on one in particular that above the others “came to symbolize the hubris and arrogance of the emerging American century” that blossomed post-WW II. Its patriarch began in oil and then dominated it in his powerful Oil Trust. It was only the beginning as the family expanded into “education of youth, medicine and psychology,” US foreign policy, and “the very science of life itself, biology, and its applications” in plants and agriculture.
The family’s name is Rockefeller. The patriarch was John D., and four powerful later-generation brothers followed him - David, Nelson, Laurance, and John D. III. Engdahl says the GMO story covers “the evolution of power in the hands of an elite (led by this family), determined (above all) to bring the entire world under their sway.” They and other elites already control most of it, including the nation’s energy, the US Federal Reserve, and other key world central banks. Today, three brothers are gone, David alone remains, and he’s still a force at age 92 although he no longer runs the family bank, JP Morgan Chase. He’s active in family enterprises, however, including the Rockefeller Foundation to be discussed in Part II of this review.
F. William Engdahl is the author of Seeds of Destruction, the Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation just released by Global Research. He is also the author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, Pluto Press Ltd.. To contact him by e-mail: info@engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.
Special Introductory Online Offer
Click to order William Engdahl’s book:
Seeds of Destruction
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on TheMicroEffect.com Mondays at noon US Central time.
Have Your Say: F. William Engdahl’s Seeds of Destruction
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Bush signs the Open Government Act in semi-secrecy
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
George Bush has signed into law S. 2488, a bill that strengthens the Freedom of Information Act. There are a lot of signs that Bush did not much like this Open Government Act, so it’s significant that he didn’t veto it.
What are the signs of Bush’s displeasure? For one thing, the WH published a description of the new law that is terse and, rather glaringly, excludes most of its more important provisions. You’ll find these spelled out in some detail in the CRS summary of the bill.
As a point of comparison, let’s look at which elements the Associated Press chose to include in its summary of the legislation. According to AP, the new law:
- requires the release of requested documents unless their disclosure would do actual harm
- brings government contractors under FOIA
- compels the government to respond to FOIA requests within 20 days of their receipt
- creates a system by which citizens may track the progress of their requests
- establishes a hot-line service for all federal agencies to cope with problems
- establishes an ombudsman to help resolve disputes about non-disclosure
By contrast, the published WH summary mentions only that the law “amends (FOIA) by…”:
(1) establishing a definition of “a representative of the news media;” (2) directing that required attorney fees be paid from an agency’s own appropriation rather than from the Judgment Fund; (3) prohibiting an agency from assessing certain fees if it fails to comply with FOIA deadlines; and (4) establishing an Office of Government Information Services in the National Archives and Records Administration to review agency compliance with FOIA.
You’ll note that there’s barely any overlap between the elements that the AP and the White House highlight. Furthermore the four elements listed by the WH say virtually nothing about the need or the mechanisms for greater openness – the very goal of the legislation.
The “Open Government Act” will “help to reverse the troubling trends of excessive delays and lax FOIA compliance in our government and help to restore the public’s trust in their government,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy
As the AP describes it:
The new law…amounts to a congressional pushback against the Bush administration’s movement to greater secrecy since the terrorist attacks of 2001.
Bush signed the bill without comment in one of his final decisions of the year…
The legislation is aimed at reversing an order by former Attorney General John Ashcroft after the 9/11 attacks in which he instructed agencies to lean against releasing information when there was uncertainty about how doing so would affect national security.
Even if the Open Government Act is not a cure for all of FOIA’s ills, it is a highly symbolic piece of legislation. And it’s hard to ignore the symbolism of the manner in which Bush signed it into law – on New Year’s Eve, without comment. It was almost as if Bush wanted to avoid drawing attention to a victory for government transparency.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/2/9486/36922
Have Your Say: Bush signs the Open Government Act in semi-secrecy
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Britain tops data breach league
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Only
The
For the first time,
Have Your Say: Britain tops data breach league
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
The dangers of public-private partnerships
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Doug Maughan states emotively that ID cards and searches are infringements on civil liberties that are a price worth paying to prevent “hundreds or perhaps thousands” being killed (Letters, January 2). One would be hard pushed to find any disagreement that the core function of a government is the protection of the citizens it represents, but there are limited resources that can be assigned to this task and the question then becomes: what application of what level of resource gives the greatest leverage in attaining our goal of protection?
What must be factored into an analysis is the degree of competence and trustworthiness of the government propounding the case for ID cards - and in this area I am in agreement with Mr Maughan when he states that “other than scaremongering about a police state, we’ve had little debate about them”. This, I’m afraid, is the nub of the matter. There deliberately has been little reasoned debate as an adversarial system leads to emotive declaration instead of forensic examination in parliament.
We now live with a UK Government that has lost credibility in what it says and does. We have lived with a generation of political hegemony from Thatcher through to New Labour that has resulted in the political process becoming adulterated by too much unaccountable influence. It is less than half a century ago that Eisenhower warned that, “in the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist”. I would contend that public-private partnerships in our society meet Eisenhower’s paradigm as it has now become more difficult to dissect the true motive behind the aims and objectives of a government that has failed in managing and leading public-private partnership projects.
Does the government have the best interest of the population at heart when it develops an argument or is it seeking partners who will donate part of their profit to the political process? Is part of this cycle an understanding that an excessive profit is accepted in advance? Critical analysis of the Skye Bridge Project, ICT in the NHS and the commercial confidentiality in PPP projects would suggest this is the case. If ID cards are to become an essential feature of citizenship why, at a time when social inclusion is a stated aim of the government, are they to cost anything from £5.4bn (government) to £18bn (LSE) or about £90 to £300? How better could billions of pounds be spent in protecting us?
I finish with another quote from Eisenhower, a statesman uniquely placed to recognise the danger of too much unaccountable influence on the political process, when he commented on partnerships: “We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” Vigilance and scrutiny are essential to good decision-making and I’m afraid this government has not won the argument.
Paul Cochrane
Have Your Say: The dangers of public-private partnerships
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
VIDEO: Police Taser Man Who Was On His Knees
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
The King County Sheriff’s Office is investigating a scuffle that erupted when Seattle police tried to make an arrest on New Year’s Eve.
Police officers ended up using a Taser on the man who, at that time, was on his hands and knees.
Nearly a dozen police officers and at least one firefighter chased and tackled the man
Police say Richardson, 23, had a simple choice — comply or get arrested, and he chose the latter. But Richardson’s aunt claims the police took it one step too far when they didn’t have to, with her nephew already on the ground.
The scuffle broke out in the packed streets near the Space Needle when a computer glitch suddenly stopped the planned fireworks, sending the excited crowds on the ground over the edge.
The footage shows Richardson being pepper-sprayed, punched then Tased from behind while he was down on his knees.
“He was beat in the back of the head with a baton, he was kicked, he was punched in the face (and) for what?” said Michelle King, his aunt.
King, who works for Seattle’s Municipal Court, says she knows the justice system and is sure the officers went too far.
“To me, the police department is nothing but a licensed gang and I stand by my son. And no matter what happens after today, I’m going to stand by my son and my nephew until the end,” she said.
When KOMO 4 News showed the tape to Seattle police, they shared a different take of the incident.
Police spokesman Mark Jamieson said officers did not use excessive force, noting that Richardson was seen running in the footage instead of complying.
