Monsanto - The Gift That Keeps On Giving (Stomach Cramps) (R8 Re-Post)

Monsanto - The Gift That Keeps On Giving (Stomach Cramps)

posted by Vincent Nunes
Sat, 03/30/2013 - 8:25am

Going to visit Big D today with the family.
There's a show on the History Channel, and it seems to portray the character of Satan as a dark-skinned man. One of my former schoolmates was disturbed by this - I wrote this in response:
To my former classmate: "You, I and everyone with a brain knows that, despite all of the the depictions of Jesus, in the Bible, he is described as a dark-skinned individual. Conversely, Satan does not have such a description.

Remember, television is programming you and I every day with some sort of propaganda. The thing to do is to never take it at face value, and when a friend or family member has questions about something like this - talk to them."
The following regards Monsanto - I will be paraphrasing some information I found, but the important thing to remember is that this is from concerned parents who witnessed this first-hand, not any supposition from me. I have done my research, and I believe that the threat is real. What Monsanto does is NOT SCIENCE. It is QUACKERY. It is SNAKE OIL. It could mean the DEATH OF EVERY PLANT ORGANISM ON EARTH, if we do not take the threat seriously.
I'm no Luddite. I'm a computer guy, and one of the better ones out there. My track record speaks for itself, as well as the thousands of people of whom I've interacted with positively. I know all about scientific advancements.
What Monsanto does is NOTHING LIKE SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT.

If you've paid any attention whatsoever to my previous articles, you'll have some idea as to why.
You don't need to read my articles to do so; read Jeffrey Smith's books. Watch Genetic Roulette. Watch The World According To Monsanto.
Ask yourself why BASF is in the biotech industry. What did BASF formerly produce?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zyklon-B
Of course, the function of those camps is a discussion for a further article.
Let's read that material I mentioned:
This began with a posting titled Conservatives Laugh As Liberals Attack President Over Non-Existent 'Monsanto Protection Act'

President Obama knows that agribusiness cannot be trusted with the regulatory powers of government. On the campaign trail in 2007, he promised: We'll tell ConAgra that it's not the Department of Agribusiness. It's the Department of Agriculture. We're going to put the people's interests ahead of the special interests.
But, starting with his choice for USDA Secretary, the pro-biotech former governor of Iowa, Tom Vilsack, President Obama has let Monsanto, Dupont and the other pesticide and genetic engineering companies know they'll have plenty of friends and supporters within his administration.President Obama has taken his team of food and farming leaders directly from the biotech companies and their lobbying, research, and philanthropic arms:

Michael Taylor
former Monsanto Vice President, is now the FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods.

Roger Beachy
former director of the Monsanto-funded Danforth Plant Science Center, is now the director of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Islam Siddiqui
Vice President of theMonsanto and Dupont-fundedpesticide-promoting lobbying group, CropLife, is now the Agriculture Negotiator for the US Trade Representative.

Rajiv Shah
former agricultural-development director for the pro-biotech Gates Foundation (a frequent Monsanto partner), served as Obama's USDA Under Secretary for Research Education and Economics and Chief Scientist and is now head of USAID.

Elena Kagan
who, as President Obama's Solicitor General, took Monsanto's side against organic farmers in the Roundup Ready alfalfa case, is now on the Supreme Court.

Ramona Romero
corporate counsel to DuPont, has been nominated by President Obama to serve as General Counsel for the USDA.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Clarence Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto from the years 1976 - 1979.

The headline of the article you posted is designed to inflame the left vs. right fight. This has NOTHING to do with left vs. right. The first line is complete bullshit. The republicans and right wing msm has ignored this story as much as the democrats and the left wing msm. We signed several petitions last week and made phone calls... not b/c we were taunted by the right but because we are INFORMED. So sad that so many simply cannot conceive of people being informed, thinking critically and acting accordingly without the msm or one of the corporate parties telling them what is important. It is DISGUSTNG and PATHETIC that the majority are nothing but lemmings on the left and right!
Absolutely (name redacted) - our son was having digestive issues and allergie/sinus issues.. once we went gluten free, gmo free and organic... his health returned. Have you seen Genetic Roulette? If not, I highly recommend seeing & sharing. GMOs were introduced in the mid 90's .. so this generation has been ingesting them since birth which is why this generation is suffering more than older generations. And why they are saying this generation is the first that may not outlive their parents! The developmental years are very important to the immune system. We are talking about our children's health! I don't give a damn about left vs. right... this is about the future of our children!! Why people cannot get this is beyond me... no actually it is not. I completely get it ... it is the power of propaganda.
My niece was diagnosed with Type I Juvenile Diabetes, Celiac Disease and Thyroid Disease within a matter of weeks. Her parents are both trained in the culinary arts but did not think to switch to non-GMO organic foods until after my niece was diagnosed with all three life threatening illnesses. I also suffer from Celiac/Thyroid - recently diagnosed. Though I suspect environmental factors have played a huge part in Thyroid Disease diagnosis, the Celiac Disease was the last thing I expected. Now, if I even touch bread, bagels, flour, anything with gluten..my fingers and my face swell. Unless you suffer from disease and/or know of someone suffering from disease caused by GMO's you aren't going to do the research and learn the who what why where when and how of the origins. Hopefully folks will start paying attention. The life expectancy of my children ... heartbreaking.
I am pretty certain the astronomical rise in Celiac Disease and Thyroid Disease (often go hand in hand) can be traced back to GMOs and corporate giants like Monsanto.

The fact that President Obama actually placed former officers of Monsanto in positions of power is horrifying to say the least. Best way to confuse and distract folks is to pit one political party against the other. Ridiculous.

It is ridiculous...but it WORKS.
Sometimes, I think that people won't heed my words of warning because it may look as if I'm preaching. I'm not. I'n very concerned - for my family, for my friends, and for all of YOU out there. This is serious stuff, dear readers.
You really need to ask yourselves...WHY MUST ANYONE TRY TO PATENT LIFE FORMS?
The answer is more horrible than you can possibly imagine.

What Is This, A Minstrel Show? Shame On CBS (R8 Re-Post)

What Is This, A Minstrel Show? Shame On CBS

posted by Vincent Nunes
Tue, 05/14/2013 - 6:45pm

I met a couple of new people today.
I met Jeffrey Deskovic.
I met Fernando Bermudez.
I met Derrick Hamilton. I actually wrote a piece about him. It began like this:

We've another one, dear readers. Can you guarantee your freedom, if you're convicted of a crime when you're in ANOTHER STATE, with dozens of witnesses who can attest to your presence at that time?
Read about Derrick Hamilton, and understand that a miscarriage of justice can happen to YOU. Let's put an end to this.

JUSTICE DENIED: THE MAGAZINE FOR THE WRONGLY CONVICTED
PAGE 10 ISSUE 41 - SUMMER 2008

Click anywhere in the above text to read that piece.
I met again with Abe George, current Brooklyn D.A. Charles "Joe" Hynes' challenger, and also with Doreen Quinn, mother of wrongly-convicted-of-murder John Guica. There are many pieces that I've written about John.
I believe that we are two movements into a performance piece by the Powers-That-Be.
The first movement consisted of a clean sweep of all of the Black and Hispanic "troublemakers" elected to represent We The People in Brooklyn. This movement was led by Shirley Huntley, but orchestrated by a person still unknown to us all. This was the bagman.
The first movement went off without a hitch.
The second movement was well on its way - a "reality" show called Brooklyn D.A. was set to go on the air, at the beginning of what looks to be a heated contest between Hynes and George.
Not so fast - George may have put the kibosh on that dog-and-pony show. Why not let Abe George say it in his own words:
Abe George Explains His Lawsuit Against "Brooklyn D.A."
Thanks to Brooklyn Ron for the above link.
I don't believe I made this clear when I first posted this piece. This show is a violation of campaign finance laws, and it is especially insidious in that the show was planned to air before the election.
"Brooklyn D.A." is essentially an INFOMERCIAL for Hynes.
It purports to masquerade as a "reality show", but the reality is that it glosses over any real cases of note.
One of the topics it wouldn't go near has to be the Hasidic sex scandal. Another topic would be the malicious prosecution of John Kennedy O'Hara. Yet another would be the machinations that cost the dearly departed "Kung-Fu" Judge John Phillips all of his Brooklyn properties and, eventually, his life.
Instead, we would be presented with a sanitized version of his "wins".
Here's the issue - these shouldn't be seen as "wins". I thought it was the job of the Brooklyn D.A. to do the business of Brooklyn residents.
Don't be fooled - "Brooklyn D.A." is an attempt to game the system.
For example, here's a description of one of the "stars" of the show:

Michael Vecchione: Rackets Bureau chief in the Brooklyn district attorney’s office is best known for his pursuit of the “Mafia cops” case against crooked NYPD Detectives Louis Eppolito and Stephen Caracappa. Hard-charging Vecchione has successfully prosecuted pols and judges alike, including Clarence Norman, former head of the Brooklyn Democratic Party. He put a camera in Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge Gerald Garson’s chambers and caught the judge accepting bribes.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/b-klyn-charles-hynes-reality-show-article-1.1299899#ixzz2TS1nA9ft

Somehow, I don't think the $150 million lawsuit pending againt Vecchione will get a mention on the show.
Related to all of this is a piece in the New York Post:

‘Wrong-man’ cop spurs DA overload

• By JOSH SAUL and BOB FREDERICKS
• Last Updated: 5:15 AM, May 14, 2013
• Posted: 12:55 AM, May 14, 2013

   

Gregory P. Mango

David Ranta served 23 years in jail for crime he didn't commit.

A team of Brooklyn prosecutors will examine the work of a decorated retired NYPD detective whose case against an alleged rabbi-killer unraveled in March, sources said yesterday.
The team will assist the two-person Brooklyn district attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit — headed by John O’Mara — to review as many as 50 cases in which former Detective Louis Scarcella was the lead investigator.
“There’s no way O’Mara can look into 50 cases, so they’re going to farm them out to other ADAs,” a source with knowledge of the review told The Post.

   

AP

Detective Louis Scarcella's wrong-man case prompts review.

The unit’s investigation of the 1990 trial of David Ranta led to his conviction for killing a Brooklyn rabbi being overturned after he spent 23 years behind bars.
DA Charles Hynes’ office has said it will now look into every murder case that resulted in a conviction after trial in which the once-heralded Scarcella, 61, headed the investigation.
“Our primary concern is to see if there are any innocent people in jail,” said Hynes’ spokesman, Jerry Schmetterer.
Among the 50 cases are several unrelated homicides in which the key witness was the same Brooklyn prostitute and crack addict.
Scarcella did not return a call for comment.

"Conviction Integrity Unit" - I wonder who came up with that? Why is it that every time one of these groups are formed, they seem to perform the opposite of their purported function?
You're going to "see if there are any innocent people in jail”?
Might I suggest somewhere to start, since you seem to be overwhelmed?
John Guica. If he isn't included in your cases, you're just blowing smoke up our fannies.
If only these people worked as hard to ensure that innocent people didn't end up behind bars as much as they seem to care about those dubious convictions...but you have to understand this salient point - those people's lives meant ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to them.
Nothing. Not worth a second thought.
However, you should know how hard they fought to KEEP THEM IN JAIL.
Fernando Bermudez had to file nearly a DOZEN TIMES before he could get his case heard.
I don't know how many times Jabbar Collins filed before getting his evidence examined. John Giuca is still waiting, despite the clearest case of juror misconduct I've ever heard. I've seen about every episode of Law & Order, as well as most of the famous movie trials, and I've seen killers, rapists and murderers set free on the merest technicalities; yet, John Giuca sits alone in a cell, separated from his family.
How many others are suffering the same fate?
You know what's crushing the headlines today?
Angelina Jolie's double mastectomy.
I commend Angelina for coming forth and admitting to such a huge decision...but isn't there other news of some import?
Oh...Prince Harry went to New Jersey.
Well, right now, Abe George seems to have interrupted that second movement. Let's see what develops.
This is no Swan Lake.
It's more like a bad minstrel show.

More Details on the Strange Organism That Could Destroy Monsanto - BNet (R8 Re-Post)

More Details on the Strange Organism That Could Destroy Monsanto - BNet

posted by Vincent Nunes
Tue, 05/17/2011 - 5:00pm

I think I need to keep hammering this home - Monsanto will NOT stop until they have control of our food supply...and then, things may go beyond the point of no return. Please think about what is really happening beyond the next baseball game.
This piece is titled: Mystery Science: More Details on the Strange Organism That Could Destroy Monsanto

Back in January, a noted plant scientist who spent much of his career at Purdue University sent a letter to the USDA informing the agency that he’d discovered a mysterious new disease-causing organism in Monsanto’s (MON) genetically engineered Roundup Ready corn and soybeans. Now, that scientist — Don Huber — has written a follow-up letter to the USDA and appears in a videotaped interview where he presents an even scarier picture of the damage he claims Monsanto’s herbicide chemical glyphosate (the main ingredient in Roundup) is doing to both plants and the animals who eat them.

In the 20-minute interview, which was conducted by Food Democracy Now’s Dave Murphy, Huber makes a strong case for his own credibility, appearing as a droll, erudite Midwestern scientist with deep connections to corn and soybean growers and livestock farmers. Although Huber’s findings have not yet been verified by outside scientists or published in a peer reviewed journal, the severity of his claims is such that the USDA ought to give them immediate attention.
It’s not the genes, it’s the herbicide
Huber’s issue is not with genetic engineering per se, but with the huge amounts of glyphosate (185 million pounds in 2007) in herbicide now used on America’s farms. Use of glyphosate has soared thanks to widespread use of Monsanto’s soy and corn seeds, which are genetically modified to survive its effects.
The problem with glyphosate, Huber says, is that it effectively “gives a plant AIDS,” weakening its defenses and making it more susceptible to pathogens, such as the one his team discovered. The scientists have taken to calling the bug “the electron microscope (EM) organism,” since it can only be seen with an electron microscope.
A big part of the problem, Huber says, lies with the way glyphosate prevents plants from absorbing vital nutrients, particularly the mineral manganese. In the Food Democracy interview, Huber says some studies have shown that Roundup Ready soybeans and corn have up to 50% less manganese than conventional varieties. Huber claims that the double whammy of weakened defenses and the new EM organism have contributed to “unexplained epidemics” of disease on farms — sudden death syndrome of soybean crops and Goss’ wilt on corn.
The problem in pictures
Here are photos he included with his follow-up letter, which was also sent to EU and UK officials at their request, showing dead or dying Roundup Ready corn and RR soybeans planted side by side with their thriving non-GE brethren:

Huber says the same thing has happened in animals. He’s heard from cattle farmers who are struggling because they’re experiencing a 15% infertility rate and 35% rate of spontaneous abortions among their herds. When the farmers switch to non-GE soy and corn for feed, the problems decline dramatically. Huber has talked to other animal vets who’ve experienced high death rates and have found that their GE-fed animals are severely deficient in manganese.
And whenever Huber has worked with vets to analyze tissue samples from GE-fed animals that were inexplicably sick or had fertility problems, the tests always come back positive for the EM organism.
It’s anecdotal, not data — but it’s still scary
Of course, all this is merely anecdotal. Whether it can be scientifically proven that farm animals are suffering because they’re eating Roundup Ready soy and corn is another story. But since GE food crops are such a fundamentally new part of agriculture (first planted in 1996) and Huber’s account — if accurate — spells disaster for American agriculture, it’s worth finding out what’s going on before allowing more of Monsanto’s RR crops onto the market.
But that’s not what the USDA did. A week and a half after Huber had his letter hand delivered to secretary Tom Vilsack, the agency gave the greenlight for Roundup Ready alfalfa. Huber was deeply disappointed:

I would have hoped that there would have been a delay and the resources allocated to answer the questions, to verify that we’re not going to further increase the severity of this organism…. Can we afford to just open the floodgates wide open before we have the answers. What’s the urgency?

A quick addition, but a huge read: check out the history of Monsanto from 1901 to the present - this is real eye-opening information.

