MASAKA STREET CHILDREN NEED YOUR HELP!

U.S. Marijuana Party Kentucky

THEIR FOOD CROPS HAVE DRIED UP!

11

22

I am posting this in an effort to make a simple plea for help for Moses Nkangi, who runs MASAKA STREET CHILDREN Orphanage in Uganda, Africa.

Their crops have failed and they are in need of assistance from anyone who is able to help.

Small donations are very helpful.  It goes toward food and necessities for the Children who live there.

I have known Moses Nkangi for quite some years through Facebook and have kept in touch with him.

As well, I have donated small amounts, when I can, to help them out.  I figure if I can send maybe $20 every three-four months it will at least give them a meal.

I know how it is because I live on next to nothing myself.  But even one meal is a big help when you have 50 Children to feed!

Please make an effort…

View original post 295 more words

Advertisements

Declaration on Seed Freedom

  1. Seed is the source of life, it is the self urge of life to express itself, to renew itself, to multiply, to evolve in perpetuity in freedom.
  2. Seed is the embodiment of bio cultural diversity. It contains millions of years of biological and cultural evolution of the past, and the potential of millennia of a future unfolding.
  3. Seed Freedom is the birth right of every form of life and is the basis for the protection of biodiversity.
  4. Seed Freedom is the birth right of every farmer and food producer. Farmers rights to save, exchange, evolve, breed, sell seed is at the heart of Seed Freedom. When this freedom is taken away farmers get trapped in debt and in extreme cases commit suicide.
  5. Seed Freedom is the basis of Food Freedom, since seed is the first link in the food chain.
  6. Seed Freedom is threatened by patents on seed, which create seed monopolies and make it illegal for farmers to save and exchange seed. Patents on seed are ethically and ecologically unjustified because patents are exclusive rights granted for an invention. Seed is not an invention. Life is not an invention.
  7. Seed Freedom of diverse cultures is threatened by Biopiracy and the patenting of indigenous knowledge and biodiversity. Biopiracy is not innovation – it is theft.
  8. Seed Freedom is threatened by genetically engineered seeds, which are contaminating our farms, thus closing the option for GMO-free food for all. Seed Freedom of farmers is threatened when after contaminating our crops, corporations sue farmer for “stealing their property”.
  9. Seed Freedom is threatened by the deliberate transformation of the seed from a renewable self generative resource to a non renewable patented commodity. The most extreme case of non renewable seed is the “Terminator Technology” developed with aim to create sterile seed.
  10. We commit ourselves to defending seed freedom as the freedom of diverse species to evolve; as the freedom of human communities to reclaim open source seed as a commons.

To this end, we will save seed, we will create community seed banks and seed libraries, we will not recognize any law that illegitimately makes seed the private property of corporations. We will stop the patents on seed.


Click here to sign the declaration

Click here to download a PDF

CONTINUE TO SOURCE…

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.” HOW THE UNITED NATIONS IS STEALING OUR “UNALIENABLE RIGHTS” TO GROW FOOD AND MEDICINE THROUGH THE U.N. CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS AND AGENDA 21.

clip_image002

10/25/2015

Sheree Krider

Because of the nature of the Beasts which we are dealing with in regards to the “War on Drugs” in general, but additionally because the Beasts are taking control of plants, food, medications and plant medicines worldwide at will, I feel it is imperative that we confront this issue now.

WHILE READING THIS KEEP IN MIND THAT THE U.S. HAS HAD A PATENT ON MARIJUANA SINCE 2003: #6,630,507 October 7, 2003 Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants.

This control is being achieved thru the United Nations which officially began on October 24, 1945, with the victors of World War II — China, the U.S.S.R., France, United Kingdom, and the United States — ratified the U.N. charter, creating the U.N. Security Council and establishing themselves as its five permanent members with the unique ability to veto resolutions. This ability keeps them in control of the U.N.

To date More than six in ten Americans have a favorable opinion of the U.N. as reported on the “Better World Campaign” website which is the funding source for the U.N.

The U.N. 1961 convention on narcotic drugs essentially set into motion the drug war as we know it today.

The United Nations Conference to consider amendments to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, met at the United Nations Office at Geneva Switzerland from 6 to 24 March 1972. 97 States were represented.

On November 7, 1972 President Richard Nixon was re-elected to office. It was on his watch that the amendments to the U.N. were enacted with an establishment of a “United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control.”

They readily admit that many of the drugs included have a useful and legitimate medical purpose and are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the American people.

The term ”addict” means any individual who habitually uses any narcotic drug. Who will determine when a narcotic has become habitual? The “Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 .

The Parties, recognizing the competence of the United Nations with respect to the international control of drugs, agree to entrust to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the Economic and Social Council, and to the International Narcotics Control Board, the functions respectively assigned to them under this Convention.”

The “Parties shall maintain a Special administration for the purpose of applying the Provisions of this Convention.” in the U.S. this was the Drug Enforcement Administration or DEA.

Article 28 control of cannabis states that if a party permits cultivation that the system of control is the same as for opium poppy in article 23 which requires licensing by the “agency” which in the case of the U.S. would be the DEA. The number of acres planted and harvested must be recorded and “the agency must purchase and take physical possession of” it. The agency has exclusive rights to importing, exporting, and wholesale trading. It is also subject to limitations on production.

This is total control of the plant by the U.N. and effectively eliminates any chance of personal growing.

Natural growing plants which are included in Schedule 1 are marijuana, mescaline (peyote), psilocybin, and Khat. Other drugs are also included in this list.

More common opiates such as hydrocodone are included in Schedule II. These are regulated and handed out at the will of the government thru the medical industrial complex. How many people have been refused a prescription for Valium or Xanax in the past year because of a positive drug screening for Marijuana? How many people who do not consume Marijuana have been cut off as well because the DEA has, for all practical purposes, threatened the physician’s livelihood thru Statutes and “Bills” which have cut people off from their medications with no warning in the past year or two?

Title 21 states that the rules shall not apply to the cultivation of cannabis/hemp plant for industrial purposes only – however, it also does not say that hemp may be used for medicine without restriction.

Article 33 states that the parties shall not permit the possession of drugs without legal authority.

In the 1972 Protocol Amending The Single Convention On Narcotic Drugs 1961 Article 49 states that:

f) The use of Cannabis for other than medical and scientific purposes must be discontinued as soon as possible but in any case within twenty-five years from the coming into force of this Convention as provided in paragraph 1 of article 41.

1972 + 25 = 1997

Ironically enough the first medical cannabis law was enacted by California in 1996 – just in time to meet the 25 year deadline for ending all use of cannabis except for medical and scientific purposes…

Proposition 215, or the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, is a California law allowing the use of medical cannabis despite marijuana’s lack of the normal Food and Drug Administration testing for safety and efficacy. It was enacted, on November 5, 1996, by means of the initiative process, and passed with 5,382,915 (55.6%) votes in favor and 4,301,960 (44.4%) against.

As I stated previously, in the U.S. the governing agency would be the DEA and on July 1, 1973 this agency officially came into existence in accordance with the U.N. Treaties which the U.S. government created and implemented. THE DEA HAS AN Annual Budget of $2.4 billion.

THE DEA Controlled Substances Act, TITLE 21 – FOOD AND DRUGS, CHAPTER 13 – DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL EFFECTIVE Oct. 27, 1970, SUBCHAPTER I – CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT,

States that:

“(1) If control is required by United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on October 27, 1970, the Attorney General shall issue an order controlling such drug under the schedule he deems most appropriate to carry out such obligations, without regard to the findings required by subsection (a) of this section or section 812(b) of this title and without regard to the procedures prescribed by subsections (a) and (b) of this section.”

Meaning, it does not matter what the U.S. Citizens (or any other country for that matter) has to say about Cannabis or any other drug or plant on the list of U.N. control we are bound by the U.N. Treaty first and foremost, which was set into place by our own government.

“In 1986, the Reagan Administration began recommending a drug testing program for employers as part of the War on Drugs program. In 1988, Drug Free Workplace regulations required that any company with a contract over $25,000 with the Federal government provide a Drug-Free Workplace. This program must include drug testing.”

Manfred Donike, in 1966, the German biochemist demonstrated that an Agilent (then Hewlett-Packard) gas chromatograph could be used to detect anabolic steroids and other prohibited substances in athletes’ urine samples. Donike began the first full-scale testing of athletes at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, using eight HP gas chromatographs linked to an HP computer.

YEP, HP IS HEWLETT PACKARD…His method reduced the screening process from 15 steps to three, and was considered so scientifically accurate that no outside challenges to his findings were allowed.

HP has laboratories around the globe in three major locations, one of which happens to be in Israel. Late Republican Senator Jesse Helms used to call Israel “America’s aircraft carrier in the Middle East”, when explaining why the United States viewed Israel as such a strategic ally, saying that the military foothold in the region offered by the Jewish State alone justified the military aid that the United States grants Israel every year.

Most everybody thinks that the Cannabis issue is a U.S. issue and an issue unto itself, not encompassed within the issue of control of the masses, and at least as far as our own laws/statutes are concerned. “ALL WE NEED TO DO IS GET OUR STATE TO LEGALIZE IT”. This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

We are all rolled up into the UN by virtue of our own Country which used this as a means to control worldwide, the people, without ever having to answer for or take responsibility for it again. Why? Because it is now a UN issue. And WE ARE BOUND by the UN treaties, as one of 5 founding members, who now rule the world.