“Why would you run from the police?” Jamieson said. “If he is intoxicated, if he is under the influence of drugs, if he has a weapon on him… clearly if he’s on his hands and knees, his hands are free; he still has access to a weapon.”
Police said they faced a near-riot scene on New Year’s Eve and Richardson, who had been drinking, was making the situation worse.
“You saw how quickly the application of the Taser got him into compliance,” Jamieson said after viewing the video tape of the arrest.
Jamieson said officers may have been giving orders that Richardson wasn’t following.
Richardson’s cousin admitted that Richardson had a verbal argument with an officer before the scuffle.
“Just yelling, arguing,” said Isaiah Cooper. “No one fought no one had weapons.”
Richardson’s family plans to sue the Seattle Police Department.
Richardson could face several charges, including obstructing an officer and criminal trespass.
Richardson has several misdemeanors on his record, including an arrest for disorderly conduct. He bailed out of jail Tuesday evening.
Have Your Say: VIDEO: Police Taser Man Who Was On His Knees
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
VIDEO: Criminal Probe Of CIA Tapes
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
“New heat on the White House”
Have Your Say: VIDEO: Criminal Probe Of CIA Tapes
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
US and UK rank poorly as global privacy is being eroded
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
A London-based human rights watchdog group on surveillance and privacy has released its National Privacy Ranking for 2007, ranking the U.S, Russia, China and much of Southeast Asia at the bottom.
Privacy International ranked Greece, Romania and Canada as leaders in protecting their citizens’ privacy.
The group assesses and ranks 14 criteria: Constitutional protection, statutory protection, privacy enforcement, identity cards and biometrics, data sharing, visual surveillance, communication interception, communication data retention, government access to data, workplace monitoring, surveillance of medical, financial and movement, border and trans-border issues, leadership, and democratic safeguards.
This year’s results indicated a general worsening of worldwide privacy standards, with an overall increase in surveillance attributable to border control and immigration issues.
The United States was summarized by the group as being the worst ranking country in the democratic world in terms of statutory protections and privacy enforcement. In short, this means that laws protecting Americans’ medical, workplace, and financial records from government and corporate surveillance are sorely lacking, and a regulatory body governing infractions of these rights is needed.
Privacy International says surveillance initiatives in the country continue to expand despite political shifts in Congress, and the United States has deteriorated into an “Endemic Surveillance Society.” The United Kingdom has also fallen into this category, which includes Thailand, Taiwan, Singapore, Russia, China, and Malaysia.
The only country on the list that enjoyed a marked improvement was the Republic of Slovenia, an EU member since 2004. The young country has two different rights to privacy detailed in its 1991 constitution, the Personal Data Protection Act which regulates both data and video surveillance, a data protection authority, regulated biometrics, and laws mandating anonymous location data.
Have Your Say: US and UK rank poorly as global privacy is being eroded
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Criminals In The Bush Administration
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Criminals In The Bush Administration
By- Suzie-Q
TPM´s Great List of Scandalized Administration Officials
Boy, was it time for an update.
Late last year we decided to take stock of all the Bush Administration officials who’d been accused of corruption and/or resigned in the face of scandal. Although we had fun doing it, we altruistically started the project in order to help our friends at Powerline, who professed an inability to think of any Bush officials beset by scandal.
This year´s result, which built on Justin Rood´s original gem, is, like our catalog of the administration´s efforts to disappear information, a staggering monument to the Bush Administration. And it wouldn’t have been possible without TPM’s research hounds, Adrianne Jeffries, Andrew Berger, and Peter Sheehy.A quick note on methodology. Since a complete catalog of administration officials who’ve been accused of some form of corruption or abuse of power would be endless, we tried to maintain a high standard for inclusion. Most of those below were the subjects of criminal probes, but we also included officials who were credibly accused of acts that, if not criminal, were a corruption of office (like the U.S. attorney scandal). And even then, such officials were only included if their accusers had them dead to rights (which is why Karl Rove didn’t make the cut). We also limited ourselves to officials who were either political appointees or whose actions were so political that they were effectively political appointees (like John Tanner).
Enjoy:
Indicted / Convicted/ Pled Guilty
* Eric G. Andell - deputy undersecretary in charge of newly created Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (previously senior adviser to Secretary of Education Rod Paige) - pleaded guilty to one count of conflict of interest for using government travel for personal causes and was sentenced to one year of probation, 100 hours of community service, and fined $5,000.
* Claude Allen - Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy- resigned, pled guilty to shoplifting from Target stores.
* Lester Crawford - Commissioner, FDA - resigned in late September 2005 after only two months on the job. On October 17th, he pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts, making a false writing and conflict of interest. On February 27, 2007, Crawford was sentenced to to three years of probation and was fined $90,000.
* Brian Doyle - Deputy Press Secretary, Department of Homeland Security - Resigned in wake of child sex scandal. Doyle was arrested on April 4th, 2006 and pleaded no contest on September 19, 2006 to seven counts of use of a computer to seduce a child and sixteen counts of transmitting harmful material to a minor. On November 17th, 2006 Brian Doyle was sentenced to five years in state prison and ten years of probation. He will also need to register as a sex offender.
* Steven Griles - Deputy Secretary at the Interior Department - is the highest-ranked administration official yet convicted in the Jack Abramoff scandal. In March 2007, Griles pleaded guilty to lying about his role in the Jack Abramoff scandal. Sentenced to 10 months incarceration.
* John T. Korsmo – Chairman of the Federal Housing Finance Board from 2002 to 2004 – pleaded guilty in 2005 to lying to the Senate and an inspector general. He swore he had no idea how a list of presidents for FHFB-regulated banks were invited to a fundraiser for his friend’s congressional campaign. On the invites, Korsmo was listed as the “Special Guest.” Got 18 months of probation and a $5,000 fine.
* Scooter Libby - Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff - resigned after being indicted for lying to a grand jury and investigators in connection with the investigation stemming from the leak of Valerie Wilson’s covert CIA operative’s identity. Convicted on four of five counts, making him the highest-ranking White House official to be convicted of a felony since the Iran-contra scandal. Sentenced to thirty months imprisonment and a fine of $250,000. On July 2nd, after a judge decided that Libby would remain in prison during the appeals process, President Bush commuted Libby’s sentence by removing the thirty months in prison.
* David Safavian - former head of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget - convicted of lying to ethics officials and Senate investigators about his ties to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. On October 27, 2006, he was sentenced to 18 months in prison. He is currently appealing the ruling.
* Robert Stein - former comptroller and funding officer for the now disbanded Coalition Provisional Authority, Southern Central Region in Al-Hillah, Iraq - pleaded guilty to conspiracy, bribery, conspiracy to commit money laundering, possession of a machine gun, and being a felon in possession of a fire arm. On January 30, 2007 Stein was sentenced to nine years in prison and ordered to forfeit $3.6 million.
* Roger Stillwell - desk officer, Interior Department - pleaded guilty to failing to report Redskins tickets and free dinners from Jack Abramoff.
Resigned Due to Investigation, Pending Investigation or Allegations of Impropriety
* Philip Cooney - chief of staff, White House Council on Environmental Quality - a former oil industry lawyer with no scientific expertise, Cooney resigned after it was revealed he had watered down reports on global warming.
* George Deutsch - press aide, NASA - resigned amid allegations he prevented the agency’s top climate scientist from speaking publicly about global warming.