Not So "Hungary" Anymore (R8 Re-Post)

Not So "Hungary" Anymore

posted by Vincent Nunes
Tue, 10/01/2013 - 1:35pm

Hungary Pays Back IMF Debt and IMF told to Vacate Country

By

Frankie Gotz

– Posted on September 7, 2013

Posted in: World News

Recently some actions have been taken by COMER to sue the people of the Bank of Canada because of the soaring national debt that has been rising for no real good reason because globalists bodies such as the elitists Bilderberg Group and the International Monetary Fund. The Bank of Canada has the power to make the nations currency without having to borrow it from private banks the way we do now.
Unfortunately the lawsuit was thrown out of court, perhaps Canadians should be trying different methods to abolish usury that perpetuates financial tyranny. Take a look at the story unfolding in Hungary:
Hungary repays 2008 IMF loan in full
BY Marton Dunai and Gergely Szakacs
(Reuters) – Hungary repaid ahead of schedule on Monday all of its outstanding debt, worth 2.15 billion euros, owed to the International Monetary Fund from a 2008 emergency loan programme, the Economy Ministry said in a statement.
The central European country, which used a 20 billion euro aid deal from the IMF and the European Union to avoid insolvency as the crisis gripped its markets in 2008, has been at odds with the Fund under its current government, which took power in 2010.
Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government, which faces an election in 2014, has sought to end what is has portrayed as undue foreign influence over its economic policies.
The last instalment of the loan was due in the third quarter of 2014 and the early repayment saved 3.5 billion forints (10 million pounds) in interest expenses, the ministry said.
SOURCE

So it looks like Hungary is trying to pay the debt off in full, take a look at this article published in the American Press:

Hungary Sheds Bankers’ Shackles

International Monetary Fund told to vacate the country; nation now issuing debt-free money

By Ronald L. Ray

Hungary is making history of the first order.
Not since the 1930s in Germany has a major European country dared to escape from the clutches of the Rothschild-controlled international banking cartels. This is stupendous news that should encourage nationalist patriots worldwide to increase the fight for freedom from financial tyranny.
Already in 2011, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán promised to serve justice on his socialist predecessors, who sold the nation’s people into unending debt slavery under the lash of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the terrorist state of Israel. Those earlier administrations were riddled with Israelis in high places, to the fury of the masses, who finally elected Orbán’s Fidesz party in response.
According to a report on the German-language website “National Journal,” Orbán has now moved to unseat the usurers from their throne. The popular, nationalistic prime minister told the IMF that Hungary neither wants nor needs further “assistance” from that proxy of the Rothschild-owned Federal Reserve Bank. No longer will Hungarians be forced to pay usurious interest to private, unaccountable central bankers.
nstead, the Hungarian government has assumed sovereignty over its own currency and now issues money debt free, as it is needed. The results have been nothing short of remarkable. The nation’s economy, formerly staggering under deep indebtedness, has recovered rapidly and by means not seen since National Socialist Germany.
The Hungarian Economic Ministry announced that it has, thanks to a “disciplined budget policy,” repaid on August 12, 2013, the remaining €2.2B owed to the IMF—well before the March 2014 due date. Orbán declared: “Hungary enjoys the trust of investors,” by which is not meant the IMF, the Fed or any other tentacle of the Rothschild financial empire. Rather, he was referring to investors who produce something in Hungary for Hungarians and cause true economic growth. This is not the “paper prosperity” of plutocratic pirates, but the sort of production that actually employs people and improves their lives.
With Hungary now free from the shackles of servitude to debt slavers, it is no wonder that the president of the Hungarian central bank, operated by the government for the public welfare and not private enrichment, has demanded that the IMF close its offices in that ancient European land. In addition, the state attorney general, echoing Iceland’s efforts, has brought charges against the last three previous prime ministers because of the criminal amount of debt into which they plunged the nation.
The only step remaining, which would completely destroy the power of the banksters in Hungary, is for that country to implement a barter system for foreign exchange, as existed in Germany under the National Socialists and exists today in the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, or BRICS, international economic coalition. And if the United States would follow the lead of Hungary, Americans could be freed from the usurers’ tyranny and likewise hope for a return to peaceful prosperity.
SOURCE
The last paragraph of the above article i don’t really like, National Socialists is the technical term for Nazism.
I hope more things like this start happening all around the world, especially in Canada.
But from another article I read, just from the article, the Prime Minister of Hungary really does seem to be doing some good things for the people of Hungary. He’s even calling and exposing the aspects of the unlawful European Parliament.

I'd love to be able to replace Hungary with America in some future posting of this nature.
Who will it be tonight - Letitia James or Daniel Squadron for the position of Public Advocate?
It's too close to tell, from what I've heard today.
As long as Breezy Point Joe's name is still on the ballot, an end run can be performed on the position of District Attorney of Kings County. I hope that the rally yesterday at Borough Hall will help to solidify things.
How much of a threat could a prosecutor possibly be? How about this: Lawyer disciplinary board seeks immediate suspension of county prosecutor’s license
From Frum Follies, some bad goings-on at Yeshiva: It Was Arrogant of YU to Misrepresent Lamm’s Mental Competence
William Rapfogel isn't the only one who was caught fondling the cookie jar: Rabbi Dovid Cohen Resigns From Chevra Hatzolah Under Cloud Of Suspicion
For those interested in "global warming"/"climate change":

IPCC WGI AR5

Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis

The Twelfth Session of Working Group I (WGI-12) was held from 23 to 26 September 2013 in Stockholm, Sweden. At the Session, the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (WGI AR5) was approved and the underlying scientific and technical assessment accepted.
There is a link to download the PDF at the page.
Something interesting for you all to check out. What companies are tracking your surfing habits? Do you want to change that? Check it out.
So...how about the "incident", yes? I haven't mentioned it in a good while.
I'm still recovering, but I am on the mend, thanks to good foods from a number of farmers' markets. I seriously and truly support these hard-working people, and in turn, they provide to me and others foods that are good for you.
Don't be gulled by the nonsense spin from companies like Monsanto, BASF and others. Their goal is to corner the market and take utter control of our food supply.
FrankenFoods are NOT food.
Your body treats FrankenFoods as an infection. This is why we are, only as of recently, suffering from food ailments involving our digestive tract and other internal organs.
Due to the "incident", I am very in touch with my organs. Processed foods, for the most part, are not good for anyone. When you see "fat-free" on the box or package, understand that the true flavour of the food has been removed.
That flavour has been replaced with a sweetener, natural, artificial or otherwise.
The liver metabolises almost everything that passes through it...everything but high fructose corn syrup, or HFCS.
If you are really concerned with your body, EXERCISE.
Drinking "diet" sodas and avoiding fat in foods is a shortcut that really gets you nowhere.
The fat IS the flavour.
Deal with it.
I'm gonna get myself some turducken the first chance I get, and I'm gonna truly enjoy it.
I'm hoping my bud's father is going home from the hospital today (Update (10/04/2013 - not yet).
Have a good day, everyone.

Occupy Wall Street - Two Dissenting Opinions (R8 Re-Post)

Occupy Wall Street - Two Dissenting Opinions

posted by Vincent Nunes
Wed, 12/07/2011 - 4:50pm

Today, we're going to see two sides of the opinions of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

The first will come from creator Frank Miller - Frank began at Marvel Comics, illustrating two issues of Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man, co-starring Daredevil. He then took over the art chores on Daredevil and eventually the scripting chores. Along with Klaus Janson, they brought a new era of greatness to the character. On his second run, Frank had an even greater run, when the character of Daredevil / Matthew Murdoch, lawyer, was broken down to its core elements, when his identity was revealed by his now-junkie girlfriend, Karen Page, for a fix. Frank then moved on to DC Comics, where he created Ronin, retold the history of Batman in Year One, and crafted the last story of the character, set into the future, called The Dark Knight Returns. Moving on to Dark Horse, he created Sin City and 300, which have been adapted as movies.

One of the main themes in Frank's work has been about getting justice, via legal means or otherwise; so it was surprising to find this coming from him:

ANARCHY
posted 11.7.2011

Everybody’s been too damn polite about this nonsense:

The “Occupy” movement, whether displaying itself on Wall Street or in the streets of Oakland (which has, with unspeakable cowardice, embraced it) is anything but an exercise of our blessed First Amendment. “Occupy” is nothing but a pack of louts, thieves, and rapists, an unruly mob, fed by Woodstock-era nostalgia and putrid false righteousness. These clowns can do nothing but harm America.

