Stop the Feds From Forcing Us to Eat Poisonous Foods

Strange Martial Law via Food Control: HR 2749

Filed Under Big Agri, Future of Food, Police State, Population Control

Not what the American people ordered – HR 2749, martial law and the enslavement of their farmers

HR 2749 is a strange bill in many ways. While the other “food safety” bills have been around since winter, allowing for much public discussion on the internet, HR 2749 has only suddenly appeared. It is a mutant conglomeration of the worst of the other bills, with the addition of one very original part – martial law.

When it was a draft, it was Waxman’s bill. But once given a number, it became Dingel’s who already had a “food safety” bill, HR 759. So Waxman got none and Dingel got two. (Was this because Waxman, being Jewish, was a hideous choice to introduce a bill with Codex in it – designed by the Nazi pharmaceutical companies that funded Hitler, provided the gas for the gas chambers, experimented on prisoners with vaccines – and is expected to kill millions?)

* HR 2749 would give FDA the power to order a quarantine of a geographic area, including “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.”

[This - "that has been used to transport or hold such food" - would mean all cars that have ever brought groceries home or any pickup someone has eaten take-out in, so this means ALL TRANSPORTATION can be shut down under this. This is using food as a cover for martial law.]

Under this provision, farmers markets and local food sources could be shut down, even if they are not the source of the contamination. The agency can halt all movement of all food in a geographic area.

[This is also a means of total control over the population under the cover of food, and at any time.] See this DailyKos entry.

The bill is unusual, too, because slow as it was to appear. The little bugger of bill has made up for it since. It got a number on June 10, went to committee on June 17, passed instantly, and is headed for a vote on the floor of the House.

The first Patriot Act was passed using fear of terrorism. This Patriot Act is more coy, hiding under a cloak of “food safety” and but also using fear – fear of food contamination. Evidently, Americans are supposed to be so frightened by the slightest possibility of a terrorist or of E-coli, they would trade away all their precious, hard fought freedoms for the promise of safety. Or at least, that is what the trade-off has become. “Terrorism” and “contamination” are great bugaboos used to open doors to an end to the US Constitution. That is exactly what we are left with after those who wrote HR 2749 are done.

Who did write these bills? It seems Monsanto had not only a hand, but a “defining” influence. http://farmwars.info/?p=594

This redefining of reality is what seems to be underlying all the loss of freedom. Normal and free are disappearing into the maw of corporate definitions of reality. See this Yup Farming piece.

So, we begin with contaminated food from filthy corporate processors and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). And what do we end up with after that reality is ground up by corporate legal hands? Changes in the definition of risk so that natural things are treated as dangerous and toxic things are untouched, such that:
Healthy, normal farms are taken over by government as though they were run by criminals and contaminated corporate slaughterhouses are untouched;
The necessary freedom of individuals to live and grow food and be left alone are somehow suddenly destroyed, though they were never the source of any food contamination issue; and such that
The profit and control and power of corporations which were absolutely the source of the increasingly terrible food, is somehow suddenly vastly increased.

Thanks to corporate control over reality, our wanting to clean up corporate processors and feedlots and CAFOS and end up with farmers’ markets and local farms and organic food has become the industrialization and potential destruction of every healthy part of the food system and the triumph of the most contaminated and toxic part. And in the non-bargain, we lost all freedoms and they took all control. And “all” is not a hyperbole here, for one need only look at another provision of HR 2749 to feel how insane, how distant from all we ever wanted.

* HR 2749 would empower FDA to regulate how crops are raised and harvested. It puts the federal government right on the farm, dictating to our farmers.

[What is missing in pointing out this astounding control, is that it opens the door to CODEX and WTO "good farming practices" will include the elimination of organic farming by eliminating manure, mandating GMO animal feed, imposing animal drugs, and ordering applications of petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides. Farmers, thus, will be locked not only into the industrialization of once normal and organic farms but into the forced purchase of industry's products. They will be slaves on the land, doing the work they are ordered to do - against their own best wisdom - and paying out to industry against their will. There will be no way to be frugal, to grow one's own grain to feed the animals, to raise healthy animals without GMO grains or drugs, to work with nature at all. Grassfed cattle and poultry and hogs will be finished. So, it needs to be made clear where control will take us. And weren't these the "rumors on the internet" that were dismissed but are clearly the case?] See this DailyKos entry.