* Michael Elston - chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty - announced his resignation on June 15, 2007. Despite allegations that he’d threatened at least four of the eight fired US Attorneys, McNulty said Elston had served the Justice Department “with distinction for nearly eight years.”
* Kyle Dustin “Dusty” Foggo - appointed executive director of the CIA, the agency’s third-highest post, in October 2004 - resigned and was ultimately indicted on bribery charges related to the Duke Cunningham scandal.
* Alberto Gonzales - former Attorney General - resigned without explanation amidst investigations of the firings of U.S. Attorneys, the politicization of the Justice Department, warrantless surveillance, and the torture and mistreatment of detainees.
* Monica Goodling - former Justice Department liaison to the White House and senior counsel to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales - resigned on April 7, 2007 amidst the investigation of the firings of U.S. Attorneys.
* Michelle Larson Korsmo - deputy chief of staff, Department of Labor - Helped her husband (see John Korsmo, above) with his donor scam. Quietly left her Labor plum job in February 2004, about two weeks before news broke that she and her husband were the targets of a criminal probe.
* Howard “Cookie” Krongard - former State Department inspector general — accused of not properly investigating State Department contractor fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan; of retaliating against whistleblowers in his own office; and of not telling the truth about his knowledge of his brother’s ties with Blackwater, a State Department contractor. Faced with a possible perjury investigation, Howard Krongard resigned on December 7, 2007.
* Julie Macdonald - former deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks at the Interior Department - resigned in May 2007 after an “inspector general’s report found she had improperly leaked information to private organizations, bullied staff scientists and broken federal rules.” The Department of the Interior is investigating many of her decisions regarding endangered species; so far seven have been overturned.
* Paul McNulty - Deputy Attorney General for the Department of Justice – resigned, after questions about his involvement in the U.S. attorney firings and his testimony to Congress about the firings.
* Richard Perle - Chairman, Defense Policy Board - resigned from Pentagon advisory panel amid conflict-of-interest charges.
* Susan Ralston - assistant, White House - resigned amidst revelations that she had accepted thousands of dollars in gifts from Abramoff without compensating him, counter to White House ethics rules.
* Janet Rehnquist - inspector general, Department of Health and Human Services - resigned on June 1, 2003 in the face of an investigation into her alleged efforts to block a politically dangerous probe on behalf of the Bush family.
* James Roche - secretary, U.S. Air Force - resigned in the wake of the Boeing tanker lease scandal, after it was revealed he had rather crudely pushed for Boeing to win a $23 billion contract.
* Kyle Sampson -former chief of staff for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales - resigned amidst the investigation of the firings of U.S. Attorneys.
* Joseph Schmitz - Inspector General, Defense - Resigned amid charges he personally intervened to protect top political appointees.
* Bradley Schlozman - resigned from his third and final post with the Justice Department after accusations of actively politicizing the department. He’s currently under investigation by the Department’s inspector general.
* Thomas Scully - Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services - shortly after Scully resigned in 2003, an investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services inspector general found that Scully had pressured the agency’s actuary to underestimate the full cost of the Medicare reform bill by approximately $100 billion until after Congress passed the bill into law. Scully was also hit with conflict of interest charges by the U.S. attorney’s office for billing CMS for expenses incurred during a job search while he still headed the agency. He settled those charges by paying $9,782.
* David Smith - deputy assistant secretary for fish, wildlife, and parks, Interior Department - resigned on July 21, 2006 after shooting a buffalo and accepting its skeletal remains and meat as an illegal gratuity. He eventually paid over $3,000 for the dead buffalo, but only after the internal inquiry had commenced. The Department of Interior inspector general also noted in a May 16, 2006 report that Smith’s involvement in the designation of Houston as a port of entry for imported wildlife in order to benefit a friend was inappropriate.
* John Tanner - Voting Rights Section Chief, Justice Department - resigned in December of 2007 and moved to the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices. Already under suspicion for aiding efforts to politicize the voting section, the bumbling proponent of voter identification laws angered lawmakers with his comments that such laws actually discriminate against white voters because “minorities die first”. Even more impressive was his apology for the comment. The DoJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility is currently investigating his travel habits and those of his deputy.
* Sara Taylor - Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Political Affairs at the White House, where she was Karl Rove´s top aide - resigned amidst the U.S. attorneys investigation and other probes of Rove´s alleged politicization of the government.
* Ken Tomlinson - Board Chairman, Corporation for Public Broadcasting; member, Broadcasting Board of Governors - resigned at the release of an inspector general report concluding he had broken laws in spending CPB money to hire politically connected consultants to search for “bias” without consulting the board. At BBG, a separate investigation found he was running a “horse racing operation” out of his office, and continuing to hire politically-wired individuals to do “consulting” work for him. After being nominated and serving another term, he finally stepped down from that spot earlier this year.
* Carl Truscott - Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Bureau - resigned. A report by the Justice Department’s inspector general found that Truscott wasted tens of thousands of dollars on luxuries, wasted millions on whimsical management decisions and violated ethics rules by ordering employees to help his nephew with a high school video project.
* Paul Wolfowitz - World Bank President - resigned in May 2007 after a committee report found that he broke ethics rules by giving his girlfriend a substantial raise.
Nomination Failed Due to Scandal
* Linda Chavez - nominated, Secretary of Labor - withdrew her nomination in January 2001 amidst revelations that an illegal immigrant lived in her home and worked for her in the early 1990s. Chavez blamed what she said were the “search-and-destroy” politics of Washington.
* Timothy Flanigan - nominated, Deputy Attorney General (also Alberto Gonzales’ top deputy at the White House) - withdrew his nomination in October 2005 amidst revelations that he’d worked closely with lobbyist Jack Abramoff when he was General Counsel for Corporate and International Law at Tyco, which was a client of Abramoff’s.
* Bernard Kerik - nominated, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security - withdrew his nomination amidst a host of corruption allegations. Eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor relating to improper gifts totaling tens of thousands of dollars while he was a New York City official in the late 1990’s. Subsequently, on November 8, 2007, Kerik was indicted on sixteen counts for bribery, tax fraud, and false statements with a maximum sentence of 142 years and more than $5 million in fines. Kerik has pleaded not guilty. For a rundown of Kerik’s myriad indiscretions, check out TPM’s Ultimate Kerik Scandal List!.
* William Mercer - the former associate deputy attorney general and US Attorney for Montana - withdrew his nomination to be the permanent number three official at the Department of Justice on June 22, 2007 due to his role in the U.S. attorney firings.
* Hans von Spakovsky - Commissioner, FEC - nomination to another term after his recess appointment failed due to allegations that he’d worked at the Justice Department to suppress minority voter turnout.
Under Investigation But Still in Office
* Stuart Bowen - Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) - was once admired for his successes while investigating allegations of waste and fraud in Iraq, but now employee allegations have prompted four government investigations into the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR).
* Lurita Doan - Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration - still in office, despite investigations by both the Office of Special Counsel and the House oversight committee that found that Doan had “crossed the line” by suggesting that the GSA use its resources to help Republicans get elected.
* Alfonso Jackson - Secretary of Housing and Urban Development - following reports that Jackson told a business group in April 2006 that he once canceled a contract after the contractor criticized President Bush, an investigation by the HUD inspector general found that while Jackson told his deputies to favor Bush supporters, there was “no direct proof that a contract was actually awarded or rescinded because of political affiliation.” A second, criminal investigation was triggered in part by Jackson’s claim before Congress in May 2007 that “I don’t touch contracts.” That probe, now before a federal grand jury, has turned up evidence that Jackson may indeed have touched contracts - and steered them towards friends.