“Occupy” is nothing short of a clumsy, poorly-expressed attempt at anarchy, to the extent that the “movement” – HAH! Some “movement”, except if the word “bowel” is attached - is anything more than an ugly fashion statement by a bunch of iPhone, iPad wielding spoiled brats who should stop getting in the way of working people and find jobs for themselves.

This is no popular uprising. This is garbage. And goodness knows they’re spewing their garbage – both politically and physically – every which way they can find.

Wake up, pond scum. America is at war against a ruthless enemy.

Maybe, between bouts of self-pity and all the other tasty tidbits of narcissism you’ve been served up in your sheltered, comfy little worlds, you’ve heard terms like al-Qaeda and Islamicism.

And this enemy of mine — not of yours, apparently - must be getting a dark chuckle, if not an outright horselaugh - out of your vain, childish, self-destructive spectacle.

In the name of decency, go home to your parents, you losers. Go back to your mommas’ basements and play with your Lords Of Warcraft.

Or better yet, enlist for the real thing. Maybe our military could whip some of you into shape.

They might not let you babies keep your iPhones, though. Try to soldier on.

Schmucks.

FM

URL of article: http://frankmillerink.com/2011/11/anarchy

Alan Moore is another creator with a vast body of work, some of which you have been exposed. He was a contributor to fanzines, which led to his being hired to publlish work for Warrior Magazine in the U.K. - the titles he created were V For Vendetta, Marvelman (changed to Miracleman due to a lawsuit from Marvel Comics), D.R. and Quinch, and other characters. Marvel U.K. hired him to write Captain Britain; on the success of this, Alan was hired to write The Swamp Thing for DC Comics. DC would also reprint V For Vendetta in color; Eclipse Comics collected the chapters of Miracleman and continued the story with new artists. In 1985, along with illustrator Dave Gibbons and colorist John Higgings, Alan produced Watchmen, the only graphic novel to win a Hugo Award. He also wrote Lost Girls, with his wife, Melinda Gebbie; From Hell, with Eddie Campbell (this delved into the story of Jack The Ripper - the movie starred the incomparable Johnny Depp); The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen, with Kevin O'Neill, and many other projects in and out of sequential art. Here is Alan's rebuttal:

On the Occupy Movement, Frank Miller and Politics

With the Occupy movement, it seems you and Frank Miller have conflicting views. Would you say that he’s against it and you’re for it?

Well, Frank Miller is someone whose work I’ve barely looked at for the past twenty years. I thought the Sin City stuff was unreconstructed misogyny, 300 appeared to be wildly ahistoric, homophobic and just completely misguided.

I think that there has probably been a rather unpleasant sensibility apparent in Frank Miller’s work for quite a long time. Since I don’t have anything to do with the comics industry, I don’t have anything to do with the people in it. I heard about the latest outpourings regarding the Occupy movement. It’s about what I’d expect from him.

It’s always seemed to me that the majority of the comics field, if you had to place them politically, you’d have to say centre-right. That would be as far towards the liberal end of the spectrum as they would go. I’ve never been in any way, I don’t even know if I’m centre-left. I’ve been outspoken about that since the beginning of my career. So yes I think it would be fair to say that me and Frank Miller have diametrically opposing views upon all sorts of things, but certainly upon the Occupy movement.

As far as I can see, the Occupy movement is just ordinary people reclaiming rights which should always have been theirs. I can’t think of any reason why as a population we should be expected to stand by and see a gross reduction in the living standards of ourselves and our kids, possibly for generations, when the people who have got us into this have been rewarded for it; they’ve certainly not been punished in any way because they’re too big to fail. I think that the Occupy movement is, in one sense, the public saying that they should be the ones to decide who’s too big to fail. It’s a completely justified howl of moral outrage and it seems to be handled in a very intelligent, non-violent way, which is probably another reason why Frank Miller would be less than pleased with it. I’m sure if it had been a bunch of young, sociopathic vigilantes with Batman make-up on their faces, he’d be more in favour of it. We would definitely have to agree to differ on that one.

What do you think needs to change in our political system?

Everything. I believe that what’s needed is a radical solution, by which I mean from the roots upwards. Our entire political thinking seems to me to be based upon medieval precepts. These things, they didn’t work particularly well five or six hundred years ago. Their slightly modified forms are not adequate at all for the rapidly changing territory of the 21st Century.

We need to overhaul the way that we think about money, we need to overhaul the way that we think about who’s running the show. As an anarchist, I believe that power should be given to the people, to the people whose lives this is actually affecting. It’s no longer good enough to have a group of people who are controlling our destinies. The only reason they have the power is because they control the currency. They have no moral authority and, indeed, they show the opposite of moral authority.

In the sixth issue of Dodgem Logic, I remember doing an article and I was trying to think of possible ways in which our society might be altered for the better. I’m not saying that any of these ways would necessarily be practical but it’s important that we try to think these things through. It’s probably more important now than it ever has been. There is a sense that we don’t have an infinite amount of time to get these things right.

With politics at the moment seemingly determined to keep ploughing on their same destructive course because they can’t think of anything other to do, when we’re facing the possibility of an economic apocalypse, of potentially an environmental apocalypse, we don’t necessarily have an infinite amount of time. I think that since our leaders are not going to address any of these problems then we really have no choice than to attempt to wrest the steering wheel from them. If they’re aiming at the precipice with the accelerator pedal flat to the floor, then we don’t have any other choices left. Do it now, in this generation, because we don’t how many more there’s going to be.

The economic problem is a strange one…

Economics is always strange. You’re not talking about anything that’s actually real. Researching a chapter for Jerusalem, I read a couple of books on economics to see if I could get my head around the facts of the situation.

I was astonished when I found out the value of derivative bonds, in 2008. These are bonds that have a value in themselves that were once connected to a real thing, there might have been a bond made for the sale of a herd of sheep, but that can be sold on and they gain in value. The notional value of the world’s derivative bonds was in the region of sixty trillion. Exactly ten times the economic output of the entire planet, which is around six trillion. That means that the gap between what economists and what the world’s economic forces and the banks thought they had to play with and what actually existed was fifty-four trillion. That would seem to me the depth of the hole we are in.

So something has to be done about that. I would suggest beheading the bankers, but while it would be very satisfying and would cheer us up, it probably wouldn’t do anything practical to alter the situation. Behead the currency. Change the currency, why not? It would disempower all the people who had bought into that currency but it would pretty much empower the rest of us, the other ninety-nine percent.

URL of article: http://www.honestpublishing.com/news/the-honest-alan-moore-interview-part-2-the-occupy-movement-frank-miller-and-politics/

I think you all know where I stand in regards to the Occupy Wall Street movement, but just in case:

I am no socialist - I've worked in one industry or another for the last 28 years, but one thing I'm sure of is that I'll have to learn to love the taste of Purina if I am dependent on my Social Security check for subsidence.

One disturbing trend has been people being rewarded for not actually producing anything of value (i.e. derivatives). Remember the Enron debacle? If Kenneth Lay, Jeffrey Skilling and the others involved saw some real penalties, we could have nipped this level of gross malfeasance in the bud. As it was, many other schemes followed, such as Worldcom. Arthur Andersen was actually able to re-market themselves as Accenture.

Amazing - a pile of crap by another name doesn't stink?

Someone brought up an interesting point: if banking rules were followed like park rules, we wouldn't be in this mess.

As the movie Inside Job attempts to illustrate, let's set concrete rules regarding financial transactions, and when they're violated, prosecute, prosecute, PROSECUTE!

It has long past been established, to the point of ridiculousness, that the financial industry cannot be trusted to police itself.

You don't place foxes in charge of guarding henhouses, right?

Our financial institutions are in it for themselves - they have FAILED US.

Our representatives are in it for themselves - they have FAILED US.

Our judicial system turns a blind eye to their continuing attempts to game the system, while throwing away the key
on We The People at every opportunity - they have FAILED US.

As Alan said, we need to wrest away the steering wheel from them, because they're driving towards oblivion with
blinders on. All they can see is QUICK PROFITS.

You constantly hear about mega-mergers, with the downsizing of "redundant" jobs; what you don't hear about is what
happens to those "downsized".

Many of them are your brothers; your sisters, your mothers; your fathers; your cousins; your best friends - and they're out there, getting pepper-sprayed; being brutalized; being maligned - and all they (and all we want) want is OUR FAIR SHARE.