When we wanted not to get E-coli in processed meat, did we intend to put our farmers into corporate servitude? Did we plan to have our own lives straight-jacketed by a million new controls over our own gardens, our own desire to grow food, our own plans to start small businesses, our own dreams to have a small piece of land and farm ourselves? Who has the audacity to take our needs and grotesquely bastardize them in these ways, while giving the destruction and totalitarian control the sham name of “food safety”?

We wanted good food. We never wanted to trap our farmers into an industrial prison on their own land, afraid moment to moment of not fulfilling some monstrous set of instructions that never end – rules the farmers loathe, rules that have not only nothing to do with real farming but which are antithetical to it. Why have we ended up with HR 2749, an intense corporate nightmare around the most central and necessary aspects of a free country and of free human beings – farming and food?

American farming needs to be relieved of the burdens it has been under, not finished off by its corporate competition. It needs freedom to flourish again. Obviously – and Congress people who would think to vote for such absurdities, take note – the imposition of surveillance, monitoring, warrantless entry, taking of all records, licensing, fees, Codex and NAIS, in addition to massive penalties and prison terms (all without judicial review over even appropriateness and validity), are not how one thanks American farmers for holding together the only working part of our food system. See Literal Enslavement by Linn Cohen-Cole.

HR 2749 is the most vicious and insane bill one could imagine. Who treats our farmers in this way? Who believes that such police measures can provide for the rebirth of farming and the return of healthy food? Who wrote this bill that trashes the freedom of all our lives? HR 2749 was not what we ordered and it should be sent back the bowels of hell it came from.

HR 2749 is both insane and cruel. And the deceptiveness of hiding a Patriot Act in it and the brutal rush to slip it through Congress are ANTI-democratic.

Go here to tell Congress, “No.” http://www.ftcldf.org/petitions/pnum993.php

http://farmwars.info/?p=1145

http://blogs.healthfreedomalliance.org/blog/2009/07/06/strange-martial-law-via-food-control-hr-2749/

Freedom to Choose Good Health

July 4th, 2009

Happy Independence Day!

---

The Fourth of July weekend is upon us, and it is a day to celebrate the freedoms that our forefathers have laid out for us. They willingly fought to establish a country that gave us the freedom to change what we feel needs to be changed. Knowing, first-hand, just how tyrannical government could be, they sought to do everything in their power to give this country the tools to fight for our freedoms against such oppressive oversight. All the groundwork has been laid in the United States Constitution, and from that, we have the inherent power to improve our lives, and most importantly, our childrens' lives.

July 4th was a pivotal day for our nation, and it goes deeper than a summer night illuminated by fireworks. Today is a day to reflect upon what it is still free, and what ought to be free. Each of you, as members of Health Freedom Alliance, are helping us work toward fighting against the impeding legislation that are slowly weaving their way into the tightly-knit fibers of this nation. We all see what is happening to our health freedoms. There is a blatant display of increasingly unbalanced and unchecked power- leaving our general health and well-being at the bottom of the agenda. This monumental day is the sole reason that we, as the people of America, have the power to keep these beasts at bay, if we so choose to exercise it.

The problem we are facing now goes beyond merely government taking advantage of the people. In a world governed by money, it should come as no surprise that the corporations are running America. Our government no longer calls the shots here and has surrendered its role to the new power profiteers. In far too many cases, laws are made in accord to the financial gain at stake. Make no mistake; if a law is put into place, odds are, the person who lobbied it is gaining more than the general populace.

The relationship of our puppet government to our corporate governors is a daisy chain of hands to pockets. This symbiotic relationship has set the precedent for what is being done to our health freedoms every day. Big Pharma is our biggest predator when it comes to our lives, and Big Agri is not too far behind. They run together like a pack of hungry wolves at a free-for-all buffet of the fat sheep they see us as. Our puppet government plays the role of our shepherd; unfortunately for us, he's made a deal with the wolves.

The ties between the wolves and the shepherd can be severed by the sharpest tool at our disposal: the Constitution. With this, we have been given the freedoms to choose what we put into our bodies, because we are the only ones who will look after ourselves. We have the liberty to refuse the toxic onslaught of vaccinations that are being pushed into our bodies under obscene public health and safety laws. It would be one thing if public health and safety were actually the case, however the evidence is stacked against them. It is your country, it is your body, and above all, it is your freedom.

Take this Independence Day to observe its true meaning, and keep fighting for your right to be alive and free in this country. America was founded with each of us in mind, and because of this, we have inherited all the tools we need to keep our country as we want it to be. Happy Independence Day, and keep up with your health!