Via the fantastic Suzie-Q blog, a must for your bookmarks.
Have Your Say: Criminals In The Bush Administration
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
UK Cop: “Ecstasy safer than aspirin”
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
A senior British police chief has come under attack for claiming the illicit drug ecstasy is safer to take than aspirin.
North Wales police chief constable Richard Brunstrom has sparked outrage by making the controversial claim and calling for the legalisation of all drugs, including heroin and cocaine, within a decade.
Brunstrom says he believes ecstasy is a “remarkably safe substance” and that people who raise concerns about the dangers of taking it were “scaremongering”.
“It’s far safer than aspirin,” he told BBC radio.
“It’s far less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol which are freely available.
“There is a lot of scaremongering, rumour-mongering around ecstasy in particular. It isn’t borne out by the evidence.”
Brunstrom’s comments have sparked calls from anti-drugs campaigners for his resignation.
Ecstasy has been blamed for causing more than 200 deaths in Britain since 1996.
AAP
Have Your Say: UK Cop: “Ecstasy safer than aspirin”
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Bogus Neocon Terror War Costs $6,000 Per Second
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Whenever the Bush administration balks at spending money on some needed issue, I always mention on my blog that the Iraq war is costing us 11 million dollars per hour.
I am embarrassed to admit that this figure is wrong. I apologize. It has recently come to light that the Iraq war (plus Afghanistan, a trivial amount by comparison) is actually costing us 20 million dollars per hour.
This new amount was revealed by The Washington Post just the other day, but I have seen precious little mention of it, either in the MSM or on the blogs. I posted about it on my own blog, and was met by the usual and expected troops of equivocators. Remember folks, until we attacked Iraq, there was no connection between that country and terrorism (except, of course, for the very conscious and deliberate conflation of the two by the Bush administration).
So what does 20 megabucks an hour really mean? For one thing, it means we are spending nearly $6,000 every second in Iraq (and Afghanistan, but note that it only gets about 1/5 of the total money, while Iraq gets the other 4/5). In the time it takes you to read this paragraph, if you read moderately quickly, we’ll have spent over $50,000. That’s comfortably more than the median income of an individual American last year.
I poked around the web a bit to see what this kind of money would fund, but it’s almost impossible for the mind to grasp the enormity, the numbingly colossal nature of this expenditure.
The money we spend in Iraq in about 40 minutes would feed one million needy American families for a month. The amount we spend on Iraq in two weeks would give NASA enough money to design, build, launch, and use a Hubble-type telescope for a decade (which includes paying the army of engineers and scientists who would run it). One month worth of Iraq would buy — outright — nearly 23,000 homes in San Francisco, the priciest market in the country.
One hour in Iraq — one short hour, the amount of time I spent putting this blog entry together — could buy over one hundred thousand computers for children in third world nations. An hour and a half would fund Human Rights Watch for a year.
I could go on and on, and you can go right ahead and calculate the numbers for your own favorite cause. But before you go, I want to point out the elephant in the room on this issue.
Where did this number come from? Who calculated that the War on Terror is costing us 20 million dollars every hour, of every day, for the foreseeable future?
Why, it was Ted Stevens, Senator Intertubes his own self.
And why did he release this number? Because he wants more funding for the war.
C’mon, folks. This thing is expensive. Pitch in! We only need 20 million of you to throw a buck in every hour. After all, what else do you have to spend it on?
Have Your Say: Bogus Neocon Terror War Costs $6,000 Per Second
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Un-American Lockheed Martin and Treason for Profit
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
As more news about Benazir Bhutto’s assassination comes out, clearly implicating the Musharraff regime in the murder, our tax dollars are going toward paying Lockheed Martin for weapons to Pakistan.
“Washington, Jan 1 - The US Defence Department has awarded a $498.2 million contract to Lockheed Martin Corp to supply 18 F-16 aircraft to Pakistan just ten days after the US Congress slapped restrictions on military aid to Islamabad.
Lockheed will sell 12 F-16C plus six F-16D planes to Pakistan under the contract, the department announced in a list of defence contract awards Monday, but did not say how soon the fighter jets would be delivered.”
Pakistan -under the Musharraf regime - continues to given aid and comfort to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, the very people who attacked this nation on 9/11. Prior to the attack on my country, Pakistan’s then-chief of the ISI wired money to one of the 9/11 hijackers and had an American journalist murdered:
“If the 9-11 Commission is really looking for a smoking gun, it should look no further than at Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmad, the director of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) at the time.
In early October 2001, Indian intelligence learned that Mahmoud had ordered flamboyant Saeed Sheikh - the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl - to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of hijacker Mohamed Atta’s two bank accounts in Florida.”
Let’s run down some of the facts about Pakistan for a moment:
- An ISI agent murdered an American journalist.
- An ISI chief financed the 9/11 hijackers, who murdered over three thousand Americans.
- Musharraf and his regime have created a haven for al Qaeda, who continue to murder American soldiers.
- The pro-Democracy candidate running against Musharraf was just assassinated
And yet nearly half a billion dollars of OUR money is going toward paying Lockheed Martin to deliver yet more weapons to the ISI-Musharraf regime. It is bad enough that Lockheed is selling weapons to a regime that has such close ties to terrorism, but that we have to pay for this purchase is absolutely astonishing.
It is even more shocking considering that just 10 days ago, Congress put restrictions on military sales to Pakistan. Someone clearly put some pressure to get this deal passed despite growing concern of Musharraf’s violent actions and Congressional restrictions to aid. Who brokered this deal?
Was it Jack Abramoff from behind his prison cell who was a paid lobbyist (with our money) to Pakistan? After all, he was helping out with the F16 issue before 9/11. Somehow, maybe the prison element, rules Abramoff out.
Was it Lynn Cheney, the Vice President’s strange other half, who helped push this deal through? After all, she was on the Board of Directors for Lockheed Martin right up to 9/11. But she has moved on to penning lesbian soft porn, which likely keeps her rather busy.
Could it be Dick Cheney’s son-in-law, Phillip J. Perry, “who had, while working for a law firm, represented Lockheed with the Department of Homeland Security, had been nominated by Bush to serve as general counsel to the Department of Homeland Security.” That all depends on what his current lobbying slate looks like. Is he still a registered lobbyist for Lockheed Martin? I don’t know. Do you? With so much secrecy, is it possible to know anything about this all Un-American family?
No, I think Dick Cheney likely called up HIS State Department and HIS Defense Department to help US part with OUR money. Because how else are we to account for the billions in aid to Pakistan, pushed through by Dick Cheney during the tenure of the Bush administration?
Lockheed Martin, as well as the other Cheney affiliated companies like Halliburton, have long profited from un-American activities, anti-Democratic activities, all out human rights abuses the world over.
Enough is enough. If the ISI and Musharraf want those jets, then they will have to purchase them on their own dime. Unless al Qaeda is no longer a threat (I may have missed the memo) or Pakistan has given their house guests the boot (another memo I may have missed), then the continued funding of the Musharraf-ISI is treason. I think we, the citizens of America, have a right not to be forced to fund treason. I would even say we have a duty to prosecute traitors. But what do I know? I am just an American citizen, a tax paying citizen. Why should I have a say in what other people do with my money?
http://www.atlargely.com/2008/01/as-more-news-ab.html
Have Your Say: Un-American Lockheed Martin and Treason for Profit
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Thousands Exposed to Poison by Government Spraying
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Sometimes bad dreams do come true. My bad dream was that the government issued quarantine, and forced everybody to be vaccinated for some fake disease. In my dream, I took my family, and fled to the hills to avoid being vaccinated.