Welcome to “THE NEW WORLD ORDER”. Yep, it’s been around a long time, we just didn’t notice it in time. Our men had just gone through a horrific war (WWII) and were too beat down and TOO sick to fight again and most likely didn’t even notice or worse yet thought the U.N. was a good thing that would prevent another WWII….. WELL, WELCOME TO WWIII AKA THE “DRUG WAR”.

I don’t care which State you reside in it is NOT legal to possess or use Marijuana in any form or fashion. You are living in an “Illusion.

As long as the U.N. has control over all narcotics in any form, we as a people will not legally be able to grow cannabis or any other plant that they categorize as narcotic.

What they will do for us is to use us like Guinea pigs in a testing environment to accumulate enough information whereby cannabis can be deemed a potentially useful drug from a pharmacological standpoint and then they can turn it over to the pharmaceutical companies to sell to us through commerce as a prescription. This is happening as we speak.

The drug war was created for us, and the prison industrial complex which they set up for control of us is the holding center for the Guinea pigs which are “us”.

They make sure enough of it gets out there that we can continue to use it illegally and they can study it at the same time they are locking us up for doing just that — using and studying marijuana. This in effect creates a double paycheck for them as they are keeping the prisons full and instituting private prisons for commerce and at the same time they are collecting information about the beneficial uses of cannabis thru drug testing patients. As well, those who seek employment or who are already employed with are targeted by random testing, and they collect our medical records for research at the same time the physicians are tagging us as cannabis abusers for reference via the ICD-10 codes used on medical claim forms submitted to the Insurance companies by our doctors’ offices. Essentially anyone who is a marijuana user is rounded up by the legal and medical system. If you use marijuana you cannot hide the fact unless you are part of the drug cartel itself and do not seek employment or medical care anywhere in the U.S. The marijuana cartel remains intact because they are “self-employed”.

Additionally, HIPPA states that In the course of conducting research, researchers may obtain, create, use, and/or disclose individually identifiable health information. Under the (HIPPA) Privacy Rule, covered entities are permitted to use and disclose protected health information for research with individual authorization, or without individual authorization under limited circumstances set forth in the Privacy Rule.

As far as Pharma Drugs are concerned, I must quote from Ms. Cris Ericson of the Vermont Marijuana Party, who stated, “People can no longer afford the pharmaceutical industry. The U.S. Congress votes to give research money to the pharmaceutical companies who invent new prescription drugs by synthesizing natural herbs, and then the pharmaceutical companies claim ownership of the new Rx patent, but it was the taxpayers who paid for the research. The taxpayers, under the patent law which states that “work made for hire, should own 50% of the patent” should rightfully be paid. The pharmaceutical companies not only profit wrongfully, by taking ownership of the patent that the taxpayers paid the research for, but then they take their huge profits and donate millions of dollars to PAC’s political action committees and Super PAC’s and then the PAC’s donate money to the U.S. Congress, so your taxpayer dollars have come full circle, and that looks just like money laundering, because millions of your taxpayer dollars end up in the campaign war chests of the elected officials.”

To that I must add that even if you obtain your medications for a $0 copay, you have paid for them already via taxation of the general public. Even those persons on disability or other government subsidy pay tax every time they make a purchase.

The U.N. Convention and the CSA both state that, “No prescriptions may be written for Schedule I substances, and they are not readily available for clinical use. NOTE: Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, marijuana) is still considered a Schedule 1 drug by the DEA, even though some U.S. states have legalized marijuana for personal, recreational use or for medical use. May 4, 2014”

This issue gains even more momentum when you understand that it is not just about cannabis/hemp/marijuana. It also involves all food and plants which are coming under their jurisdiction.

It is entirely possible that just as they can use drug testing to determine what drugs you put into your body they could develop testing to determine what foods you are eating. Imagine being “food tested” to see if you ingested beef or broccoli that was illegal to be in possession of! It seems an exaggeration but entirely within the realm of possibility.

HENCEFORTH, AGENDA 21…

The national focal point in the United States is the Division Chief for Sustainable Development and Multilateral Affairs, Office of Environmental Policy, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State.

A June 2012 poll of 1,300 United States voters by the American Planning Association found that 9% supported Agenda 21, 6% opposed it, and 85% thought they didn’t have enough information to form an opinion.

The United States is a signatory country to Agenda 21, but because Agenda 21 is a legally non-binding statement of intent and not a treaty, the United States Senate was not required to hold a formal debate or vote on it. It is therefore not considered to be law under Article Six of the United States Constitution. President George H. W. Bush was one of the 178 heads of government who signed the final text of the agreement at the Earth Summit in 1992, and in the same year Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Eliot Engel and William Broomfield spoke in support of United States House of Representatives Concurrent Resolution 353, supporting implementation of Agenda 21 in the United States. In the United States, over 528 cities are members of ICLEI, an international sustainability organization that helps to implement the Agenda 21 and Local Agenda 21 concepts across the world.

During the last decade, opposition to Agenda 21 has increased within the United States at the local, state, and federal levels. The Republican National Committee has adopted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, and the Republican Party platform stated that “We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.” Several state and local governments have considered or passed motions and legislation opposing Agenda 21. Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21. Many other states, including Arizona, are drafting, and close to passing legislation to ban Agenda 21.

The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) was established in 1974 as an intergovernmental body to serve as a forum in the United Nations System for review and follow-up of policies concerning world food security including production and physical and economic access to food. The CFS Bureau and Advisory Group-The Bureau is the executive arm of the CFS . It is made up of a Chairperson and twelve member countries. The Advisory group is made up of representatives from the 5 different categories of CFS Participants. These are: 1 UN agencies and other UN bodies; 2 Civil society and non-governmental organizations particularly organizations representing smallholder family farmers, fisherfolks, herders, landless, urban poor, agricultural and food workers, women, youth, consumers and indigenous people; 3 International agricultural research institutions; 4 International and regional financial institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, regional development banks and the World Trade Organization; 5 Private sector associations and philanthropic foundations.

FREEDOM ADVOCATES OPPOSITION TO AGENDA 21:

“Even the term “sustainable” must be defined, since on the surface it appears to be inherently positive. In reality, Sustainable Development has become a “buzz” term that refers to a political agenda, rather than an objectively sustainable form of development. Specifically, it refers to an initiative of the United Nations (U.N.) called Sustainable Development Agenda 21. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 is a comprehensive statement of a political ideology that is being progressively infused into every level of government in America.”

Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines unalienable as “not alienable; that cannot be alienated; that may not be transferred; as in unalienable rights” and inalienable as “cannot be legally or justly alienated or transferred to another.”

The Declaration of Independence reads:

“That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…”

This means that human beings are imbued with unalienable rights which cannot be altered by law whereas inalienable rights are subject to remaking or revocation in accordance with man-made law. Inalienable rights are subject to changes in the law such as when property rights are given a back seat to emerging environmental law or free speech rights give way to political correctness. In these situations no violation has occurred by way of the application of inalienable rights – a mere change in the law changes the nature of the right. Whereas under the original doctrine of unalienable rights the right to the use and enjoyment of private property cannot be abridged (other than under the doctrine of “nuisance” including pollution of the public water or air or property of another). The policies behind Sustainable Development work to obliterate the recognition of unalienable rights. For instance, Article 29 subsection 3 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights applies the “inalienable rights” concept of human rights:

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

Read that phrase again, carefully! “Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

It suffices to say that the “war on drugs” is a war on us as a people. It is entwined with the United Nations and agenda 21. It is control of the masses through the illusion of a better world and offers peace and harmony to all people. It sounds really good on the surface until you start analyzing the issues at hand. The problem is that its intent is ultimately to control everything and everybody.

“Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to purposes and principles of the united nation”…there you have it in one sentence, straight out of the horse’s mouth. The new world order is now. If we continue down this path, sooner rather than later we will be told that we can no longer grow our own food, or meat, eggs, cheese, etc. It must be purchased through a reputable source – the grocery stores and the pharmacy so it can be “regulated”.

Our rights to the cannabis/marijuana plant has all but been lost at this point and if we do not do something immediately to regain it and continue passing illegal statutes (by virtue of the U.N.) state to state is not going to hold up in the long run because, first of all, federally it remains illegal and they can squash those legalization antics at any time, and most of all the U.N. owns it. And who owns the U.N.? The United States and five other countries which are china, Russia, France and the U.K.

It seems to me that the placing of these plants (including marijuana, and peyote) into a “U.N. Convention of Narcotic Drugs” was just the first step in their taking total control of all people throughout the world through their access to food and medication, and was and still is a test case to see if it would work in their favor. So far it seems it is working in their favor because we are losing the ability to fight back on a political basis and their guns are bigger than ours.

The fact that for years we have blamed the eradication of marijuana on Harry Anslinger even though the LaGuardia commission refuted his findings and Harry Anslinger himself later admitted his testimony wasn’t true and in fact marijuana was relatively harmless, only proves that the rhetoric remained in place for ulterior motives.

When the 1937 tax act was repealed in 1969 in Timothy Leary v. United States, the Controlled Substance Act of 1970 picked up and took over keeping the plant from us yet again. To this day it remains illegal although individual states within the U.S. are attempting to change that, the fact still remains that legally it is still a schedule 1 at the federal level and since federal law trumps state law we are getting next to nowhere.

The only thing that state legalization does do, is keep the state authorities from prosecuting except within the realm of the individual state statutes. At least we are fighting back and gaining momentum in that we are letting them know how we feel about it! Other than that at any time everything gained could be lost at the whim of the federal government.

If we do not focus on regaining the freedom of cannabis from the U.N. now, not only will it be forever lost to pharma, all of our food, medicines and plants are going right along with it and we will not ever be able to get them back. And if you think the prison industrial complex is a monstrosity now just wait till we are being locked up for growing a tomato or hiding a laying hen in our closet just to have access to an egg. Yes, I believe that it will get that bad in the not so far future.