360: Soldiers Asked if They Would Shoot American Citizens: February 8, 2008

U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens


Iraq vet exposes how he was trained to round up
Americans in martial law exercise,
asked if he would kill his own friends and family

We received an e mail from "Scott", a member of a pipefitters union that runs an apprenticeship program called Helmets To Hard Hats, which according to its website, "Is a national program that connects National Guard, Reserve and transitioning active-duty military members with quality career training and employment opportunities within the construction industry." Scott writes that his company hired a soldier who had recently returned from Iraq, who told him that U.S. troops were being quizzed on whether or not they would be prepared to shoot their own friends and family members during a national state of emergency in America. "I have become very close to this young man and have gained his respect and trust," writes Scott. "I want you to know that he informed me about one particular training exercise his superiors made them perform. It was concerning the rounding up of American citizens that disobey any type of martial law or in other words any type of infringement on our freedoms." "He was asked if he could shoot his friends or family members if ordered to do so. At the time he said he could," writes Scott. Scott says that the soldier later "had time to clear his head" and realize the truth, recanting his vow to kill his own countrymen if ordered to do so. The issue of whether U.S. troops would be prepared to round-up, disarm and if necessary shoot Americans who disobeyed orders during a state of martial law is a question that military chiefs have been attempting to answer for at least 15 years. Its known origins can be traced back to an October 1994 Marine questionnaire out of the Twentynine Palms Marine Base in California. Recruits were asked 46 questions, including whether they would kill U.S. citizens who refused to surrender their firearms. Documentary film maker Alex Jones brought to light similar training programs that were taking place across the country in the late 90's which revolved around U.S. Marines being trained to arrest American citizens and take them to internment camps. During one such program in Oakland California, dubbed "Operation Urban Warrior," Marines refused to answer if they would target American citizens for gun confiscation if ordered to do so. During hurricane Katrina, National Guard units were ordered to confiscate guns belonging to New Orleans residents. As we first exposed in May 2006, Clergy Response Teams are being trained by the federal government and FEMA to "quell dissent" and pacify citizens to obey the government in the event of a declaration of martial law. Pastors and other religious representatives are being taught to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for the implementation of martial law, property and firearm seizures, mass vaccination programs and forced relocation. Many scoffed at our original story, which was based on the testimony of a whistleblower who was asked to participate in the program. Claims that the story was a conspiracy theory soon evaporated when a mainstream KSLA news report confirmed the existence of the program. The experiences of U.S. troops in the worst areas of Iraq, where soldiers are ordered to go door to door and arrest all men of military age as well as confiscate their weapons, is a mere portend of what is being planned for America if these training programs ever come to fruition. More Links: U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=548 U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens» Iraq vet exposes how he was trained to round up Americans in martial law exercise, asked if he would kill his own friends and family ... www.opednews.com/maxwrite/link.php?id=51342 U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens, Discusion about US Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens in the AboveTopSecret.com website alternative topics discussion forum ATS Skunk Works. www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread331857/pg1 U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens | Clipmarks U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens ... //paradigmtimes.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/ us-troops-asked-if-they-would-shoot-american-citizens/" ... www.clipmarks.com/clipmark/32FDEB85-0FE0-4278-9BFB -58CDC91A3EC1/

360: Top 10 Censored Stories from the Major Media: September 28, 2007

Censored!
10 big stories the mainstream media missed

by Amanda Witherell
9/26/2007

For 31 years, Project Censored has been compiling a list of the major stories that the nation's news media have ignored, misreported or poorly covered. The Oxford American Dictionary defines censorship as "the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts," which Project Censored Director Peter Phillips says is also a fine description of what happens under a dictatorship. When it comes to democracy, the black marker is a bit more nuanced. "We need to broaden our understanding of censorship," he says. After 11 years at the helm of Project Censored, Phillips thinks the most bowdlerizing force is the fourth estate itself: "The corporate media is complicit. There's no excuse for the major media giants to be missing major news stories like this."

As the stories cited in this year's Project Censored selections point out, the federal government continues to provide major news networks with stock footage, which is dutifully broadcast as news. The George W. Bush administration has spent more federal money than any other presidency on public relations. Without a doubt, says writer and longtime Project Censored judge Michael Parenti, the government invests in shaping our beliefs. "Every day they're checking out what we think," he says. "The erosion of civil liberties is not happening in one fell swoop but in increments. Very consciously, this administration has been heading toward a general autocracy."