Now, nine months later, this dream has come true. In an emergency, I relinquished my rental contract and moved my pregnant partner and three and a half year old daughter out of Santa Cruz, CA, to avoid being exposed to potentially deadly chemicals.
The chemicals, known by their trade names as Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F, have been sprayed via state owned airplanes in September and October in Monterey County California. These same aerial chemicals, despite their known health risks, were sprayed on two nights (11-8, 11-9) over the people of Santa Cruz County. The purpose of this spray is to control the mating habits of the light brown apple moth (LBAM). The reason the moth needs to be controlled is due to the possibility of 100 million dollars of damage (Realize that this figure is not a fact, but based on a government guess).
Government’s Pesticide Experiment Program
The California Department of Food and Agriculture’s own doctor acknowledges, in court documents, that aerial application of this chemical has not been tested. Let me repeat this so you understand, chemicals are being sprayed on young children, nursing mother’s, people with asthma, lung problems, heart problems, the elderly, the disabled, the homeless and the chemically sensitive - and this chemical formulation has NEVER been tested on even a piece of dirt, let alone, humans. The newly designed Faroes Statement, the consensus of over 200 scientists, calls for a precautionary approach with respect to exposure of fetuses and children to environmental toxins. The consensus is that exposure of fetuses or children to chemicals can cause increased susceptibility to disease and disability later in life. In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has specific directives and codes that state that they should not experiment with pesticides on pregnant women, or infants. It is a fact, since this aerial pesticide has not been proven to control the moth’s mating habits and has not been proven safe to animals or humans, that this is an experiment.
In Monterey, approximately 100,000 residents were exposed to untested chemicals to control the mating habits of less than 750 moths. In Santa Cruz County, over 100,000 residents will be exposed between 11/06/07 – 11/09/07 to untested chemicals to control the mating habits of less than 9,000 moths. This is not a one time application, but will continue monthly beginning again in February, for nine months, and then repeated for up to a total of three years. Again, this program designed to eradicate the moth at best will only control the moth’s mating habits; it will not eliminate the moth. At worst, the program will be ineffective, cost tax payers millions of dollars, and cause permanent disability to residents and their pets. All this harm is over a little moth that has yet to cause even $1 of damage in California.
Did you know that each aerial application of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F costs approximately $3.5 million and that $3 million is paid directly to the manufacturer Suterra, LLC of Bend, Oregon?
The projected expense of this eradication “attempt” will cost tax payers over $70 million dollars just to spray Monterey and Santa Cruz counties the proposed 9 times. These monthly sprays are already scheduled for next year to begin in March. The California Department of Food and Agriculture has created a map which shows the spray area to grow and encompass various portions of the entire San Francisco Bay Area, click on the Central Coast (www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PDEP/lbam/maps.html) . The United States EPA has authorized an emergency permit which could allow the CDFA to aerially spray the state of California until the year 2010. This Light Brown Apple Moth Eradication could cost California tax payers more than $500 million dollars when all is said and done, which is five times the projected amount of losses to the agricultural industry if the moth were to infest the state. Ridiculous and frivolous spending on untested, unproven and toxic methods of “attempted” pest eradication are unacceptable actions taken by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the California Department of Food and Agriculture. This is not a state plan, but is a plan that is sponsored, endorsed, and largely funded by the EPA and the USDA.
Documented and Undocumented Pesticide Damage to Humans
While the moth may cause an estimated $100 million of crop damage, one cannot put a price tag on the damage that Checkmate’s chemicals cause to humans. In Monterey County, the first county in California to be sprayed with Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F, documented affidavits show that citizens got sick, ill or suffered life threatening reactions to the toxic spray. One infant in the City of Monterey nearly died from inhalation of the experimental biochemical, and now has permanent lung damage. Dozens of women in cities throughout the Monterey Peninsula are reporting problems with their reproductive systems after exposure to the pesticide, including: sudden, severe and irregular menstrual cycles, extreme cases of tender and swollen breasts, and the recurrence of menopause symptoms in older women. Other side effects of both Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F include: asthma and sudden breathing difficulties, chest pain, vomiting, lethargy, fatigue, and extreme mood swings. Some people have coughed up blood and have gotten bloody noses from Checkmate exposure.
If you are familiar with chemical exposure, then there is something to note which is of great alarm. If you have ever smelled paint, bleach, or something toxic like that, it takes a significant and potent amount of the chemical to make one sick. It is not typical that such small and minute amounts of chemicals can cause such severe damage as described above. The explanation for the severe side effects, is that the chemicals are in miniature balls of volatile plastic called microcapsules; thus chemicals can be introduced deeply into the body through swallowing or inhalation of the micro-sized particles. It is as if this “agricultural” product acted more like a drug on humans, than as a pesticide on moths.
Thousands of residents, including myself, have undocumented pesticide damage. I lived forty miles from the October-Monterey spray zone, and on the last day of aerial spraying, my entire family became ill. My daughter vomited. I had severe intestinal distress and could not eat for several days. I felt nervous and anxious, as if I had the caffeine equivalent of 10 cups of coffee. And for the first time in my life, I had yellow/red colored urine (I am now mostly recovered). I did not link these symptoms to pesticide exposure until days later upon talking and hearing about dozens of other Santa Cruz residents who were experiencing the same or similar symptoms, on or near the same day. Their symptoms included severe vomiting and yellow/red colored urine. Recently I learned that this exposure may not have been from pesticide drift, but a rogue plane releasing chemicals where it was not supposed to. Witnesses have recently linked the red color to the Checkmate formulations, seeing small red droplets where the Checkmate has contacted metallic objects.
The questions I ask myself are: What type of chemical, in such small doses, causes such profound harm? Why does a chemical claimed to be harmless to humans by the EPA, the CDFA and Governor Schwarzenegger have a significant and severe effect on the female reproductive system?
Microcapsules = Microwarfare
The aerial application of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F is designed out of the concept of miniature plastic sphere-like particles, generally the same size as the width of a human hair. They are called microcapsules. Each capsule is a biologically “loaded gun” due to its own chemical make-up and that of the pheromones held inside. Research indicates that the capsules are likely made out of a urea-formaldehyde polymer, the industry standard. This is an extremely volatile plastic which, under UV rays, degrades over a time period estimated to be anywhere from 30-70 days. These “agricultural” microcapsules have never been tested safe for humans. Thus, the life of these microcapsules inside our bodies is truly unknown as are the health risks of inhaling or swallowing them. Preliminary research on the microcapsules have revealed that they are made of a new technology, and that the large capsules are made up of a cluster of smaller 3-4 micron size capsules - a size of capsule that can be deadly to humans over the long term.
Many of the chemicals used to make the Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F products have been deemed harmful for human consumption, like butelated hydroxyl tolune (BHT). For example: on the label for BHT it says (in big letters) “Do not inhale this product. Dangerous to respiratory health.” The symptoms documented by Monterey County residents can be directly correlated to the warning labels of BHT, and several other chemicals. BHT, is also known as DBPC, a dangerous pesticide known to cause sterility in men. Recently, Dole Food Company lost a lawsuit in which Nicaraguan Banana farmers were exposed to DBPC. In pending lawsuits, thousands of South American Farmers are claiming that they were harmed by exposure to DBPC.