So if you are not worried about it because you do not smoke marijuana, you might ought to worry about it because your grandkids will still need to eat whether or not they have cannabis as a medication through the pharmaceutical industrial complex. And to top it all off, what happens when you “break the law” by planting food and they find out and take away your right to obtain food much the same way they have taken away our rights to obtain scheduled medications because you tested positive for marijuana? (Don’t worry too much I am sure they will let you “something” to eat!)

We must have access to our own gardens and herbal plants because virtually every “drug” made comes from a plant and both prescription drugs and over the counter medications are at risk and could disappear rapidly. Remember over-the-counter pseudoephedrine? Every time they want to take something out of our hands they make it illegal and claim it is for the greater good. You may very well need to grow your own medicine too because if you do not meet their requirements they won’t let you have any of theirs.

It is a fact that cannabis/hemp is a food and a medicine. By withholding it from us they have effectively made many of us weaker through endocanabinoid deficiency and people are becoming sicker in general from the foods that we ingest as well as the ones that we do not have access to. Our ability to stand up to an enemy of any kind on a physical scale has been dramatically affected by both nutrition and the chemicals we are exposed to in our food and in our air and water as well as required inoculations against various diseases. Our children are having the worse reactions to all this which can be seen by the rise in not only autism but other birth defects as well.

The most important thing to note is that cannabis, food and medicine is something that everyone needs to have access to in various forms for various reasons. If it is only available thru a controlled environment then we will be subjected to probable malnutrition and genocide. Our health has become bad enough already due to corporate food and medicine. We certainly do not need it to get any worse. Is this going to be total population control via food and medicine? I am afraid so.

“People who don’t get enough food often experience and over the long term this can lead to malnutrition. But someone can become malnourished for reasons that have nothing to do with hunger. Even people who have plenty to eat may be malnourished if they don’t eat foods that provide the right nutrients, vitamins, and minerals.”

NOW THAT THE BEAST HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED, WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION TO TAKE?

Probably the best thing we can do right is to demand cannabis sativa and any naturally growing plant removed from United Nations control and the Controlled Substance Act in the U.S.

Additionally, Agenda 21 needs to be eliminated as it stands now. No entity should be allowed total control over plants and food, especially those grown in our own garden.

However, it is a fact that any type of food or medicine created and/or sold by a corporate entity has to be governed. Their entire purpose is to make money and they will do anything to accomplish that including selling us pink slime for meat. That is what should be governed.

It seems to me that the FDA is not doing its job correctly. Protect the people, not the corporations. The fact that a corporation has its own “personhood” is just totally ridiculous and must end.

The United Nations itself could be modified into an agency that protects the unalienable rights of the people throughout the world. It cannot police the world however. And it cannot rule the people as a government does. For this reason any policing agencies that are international such as Interpol must be eliminated. This would throw the policing back to the people’s own respective countries and the people of those countries will have to police their own governments to ensure that they keep the will of their people as top priority while governing.

Will this mean that war will continue to be a fixture in our world? Yes, of course it does. War always has been and always will be. It is the next closest thing to “God” that exists in that aspect. But if each country’s government has jurisdiction over its own people then the citizens can decide who will be ‘in charge’. If they need help during a crisis then other countries can step in to help where needed at the time and as they choose to do so. If the whole world comes under the rule of one governing body then we would have no control anymore at all. And this is what it seems to be leading up to – one governing body ruling virtually the entire planet with the ‘head’ of that governing body being the five original victors of WWII: the United States, Russia (U.S.S.R), France, China and the U.K.

World War II never really ended, it just changed it course. We have to put an end to this global war against all God’s people and the time is now! If you do not believe in god then you can say we have to put an end to the war against world humanity. It means basically the same thing – at least to me.

Just say no!

clip_image003

NOTES & REFERENCE LINKS:

Leary v. United States, 395 U.S. 6 (1969), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the constitutionality of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. Timothy Leary, a professor and activist, was arrested for the possession of marijuana in violation of the Marihuana Tax Act. Leary challenged the act on the ground that the act required self-incrimination, which violated the Fifth Amendment. The unanimous opinion of the court was penned by Justice John Marshall Harlan II and declared the Marihuana Tax Act unconstitutional. Thus, Leary’s conviction was overturned. Congress responded shortly thereafter by repealing the Marihuana Tax Act and passing the Controlled Substances Act to continue the prohibition of certain drugs in the United States.

“By 2020, 30 billion connected devices will generate unprecedented amounts of data. The infrastructure required to collect, process, store, and analyze this data requires transformational changes in the foundations of computing. Bottom line: current systems can’t handle where we are headed and we need a new solution. HP has that solution in The Machine. ”

Ban Ki-moon (Hangul: ???; hanja: ???; born 13 June 1944) is a South Korean statesman and politician who is the eighth and current Secretary-General of the United Nations. Before becoming Secretary-General, Ban was a career diplomat in South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in the United Nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime

http://kidshealth.org/parent/growth/feeding/hunger.html

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/types.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/27/autism-rates-rise/6957815/

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/

http://www.nel.edu/pdf_/25_12/NEL251204R02_Russo_.pdf

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

http://hemp.org/news/book/export/html/626

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/anslng1.htm

http://www.freedomadvocates.org/understanding-unalienable-rights-2/

http://www.freedomadvocates.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_World_Food_Security

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

https://www.worldwewant2015.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_relations

http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/systems-research/themachine/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Labs#Labs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_Donike

http://www.globalsources.com/manufacturers/Drug-Test-Kit.html?keywords=_inurl%3A%2Fmanufacturers%2F&matchtype=b&device=c&WT.mc_id=1001007&WT.srch=1&gclid=Cj0KEQjw2KyxBRCi2rK11NCDw6UBEiQAO-tljUJHHVLsYxnVYIjclmlCiwuLEH2akAa-iTolJ2zN6-8aAjtm8P8HAQ

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/2108cfrt.htm

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/1308/1308_11.htm

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter13&edition=prelim

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter13&edition=prelim

http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/ucm148726.htm#cntlsbc

http://www.medicinehunter.com/plant-medicines

http://www.unfoundation.org/what-we-do/issues/united-nations/advocating-us-funding-un.html

http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/21usc/index.html

http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/hp/cannabis-pdq

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=2767

Titles II and III Of The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act Of 1970 (Pub-Lic Law 91–513) https://legcounsel.house.gov/Comps/91-513.pdf

Is Privacy Dead? 4 Government and Private Entities Conspiring to Track Everything You Do Online and Off

The police-corporate surveillance “complex” is being consolidated, drawing ever-closer corporate tracking and government surveillance.
September 10, 2012  |

Americans’ personal privacy is being crushed by the rise of a four-headed corporate-state surveillance system.  The four “heads” are: federal government agencies; state and local law enforcement entities; telecoms, web sites & Internet “apps” companies; and private data aggregators (sometimes referred to as commercial data warehouses).

Conventional analysis treats these four domains of data gathering as separate and distinct; government agencies focus on security issues and corporate entities are concerned with commerce. Some overlap can be expected as, for example, in case of a terrorist attack or an online banking fraud.  In both cases, an actual crime occurred.

But what happens when the boundary separating or restricting corporate-state collaboration, e.g., an exceptional crime-fighting incident, erodes and becomes the taken-for-granted operating environment, the new normal?  Perhaps most troubling, what happens when the traditional safeguards offered by “watchdog” courts or regulatory organizations no longer seem to matter?  What does it say that the entities designed to protect personal privacy rights seem to have either been effectively “captured” or become toothless tigers?

In President Eisenhower’s legendary 1960 farewell address, he warned of the potential power of the military-industrial complex.  Ike’s 20th century formulation represented the intertwining of the U.S. military and private contractors to achieve two complementary goals.  First, it sought to help corporations make guaranteed, cost-plus profits and to provide glide-path retirement programs for the military brass.  Second, it sought to influence Congress and thus shape foreign policy, helping fulfill the then just-emerging global imperialist strategy.

Today’s corporate-state surveillance complex demonstrates a comparable intertwining of U.S. policing forces and private companies in the monitoring of domestic life.  It is being implemented thanks to the technology fruits of a half-century of the military-industrial complex.  The Defense Department created the Internet and what it can do in Yemen it can do in Oakland. The global war on terrorism is coming home!

In the wake of the Great Recession, we are living through a great economic and social restructuring.  The global world order is shifting and, accordingly, America’s class and social relations are being reordered.  Occupy Wall Street’s formulation of the social crisis, the 1% vs. the 99%, has become the shorthand descriptor of this restructuring of American economic relations.  No time is better to impose high-tech social disciple then one marked by economic and social crisis.  The unanswered question is obvious:  Are we witnessing the formation of the high-tech police state?

* * *

To reiterate, the four-headed corporate-state surveillance hydra consists of (i) federal agencies; (ii) state and local law enforcement entities; (iii) telecoms, web sites & Internet “apps” companies; and (iv) private data aggregators.  The following overview sketches out the parameters of the ever-growing domestic spy state, how it’s being implemented and some of the more egregious examples of abuse of public trust if not the law.

#1 — Federal Surveillance

The attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent (and endless) “war on terror” continue to provide the rationale for an ever-expanding domestic security state.  The leading agencies gathering data on Americans (and others) include the National Security Agency (NSA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Defense (DoD) as well as the FBI and IRS.  In the wake of 9/11, the NSA took the lead in federal domestic cyber surveillance, but in 2010 the NSA ceded this authority to the DHS.