Carl Jensen, who founded Project Censored in 1976 after witnessing the landslide re-election of Richard Nixon in 1972 in spite of mounting evidence of the Watergate scandal, agrees that this year's censored stories amount to an accumulated threat to democracy: "I'm waiting for one of our great liberal writers to put together the big picture of what's going on here."


1: GOOD-BYE, HABEAS CORPUS

The Military Commissions Act, passed in September 2006 as a last gasp of the Republican-controlled Congress and signed into law by Bush that Oct. 17, made significant changes to the nation's judicial system.

The law allows the president to designate any person an "alien unlawful enemy combatant," shunting that individual into an alternative court system in which the writ of habeas corpus no longer applies, the right to a speedy trial is gone, and justice is meted out by a military tribunal that can admit evidence obtained through coercion and presented without the accused in the courtroom, all under the guise of preserving national security.

Habeas corpus, a constitutional right cribbed from the Magna Carta, protects against arbitrary imprisonment. Alexander Hamilton called it the greatest defense against "the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny."

The Military Commissions Act has been seen mostly as a method for dealing with Guantanamo Bay detainees, and most journalists, including editors at The New York Times, have reported that it doesn't have any impact on Americans.

Investigative journalist Robert Parry disagrees. The right of habeas corpus no longer exists for any of us, he wrote in the online journal Consortium. Deep down in the lower sections of the act, the language shifts from the very specific "alien unlawful enemy combatant" to the vague "any person subject to this chapter."

"Why does it contain language referring to 'any person' and then adding in an adjacent context a reference to people acting 'in breach of allegiance or duty to the United States'?" Parry writes. "Who has 'an allegiance or duty to the United States' if not an American citizen?"

Though Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) moved quickly to remedy the situation with the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act, that legislation has yet to pass Congress, which some suspect is because too many Democrats don't want to seem soft on terrorism. Exactly how the language of the Military Commissions Act may be manipulated remains to be seen.

Sources: "Repeal the Military Commissions Act and Restore the Most American Human Right," Thom Hartmann, Common Dreams Web site, commondreams.org; "Still No Habeas Rights for You," Robert Parry, consortiumnews.com, Feb. 3, 2007; "Who Is 'Any Person' in Tribunal Law?" Robert Parry, consortiumnews.com



2: MARTIAL LAW: COMING TO A TOWN NEAR YOU

The Military Commissions Act was part of a one-two punch to civil liberties. While the first blow to habeas corpus received some attention, there was almost no media coverage of a private Oval Office ceremony held the same day the military act was signed at which Bush signed the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, a $532-billion catchall bill for defense spending.

Tucked away in the deeper recesses of that act, Section 1076 allows the president to declare a public emergency and dispatch federal troops to take over National Guard units and local police if he determines them unfit for maintaining order. This is essentially a revival of the Insurrection Act, which was repealed by Congress in 1878, when it passed the Posse Comitatus Act to bar Northern troops from supervising Southern elections after Reconstruction. That act reinforced the idea that the federal government should patrol the nation's borders and let the states take care of their own territories.

The Warner act defines a public emergency as a "natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any state or possession of the United States" and extends its provisions to any place where "the president determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the state or possession are incapable of maintaining public order." On top of that, federal troops can be dispatched to "suppress, in a state, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy." Everything from a West Nile virus outbreak to a political protest could fall into the president's personal definition of mayhem. That's right — put your picket signs away.

The Warner act passed with 90 percent of the votes in the House and cleared the Senate unanimously. Months after its passage, Leahy was the only elected official to have publicly expressed concern about Section 1076. In February, he introduced Senate Bill 513 to repeal Section 1076. It's currently in the Armed Services Committee.

Sources: "Two Acts of Tyranny on the Same Day!" Daneen G. Peterson, stopthenorthamericanunion.com, Jan. 20, 2007; "Bush Moves Toward Martial Law," Frank Morales, uruknet.., Oct. 26, 2006



3: AFRICOM

Jimmy Carter was the first president to articulate a clear connection between America's foreign policy and its concurrent "vital interest" in oil. During his 1980 State of the Union address, he said, "An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."

Under what became the Carter Doctrine, an outpost of the Pentagon called the United States Central Command, or CENTCOM, was established to ensure the uninterrupted flow of that slick "vital interest."

The United States now plans a similar permanent base in Africa, an area traditionally patrolled by more remote commands in Europe and the Pacific. No details have been released about exactly what AFRICOM's operations and responsibilities will be or where troops will be located, though government spokespeople have vaguely stated that the mission is to establish order and keep peace for volatile governments — that just happen to be in oil-rich areas.