Within these microcapsules is an endocrine disrupter which attaches itself to estrogen receptors and forces the activation and constant production of estrogen to occur in the human body. This happens for men, women and children. This chemical is called 2 hydroxy 4n octyloxybenzophenone. The warnings surrounding the exposure to this toxic chemical can be directly correlated to the documented symptoms of women living within the spray zone in Monterey County. These are health concerns which CANNOT be overlooked or swept under the carpet. The entire state of California and its residents are at risk for severe short term reactions to this aerial spraying. The projected long term effects of exposure to Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F are unknown, undocumented and until now - not even a thought in the minds of those who are authorizing the spraying, and manufacturing the chemical.
In addition to the horrible documented health effects of coming into contact with Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F, there is a great chance that it will not even prove to be an effective investment. The EPA’s own documents state that such a microcapsule cannot successfully release pheromone, and that “The studies show that only a small proportion of the microcapsules actually release any pheromone or only a portion of the total pheromone loaded into the capsule is capable of ever being released.” Science and competent intelligence does not seem to be the methodology of this spray program; in light of such statements made, the technology cannot work.
The EPA masks their “emergency approval” of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F behind the assertion that the pheromones in the products are safe. They then make the scientific leap and pronounce the entire pesticide is safe to be sprayed on residential neighborhoods, schools and water ways. This arrogant assertion by the CDFA and the EPA comes, again, without ANY LEGITIMATE TESTING. Under the “emergency exemption” (also known as Section 18), regulations allow the EPA to disregard the important 3% of “inert” ingredients. The “emergency exemption” allows this disregard even though many of those ingredients are not even inert, and are actually part of the “active” ingredients. The EPA then reaches the conclusion, “EPA believes use of these pheromone products, including aerial application over residential areas, presents negligible risks to human health and the environment.” This is another case of ridiculous, frivolous and blatant disregard for human health by Governor Schwarzenegger, the CDFA and the EPA.
In addition to the aerial application which focuses on the agriculture industry, microcapsules are used in medical and military technology. In medical technology, microcapsules are used to time-release drugs into the body. The medical capsules are made out of a bio-compatible material that the body can easily absorb. In military technology, they can be used for chemical shields, or for experimental “non-lethal” weapons (That means the weapon does not cause immediate death). These thoughts do not leave one with a pleasant taste about how these microcapsules are being used in our neighborhoods and communities.
The over 30 billion microcapsules sprayed over Monterey County last month are not bio-compatible; and yet children are playing in them, dogs are rolling around in them, and people are inhaling them. And the state continues to spray more communities as I write this.
Like pollen, the miniature capsules can float in the air and they can stick to surfaces people touch. Imagine hundreds of synthetic microscopic plastic balls floating in the environment and then entering your nose, mouth, eyes and ears. Is this safe? What happens when those minuscule plastic balls are inhaled? We know what happens. They get lodged in your lungs, you cough profusely to expel them, and you go into respiratory distress. Some Monterey County residents report asthma attacks increasing, others report coughing so hard and for such long durations that they cough up blood. One healthy adult male in the sprayed Salinas area, who jogs five miles daily, now has developed asthma since the last two aerial sprays. For the first time in his life, he must use an inhaler to help him breathe. The local doctor he sees is out of inhaler samples, he’s given them all away.
These and other serious side effects associated with the aerial application of Checkmate OLR-F and Checkmate LBAM-F are being captured by citizen groups daily. Local doctors are refusing to document that their patients’ symptoms have any relation to the aerial spraying. One doctor even told his patient (who was very ill from the spraying) that he would have to consult with this lawyer before discussing the matter further. An attorney representing the CDFA declared to a judge in Monterey County superior court during a hearing where a local environmental organization was suing the CDFA to stop the aerial spraying, that the CDFA has no intention on monitoring or following up on any of the health concerns or complaints that have been or will be filed in association with this aerial application. This is another blatant disregard for the health and well being of citizens. The CDFA can pay $3.5 million dollars to spray the residents of Monterey County, but cannot and will not spend a penny to assure citizens and residents that their health is of consequence to this program. This is repulsive! This is a crime!
Cities Are the Targets!
If you examine the CDFA reports (www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PDEP/lbam/maps.html) you will see the cause for grave alarm. The LBAM aerial spraying program does not target agricultural fields with this agricultural technology, but rather targets mostly residential and urban areas that are great distances from crops and fields.
It does not take a rocket scientist to connect the dots:
1) A biochemical never tested before is being sprayed on cities and not agriculture.
2) The chemical has never been tested on moths, animals, or humans for safety or efficacy.
3) An emergency exemption is used for a moth which is not dangerous to humans; nor does it cause significant crop damage, especially in California’s warm climate regions.
4) Minute doses of the chemical causes reproductive effects on women, and likely men.
5) Some of the chemical ingredients have no material safety data sheets regarding human exposure, and samples of the pesticide have never been independently scrutinized except by the EPA.
6) The majority of the funding of this project comes from the USDA and Commodity Credit Corporation funds, these funds are managed by George W. Bush appointees.
7) Plans are being put in place to continue aerial spraying over other populated portions of California, including San Mateo, San Francisco, Oakland, and many regions in Southern California. The moth has a peculiar habit of living in cities.
8) The spray plan does not include all the moth finds, but rather mostly moth finds in cities. For a spray plan to work to control these insects, a buffer zone should be created around all the moths; such that none escape the spray, but this is not what is being done.
9) People who have been sprayed feel significantly impacted, physically and emotionally.
10) People who understand the situation respond to it, as if they are being attacked.
11) Preliminary research shows the microcapsule particles to be of a dangerous size.
12) Microcapsules are used to deliver drugs deep into the human body.
For me, I felt like the airplanes spraying chemicals were attacking my very right to exist and be here. What do you conclude?
Is the Government Negligent, Or Sinister?
The urgent question that I must bring your attention to, is this: Is the government just the biggest, dumbest entity on the planet; where they haphazardly declare an emergency, which this is not one, and then over eagerly dose whole cities with untested chemicals?
Or,
Is what we are experiencing part of a sinister plan to poison (or worse) a large populace, who more and more, is choosing an alternative and chemical free lifestyle? It is unclear how much the government is aware of this plan, but it is clear that the government goes out of their way to deny and hide all serious reported health claims.
These may be scary questions to consider or you may find them amusing and absurd. But if you lived in the spray zone and experienced what we have, you might be asking yourself the same questions too.
It is likely that both of these statements are true, that the government is acting in a negligent, and sinister way.
A Time for Mourning
Even if we do not know for sure the intention of the aerial spray, we must begin to acknowledge the great human tragedy that is now playing out before us.
Over 200,000 fellow residents of California, USA, are being exposed, needlessly, to biologically active time-release chemicals. Pregnant women, infants, and the sick will be the most effected, because we know that even the most minute dose of the chemical can find its way into fetuses and affect them, and can find its way into human breast milk. These residents are being exposed to chemicals against their will. Some of them have had to rush to the emergency room for treatment. Others, like myself, have literally fled to protect their lives. Many businesses are and will be devastated as owners decide to move out if their business is affected. Many children’s hopes will be dashed when their parents decide to leave the area and the only homes they’ve ever known, and many sick and elderly people will be torn from their own homes to avoid becoming gravely ill.