Personal information is gathered from a host of both public and private sources.  One source is “public records” that can range from birth, marriage and death records; court filings, arrest records, driver’s license information, property ownership registrations (e.g., car or house), tax records, professional licenses and even Securities and Exchange Commission filings.  Another source is “private” records from ChoicePoint and LexisNexis as well as credit reporting agencies such as Equifax, Experian Information Solutions and Trans Union LLC.

CONTINUE READING:

Absolute Asinine Laws

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña brought some roadside weeds home from Kansas. Cops decided it was reefer, and a Texas court sentenced him to life in prison – without the evidence. It took a decade for Peña to get back some of the pieces of his life.

By Jordan Smith, Fri., March 16, 2012

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña was tired as he drove south toward Houston on the morning of Sept. 27, 1998. Following a quick trip north to Kansas in a rented van – to pick up the brother of a distant cousin’s son – he was on his way home to Houston, where he lived with his wife and four children. It was the kind of favor Peña often did for friends and family, no matter how distant the relation – and the kind of favor that irritated his wife. “I was tired, and I was trying to get home,” the 50-year-old recently recalled. “My wife was mad at me for doing favors for other people” when he could instead be home.

That morning, just before 8am, Peña was cruising south down I-45, a little more than two hours from home. He was driving in the right-hand lane through Leon County when he passed a state trooper sitting in his car on the grass median. He thought nothing of it – just another Texas trooper on a long and nondescript stretch of highway – until he noticed the trooper pull out onto the road and follow him. The officer, Mike Asby, a veteran member of the Texas Department of Public Safety, drove in the left lane until his car was parallel with Peña’s. Peña looked over at Asby. “He pulled up next to me, and I looked at him because I wasn’t not going to make eye contact” with an officer whom Peña thought was definitely checking him out for whatever reason.

Although Peña steadfastly maintains that he wasn’t doing anything wrong or unusual, Asby would later testify that Peña caught his attention because he was driving more slowly than the rest of traffic in a van caked with mud; when the van “weaved across the center stripe and also across the solid yellow line on the shoulder,” Asby testified in January 2003, he had to take action. “You’re required to stay in a single lane of traffic,” he said. He activated his lights and pulled Peña over.

Within the hour, Peña would be in handcuffs in the back of the trooper’s car, headed to the county jail in Centerville on a charge of marijuana possession. Nearly five years later, Peña would be convicted and sentenced to life in prison for possession of what the state said turned out to be 23.46 pounds of freshly cut marijuana that Peña was transporting in the back of the muddy blue van. Although Asby testified that this was not a normal highway drug bust – “normally,” he testified, marijuana moves north from Houston, already “dried out, cured, and ready to be sold” – he was certain that what he found casually laid out in the back of the van was pot because it smelled like pot – and he knows pot when he smells it. “It’s something that you learned in [28] years of experience being on the road?” prosecutor Whitney Smith (now Leon Coun­ty’s elected D.A.) asked Asby.

“Yes, sir,” Asby replied.

Just Trust Us

There are at least two problems with the official story of Peña’s arrest and prosecution. First, Peña is adamant – and has been since 1998 – that what he was transporting was not marijuana, but actually hemp, pot’s non-narcotic cousin. Peña says he found the plants growing wild in Kansas and cut them down, thinking that he could use the stems and leaves in the various craft projects he made with leather and wood in his garage workshop; there was no doubt in Peña’s mind that what he was transporting was not marijuana. The second, and eventually more decisive problem with the official story of the Peña bust, is that prior to his trial, officials with the Department of Public Safety lab in Waco, where the plants were taken for testing, completely destroyed all of the case evidence – all 23.46 pounds of plant material – and then also lost the case file with all of the original documentation of the lab’s work on the case. By the time Peña was finally tried – more than four years later – there was absolutely no evidence to show the jury; instead, the state relied completely on the “experience” of Asby and of Waco lab supervisor Charles Mott (now retired) to persuade jurors that what they say they saw and tested was actually marijuana.

It worked.

That is, it worked until late last year, when Peña’s conviction was finally overturned by the Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, and Leon County subsequently dismissed the charges for good. In the intervening decade, however, Peña’s case became a political hot potato, catching the attention of judges and lawyers across the state who watched as the 10th Court of Appeals, based in Waco, played tug-of-war with the Austin-based CCA over the power of the Texas Constitution, and whether it affords citizens greater rights and protection against state power than does the U.S. Constitution.

It’s a conflict that has left the state of Texas divided and may mean – at least for the time being – that persons tried for crimes in one part of the state will be afforded greater protection from prosecutorial errors or malfeasance than are others. Frankly, says Keith Hampton, an Austin defense attorney who represented Peña just before his case was dismissed, you just “don’t see this happen very often.” Ulti­mate­ly, whether the protections gleaned from the Texas Constitution by the 10th Court will remain in force and be applied to all Texans is still to be determined.

Weeds, Not Weed

Peña had a knack for creating handcrafted leather and wood items that sold like hotcakes, he says, at flea markets in and around Houston. He made personalized shellacked plaques and leather key chains with popular first names spelled out in tiny beads, and at a dollar a key chain, they sold well. So when he first saw the hemp plants growing on the roadside near Manhattan, Kan., they gave him an idea. He would take the plants – which, to an untrained eye, look exactly like marijuana plants – press the leaves, and then use them on plaques or affixed to the small leather wallets that he also had become expert at making. He recognized these as “volunteer” hemp plants – they grow wild across the country, reminders of the days when hemp farming was commonplace and even, during World War II, encouraged by the feds as supporting the war effort. By the Kansas roadside, they were scraggly and abundant. When he pulled into the Tuttle Creek State Park outside Manhattan, and saw the plants growing everywhere, he “loaded … up.”

Indeed, Peña thought nothing of the fresh-cut plants that he’d laid out in the back of the blue van he was driving. He knew – partly from experience of having smoked pot when he was younger, and partly because he knew that hemp was once a major agricultural commodity – that the plants were nothing more than weeds that looked like weed.

However, that’s not how Asby saw it. To him, it was clear that one thing, and only one thing, was taking place. Peña was moving a large amount of marijuana to Houston – as unusual as that might be, Asby acknowledged.

Peña repeatedly told Asby that the plants were hemp, and his insistence clearly gave some pause to Asby and the two backup officers who soon joined him. The three men stood next to the van pondering the notion that a plant could look like, but not actually be, marijuana. “I … questioned them, I said, ‘Well, he says it’s not marijuana,'” Asby recalled in court. “I knew that there was a substance called hemp and I was asking them. … And I asked them, ‘You ever heard of something like marijuana, just hemp, that is legal to have?'” he continued. “I don’t know that there is a legal kind. That was the question I was asking the officers: ‘Have you ever heard of this … where marijuana was cut and it turns out to be legal?'”

In the end, Asby was unpersuaded. “I just know marijuana smells like marijuana,” he testified in 2003. “And I have never found anything that I thought was marijuana that wasn’t.” He cuffed Peña and hauled him off to jail.

Page:   1   |   2   |   3   |   All

Absolute Asinine Laws

 

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña brought some roadside weeds home from Kansas. Cops decided it was reefer, and a Texas court sentenced him to life in prison – without the evidence. It took a decade for Peña to get back some of the pieces of his life.

By Jordan Smith, Fri., March 16, 2012

Life in Prison for Hemp

José Peña was tired as he drove south toward Houston on the morning of Sept. 27, 1998. Following a quick trip north to Kansas in a rented van – to pick up the brother of a distant cousin’s son – he was on his way home to Houston, where he lived with his wife and four children. It was the kind of favor Peña often did for friends and family, no matter how distant the relation – and the kind of favor that irritated his wife. “I was tired, and I was trying to get home,” the 50-year-old recently recalled. “My wife was mad at me for doing favors for other people” when he could instead be home.

That morning, just before 8am, Peña was cruising south down I-45, a little more than two hours from home. He was driving in the right-hand lane through Leon County when he passed a state trooper sitting in his car on the grass median. He thought nothing of it – just another Texas trooper on a long and nondescript stretch of highway – until he noticed the trooper pull out onto the road and follow him. The officer, Mike Asby, a veteran member of the Texas Department of Public Safety, drove in the left lane until his car was parallel with Peña’s. Peña looked over at Asby. “He pulled up next to me, and I looked at him because I wasn’t not going to make eye contact” with an officer whom Peña thought was definitely checking him out for whatever reason.

Although Peña steadfastly maintains that he wasn’t doing anything wrong or unusual, Asby would later testify that Peña caught his attention because he was driving more slowly than the rest of traffic in a van caked with mud; when the van “weaved across the center stripe and also across the solid yellow line on the shoulder,” Asby testified in January 2003, he had to take action. “You’re required to stay in a single lane of traffic,” he said. He activated his lights and pulled Peña over.

Within the hour, Peña would be in handcuffs in the back of the trooper’s car, headed to the county jail in Centerville on a charge of marijuana possession. Nearly five years later, Peña would be convicted and sentenced to life in prison for possession of what the state said turned out to be 23.46 pounds of freshly cut marijuana that Peña was transporting in the back of the muddy blue van. Although Asby testified that this was not a normal highway drug bust – “normally,” he testified, marijuana moves north from Houston, already “dried out, cured, and ready to be sold” – he was certain that what he found casually laid out in the back of the van was pot because it smelled like pot – and he knows pot when he smells it. “It’s something that you learned in [28] years of experience being on the road?” prosecutor Whitney Smith (now Leon Coun­ty’s elected D.A.) asked Asby.

“Yes, sir,” Asby replied.