We The People are NOT asking for "handouts"; after all, that's what the big banks got...and in excess of SIXTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS.

R.I.P., David Earl Simmons (R8 Re-Post)

R.I.P., David Earl Simmons

posted by Vincent Nunes
Sun, 06/05/2011 - 4:00am

Saturday, June 4th, 2011 was a very emotional day for my extended family and I.
On this day, we laid my brother, David Earl Simmons, known to our community as "Big D", to rest.

Here is the funeral program: http://www.honoryou.com/programs/PDF/110604ds.pdf
I would like to extend a personal note of thanks to his many co-workers and members of management who came by to offer their condolences and to extend their good wishes to my family and I at our loss...but what I witnessed was that we were not the only ones affected by his passing. It seemed that his entire office came to pay their respects, and for that - I thank you all.
To the partners at Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer - you fellas are tops in my book.
To the staff at MCS Management - what a beautiful thing you all did with your presence...it truly warmed our hearts to see all of you show up and to hear you extol your praises.
Thanks to all involved for the beautiful floral arrangements.
To my extended family - let's make an effort to keep in touch under more pleasant circumstances.
To Shelly, Carol, D.J., Richona, Mrs. J., Robert, Idwana, Eric, et. al., thank you for always making me feel welcome. I won't be a stranger.
To the entire staff at Cotton Funeral Service - you guys have a fantastic facility, wonderful staff, and you did a fantastic job with my brother. I really can't thank you enough for everything.
And last, but absolutely not least - Earl, thanks for getting us there and back without a hitch, and especially for taking care of Mom in her time of need. You are a gentleman and a true professional.
Mom...this is for you. Stay strong.

Vincenzo's Crock Pot #15 - It's The End Of The World As We Know It (R8 Re-Post)

Vincenzo's Crock Pot #15 - It's The End Of The World As We Know It (Off-topic, but pertinent due to our current Ebola/Enterovirus D68 crisis) 

posted by Vincent Nunes
Fri, 12/21/2012 - 11:41am

A man who produces something of value, or helps to keeps things that produce something of value working, are worth more and should be compensated more than one who just moves monies around. Banks are no longer "risking money"; indeed, if there's any risk, it's borne upon We The People.

I just want you to think about that.

You should read Philip Giraldi's article, Christmas in Connecticut.

This is the Crock Pot, so let's flavor this bad boy with some good helpings.

This is the last day on the Mayan calendar, but that never meant that it signified the end of existence. I like to think of this as an opportunity for a new beginning - it has been indicated that there are celestial alignments taking place; of course, this is the Winter Solstice.

I'm going to write something really controversial right now.

It was a good thing that George Walker Bush stole the election against Albert Gore in 2000.

WhatwhatWHAT?!?

What could I possibly mean by that?

I just watched a video compilation by Ryan Dawson, the producer of a number of films regarding the events of September 11th, 2001. I'm sure that many of you out there wonder why I just don't type "9/11" like everyone else does. Well, I don't believe that the tragedy and destruction visited upon us over 11 years ago should be relegated to a goddamn cutesy term like "9/11" or "Ground Zero", like we're referring to a day when we had a triple rainbow in the sky. It's much worse than that. It was the day that our government failed We The People:

• It was the day after $2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS went missing from the Pentagon, yet no investigation into those missing funds has been forthcoming. Some would say that it's impossible to track because the attack that took out the Pentagon directly impacted the offices that provided for the accounting. That's a load. Dov Zackheim was in charge of those funds - you mean, he can't be be held accountable? Where's Columbo when you need him?
• Let's go the the main narrative itself - that two commercial aircraft took out three buildings. It is laughable at best. Yet, this is the story they're sticking to. You have to understand - it's a slap in the face to anyone not blinded by a manufactured hate for brown-skinned Middle Easterners. Before them, it was the Russians, remember? Don't forget about the impromptu rave going on across the water.

• Our wiretap system was compromised by a foreign nation, who then used said compromised system as an early warning for their drug traffickers, and further to blackmail our representatives (the ones not caught in honeytraps). This was a main component in Carl Cameron's four-part report on spying within the United States; of course, you may not have seen this report, since Abe Foxman nearly gave birth whining about it. It was erased from the FOX News archives. Of course, I have them.
• FEMA was in New York City the night before - why does that remind me of BATF officials not being in the Murrah Building the day of its destruction, due to an unnamed investigation? Just as an aside, it's inconceivable that a truck bomb so far from the building could do what it was purported to have done.
• The anthrax attacks, purported to have been committed by Muslims, was a psy-op of the lowest order. The conflation of America with Israel was clumsily performed; worse, the anthrax used was traced to Fort Detrick. The lab had been broken into by Lt. Col. Philip Zack, though the trail was led instead to Steven Hatfill, when the frameup of Dr. Asaad went awry. When the Hatfill frame failed, Bruce Ivins was made the patsy, who shortly then committed suicide. Dead men tell no tales; nor do they put the lie to bad frameups.
• The seismic recordings at the Lamont-Doherty Observatory indicate readings far beyond what impacts from jetliners could produce. Why hasn't this gone any further?
• Wait - how could I mention the anthrax attacks without mentioning that our representatives were warned to tak Cipro? Who warned them? Tim Osman? (Actually, it was Jerome Hauer.) 

I could go on and on, but I just wanted to mak a point of all of the avenues of exploration that have gone untouched. I mentioned Ryan's video - in it, you will see CNN's Piers Morgan arguing with former Minnesota governer and Conspiracy Theory's Jesse Ventura that there were never reports of the Saloman Building, also known as WTC Building Seven, collapsing before 5:20 PM.
CNN did it.
The BBC did it.
FOX did it.
CBS did it.
I have downloaded 42 gigabytes regarding all of the news occurring on September 11th, 2001. I've got it.
You know what's also mentioned? At 10:45 AM, there are reports of an explosion. It's never mentioned again. Was that supposed to be Flight 93? I can only speculate upon this point, and I'd rather deal with the facts of the situation.
But I do wish to speculate upon one point - that if Albert Gore were our President, rather than George Walker Bush, our nation would be worse off.
How can I say this?
George Walker Bush is a fool. But George Walker Bush is also a coward. That cowardice saved us from mutually assured destruction eleven years ago - destruction that would have come forth as a result of the bluster of a liar.
Albert Gore is a liar.
Albert Gore is lying about Anthropogenic Human-caused Global Warming (now alternating with "Climate Change", when appropriate).
Climategate has borne this out - Michael Mann, Phil Jones and their collaborators have gamed the system with their corrupted "peer review" circus which kept dissenting views from being posted in the climate journals and from the public.
And let's just apply some basic logic here - what does trading carbon credits have to do with improving carbon emissions? Do carbon emissions follow market share?
Furthermore, CO2 is an essential element necessary to the propogation of life on our planet. Plants require CO2, and in turn, provide O2 (oxygen) for us to breathe. This is why deforestation is utterly foolish. We could plant hemp, which would restore the viability and arability of the soil, and provide to us so much more than just pulp for paper.
It is my view that not only did Bush the Shrub steal the election, Gore threw the election.
He dove like Greg Louganis, baby!
The vote discrepancies alone should have mandated a recount - a real recount, not that dog-and-pony show we got. In return, I believe he was promised that he would be enriched by the scheme of saving the world from "global warming" .
Wow.
That was quite a mouthful, huh?
Did you hear about Lord Monckton using the microphone of the delegate from Myanmar to tell all assembled that there is no basis for the claims of the IPCC for the last eighteen years. He was removed from the Doha conference, but there's no doubt that the gravy train of easy profits that they all planned to board has just ran out of steam.
Now of course, you're asking: what does this have to do with the events of September 11th, 2001?
I don't believe in an "inside job" when it comes to the events of September 11th; I do when it comes to the financial malfeasance that has the middle class of America poorer day by day. There were elements of our government who were aware of those events - there were a number of people warned not to fly on September 11th, notably Willie Brown and author of the Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie.
I did state that Bush was a coward. His cowardice accounts for his photo-op at Booker Elementary School (where he mentions that he saw the first plane impact - an impossible feat that he mentioned twice, since that footage wasn't available until September 12, 2001 on broadcast and cable news). If he had any foreknowledge whatsoever of those events, he wanted nothing directly to do with them; instead, he put the lives of a number of children at risk, something that we now know is not above reproach - ask the families of the victims of the Newtown, Connecticut massacre.
Considering Gore's collusion with the climate thieves, I posit that he would have had an active hand in the staging of the events of September 11th, and when things went wrong, like the WTC Twin Towers "collapsing" out of sequence; WTC 7 collapsing from nothing; the attack on the Pentagon failing to leave plane debris commesurate with a multi-ton aircraft, much as the crash of Flight 93; NORAD failing to properly account for the whearabouts of said flights; when all those things and more had gone wrong, he would have upped the ante and forced us over the edge of diplomacy.
Understand, of course, this is merely conjecture on my part. Just think, though - "Global warming" is a fallacy - the Earth goes through warming and cooling periods, and we could no more predict the weather ten years from now than we could ten days from now. If he was willing to stick with the script for that load of bollocks, what would he have done in the face of an attack on America?
Geez - it's a bit morbid in here - let's get ready for a brand new day.
The facility that was complicit in the lack of care and the eventual untimely death of the Kung-Fu Judge, the Honorable John L. Phillips, has been slapped with a class-action law suit - oh, happy day! Let justice prevail!
Congratulations to Steve Tefft for becoming Ink Master!
Best wishes to all my friends and their families this holiday season!
Best wishes also go out to all of you, dear readers! Let's start a brand new era of enlightenment - there is nothing to fear but fear itself.