There is a war happening right here, on our own soil; as citizens try desperately to assert their right to survive, to exist, and to do so without this obscene government intrusion.
Today is a day to mourn. A day to mourn the ignorance and the violence perpetuated on our own soil. Today is a day to acknowledge the profound and sad fact that our government seems hell bent on turning this world into a war zone. Today is a day to mourn for the children whose growing bodies are being affected by this spray and for the countless people who were not even informed about what the spray means or when it will take place. Today is a day to mourn the liars in the government, who use our tax money to test chemicals on the public and then use our money, again, to pay lawyers to defend their negligent actions in court case after court case.
Today is not a good day, but a day when we are being called upon to surrender our greater reality that includes all of our feelings and experiences, good ones and bad ones. We must look now on what we have become as a nation, and what we have allowed to happen.
I sincerely believe that only through looking at the outer and inner experience and through accepting our own feelings, can we find a way to both make peace within and to take effectual action in the world to stop this violence once and for all.
The Earth is in mourning. She wants to protect her children from harm so badly.
Recent Checkmate Aerial Spray Research Confirms Its Harm
A recently released study about Checkmate LBAM-F by the Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory at
The University of California, Davis confirms the danger of this aerial application. The authors state on page three that, “the microcapsules ranged in size from approximately 10 microns to 190 microns..”
Microcapsules circa the 10 micron size range fall under the category of “particle pollution” according to the American Lung Association (ALA). On the ALA’s website they state, “”Particle pollution, called particulate matter or PM, is a combination of fine solids and aerosols that are suspended in the air we breathe… The ones of most concern are small enough to lodge deep in the lungs where they can do serious damage. They are measured in microns. The largest of concern are 10 microns in diameter.”
Particle pollution has well documented short and long term health effects, including: death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes; inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults; increased severity of asthma attacks in children; slowed lung function growth in children and teenagers; significant damage to the small airways of the lungs; and increased risk of dying from lung cancer. Children under 18 and adults over the age of 65 will be the ones most harmed by this chemical assault.
A Call to Action
Aerial application of chemicals, whether supposed safe or not, violates the very roots of our democracy and the free will of the people of the United States of America. What choices will residents of this democracy have left if they choose to not be sprayed with potentially deadly chemicals and are then denied that right? If you continue to stand by and let this happen, do you think your city and your county will be immune from the next senseless government incursion? Now there are court cases and legal presidents being set, which our government can use, to justify further hostile actions against its own people.
You cannot continue to sit around and think that you will not be affected by the actions that our government is taking today. You must act because the people here need your help. Every action you take has the potential to help. Your friends and family need you. Your country needs you. This world needs everyone of you to stand up and say loudly and clearly that you have had enough and you will not take this governmental bullying anymore!
Here are suggestions for action:
Call Governor Schwarzenegger who supports the biochemical aerial spraying that harms children and tell his staffers that you order the Governor to immediately halt the spraying.
(916) 445-2841 2841 (press #1, #5, #0)
Fax: (916) 445-4633
See my related story: (www.newstarget.com/022158.html)
Call your local senator and congressional representative. And I encourage you to call these California Senators. Federal offices will say that this is a state matter. You tell them that this LBAM eradication plan is funded by the USDA and that this is certainly a federal problem.
(Both California US Government Senators have been sitting on the fence, even though a congressional investigation as to why the USDA and EPA are so eager to spray chemicals on people, in plain violation of their own laws, is called for.)
Senator Diane Feinstein
San Fransisco Office - (415) 393-0707
Senator Barbara Boxer
San Fransisco Office - (415) 403-0100
Democracy Now!
They want to here our stories,
(www.democracynow.org/storyidea.pl)
Send them this link with this article, or post a summary of this article to their e-mail.
The American Civil Liberties Union
The ACLU is a pioneer in human and civil rights, yet they claim that this is an environmental issue. Think again, this is a human rights issue, let them know (www.aclu.org/contact/general/index.html)
The Sierra Club
They should be suing to stop this but rather have laid back in their support, claiming that pheromones are a safer alternatives than insecticides according to the information they are receiving from the EPA. Think Again, pheromones in microcapsules, never tested before on animals or people, could be deadly. The Sierra Club is being intentionally misled into supporting a substance that they know very little about.
Let them know your opinion. National Headquarters 415-977-5500
The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
They are a lead environmental organization who usually has a fabulous track record in fighting against such atrocities as spraying chemicals. However, they have been ardent supporters of pheromone use, stating that the pheromone is safe because the EPA says it is better than traditional pesticides. Note that we were also told that they have not done ANY independent research into the toxic side effects of pheromones and do not have the resources to have their own scientists do any testing. Basically they are taking the EPA and USDA’s word that it is safe, even though there are no tests available to show that it is safe or effective.
Call them and let them know how you feel. And ask them why they aren’t doing their own tests.
National Headquarters Telephone: (212) 727-2700
Or the San Francisco, CA Office: (415) 875-6100
Personal Action
Talk to your friends about this and other government abuses.
If you can provide us legal, scientific, medical or other expert support contact the author of this article immediately.
Write Articles relating to this topic or to human rights in the United States.
Alert national and international media organizations, use your personal contacts to help the cause; spread this article.
Feel your feelings, let your feelings be present.
Pray, Meditate, Dance, Dream, Act for peace.
Boycott Roll International, owner of Suterra the maker’s of Checkmate
Companies include: Fiji Water, Paramount Farms, Paramount Citrus, POM Wonderful, The Franklin Mint, and Teleflora
Some of Checkmate’s Published Ingredients:
Here are three published Checkmate ingredients, of particular concern, which have been and will continue to be sprayed upon humans and their environment.
Butylated hydroxytoluene
The Material Saftey Data Sheet States:
“Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast” “The substance may be toxic to blood, liver, central nervous system(CNS). Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substances can produce target organs damage.”
Tricaprylmethyammonimum chloride
There is no information or documentation about this substance or how chronic exposure to it can effect human health. That means we cannot be certain that even small doses are safe.
2-hydroxy-4-n-octyloxybenzophenone
This is a Xenochemical that binds to estrogen receptors not just in animals, but in humans. In other words, even in small doses, it signals people’s bodies to take a specific biological action. Even small doses could affect hormonal functions by causing the constant production of estrogen. Prolonged exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals is the cause of breast cancer.
Legal Cases
Helping Our Peninsula’s Environment sued for a restraining order to stop aerial spraying in Monterey and lost because the disputed Checkmate ingredient was not in the EPA’s documents; even though the pesticide manufacturer, Suterra, reported that they did use the disputed ingredient in the manufacture of Checkmate. The lawsuit included a document by a former EPA chemist showing how such an aerial spray program is dangerous to both humans and the environment. The lawsuit continues. Text of HOPE’s lawsuit is at (www.1hope.org/SPRAYTRO.PDF)
The City and County of Santa Cruz voted to sue the California Department of Food and Agriculture, they too lost their request for a restraining order of the spray, even with a rock-solid case which stated that the county could not perform its functions; such as school, police, protect, and administer the city while aerial spraying continued. They too did not get a restraining order, as their case continues. You can read the court case here
(www.santacruzcourt.org/News/lbam.htm)
A group of local residents filed suit in Federal Court and also did not get a restraining order, but did get a November 21st, 2007 Federal Court date to have their case more fully considered. Please consider attending this monumental hearing as citizens will stand and defend their civil liberties and right to a healthy life. Docket #0705587
Conclusion
Telling you this truth, about this atrocity, is my prayer and hope for peace.