Just Trust Us

There are at least two problems with the official story of Peña’s arrest and prosecution. First, Peña is adamant – and has been since 1998 – that what he was transporting was not marijuana, but actually hemp, pot’s non-narcotic cousin. Peña says he found the plants growing wild in Kansas and cut them down, thinking that he could use the stems and leaves in the various craft projects he made with leather and wood in his garage workshop; there was no doubt in Peña’s mind that what he was transporting was not marijuana. The second, and eventually more decisive problem with the official story of the Peña bust, is that prior to his trial, officials with the Department of Public Safety lab in Waco, where the plants were taken for testing, completely destroyed all of the case evidence – all 23.46 pounds of plant material – and then also lost the case file with all of the original documentation of the lab’s work on the case. By the time Peña was finally tried – more than four years later – there was absolutely no evidence to show the jury; instead, the state relied completely on the “experience” of Asby and of Waco lab supervisor Charles Mott (now retired) to persuade jurors that what they say they saw and tested was actually marijuana.

It worked.

That is, it worked until late last year, when Peña’s conviction was finally overturned by the Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, and Leon County subsequently dismissed the charges for good. In the intervening decade, however, Peña’s case became a political hot potato, catching the attention of judges and lawyers across the state who watched as the 10th Court of Appeals, based in Waco, played tug-of-war with the Austin-based CCA over the power of the Texas Constitution, and whether it affords citizens greater rights and protection against state power than does the U.S. Constitution.

It’s a conflict that has left the state of Texas divided and may mean – at least for the time being – that persons tried for crimes in one part of the state will be afforded greater protection from prosecutorial errors or malfeasance than are others. Frankly, says Keith Hampton, an Austin defense attorney who represented Peña just before his case was dismissed, you just “don’t see this happen very often.” Ulti­mate­ly, whether the protections gleaned from the Texas Constitution by the 10th Court will remain in force and be applied to all Texans is still to be determined.

Weeds, Not Weed

Peña had a knack for creating handcrafted leather and wood items that sold like hotcakes, he says, at flea markets in and around Houston. He made personalized shellacked plaques and leather key chains with popular first names spelled out in tiny beads, and at a dollar a key chain, they sold well. So when he first saw the hemp plants growing on the roadside near Manhattan, Kan., they gave him an idea. He would take the plants – which, to an untrained eye, look exactly like marijuana plants – press the leaves, and then use them on plaques or affixed to the small leather wallets that he also had become expert at making. He recognized these as “volunteer” hemp plants – they grow wild across the country, reminders of the days when hemp farming was commonplace and even, during World War II, encouraged by the feds as supporting the war effort. By the Kansas roadside, they were scraggly and abundant. When he pulled into the Tuttle Creek State Park outside Manhattan, and saw the plants growing everywhere, he “loaded … up.”

Indeed, Peña thought nothing of the fresh-cut plants that he’d laid out in the back of the blue van he was driving. He knew – partly from experience of having smoked pot when he was younger, and partly because he knew that hemp was once a major agricultural commodity – that the plants were nothing more than weeds that looked like weed.

However, that’s not how Asby saw it. To him, it was clear that one thing, and only one thing, was taking place. Peña was moving a large amount of marijuana to Houston – as unusual as that might be, Asby acknowledged.

Peña repeatedly told Asby that the plants were hemp, and his insistence clearly gave some pause to Asby and the two backup officers who soon joined him. The three men stood next to the van pondering the notion that a plant could look like, but not actually be, marijuana. “I … questioned them, I said, ‘Well, he says it’s not marijuana,'” Asby recalled in court. “I knew that there was a substance called hemp and I was asking them. … And I asked them, ‘You ever heard of something like marijuana, just hemp, that is legal to have?'” he continued. “I don’t know that there is a legal kind. That was the question I was asking the officers: ‘Have you ever heard of this … where marijuana was cut and it turns out to be legal?'”

In the end, Asby was unpersuaded. “I just know marijuana smells like marijuana,” he testified in 2003. “And I have never found anything that I thought was marijuana that wasn’t.” He cuffed Peña and hauled him off to jail.

Page:   1   |   2   |   3   |   All

Fooling Mother Nature: still not a good idea

Susan Reimer

Susan Reimer

9:05 a.m. EST, February 6, 2012

Mother Nature is in the news of late, and she doesn’t seem happy.

Monsanto, the Great Satan in the eyes of the environmental movement, is making headlines with huge profit increases and yet another David-versus-Goliath lawsuit in Manhattan filed by organic and family farmers who fear the health consequences of the company’s genetically modified food crops.

Scotts Miracle-Gro, a lesser Satan in the garden, tried to polish its image with an arranged marriage with the National Wildlife Federation, only to have the nuptials hastily canceled when Scotts pleaded guilty to knowingly selling tons of bird seed tainted with pesticides.

    Meanwhile, theU.S. Department of Agriculturemoved the lines on its plant hardiness zones a little further north — meaning more of those tender plants we tried in the garden will survive our milder winters. But the USDA pointedly said that this is not evidence of global warming.


    Follow @BaltSunLetters for the latest reader letters to The Sun.


    Oh, and pythons in the Florida Everglades are eating all the mammals they can find — a food group which, last time I looked, would include humans.

    First, on the matter of Monsanto. The multinational is the world’s leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate, sold under the name Roundup. It is also the leading producer of genetically engineered corn, wheat, soybeans and alfalfa, called Roundup-ready crops because you can spray huge areas with the stuff, but only the weeds will die.

    Supposedly.

    There is fear that all this spraying is producing super-weeds and super-bugs and new plant diseases, not to mention what it might be doing to the wildlife that swims in or drinks from contaminated water sources. And there is research suggesting that ingesting the genetically modified grains has resulted in an increase in livestock infertility.

    Environmentalists and safe-food activists are calling on President Barack Obama and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to stop the planting of Roundup-ready crops here and the strong-arm peddling of them abroad. But because there is such a revolving door for Monsanto executives and posts in federal agencies, nobody trusts the government to do the cautious thing here, especially when the company plays the “end world hunger now” public relations card.

    While Monsanto markets to the farmers and the super-farmers, it has licensed Scotts Miracle-Gro to sell Roundup to the home gardener, and I admit that I use it on sidewalk and driveway weeds. And I like Miracle Gro plant food. It could be my imagination, but it seems to increase the number of blooms on my annuals.

    But it looked pretty disingenuous for Scotts to try to buy some green cred from the National Wildlife Federation days before the corporation would be fined millions of dollars for selling bird seed contaminated with pesticides. I mean, really?

    The guilty plea gave the NWF a graceful way out of the deal, but the firestorm on social media might have scotched it in any case. Garden and environmental bloggers and birders took to the Internet immediately and in great and angry numbers. It was Bank of America‘s debit card fee redux.

    Now, about that map. It took long enough, and a couple of failed tries apparently, but the U.S. Department of Agriculture has released its first zone hardiness map for the United States and Puerto Rico since 1990. If you cross-check the new interactive map (available only online) with the old one, you can see if winters have indeed been as mild as you think they have been where you live.

    The map was charted using temperatures over the last 30 years — instead of, perhaps, the last 20 — which critics say was done to dilute the evidence of global warming. And, as it addresses only winter hardiness, the new map says nothing about the heat and humidity, as well as the arid Augusts and Septembers, of our growing seasons here in Maryland.

    At the end of the day, your local nursery is better at telling you what will grow in your micro-climate than the USDA.

    And finally, if the alligators in the Florida Everglades don’t get you, the pythons and the anacondas might.

    I am not sure if that has anything to do with genetically modified food, the poisoning of birds or global warming. It might just be poor pet stewardship. But, to paraphrase that butter commercial from another time, “It’s not nice to fool around with Mother Nature.”

    Susan Reimer‘s column appears Mondays. Her email is susan.reimer@baltsun.com.

    CONTINUE READING….

    Open Seeds: Biopiracy and the Patenting of Life by grtv

     

    Open Seeds: Biopiracy and the Patenting of Life

    by grtv

    As the world begins to digest the implications of intellectual property for online censorship, another IP issue threatens an even more fundamental part of our daily lives: our food supply. Backed by legal precedent and armed with seemingly inexhaustible lobbying funds, a handful of multinationals are attempting to use patents on life itself to monopolize the biosphere.

    Find out more about the process of patenting life and what it means for the food supply on this week’s GRTV Backgrounder.

    Transcript and sources:

    The oft-neglected legal minefield of intellectual property rights has seen a surge in public interest in recent months due to the storm of protest over proposed legislation and treaties related to online censorship.[1] One of the effects of such legislation as SOPA and PIPA and such international treaties as ACTA is to have drawn attention to the grave implications that intellectual property arguments can have on the everyday lives of the average citizen.

    As important as the protection of online freedoms is, however, an even more fundamental part of our lives has come under the purview of the multinational corporations that are seeking to patent the world around us for their own gain. Unknown to a large section of the public, a single US Supreme Court ruling in 1980 made it possible for the first time to patent life itself for the profit of the patent holder.

    The decision, known as Diamond v. Chakrabarty, centered on a genetic engineer working for General Electric who created a bacterium that could break down crude oil, which could be used in the clean-up of oil spills.[2] In its decision, Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger ruled that:

    “A live, human-made micro-organism is patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101”

    With this ruling, the ability to patent living organisms, so long as they had been genetically altered in some novel way, was established in legal precedent.

    The implications of such a monumental ruling are understandably wide-reaching, touching on all sorts of issues that have the potential to change the world around us. But it did not take long at all for this decision’s effects to make itself felt in one of the most basic parts of the biosphere: our food supply.