Why Hizzoner's Sugary Drink Ban Is Simply A Money Grab For The Soda Companies (R8 Re-Post)

Why Hizzoner's Sugary Drink Ban Is Simply A Money Grab For The Soda Companies

posted by Vincent Nunes
Fri, 07/20/2012 - 3:15am

I hope everyone's enjoying their summer.
Before I begin, let's revisit the subject of this story:

New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks

Chang W. Lee/The New York Times

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg on Wednesday with Linda I. Gibbs, deputy mayor for health, as he discussed a plan to ban large sugary beverages. Next to each soda is the amount of sugar in it.

By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM

Published: May 30, 2012

New York City plans to enact a far-reaching ban on the sale of large sodas and other sugary drinks at restaurants, movie theaters and street carts, in the most ambitious effort yet by the Bloomberg administration to combat rising obesity.

Reactions to Big Sugary Drinks Ban

What Else Should the Mayor Ban?

City Room

With supersize soft drinks facing prohibition, we seek your suggestions for other vices the Bloomberg Administration should outlaw.

Graphic: Sweet Limits

A guide to what restaurants, movie theaters and food carts could sell under the ban.

Connect with NYTMetro

The proposed ban would affect virtually the entire menu of popular sugary drinks found in delis, fast-food franchises and even sports arenas, from energy drinks to pre-sweetened iced teas. The sale of any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces — about the size of a medium coffee, and smaller than a common soda bottle — would be prohibited under the first-in-the-nation plan, which could take effect as soon as next March.
The measure would not apply to diet sodas, fruit juices, dairy-based drinks like milkshakes, or alcoholic beverages; it would not extend to beverages sold in grocery stores or convenience stores.
“Obesity is a nationwide problem, and all over the United States, public health officials are wringing their hands saying, ‘Oh, this is terrible,’ ” Mr. Bloomberg said in an interview on Wednesday in City Hall’s sprawling Governor’s Room.
“New York City is not about wringing your hands; it’s about doing something,” he said. “I think that’s what the public wants the mayor to do.”
A spokesman for the New York City Beverage Association, an arm of the soda industry’s national trade group, criticized the city’s proposal on Wednesday. The industry has clashed repeatedly with the city’s health department, saying it has unfairly singled out soda; industry groups have bought subway advertisements promoting their cause.
“The New York City health department’s unhealthy obsession with attacking soft drinks is again pushing them over the top,” the industry spokesman, Stefan Friedman, said. “It’s time for serious health professionals to move on and seek solutions that are going to actually curb obesity. These zealous proposals just distract from the hard work that needs to be done on this front.”
Mr. Bloomberg’s proposal requires the approval of the Board of Health, a step that is considered likely because the members are all appointed by him, and the board’s chairman is the city’s health commissioner, who joined the mayor in supporting the measure on Wednesday.
Mr. Bloomberg has made public health one of the top priorities of his lengthy tenure, and has championed a series of aggressive regulations, including bans on smoking in restaurants and parks, a prohibition against artificial trans fat in restaurant food and a requirement for health inspection grades to be posted in restaurant windows.
The measures have led to occasional derision of the mayor as Nanny Bloomberg, by those who view the restrictions as infringements on personal freedom. But many of the measures adopted in New York have become models for other cities, including restrictions on smoking and trans fats, as well as the use of graphic advertising to combat smoking and soda consumption, and the demand that chain restaurants post calorie contents next to prices.
In recent years, soda has emerged as a battleground in efforts to counter obesity. Across the nation, some school districts have banned the sale of soda in schools, and some cities have banned the sale of soda in public buildings.
In New York City, where more than half of adults are obese or overweight, Dr. Thomas Farley, the health commissioner, blames sweetened drinks for up to half of the increase in city obesity rates over the last 30 years. About a third of New Yorkers drink one or more sugary drinks a day, according to the city. Dr. Farley said the city had seen higher obesity rates in neighborhoods where soda consumption was more common.
The ban would not apply to drinks with fewer than 25 calories per 8-ounce serving, like zero-calorie Vitamin Waters and unsweetened iced teas, as well as diet sodas.
Restaurants, delis, movie theater and ballpark concessions would be affected, because they are regulated by the health department. Carts on sidewalks and in Central Park would also be included, but not vending machines or newsstands that serve only a smattering of fresh food items.
At fast-food chains, where sodas are often dispersed at self-serve fountains, restaurants would be required to hand out cup sizes of 16 ounces or less, regardless of whether a customer opts for a diet drink. But free refills — and additional drink purchases — would be allowed.
Corner stores and bodegas would be affected if they are defined by the city as “food service establishments.” Those stores can most easily be identified by the health department letter grades they are required to display in their windows.
The mayor, who said he occasionally drank a diet soda “on a hot day,” contested the idea that the plan would limit consumers’ choices, saying the option to buy more soda would always be available.
“Your argument, I guess, could be that it’s a little less convenient to have to carry two 16-ounce drinks to your seat in the movie theater rather than one 32 ounce,” Mr. Bloomberg said in a sarcastic tone. “I don’t think you can make the case that we’re taking things away.”
He also said he foresaw no adverse effect on local businesses, and he suggested that restaurants could simply charge more for smaller drinks if their sales were to drop.
The Bloomberg administration had made previous, unsuccessful efforts to make soda consumption less appealing. The mayor supported a state tax on sodas, but the measure died in Albany, and he tried to restrict the use of food stamps to buy sodas, but the idea was rejected by federal regulators.
With the new proposal, City Hall is now trying to see how much it can accomplish without requiring outside approval. Mayoral aides say they are confident that they have the legal authority to restrict soda sales, based on the city’s jurisdiction over local eating establishments, the same oversight that allows for the health department’s letter-grade cleanliness rating system for restaurants.
In interviews at the AMC Loews Village, in the East Village in Manhattan, some filmgoers said restricting large soda sales made sense to them.
“I think it’s a good idea,” said Sara Gochenauer, 21, a personal assistant from the Upper West Side. Soda, she said, “rots your teeth.”
But others said consumers should be free to choose.
“If people want to drink 24 ounces, it’s their decision,” said Zara Atal, 20, a college student from the Upper East Side.
Lawrence Goins, 50, a postal worker who lives in Newark, took a more pragmatic approach.
“Some of those movies are three, three and a half hours long,” Mr. Goins said. “You got to quench your thirst.”

Colin Moynihan contributed reporting.