Increasing U.S. oil imports come from African countries — in particular Nigeria. According to the 2007 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, "disruption of supply from Nigeria would represent a major blow to U.S. oil-security strategy."

Source: "Understanding AFRICOM," moonofalabama.org, Feb. 21, 2007



4: SECRET TRADE AGREEMENTS

As disappointing as the World Trade Organization has been, it has provided something of an open forum in which smaller countries can work together to demand concessions from larger, developed nations when brokering multilateral agreements.

At least in theory. The 2006 negotiations crumbled when the United States, the European Union and Australia refused to heed India's and Brazil's demands for fair farm tariffs. In the wake of that disaster, bilateral agreements have become the tactic of choice. These one-on-one negotiations, designed by the United States and the EU, are cut like backroom deals, with the larger country bullying the smaller into agreements that couldn't be reached through the WTO.

Bush administration officials, always quick with a charming moniker, are calling these agreements "competitive liberalization," and the EU considers them essential to negotiating future multilateral agreements. But critics see them as fast tracks to increased foreign control of local resources in poor communities.

Sources: "Free Trade Enslaving Poor Countries," Sanjay Suri, Inter Press Service, psnews.org/news.asp?idnews=37008, March 20, 2007; "Signing Away the Future," Emily Jones, Oxfam Web site, oxfam.org, March 2007



5: SHANGHAIED WORKERS CONSTRUCT U.S. EMBASSY IN IRAQ

Part of the permanent infrastructure the United States is erecting in Iraq includes the world's largest embassy, built on Green Zone acreage equal to that of Vatican City. The $592-million job was awarded in 2005 to First Kuwaiti Trading and Contracting. Though much of the project's management is American, most of the workers are from small or developing countries, such as the Philippines, India and Pakistan. According to David Phinney of CorpWatch — a California-based organization that investigates and exposes corporate environmental crimes, fraud, corruption and violations of human rights — these workers are recruited under false pretenses. At the airport, their boarding passes read Dubai. Their passports are stamped Dubai. But when they get off the plane, they're in Baghdad.

Once on site, they're often beaten and paid as little as $10 to $30 a day, CorpWatch concludes. Injured workers are dosed with heavy-duty painkillers and sent back on the job. Lodging is crowded and food is substandard. Kuwaiti managers take their passports, which is a violation of U.S. labor laws.

The Pentagon has investigated and confirmed a number of abuses, but has not released the names of any violating contractors or announced penalties. In the meantime, billions of dollars in contracts continue to be awarded to First Kuwaiti and other companies at which little accountability exists.

Source: "A U.S. Fortress Rises in Baghdad: Asian Workers Trafficked to Build World's Largest Embassy," David Phinney, corpwatch.org, Oct. 17, 2006



6: FALCON'S TALONS

Operation FALCON, or Federal And Local Cops Organized Nationally, is, in many ways, the manifestation of martial law forewarned by Frank Morales (see Story 2). In an unprecedented partnership, more than 960 federal, state and local police agencies teamed up in 2005 and 2006 to conduct the largest dragnet raids in U.S. history. Armed with fistfuls of arrest warrants, they ran three separate raids around the country that netted 30,150 criminal arrests. According to the Detroit Free Press, in Michigan the multi-agency sweeps netted 480 arrests.

The Justice Department claimed the agents were targeting the "worst of the worst" criminals, and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said, "Operation FALCON is an excellent example of President Bush's direction and the Justice Department's dedication to deal both with the terrorist threat and traditional violent crime."

However, as writer Mike Whitney points out on Uruknet.., none of the suspects has been charged with anything related to terrorism. Additionally, though more than 30,000 individuals were arrested, only 586 firearms were found.

Though the U.S. Marshals Service has been quick to tally the offenses, Whitney says the numbers just don't add up. For example, Falcon II(the second set of raids) in 2006 captured 462 violent sex-crime suspects and 1,094 registered sex offenders among a total of 9,037 fugitives.

What about the other 7,481 people? "Who are they, and have they been charged with a crime?" Whitney asked. The Marshals Service remains silent about these arrests.