    In the years following the Diamond v. Chakrabarty decision, an entire industry rose up around the idea that these new patent protections could foster the economic incentive for major corporations to develop a new class of genetically engineered foods to help increase crop yields and reduce world hunger.

    The first commercially available genetically modified food, Calgene’s “Flavr Savr” tomato, was approved for human consumption by the Food and Drug Administration in the US in 1992 and was on the market in 1994.[3] Since then, adoption of GM foods has proceeded swiftly, especially in the US where the vast majority of soybeans, corn and cotton have been genetically altered.

    By 1997, the problems inherent in the patenting of these GM crops had already begun to surface in Saskatchewan, Canada. It was in the sleepy town of Bruno that a canola farmer, Percy Schmeiser, found that a variety of GM canola known as “Roundup Ready” had infected his fields, mixing with his non-GM crop.[4] Amazingly, Monsanto, the agrichemical company that owned the Roundup Ready patent, sued Schmeiser for infringing their patent. After a years-long legal battle against the multinational that threatened to bankrupt his small farming operation, Schmeiser finally won an out-of-court settlement with Monsanto that saw the company agree to pay for the clean-up costs associated with the contamination of his field.

    In India, tens of thousands of farmers per year commited suicide[5] in an epidemic labeled the GM genocide.[6] Sold a story of “magic seeds” that would produce immense yields, farmers around the country were driven into ruinous debt by a combination of high-priced seeds, high-priced pesticides, and crop failure. Worst of all, the GM seeds had been engineered with so-called “terminator technology,” meaning that seeds from one harvest could not be re-planted the following year. Instead, farmers were forced to buy seeds at the same exorbitant prices from the biotech giants every year, insuring a debt spiral that was impossible to escape. As a result, hundreds of thousands of farmers have committed suicide in the Indian countryside since the introduction of GM crops in 1997.

    As philosopher, quantum physicist and activist Vandana Shiva has detailed at great length, the effect of the invocation of intellectual property in enabling the monopolization of the world’s most fundamental resources was not accidental or contingent.[7] On the contrary, this is something that has been self-consciously designed by the heads of the very corporations who now seek to reap the benefit of this monopolization, and the monumental nature of their achievement has been obscured behind bureaucratic institutions like the WTO and innocuous sounding agreements like the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.

    Although the deck appears to be stacked in favour of the giant multinationals and their practically inexhaustible access to lobbying and legal funds, the people are by no means incapable of fighting back against this patenting of the biosphere.

    In India itself, where so much devestation has been wrought by the introduction of genetically engineered crops, the people are fighting back against the world’s most well-known purveyor of GMO foods, Monsanto. The country’s National Biodiversity Diversity Authority has enabled the government to proceed with legal action against the company for so-called biopiracy, or attempting to develop a GM crop derived from local varieties of eggplant, without the appropriate licences.[8]

    Although resistance to the patenting of the world’s food supply should be applauded in all its forms, what is needed is a fundamental transformation in our understanding of life itself from a patentable organism to the common property of all of the peoples who have developed the seeds from which these novel GM crops are derived.

    This concept, known as open seeds, is being promoted by organizations around the globe, including Dr. Vandana Shiva’s Navdanya organization.[9]

    PLEASE CONTINUE READING HERE…

    11/30/2010 SB510 Passes in Senate

     

    Does Senate Bill 510 Put Raw Milk in Real Danger?

    by A.K. Streeter, Portland, Oregon on 11.30.10

    Food & Health

     

    Today the U.S. Senate passed Senate Bill 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act. After the recent scandal with eggs, and all of the other food safety issues of recent years (meat, peanut butter, spinach), many people believe this is a positive step – and obviously Senate lawmakers, who voted 75 to 23 to pass SB 510, also think the bill is good. A segment of farm advocates have warned that SB 510 is a severe threat to small farms – and by extension, most raw milk producers – because of the sweeping powers it gives to the Federal Drug Administation (FDA) and the possibility for onerous paperwork and other regulations for farmers. But there’s some good news.

    SB 510 will give the FDA broader jurisdiction, specifically in the wording of the bill that lets the FDA act on “reason to believe.” SB 510 would also allow the FDA to mandate that a company recall a food product it suspects is infected. Thus if the FDA has reason to believe – a very subjective measure – raw milk is harmful, it could attempt to shut down that producer – unless the farmer had gone through the necessary paperwork to get an exemption.

    While SB 510 passed, the Tester/Hagen Amendment that was recently added to the bill excludes small farmers and farms making less than $500,000 annually, by allowing them to apply for exemption from FDA regulatory oversight. The inclusion of the amendment made the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition finally lend support for SB 510.

    As Kari Marion spells out in her blog at JustMeans, the Centers for Disease Control have tallied the big costs of food safety breaches: they “cause approximately 75 million illnesses each year including approximately 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths.”

    To put the dangers of raw milk in perspective in comparison with those annual figures, a CDC representative gave the following statistics in a recent Reuters story: from 1993 to 2006 outbreaks related to raw milk and cheese and yogurt made from it have been tied to 1571 illnesses, 202 hospitalizations and two deaths.

    Even after the inclusion of the Tester-Hagan amendment, the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, another small farm advocacy group is still opposed. FTCLDF president Pete Kennedy told the Daily Caller:

    “The Tester-Hagan amendment is an improvement on the bill, but I think it’s still fundamentally flawed,” Kennedy told TheDC. “I think over time the powers given by the bill could possibly whittle away at the protection provided by Tester-Hagan, they’ll have broad power, and unfortunately under their existing power, what we see right now they seem to have three particular targets, which are raw milk, raw cheese, and supplements.”

    So while the Tester-Hagan amendment is good news for sustainable and local farm proponents, it seems the freedom to choose our food sources is not entirely out of the woods.

    Read more about raw milk at TreeHugger:
    If You Want Safe Food, Know Where It Comes From
    The Raw Milk Revolution: Book Review
    Raw Milk Risks and Benefits Explained
    The Milk Police: Smuggling Raw Milk Across State Lines

    Other Links:

    http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/11/18/congress-giving-fda-power-over-our-food/

    http://www.newsday.com/lifestyle/home-and-garden/garden-detective-1.812029/sb-510-food-safety-bill-passes-senate-1.2504410

    SB.510 Food Safety bill passes Senate

    11:47 AM By Jessica Damiano

    The somewhat controversial (in some circles, anyway) Food Safety Modernization Act passed the Senate easily this morning, 73 to 25.

    It’s had a long journey, and it isn’t done yet: The Senate version still has to be reconciled with the House’s 2009 version.

    Whats the fuss? Read about the bill’s pros and cons.

    Senate Bill sb 510 and your right to grow your own food

    Senate bill S 510 vote imminent – procedural vote passes 74-25

    (NaturalNews) U.S. Senate Bill S 510 is now on the Senate floor where a vote is expected shortly. Yesterday, the Motion to Invoke Cloture passed on a vote of 74-25 (see how they voted, below), sending the bill forward for a final vote perhaps as early as today.
    US Senate offices are experiencing a huge backlash of grassroots opposition to the bill — called the Food Safety Modernization Act — as virtually every health freedom organization, family farm group and even dietary supplement companies have aligned to oppose this new bill. It is being called “The most dangerous bill in United States history” and would thrust America into a new Dark Ages of FDA tyranny over seeds, foods, herbs, gardens and nutritional supplements. (http://naturalnews.com/030418_Food_…)
    Opposition to the bill has been widespread. For example, the John Birch Society issued this alert yesterday:
    Senate Bill 510 has already passed committee and is on the Senate calendar. It calls for enhanced expansion of FDA authority over small farms, ranches, and other food producers, establishes burdensome administrative requirements for large and small operations, and arbitrary legal authority to recall “unsafe medications,” the definition of which is not clearly established; if in line with the global standard set by Codex Alimentarius, “unsafe medications” could extend to dietary supplements and herbal products. There is language that currently exempts from heavy regulation dietary supplement manufacturers and packagers. However, the FDA and its agents are notorious for interpreting regulations their own way.
    Take Action: Click here to sign the John Birch Society petition opposing S.510.
    The John Birch Society insists that “My right to produce, distribute, and consume the foods of my choice is part of my right to life and liberty under the Constitution.”
    I happen to agree. The FDA has no business telling us we can’t buy raw milk, or we can’t save our own garden seeds or grow organic produce and sell it at the farmer’s market.