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

• Read All Comments (1426) »

 

All of the rhetoric sounds fine and dandy, but does it truly address the issue of OBESITY?
The current epidemic of obesity did not begin until high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) replaced sugar in our soft drinks.
Here's the facts, dear readers - HFCS turns directly into FAT once ingested.
Let's repeat that:
HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP (HFCS) IS NOT METABOLIZED ONCE INGESTED; IT TURNS DIRECTLY INTO FAT.
Sugar isn't much better, but for those who regularly exercise and note their sugar intake, it isn't an issue.
I recently lost 112 pounds. I still avoid sodas like the plague. I, however, know better than to arbitrarily decide for everyone that no one else can have soda.
If you go to a supermarket, you readily see 2/3-liter bottles of soda. They are priced similarly to the cold 20-ounce sodas you can get at your convenience store.
You don't see any problem here?
The soda companies would love to phase out those huge bottles. Think of the profit margin.
The soda ban totally misses the issue of obesity.
How about we remove HFCS from sodas and instead...use STEVIA?
I've tried it - it's good. No calories. No need to mark sodas as "diet".
Just like that, we could wipe out obesity in New York City in a matter of months.
Snapple is marketing a "lightly sweetened" tea; Pepsi Next is reported to have 60% less sugar. Those are steps in the right direction, but why take baby steps? Let's make the logical leap.
Let's do something to truly affect obesity. Maybe we could get McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, White Castle, etc., to follow this example.
Maybe then, Dominic Carter and I can enjoy a shake every once in a while.

Monsanto's Roundup Linked to Cancer - Again (Re-Post from TruthOut)

Monsanto's Roundup Linked to Cancer - Again

Monday, 06 October 2014 09:19 By Jeff Ritterman, M.D., Truthout | News Analysis 

 

A brilliant and celebrated inventor, John Franz, gave us an herbicide, Roundup, which has changed the face of agriculture. This herbicide has become the foundation for an entirely novel approach to farming - biotech agriculture - that has expanded rapidly throughout the globe.

Monsanto makes seeds for soy, corn, canola, cotton, alfalfa and sugar beets that are genetically engineered to be tolerant to Roundup. The seeds are marketed in 120 countries. Throughout the world, Roundup is sprayed heavily as a weed killer without fear of damaging the cash crops, which have been engineered to survive the herbicide's effects.

"The change in how agriculture is produced has brought, frankly, a change in the profile of diseases. We've gone from a pretty healthy population to one with a high rate of cancer, birth defects and illnesses seldom seen before."

Roundup seemed, at first, to be the perfect herbicide. It blocks the ESPS synthase enzyme, which prevents the synthesis of amino acids that plants need for growth. Since animals don't have this enzyme, it was initially hypothesized that they would be safe from Roundup's effects.
Unfortunately, Roundup has now been shown to affect much more than the EPSP synthase enzyme. The herbicide has been proven to cause birth defects in vertebrates, including in humans, and it may also be the cause of a fatal kidney disease epidemic.
An increasing number of studies are now linking the herbicide to cancer.
Roundup Linked to Increased Cancer in "Soy Republic"

Roundup is now heavily sprayed in what is known as the "Soy Republic," an area of Latin America larger than the state of California. This region has undergone a profound transformation since genetically modified (GM) crops were first introduced in 1996. Some 125 million acres in Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Uruguay and Paraguay are now devoted to GM soy production.
Doctors serving these areas have documented an alarming increase in cancers. A group of dedicated physicians formed an organization, Doctors of Fumigated Towns. They held a national conference in August of 2010 in Córdoba, the center of Argentina's soy region. The Department of Medical Sciences of the National University at Córdoba sponsored the conference. An estimated 160 doctors from throughout the country attended.
Dr. Medardo Avila Vazquez, a pediatrician specializing in environmental health, explained his concerns:
"The change in how agriculture is produced has brought, frankly, a change in the profile of diseases. We've gone from a pretty healthy population to one with a high rate of cancer, birth defects and illnesses seldom seen before. What we have complained about for years was confirmed and especially what doctors say about the sprayed towns and areas affected by industrial agriculture. Cancer cases are multiplying as never before in areas with massive use of pesticides."
Dr. Avila Vazquez blamed the biotech agricultural corporations for placing their profits over the public's health:
"The tobacco companies denied the link between smoking and cancer, and took decades to recognize the truth. The biotech and agrochemical corporations are the same as the tobacco industry; they lie and favor business over the health of the population."
It was the health of the population that concerned Dr. Damian Verzeñassi, professor of social and environmental health from the National University at Rosario. In 2010, he began a house-to-house epidemiological study of 65,000 people in Santa Fe, also in Argentina's soy region. He found cancer rates two to four times higher than the national average, with increases in breast, prostate and lung cancers.
Dr. Verzeñassi commented on his findings: "Cancer has skyrocketed in the last fifteen years."
Much the same was found in Chaco, Argentina's poorest province. In 2012, two villages were compared, the heavily sprayed farming village of Avia Terai and the non-sprayed ranching village of Charadai. In the farming village, 31 percent of residents had a family member with cancer while only 3 percent of residents in the ranching village had one.
Carlos Fria lives in Avia Terai. He has complained about glyphosate spraying in close proximity to his home:
"If the wind changes, the agrochemicals come into the house. My uncle just died of cancer. My wife too, passed away from cancer. Now many, many people are dying of cancer. It didn't used to be like that. In my opinion, this has to do with the poison they put on the fields."
Roundup Linked to Lymphoma
Research has also been done in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia and New Zealand investigating possible links between glyphosate, Roundup's active ingredient, and cancer. A large number of studies have focused on glyphosate's possible association with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have analyzed studies spanning almost three decades. The IARC is the branch of the World Health Organization that promotes cancer research. Scientists throughout the world with skills in epidemiology, laboratory sciences and biostatistics are brought together to identify the causes of cancer so that preventive measures may be instituted. The agency views cancers as linked, directly or indirectly, to environmental factors.

The research shows that Roundup is linked to a host of cancers in those living in the heavily sprayed regions of Latin America. It has also been linked to B cell lymphoma, and to brain cancer.

In April of 2014, scientists at the IARC published their review of twenty-five years of research on the relationship between pesticide exposure and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. They found a positive association between organo-phosphorus herbicides, like glyphosate, and this cancer. The B cell lymphoma sub-type, in particular, was strongly associated with glyphosate exposure.
Roundup Linked to Brain Cancer

The linkage to lymphoma is the most recent research raising concerns about glyphosate's connection to cancer. Scientists from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a branch of the US Department of Health and Human Services, specialize in illnesses caused by toxic substances. They published the results of the US Atlantic Coast Childhood Brain Cancer Study in 2009. Children with brain cancer from Florida, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania were compared to age matched controls. The researchers found that if either parent had been exposed to Roundup during the two years before the child's birth, the chances of the child developing brain cancer doubled.
Roundup and Cancer: Human Observations Summarized
The research shows that Roundup is linked to a host of cancers in those living in the heavily sprayed regions of Latin America. It has also been linked to B cell lymphoma, and to brain cancer.
While the epidemiological studies show close correlation, they cannot prove causality. The gold standard for scientific proof is a randomized controlled trial, which would be unethical in this instance. You cannot ethically expose humans to an herbicide. Scientists therefore use a variety of experimental models to assess cancer risk.
Roundup Causes DNA Damage, Errors During Cell Division
Cancer risk can be evaluated by experiments that measure Roundup's ability to induce DNA damage.
One of the initial steps in the development of cancers is often damage to our DNA. Each of our cells gets its operating instructions from its DNA. If the DNA is damaged, the faulty operating instructions can re-program cells to divide rapidly and chaotically. When this happens, cells become transformed into cancers.
A number of experiments have been done using various animal models, all showing the same results: after exposure to Roundup, cells exhibited DNA damage. This was true in fruit fly larvae, in mice, in the blood cells of the European eel and in the lymphocytes of cows.
Another experimental model that has been used to judge glyphosate's cancer risk focuses on the herbicide's impact on cell division. Cells are vulnerable to being turned into cancers if an error is made during this delicate process. In the process of cell division, the DNA must be copied precisely. Each daughter cell must receive from its parent cell an identical copy of the DNA. If a mistake is made, the daughter cells will receive faulty DNA copies. Cells with damaged DNA can turn into cancers.
In a 2004 study done at the National Scientific Research Center and the University of Pierre and Marie Curie in France, Roundup caused significant errors in the cell division of sea urchin embryos. The scientists commented that these abnormalities are hallmarks of cancer and delivered a particularly chilling warning: The concentration of Roundup needed to cause these errors was 500 to 4,000 times lower than the dose to which humans may be exposed by aerial spraying or handling of the herbicide.
Roundup Damages Human DNA
The most worrisome of the DNA studies are the ones that show DNA damage in humans.
Dr. Fernando Manas, a biologist at the National University of Rio Cuarto in Argentina, has been investigating the effects of pesticides for years. He believes that glyphosate spraying is causing cancer by inducing DNA damage. His research has documented genetic damage in those exposed. When Dr. Manas studied pesticide sprayers working in the soy industry in Córdoba, he found significantly more DNA damage in their lymphocytes than in those of an unexposed group of controls. Roundup was one of the most commonly used pesticides.