Sources: "Operation FALCON and the Looming Police State," Mike Whitney, uruknet.., Feb. 26, 2007; "Operation Falcon," sourcewatch.org, Nov. 18, 2006



7: BLACKWATER

The war outsourcing has served two purposes for the Bush administration:Giving powerful corporations and private companies lucrative contracts supplying goods and services to American military operations overseas while quietly achieving an escalation of troops beyond what the public has been told or understands. Without actually deploying more military forces, the federal government instead contracts with private security firms like Blackwater to provide heavily armed details for U.S. diplomats in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries.

Blackwater is one of the more successful and well connected of the private companies profiting from the business of war. Started in 1996 by an ex-Navy Seal named Erik Prince, the North Carolina company employs 20,000 hired guns, training them on the world's largest private military base. The firm is the subject of Blackwater, an eye-opening book by Jeremy Scahill, who recently testified before the Senate Democratic Policy Committee. The company — founded by Michigan-born Prince, who has ties to the DeVos family in Holland — was also the subject of a recent Metro Times cover story ("Soldiers of fortune," May 9). Blackwater finally made front pages nationwide last week in the controversy following a shooting incident that left at least eight Iraqis dead.

Source: "Our Mercenaries in Iraq," Jeremy Scahill, Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, Jan. 26, 2007



8: KIA: THE NEOLIBERAL INVASION OF INDIA

A March 2006 pact under which the United States agreed to supply nuclear fuel to India for the production of electric power also included a less-publicized corollary — the Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture. While it's purportedly a deal to assist Indian farmers and liberalize trade (see No. 4), critics say the initiative is destroying India's local agrarian economy by encouraging the use of genetically modified seeds, which in turn is creating a new market for pesticides and driving up the overall cost of producing crops.

The deal provides a captive customer base for genetically modified seed maker Monsanto and a market for cheap goods to supply Wal-Mart, whose plans for 500 stores in the country could wipe out the livelihoods of 14 million small vendors.

Monsanto's hybrid Bt cotton has already edged out local strains, and India is currently suffering an infestation of mealy bugs, which have proven immune to the pesticides the chemical companies have made available. Additionally, the sowing of crops has shifted from the traditional to the trade-friendly. Farmers accustomed to cultivating mustard, a sacred local crop, are now producing soy, a plant foreign to India.

Though many farmers see the folly of these deals, it's often too late, and suicide has become a popular final act of opposition. Hope comes in the form of a growing cadre of farmers hip to the flawed agreements. They've organized into local sanghams, 72 of which now exist as small community networks that save and share seeds, skills and assistance during the good times of harvest and the hard times of crop failure.

Sources: "Vandana Shiva on Farmer Suicides, the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal, Wal-Mart in India," Democracy Now! democracynow.org, Dec. 13, 2006; "Genetically Modified Seeds: Women in India take on Monsanto," Arun Shrivastava, globalresearch.ca, Oct. 9, 2006



9: THE PRIVATIZATION OF AMERICA'S INFRASTRUCTURE

In 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation for the greatest public-works project in human history: the interstate highway system, 41,000 miles of roads funded almost entirely by the federal government.

Today, many of those roads are in need of repair or replacement, but the federal government has not exactly risen to the challenge. Instead, more than 20 states have set up financial deals leasing the roads to private companies in exchange for repairs. These public-private partnerships are being lauded by politicians as the only credible financial solution. But opponents of all political stripes point out that most of the benefits are actually going to the private side of the equation — these companies are entering into long-term leases of infrastructure like roads and bridges for a low amount. They work out tax breaks to finance the repairs, raise tolls to cover the costs, and start realizing profits for their shareholders in as little as 10 years.

Cheerleaders for privatization are deeply embedded in the Bush administration (see No. 7), where they've been secretly fostering plans for a North American Free Trade Agreement superhighway, a 10-lane route set to run through the heart of the country and connect the Mexican and Canadian borders. It's specifically designed to plug into the Mexican port of Lázaro Cárdenas, taking advantage of cheap labor by avoiding the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, whose members are traditionally tasked with unloading cargo, and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, whose members transport that cargo that around the country.

Sources: "The Highwaymen," Daniel Schulman with James Ridgeway, Mother Jones, motherjones.com, Feb. 2007; "Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway," Jerome R. Corsi, Human Events, humanevents.com, June 12, 2006



10: VULTURE FUNDS: DEVOURING THE DESPARATE

Named for a bird that picks meat from a carcass, this financial scheme couldn't be more aptly described. Well-endowed companies swoop in and purchase the debt owed by a third-world country, then turn around and sue the country for the full amount — plus interest. In most courts, they win. Recently, Donegal International spent $3 million for $40 million worth of debt Zambia owed Romania, then sued for $55 million. In February an English court ruled that Zambia had to pay $15 million.