    How they voted so far

    Here’s how the senators voted on the motion to send S.510 to a full floor vote: (this is a procedural vote to move the bill forward so that it can be voted on for final passage)
    Who voted in FAVOR of moving S.510 forward
    Akaka (D-HI)
    Alexander (R-TN)
    Barrasso (R-WY)
    Baucus (D-MT)
    Bayh (D-IN)
    Begich (D-AK)
    Bennet (D-CO)
    Bingaman (D-NM)
    Boxer (D-CA)
    Brown (D-OH)
    Brown (R-MA)
    Burr (R-NC)
    Burris (D-IL)
    Cantwell (D-WA)
    Cardin (D-MD)
    Carper (D-DE)
    Casey (D-PA)
    Collins (R-ME)
    Conrad (D-ND)
    Coons (D-DE)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Dodd (D-CT)
    Dorgan (D-ND)
    Durbin (D-IL)
    Enzi (R-WY)
    Feingold (D-WI)
    Feinstein (D-CA)
    Franken (D-MN)
    Gillibrand (D-NY)
    Grassley (R-IA)
    Gregg (R-NH)
    Hagan (D-NC)
    Harkin (D-IA)
    Inouye (D-HI)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Johnson (D-SD)
    Kerry (D-MA)
    Klobuchar (D-MN)
    Kohl (D-WI)
    Landrieu (D-LA)
    Lautenberg (D-NJ)
    LeMieux (R-FL)
    Leahy (D-VT)
    Levin (D-MI)
    Lieberman (ID-CT)
    Lincoln (D-AR)
    Lugar (R-IN)
    Manchin (D-WV)
    McCaskill (D-MO)
    Menendez (D-NJ)
    Merkley (D-OR)
    Mikulski (D-MD)
    Murray (D-WA)
    Nelson (D-FL)
    Pryor (D-AR)
    Reed (D-RI)
    Reid (D-NV)
    Rockefeller (D-WV)
    Sanders (I-VT)
    Schumer (D-NY)
    Shaheen (D-NH)
    Snowe (R-ME)
    Specter (D-PA)
    Stabenow (D-MI)
    Tester (D-MT)
    Thune (R-SD)
    Udall (D-CO)
    Udall (D-NM)
    Vitter (R-LA)
    Voinovich (R-OH)
    Warner (D-VA)
    Webb (D-VA)
    Whitehouse (D-RI)
    Wyden (D-OR)
    Who OPPOSED S.510
    Bennett (R-UT)
    Bond (R-MO)
    Brownback (R-KS)
    Bunning (R-KY)
    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    DeMint (R-SC)
    Ensign (R-NV)
    Graham (R-SC)
    Hatch (R-UT)
    Hutchison (R-TX)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Kyl (R-AZ)
    McCain (R-AZ)
    McConnell (R-KY)
    Nelson (D-NE)
    Risch (R-ID)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Shelby (R-AL)
    Wicker (R-MS)
    All of you who live in states where senators voted in favor of this need to call your U.S. Senate offices today — right now — and urge them to oppose this nefarious bill.
    Call the Capitol Switchboard and ask to be directly connected to your Senator’s office: 202-224-3121.
    We are about to lose our food freedoms over the bill, because unless more pressure is brought to bear, it looks like this bill will soon pass — and we will be thrust into a new era of FDA tyranny over the food supply.

    Articles Related to This Article:

    FDA drug safety bill passes in the U.S. Senate; health freedom advocates outraged at betrayal of American consumers
    Natural health community having a huge impact on Senate bill S.1082; consumers achieving important victories
    Update on Senate bill S.1082 and implications for the health freedom of consumers
    Beware of the Senate Bill 510, the Food Seizure and Big Agra Act
    US Senate debate on S.510 Food Safety bill could extend into the weekend
    Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America

    It’s Friday! What are you eating for dinner???

     

     

    ChicagoStudentsGarden

     

    Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

    GMOs are being pushed allegedly to conquer the food crisis, but in reality GMOs do nothing of the sort and can actually contaminate normally grown foods. The proponents of GMOs claim an increased yield, but in fact over 20 years, the yields of soybean, corn, and feed crops have failed to increase. Dr. Doug Gurian-Sherman, former US EPA and US FDA biotech specialist concludes that “traditional breeding” out performs genetically modified crops hands down! He also states there are no GM crops that were genetically engineered to resist drought, reduce fertilizer pollution, or save soil…no not one!

    Bill Cristinson, President of the U.S. Family Farm Coalition states that the promise of using less chemicals and producing a greater yield is total hogwash. Even a major UN-World Bank sponsored report compiled by 400 scientists and endorsed by 58 countries concluded that GMOs had little to offer in the way of helping the world’s food supply.

    GMO foods have not been shown safe to eat. Genetic modification is really a crude way to instill foreign genetic material (viruses and bacteria) into crops and the consequences are unknown. Animals will avoid GMO foods, even insects and vermin will not eat these food crops. Little testing has been done for safety and only one study has been published on the direct effects of eating GM foods. It found unexpected effects on gut bacteria (which is of extreme worry since the gut is your immune system balance) but was never followed up. Claims that Americans have eaten GM foods for years with no ill effects are false. No one has studied or monitored people who have ingested GM foods for any period of time. Unfortunately, the government has refused to label GM foods; so again, the citizen is a guinea pig for unknown ill effects of an untested crop altering program.

    Dr. Suzanne Wuerthele, US Environmental Protection Agency toxicologist states, “We are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences.”

    Everyone has heard of Mad Cow disease and most understand that the cause is feed contaminated with bones from dead animals, purposely put in the grain allegedly to enhance the feed…but in fact, causes this deadly disease. As well, stealth GMOs are in animal feeds without the consent of consumers. Meat, eggs, and dairy products from animals raised on the millions of tons of GM feed imported into Europe do not have to be labeled. Are they force fed the GM food or is it simply intermixed? We don’t know. However, GM crops fed to animals can appear in the resulting product and the animals’ health can be affected as well as the health of those eating the animals or their byproducts, eggs and dairy.

    GM seed prices in America have increased dramatically compared to normal and organic seeds, which in effect cuts the average farm incomes for those growing GM crops. The farms that have been growing GM seeds are now dealing with the consequences of increased pricing as well as having their soil contaminated with genetically altered seeds and crops.

    GM contamination of conventional food is increasing. For example, a one year test of GM rice grown in a field was found to have extensively contaminated the US rice supply and seed stocks. Canada’s oilseed rape industry (Canola) has been destroyed by contamination from GM rapeseed. The coexistence of normal seeds and crops with GM’s is practically impossible. Once it spreads, it is impossible to grow normal crops as the soil is contaminated and the genetic alterations spread. It is a one way choice, once it’s made, it cannot be reversed. For an overview of the worldwide contamination of GMOs in fish, insects, crops, trees, plants, etc, see this link.

    The big biotech firms (especially Monsanto) pushing their genetically altered foods have a terrible history of toxic contamination and public deception. Of course they have patents on the GMO’s and that allows them to control and monopolize the world’s food supply. They have even started harassing and intimidating farmers for the “crime” of saving patented seed or “stealing” patented genes – even if those genes got into the farmer’s fields through accidental contamination by wind or insects. Farmers are being sued for having GMOs on their property that they never wanted, never bought and never knew about and don’t intend to use. It’s gotten totally out of hand. Do you see the picture of control with the food industry…and America the bread basket of the world!

    Our water is filled with the poison of fluoride, and now our food is contaminated by being genetically altered with viruses and bacteria that no honest consumer would ever want to eat. And we don’t even know which foods we buy are GMOs. Again, it appears this is part of the big picture to control our food and the population of the world. I’d bet the Rockefeller Foundation for Population Control and their friends are behind this entire plan. If you have a little piece of land, grow your own and learn to can fruits, vegetables, and meats just like our grandparents did.

    Life is changing radically in America and sadly most are not prepared to care for themselves without the help of the state as we once were in generations past.

    Click here for part —–> 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

    © 2010 Kelleigh Nelson – All Rights Reserved

    Share This Article

    Click Here For Mass E-mailing

    Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts


    Kelleigh Nelson has been researching the Christian right and their connections to the left, the new age, and cults since 1975. Formerly an executive producer for three different national radio talk show hosts, she was adept at finding and scheduling a variety of wonderful guests for her radio hosts. She and her husband live in Knoxville, TN, and she has owned her own wholesale commercial bakery since 1990. Prior to moving to Tennessee, Kelleigh was marketing communications and advertising manager for a fortune 100 company in Ohio. Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she was a Goldwater girl with high school classmate, Hillary Rodham, in Park Ridge, Illinois. Kelleigh is well acquainted with Chicago politics and was working in downtown Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention riots.

    E-Mail: proverbs133@bellsouth.net

    It’s Friday! What are you eating for dinner???

     

     

    ChicagoStudentsGarden

     

    Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

    GMOs are being pushed allegedly to conquer the food crisis, but in reality GMOs do nothing of the sort and can actually contaminate normally grown foods. The proponents of GMOs claim an increased yield, but in fact over 20 years, the yields of soybean, corn, and feed crops have failed to increase. Dr. Doug Gurian-Sherman, former US EPA and US FDA biotech specialist concludes that “traditional breeding” out performs genetically modified crops hands down! He also states there are no GM crops that were genetically engineered to resist drought, reduce fertilizer pollution, or save soil…no not one!

    Bill Cristinson, President of the U.S. Family Farm Coalition states that the promise of using less chemicals and producing a greater yield is total hogwash. Even a major UN-World Bank sponsored report compiled by 400 scientists and endorsed by 58 countries concluded that GMOs had little to offer in the way of helping the world’s food supply.

    GMO foods have not been shown safe to eat. Genetic modification is really a crude way to instill foreign genetic material (viruses and bacteria) into crops and the consequences are unknown. Animals will avoid GMO foods, even insects and vermin will not eat these food crops. Little testing has been done for safety and only one study has been published on the direct effects of eating GM foods. It found unexpected effects on gut bacteria (which is of extreme worry since the gut is your immune system balance) but was never followed up. Claims that Americans have eaten GM foods for years with no ill effects are false. No one has studied or monitored people who have ingested GM foods for any period of time. Unfortunately, the government has refused to label GM foods; so again, the citizen is a guinea pig for unknown ill effects of an untested crop altering program.

    Dr. Suzanne Wuerthele, US Environmental Protection Agency toxicologist states, “We are confronted with the most powerful technology the world has ever known, and it is being rapidly deployed with almost no thought whatsoever to its consequences.”

    Everyone has heard of Mad Cow disease and most understand that the cause is feed contaminated with bones from dead animals, purposely put in the grain allegedly to enhance the feed…but in fact, causes this deadly disease. As well, stealth GMOs are in animal feeds without the consent of consumers. Meat, eggs, and dairy products from animals raised on the millions of tons of GM feed imported into Europe do not have to be labeled. Are they force fed the GM food or is it simply intermixed? We don’t know. However, GM crops fed to animals can appear in the resulting product and the animals’ health can be affected as well as the health of those eating the animals or their byproducts, eggs and dairy.