The pesticide sprayers in Córdoba, the Ecuadorians living in Sucumbíos, and the normal volunteers all developed Roundup-induced DNA damage in their lymphocytes.

Genetics researchers from the Pontifical Catholic University in Quito, Ecuador evaluated Ecuadorians living in the Sucumbíos district in northern Ecuador for evidence of DNA damage. This area was heavily sprayed with Roundup by the Colombian government to eradicate illicit crops. Those exposed to the herbicide developed a number of acute symptoms, including abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, fever, heart palpitations, headaches, dizziness, numbness, insomnia, depression, shortness of breath, blurred vision, burning of eyes, blisters and rash. When compared to a control group, they also showed significantly more DNA damage.
Interestingly, scientists have known since 1998 that when normal human lymphocytes were exposed to Roundup in a test tube, the lymphocytes developed DNA damage.
The pesticide sprayers in Córdoba, the Ecuadorians living in Sucumbíos, and the normal volunteers all developed Roundup-induced DNA damage in their lymphocytes. A cancer of the lymphocytes is known as a "lymphoma," the very same type of cancer that the International Agency for Research on Cancer showed to be strongly associated with glyphosate exposure.
Roundup Boosts Cancer in Tissue Culture Studies
Another method that scientists have used to assess Roundup's cancer risk is to expose cells grown in "tissue culture" to the herbicide. Sheets of cells are grown on a small dish with nutrients. Glyphosate is added and its effects are observed.
In 2010, researchers in India exposed mouse skin cells grown in tissue culture to Roundup. When the herbicide was added, the cells became cancerous.
Scientists in Thailand studied the impact of Roundup on human estrogen-responsive breast cancer cells in tissue culture. They published their results in 2013. Hormone-responsive breast cancer cells are known to grow when exposed to estrogen. Roundup also stimulated these cells to grow. The herbicide was able to bind to the cancer's estrogen receptors, thus mimicking the effects of estrogen and accelerating tumor growth.
Roundup Causes Cancer in Test Animals
Roundup's effects have been assessed in studies with a variety of test animals for more than three decades.
One of the earliest studies was done in 1979-1981, under the auspices of the United Nations Environmental Program, the International Labor Organization and the World Health Organization. Rats exposed to low levels of the herbicide developed testicular cancer. A larger dose did not produce the cancer. Unfortunately, at the time of the experiment, it was not understood that certain substances have more potent effects at lower doses than at higher doses. The evaluators erroneously dismissed the results showing the low-dose effect.
In a study from the Institute of Biology at the University of Caen in France, researchers studied glyphosate's effects on rats. Originally published in 2012, the resulting report was retracted after the biotech agriculture industry complained. After extensive review failed to show any fraud or problem with the data, the report was re-published in 2014. In this study, Roundup was shown to double the incidence of mammary gland tumors. These cancers developed much faster in rats exposed to Roundup than in controls. There was also an increase in cancers of the pituitary gland.
Rounding Up the Evidence
Epidemiological studies in humans, in the soy regions of Argentina and in Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have shown Roundup to be linked to an increase in cancer risk. There is a strong association between Roundup and B cell lymphoma, brain cancer and a variety of other cancers in those living in heavily sprayed areas.
In addition to these epidemiological observations, laboratory studies have shown that Roundup causes DNA damage, disturbs cell division, increases cancer growth in tissue culture and induces cancer when fed to test animals.
Proving Causality

Does the evidence linking Roundup to cancer prove causality? In the 1964 landmark Surgeon General's Report, which for the very first time linked tobacco to cancer, Surgeon General Dr. Luther Terry presented criteria for the establishment of a cause and effect relationship in a scientific study.
To meet Dr. Terry's criteria, an association must be strong, specific and consistent. Cause must precede effect. And the association must be biologically plausible.

Biotech agriculture's most powerful backer, it seems, is the government of the United States.

How well does the association between Roundup and cancer fit these criteria?
Roundup exposure is consistently and specifically associated with precancerous abnormalities in a wide variety of experimental settings. Epidemiological observations show a tight linkage between glyphosate and cancer. In the laboratory research, as well as in the epidemiological studies in the field, exposure to the herbicide precedes the development of the abnormalities. There are plausible biological mechanisms that explain how glyphosate can transform cells into cancers.
In citing the Surgeon General's report, Drs. Wild and Seber, in their highly regarded statistics textbook, Chance Encounters, provide an example of a strong association. If an "illness is four times as likely among people exposed to a possible cause as it is for those who are not exposed," the association is considered strong.
Most of the glyphosate exposure experiments and epidemiological observations show a doubling of cancer risk. This leaves some room for doubt.
But who, given the science, would want to expose their loved ones to Roundup?
The State of the Science vs. the Science of the State

Roundup has now been conclusively proven to cause birth defects and to be closely linked to cancer. If we do not want this herbicide to accumulate in our water, land, and food, we need to stop using it.

In the final sad irony, when the cancer cells reach their growth peak, they kill their host and die in the process.

The science is clear, but powerful economic interests have, thus far, prevailed. The executives of the biotech agricultural corporations and their backers have ignored or denied the science documenting Roundup's harm.
Biotech agriculture's most powerful backer, it seems, is the government of the United States.
This official policy was explained in a 2010 US State Department cable from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:
"Our biotech outreach objectives for 2010 are to increase access to, and markets for, biotech as a means to help address the underlying causes of the food crisis, and to promote agricultural technology's role in mitigating climate change and increasing biofuel production."
The US government has been willing to exercise its muscle in support of the biotech agricultural corporations.
In El Salvador, for example, the United States recently pressured the government to buy Monsanto's GM seeds or risk losing $277 million in development aid. El Salvador refused and stood firm, preferring to buy the seeds from its own struggling farmers.
Cancer's Lessons
There is a disturbing parallel between the exponential growth of biotech agriculture and the spread of a cancer in the human body.
Cancers are cells that reproduce rapidly and haphazardly with no regard for the greater good of the organism. Cancer cells consume valuable energy, starving out normal cells. They grow so wildly and so quickly that they crowd out their neighbors. They send off emissaries to start new cancer colonies. They make harmful substances that damage healthy cells. They spread relentlessly. In the final sad irony, when the cancer cells reach their growth peak, they kill their host and die in the process.
Like a cancer, biotech agriculture has crowded out its neighbors and is spreading relentlessly. Also like a cancer, it makes harmful substances. Roundup is one of them. As more acreage comes under GM cultivation, we can expect Roundup use to continue to increase.
Roundup kills plants, causes birth defects in vertebrates, and is linked to cancer. Can a living planet withstand the continuous assault from this poison any more than the human body can withstand the attack from an aggressive cancer?
Do we need to fight biotech agriculture with the same persistence, commitment and force that we bring to bear in battling cancers?
The author thanks Vivien Feyer for contributions to this article.

Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.

Jeff Ritterman, M.D.

Jeff Ritterman, M.D. is vice president of the board of directors of the SF Bay Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. He is the retired chief of cardiology at Kaiser Richmond and a former Richmond, California, city councilman. Follow him on Twitter @JeffRitterman.

Related Stories

Roundup Ready Alfalfa Damages US Seed Industry

By Phillip Geertson, Activist Post | Report

Monsanto Found Guilty of Chemical Poisoning in France

By Anthony Gucciardi, Natural Society | Report

Monsanto and Big Food Losing the GMO and "Natural" Food Fight

By Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association | News Analysis

Who really thinks is a good idea to inundate soil with this POISON?!?


One person commented how "back-breaking" it is to simply pull weeds from the soil...well, sometimes, things take hard work, and there's no getting around it.


Tell me what YOU think.

---

Hide Comments