Often these countries are on the brink of having their debt relieved by the lenders in exchange for putting the money owed toward necessary goods and services for their citizens. But the vultures effectively initiate another round of deprivation for the impoverished countries by demanding full payment, and a loophole makes it legal.

U.S. Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Donald Payne (D-N.J.) have lobbied Bush to take action, but political will may be elsewhere. Debt Advisory International, an investment consulting firm that's been involved in several vulture funds that have generated millions in profits, is run by Paul Singer — the largest fundraiser for the Republican Party in the state of New York. He's donated $1.7 million to Bush's campaigns.

Source: "Vulture Fund Threat to Third World," Newsnight, gregpalast.com, Feb. 14, 2007



15 MORE STORIES THE MAINSTREAM NEGLECTED

11: The Scam of 'Reconstruction' in Afghanistan (Sources: corpwatch.org, tomdispatch.com)

12: Another UN Massacre in Haiti (Source: haitiaction.net)

13: Bush Pushes Immigrant Roundups for Political Ends (Sources: fpif.org, thenation.com)

14: Impunity for U.S. War Criminals (Source: public.cq.com)

15: Chemicals Damaging DNA (Source: precaution.org)

16: No Hard Evidence Connecting Osama Bin Laden to Sept. 11 (Source: "FBI Says, 'No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11," Paul V. Sheridan and Ed Haas, Ithaca Journal, June 29, 2006)

17: Factories Exceed Water Pollution Limit (Source: corpwatch.org)

18: Mexico's Stolen Election (Sources: narconews.com, counterpunch.org, alternet.org)

19: Bolivia Rejects IMF and FTA (Source: afsc.org)

20: Animal Rights Activists are now Terrorists (Source: vjel.org)

21: U.S. Seeks WTO Impunity for Illegal Agribusiness Subsidies (Source: oxfam.org)

22: North Invades Mexico (Source: tomdispatch.com)

23: Dianne Feinstein's Conflict of Interest in Iraq (Source: bohemian.com)

24: Media Exaggerates Threat From Iran's President (Source: globalresearch.ca)

25: Native Energy Futures (Source: lipmagazine.org)


Note: To read more about these stories go to projectcensored.org.

360: Peace: September 16, 2007

The first peace, which is the most important,

Is that which comes within the souls of people

When they realize their relationship,

Their oneness, with the universe and all its powers,

And when they realize that at the center

Of the universe dwells Wakan-Tanka (the Great Spirit),

And that this center is really everywhere, it is within each of us.

This is the real peace, and the others are but reflections of this.

The second peace is that which is made between two individuals,

And the third is that which is made between two nations.

But above all you should understand that there can never

Be peace between nations until there is known that true peace,

Which, as I have often said, is within the souls of men.


Black Elk, Oglala Sioux & Spiritual Leader (1863 - 1950)

360: Declaration of Rights Indigenous People: September 14, 2007

NEW YORK - After three decades of drafts, deliberations and delays, the United Nations General Assembly voted Sept. 13 to adopt the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The majority, 143 countries, voted in favor. As expected, the only countries opposing the adoption were the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. The main objections of these countries


centered on indigenous peoples' control over land and resources, their right to self-determination, and that the declaration might give indigenous peoples veto authority over development on their lands and territories.


Its adoption marks the first time in history that indigenous peoples' collective rights to self-determination and control over their lands and natural resources will formally be recognized by the United Nations.


''The international community is finally recognizing that indigenous peoples have a permanent right to exist as distinct peoples, and that we have a right to be self-governing,'' said Robert Tim Coulter, one of the original authors of the declaration who worked with chiefs from the Iroquois Confederacy to draft the first 10 points in 1976.


''The world is taking a formal stand that indigenous peoples have the right to be free from all forms of discrimination and to maintain our cultures, societies, languages and spiritual practices,'' said Coulter, executive director of the Indian Law Resource Center in Helena, Mont., and Washington, D.C.


While the declaration is non-binding, it will still have a major influence on eliminating discrimination and human rights violations suffered by more than 370 million indigenous peoples worldwide.


The declaration sets minimal standards on how countries should treat indigenous peoples, and it will influence laws and federal policies affecting more than 560 Indian nations in the United States.


In recent years, there have been many unfavorable U.S. Supreme Court cases that denied Indian people equality under the law by simply taking their land with no compensation.