    GM seed prices in America have increased dramatically compared to normal and organic seeds, which in effect cuts the average farm incomes for those growing GM crops. The farms that have been growing GM seeds are now dealing with the consequences of increased pricing as well as having their soil contaminated with genetically altered seeds and crops.

    GM contamination of conventional food is increasing. For example, a one year test of GM rice grown in a field was found to have extensively contaminated the US rice supply and seed stocks. Canada’s oilseed rape industry (Canola) has been destroyed by contamination from GM rapeseed. The coexistence of normal seeds and crops with GM’s is practically impossible. Once it spreads, it is impossible to grow normal crops as the soil is contaminated and the genetic alterations spread. It is a one way choice, once it’s made, it cannot be reversed. For an overview of the worldwide contamination of GMOs in fish, insects, crops, trees, plants, etc, see this link.

     

    The big biotech firms (especially Monsanto) pushing their genetically altered foods have a terrible history of toxic contamination and public deception. Of course they have patents on the GMO’s and that allows them to control and monopolize the world’s food supply. They have even started harassing and intimidating farmers for the “crime” of saving patented seed or “stealing” patented genes – even if those genes got into the farmer’s fields through accidental contamination by wind or insects. Farmers are being sued for having GMOs on their property that they never wanted, never bought and never knew about and don’t intend to use. It’s gotten totally out of hand. Do you see the picture of control with the food industry…and America the bread basket of the world!

    Our water is filled with the poison of fluoride, and now our food is contaminated by being genetically altered with viruses and bacteria that no honest consumer would ever want to eat. And we don’t even know which foods we buy are GMOs. Again, it appears this is part of the big picture to control our food and the population of the world. I’d bet the Rockefeller Foundation for Population Control and their friends are behind this entire plan. If you have a little piece of land, grow your own and learn to can fruits, vegetables, and meats just like our grandparents did.

    Life is changing radically in America and sadly most are not prepared to care for themselves without the help of the state as we once were in generations past.

    Click here for part —–> 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

    © 2010 Kelleigh Nelson – All Rights Reserved

    Share This Article

    Click Here For Mass E-mailing

    Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts


    Kelleigh Nelson has been researching the Christian right and their connections to the left, the new age, and cults since 1975. Formerly an executive producer for three different national radio talk show hosts, she was adept at finding and scheduling a variety of wonderful guests for her radio hosts. She and her husband live in Knoxville, TN, and she has owned her own wholesale commercial bakery since 1990. Prior to moving to Tennessee, Kelleigh was marketing communications and advertising manager for a fortune 100 company in Ohio. Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she was a Goldwater girl with high school classmate, Hillary Rodham, in Park Ridge, Illinois. Kelleigh is well acquainted with Chicago politics and was working in downtown Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention riots.

    E-Mail: proverbs133@bellsouth.net

    Gene-Altered Fish Closer to Approval

    By GAUTAM NAIK

    The U.S. has moved closer to approving a laboratory-tweaked salmon that grows twice as fast as conventional farmed fish and would become the first genetically modified animal to appear on American dinner plates.

    View Full Image

    GMFOOD

    Reuters

    The gene-altered salmon faces opposition from activists such as these in Washington last week.

    GMFOOD

    GMFOOD

    An FDA advisory committee discussed Monday whether the fish was safe to eat and whether it posed any threat to the environment. The meeting ended without any decision about the fish. But in some ways, the FDA has already drawn its conclusions: In the run-up to the meeting, the FDA posted an analysis online that concluded the genetically altered version was as safe to eat as traditional Atlantic salmon, and posed little risk to the environment.

    The AquAdvantage Atlantic salmon contains a growth hormone gene from the Chinook salmon, which accelerates its development in the first year. It also contains a fragment of DNA from the eel-like ocean pout species, which helps to switch on the Chinook gene. The altered fish stops growing when it reaches normal size.

    View Full Image

    0920gmfood

    Associated Press

    Ron Stotish, chief executive officer of AquaBounty, the company that applied with the FDA to market genetically modified salmon.

    0920gmfood

    0920gmfood

    In its analysis, the FDA said the modified fish was chemically and biologically no different from a conventional Atlantic salmon. It offers a commercial advantage because it can reach market weight in 1.5 years to two years, about half the time required for a regular Atlantic salmon.

    "There’s an opportunity here to re-establish a domestic salmon industry with land-based aquaculture," said Ronald Stotish, president and chief executive officer of the fish’s developer, AquaBounty Technologies Inc. of Waltham, Mass., who attended the FDA meeting. Out of some 1.5 million tons of Atlantic salmon produced globally each year, the U.S. consumes about 450,000 tons, almost all of it imported, according to Mr. Stotish.

    Experience WSJ professional

    Editors’ Deep Dive: Genetically Modified Foods Growing Globally

    Access thousands of business sources not available on the free web. Learn More

    But Jaydee Hanson, senior policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C., that is campaigning against the salmon, said some of the safety studies were based on sample sizes that were too small. Several of the key studies were based on sample sizes of about 30 fish, while others had slightly more.

    "A minimum of 100 fish should have been required," said Mr. Hanson, who spoke at the meeting. "The data isn’t enough—the FDA should ask for more."

    Mr. Stotish of AquaBounty defended the test data as sufficient. But during Monday’s meeting, several panelists expressed concerns about the data, though they said there was no reason to believe the salmon wasn’t safe.

    The fish story is part of a larger global trend. Driven by a growing population, higher food prices and the lack of clear-cut evidence that genetically modified food is harmful to human health, there has been a growing global acceptance of products once derided as "Frankenfoods." That’s especially true in developing countries.

    Genetically altering food can offer several benefits, scientists say. A crop can be engineered to provide larger yields, to be more tolerant of pesticides, or to better resist drought or pests. Sometimes, they may be cheaper to produce. Many countries are racing to take advantage of genetically modified (or GM) food.

    In a significant but little-noticed move last December, China declared that certain strains of GM rice and corn were safe to produce and consume.

    That step endorsed the use of biotechnology for the planet’s most important food crop, rice, which feeds half of humanity, and the biggest animal-feed crop, corn. While further field trials are needed, industry experts expect Chinese GM rice and corn to be produced in two to three years.

    South Africa grows GM corn. Brazil and Pakistan grow GM soybeans and corn. India has been growing GM cotton for several years. A recent push to commercialize India’s first GM food crop—a pest-resistant eggplant—was recently put on hold on safety grounds.

    In 2009, global acreage used to grow GM crops rose 6.8% to 330 million acres from 309 million acres in 2008, according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, a GM industry group. Almost half of the global acreage was planted in developing countries.

    Farmers world-wide pay roughly $9 billion annually for GM seed, according to seed-industry estimates. There are several developers of genetically modified crops, of which Monsanto Co. of St. Louis is the largest.

    Europe has long been extremely cautious about planting GM crops. But in late July, the European Commission approved the import of six GM corn varieties for use in food and animal feed, though not for cultivation in Europe itself. In the same month, the commission also proposed new rules allowing each of its member states to choose whether or not to grow an approved GM crop within its borders. So far, the only EU-approved GM crop is a high-starch potato engineered for industrial use.

    On the animal front, scientists at the University of Guelph in Canada have created a genetically modified pig that can better digest and process phosphorus, reducing production costs. The animals are cheaper to feed because they don’t need phosphorus supplements—a chemical vital to a pig’s diet but expensive for farmers to buy. The pig’s developers also claim that because animals release 30% to 70% less phosphorus in their waste, they’re good for the environment. Swine waste is a significant source of pollution.

    Enviropig, which some critics have already dubbed "Frankenswine," is still under review by two Canadian regulatory agencies, Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. A few months ago, another agency, Environment Canada, approved production of the animals as long as they are strictly contained. The FDA and Canadian authorities are still reviewing data about the pig to see if it’s safe to eat.

    Journal Community
    More

    In the U.S., GM crops were introduced in 1996, and are a regular part of the food supply, including corn, soybeans and sugar. "If you eat any of those products, you have an 85% or greater possibility that you are eating a GM food," said Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition at New York University.

    AquaBounty created its first genetically altered salmon in 1989, and submitted its initial set of data to the FDA in 1995. So far, it has accumulated data from 10 generations of the animals. The company has far-flung operations—it is based in the U.S., its stock trades in London and it has fisheries in Canada and Panama.

    Fish grown from the engineered eggs are all female and sterile. To prevent an accidental escape into the sea, AquaBounty wants the FDA to approve the fish only for inland fisheries.

    In its scientific assessment, the FDA said that the genetically altered salmon posed "no additional allergenic risk than control Atlantic salmon."

    Still, worries abound. Some 20 environmental and consumer groups have submitted joint comments to the FDA panel identifying what they believed were flaws in how AquaBounty sterilizes and isolates the modified fish, and the high volume of antibiotics that may be required to produce them in factory farms.

    AquaBounty’s Mr. Stotish said, "That’s preposterous and totally designed to frighten people. The data doesn’t support their accusation at all."

    On Tuesday, the FDA will hold a hearing on how the fish and products made from it should be labeled for consumers. It’s not clear when the FDA will make a final decision about the fish.

    If approved, the fish likely won’t show up in the nation’s food supply for two or three years.

    [GMFOOD]

    Write to Gautam Naik at gautam.naik@wsj.com

    Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

    Gene-Altered Fish Closer to Approval

    Hello world!

    Sheree 2009