I leave you with part of this press release by a strong opponent to the aerial spraying, California State Senator John Laird.
“Of greatest concern to me is the notion that speculative economic impacts may be outweighing the need to protect human health. In Monterey County there are reports of more than 200 health complaints associated with aerial spraying. Yet, to date there is no evidence that reports have been analyzed, and a promised ‘white paper’ on the toxicological data on the pheromone product and the health complaints taken as a whole has not been released. In fact, in his October 26th letter to me, CDFA Secretary Kawamura indicated there are no plans to either study long term effects of the spraying or conduct an epidemiological analysis of the complaints CDFA has received.
In light of the unresolved health complaints and unanswered scientific questions, the “precautionary principle” should serve as a guide. It has been described as a political and moral principle that says if an action or policy could harm the public or the environment, the burden of proof falls on the proponent of the action — rather than on the public.
It was determined in Superior Court that the County of Santa Cruz failed to meet the burden of proof required to obtain a temporary restraining order against the state. However, in the court of public opinion, the burden of proof ought to be on CDFA to prove LBAM-F and OLR-F are safe prior to spraying it on residential populations monthly for an open-ended period of time.”
(http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/MEMBERS/A27/press/20071103AD27PR01.htm)
Further information and research about the Light Brown Apple Moth Aerial Spray program is available at: Hope For Truth
About the author
Rami Nagel is a father who cares about the way we affect each other, our children, and our planet through our lifestyle choices. His health background is in hands-on energy healing, Hatha & Bhakti yoga and the Pathwork.
Rami is author of several health resources:
www.curetoothdecay.com - Heal and Prevent Cavities with Nutrition!
www.healingourchildren.net - Learn the Cause and Prevention of the Diseases of Pregnancy and Childhood
www.preconceptionhealth.org - A Program for Preconception Health based on Indigenous Wisdom
www.yourreturn.org - The cause of disease and the end of suffering of humanity.
Have Your Say: Thousands Exposed to Poison by Government Spraying
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
VIDEO: Professionals Call for End to Water Fluoridation
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
As detailed in this ABC News Story, over 600 (now over 1,200) professionals are urging Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks.
Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.
Have Your Say: VIDEO: Professionals Call for End to Water Fluoridation
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Police anger at Commons march ‘ban’
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Jamie Doward
The Observer
Police last night accused the government of attempting to ban 10,000 officers from marching through Westminster in a mass protest over their pay award. The demonstration would be the force’s biggest since 1919.Relations between the Home Office and the force have fallen to a new low, with the Police Federation of England and Wales, the body that represents 124,000 rank-and-file officers, claiming the government is ‘interfering behind the scenes’ over plans for the march to Parliament on 23 January.
The high-profile demonstration, intended to highlight the force’s anger over its recent below-inflation, 1.9 per cent pay rise, is threatening to become a major political flashpoint in the new year. The police claim their preferred route for their march is set to be banned under archaic ’sessional orders’, laws drawn up in the early 19th century to combat large-scale radical protests that threatened a disturbance of the peace.
The orders are renewed by Parliament each year and invoked by the Metropolitan Police if the force believes a protest will prevent MPs from going about their daily business. Critics of the orders claim they are a heavy-handed response designed to stifle peaceful protest.
Last night the federation claimed that parliamentary officials were in talks with the Met with a view to banning the march outside Parliament and said the government had no intention of lifting the orders so that the protest could go ahead. ‘There appears to be some behind-the-scenes government interference,’ said Alan Gordon, vice-chairman of the federation. ‘There is pressure being brought on the Metropolitan Police to either postpone the march altogether or to reroute it in such a way that it will disappear into side streets where it will be out of the public gaze.’
The latest skirmish between the thin blue line and the government follows months of bitter wrangling over pay. Earlier this year there was widespread outrage among police officers in England and Wales after they discovered that a 2.5 per cent pay rise was not going to be backdated. It meant their real pay rise was 1.9 per cent.
Rank-and-file officers will shortly be balloted on whether they should have the right to take industrial action, which is currently illegal. Any move to ban or reroute the march would heighten tensions between the two sides in the run-up to the ballot.
‘The government is extremely embarrassed by this whole affair,’ Gordon said. ‘They realise they have made a crass decision by not backdating this pay and I think they were hoping that the whole problem would disappear over the Christmas break.’
The government denied it was attempting to block the protest. A Home Office spokesman said any decision on the march was not up to the government. ‘The decision is a matter for the Metropolitan Police,’ the spokesman said.
The Met confirmed it was in talks with the federation over whether the march would go ahead. ‘We are in discussions with the Police Federation regarding the planned demonstration on 23 January,’ a Met spokeswoman said.
Gordon said using archaic orders to ban or reroute the march on law-and-order grounds would widen the rift between the police and government. ‘To think there is a likelihood of public disorder from 10,000 police officers marching through central London is a nonsense,’ he said. ‘I can only assume they are doing this because they do not want the embarrassment. It will just raise the police’s anger and mistrust of this government.’
Have Your Say: Police anger at Commons march ‘ban’
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
VIDEO: Pakistan and 9/11
Thursday, January 3rd, 2008
Protected by Bush
CIA = ISI (Pakistani intelligence) = al Queda
On October 1, 2001, did the FBI uncover evidence that Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed, the Director of the Pakistani Intelligence Service (the ISI) authorize the wiring of $100,000 to Florida to Mohammed Atta (supposed hijack ringleader of the 911 attack) through Omar Saeed Sheikh (an alleged ISI agent)?
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/243.html
Why did only a single US press outlet, the Wall Street Journal website, mention this connection in the editorial section (James Taranto writing) on October 10, 2001, saying it was an “internet only” story - when in fact it was a major story reported at great length in the main line Indian press?
Does this mean that Al-Queda was used as a tool by members of the American government in the same way that they used the Mujahdeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan?
Have Your Say: VIDEO: Pakistan and 9/11
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Related News
- Culture observed during slavery still being practised
- Does Organic Really Mean Organic?
- Bush backs modified crops
- Crisis Looms as Corporations Seize Control of Commodities
- The Foods That Are Most Affected by Pesticides
Loading ...
Email This Page To A Friend
- Susan Klebold The Columbine Essay - O Magazine
- ID card officials back away from scandal-hit database
- Refugees Increasingly Being Refused Asylum
- Police in Wales have taken DNA samples from more than 55,000 innocent people
- BBC Pays Google For Internet Marketing
- Freedom of Information Act Cost BBC £3m
- U.S. Extends Blackwater Task In Iraq
- District 9 Hits UK
- Internet Marketing - 7 Future Proofing SEO Tips
- Stop the War Coalition: Conspiracy Groups Distraction At Best, Antisemitic At Worst
- News To Your Inbox
- Join The RINF Forum
- Twitter - RINF Forum
- Twitter - Main Newswire
- Add To My Yahoo
- Add To Google
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
Hotels Morecambe
Web Hosting Reviews
Log Splitter
Home based business opportunities
Find Office Chairs
WoW guide reviews
Get Ghillie Suits
Best weight loss pills
Online Dating