Coulter said over time the declaration will influence U.S. court decisions that too often are discriminatory and unfair. Congress, Indian nations and Native advocates also will be guided by principles in the declaration when policies in the U.S. Justice and Interior departments are being developed.


In the last five years, there have been at least four cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court looked to international law to help shape its decisions: a death penalty case regarding the mentally retarded, a case in Michigan on desegregation, and a same sex case in Texas, among others.


If international law mandates that indigenous peoples must be accorded the same rights as others, it will help reduce widespread racism and discrimination.


The declaration will be especially helpful in South and Central America, where the Mayan village of El Estor was burned in recent months to make way for a nickel mine owned by a Canadian company.


One provision in the declaration that may help communities like El Estor states that indigenous peoples have the right to ''free, prior and informed consent'' over development affecting their lands, territories and resources.


For hundreds of years colonizing countries moved into indigenous peoples' homelands, but never shared the benefits or paid them for land and resources taken. In Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Americas, many tribes and indigenous peoples lack sufficient political clout to protect their ways of life when extractive industries, transnational corporations and countries decide to take their lands and resources, often with no compensation.


Armand MacKenzie, an international human rights lawyer and activist, said his people, the Innu of Labrador and Quebec, have launched legal challenges against Canada to recover land that was taken when Canada passed a law that unilaterally extinguished their rights without any consultation.


''The declaration says we have the right to restitution and compensation for lands that were stolen,'' MacKenzie said before the vote. ''That's why Canada has been actively opposing the declaration and is expected to vote against it.''


The Innu in Labrador were forcibly relocated and are said to have the highest suicide rate in the world, especially among youth. Survival International issued a report called ''Canada's Tibet: Killing of the Innu'' that documents how Canada's harsh policies have devastated a traditional culture.


Indigenous peoples' collective rights are unique by virtue of their history, cultures and ancestral ties to their homelands. While all citizens of the world have individual human rights, indigenous peoples also hold collective rights where language, culture, ceremonies, medicines, sacred sites and lands are concerned.


At the international level, human rights laws are made by treaties, conventions or covenants such as the Convention on the Rights of Women and the Convention on the Elimination of Racism and Discrimination.


The declaration is expected to eventually become a convention and then binding international law within a few years. Many states are operating by and honoring some of these rights now.


Valerie Taliman, Navajo, is director of communications for the Indian Law Resource Center in Helena, Mont. She can be reached at (406) 449-2006, or visit www.indianlaw.org.

360: Message From Leonard Peltier: August 23, 2007

A Message from Leonard Peltier

Greetings Brothers and Sisters,

I hope my message finds you in the best of health and spirits and that each one of you is enjoying your summer and looking forward for the Fall Season. I have always enjoyed the Fall Season. I still remember the vivid colors of the leaves changing and falling in preparation for our Winter. This Sept 12, 2007 I will be 63 years old, and I can no longer say I am a young man eh? Behind bars I have aged from a youth into an Elder. As the seasons have passed I have become an elder, my children have grown, and my grandchildren are now young men and women, and lately I became a Great – Grandfather.

This year will mark more than 31 years of my unjust imprisonment. Your thoughts, supports, letters, cards, prayers, and energy have kept me strong. I thank you for the lovely cards, and letters that I have been receiving, for I enjoy hearing from you! Some of you have been writing me for the past 32 years and through your letters have included me in your family gatherings, festivities and in your life as the years have passed. I thank you! Many of you are writing me to tell me about the activities and events that are being held in my honor, and your efforts of joining me and the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee in our ongoing campaign towards my freedom. On a sad note I also receive letters from supporters who identify themselves as loyal Peltier supporters and yet in their letters their advice is for the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee to be closed and how inappropriate it is for me or the LPDC to be asking for support and help so that we can continue our ongoing work towards my freedom. I once wrote in a message a few months ago that we are all climbing the same mountain, just on different sides at times. As I read my letters from supporters that write to tell me of their ongoing work towards my freedom and state that we are all working together, I feel inspired and know that each one of us is working in unity and solidarity from all sides of the mountain until we win this ongoing struggle for my freedom.
As for the "supporters" who write me and offer their advice on closing the LPDC office, and for the committee to stop raising funds for our legal campaign, I wonder which mountain they are climbing? Are they maybe working with an organization that for the past 32+ years has falsified affidavits, withheld evidence, and has withheld documents in their efforts to keep me wrongfully incarcerated? One would start to wonder…

My case has been fraught with government misconduct since the beginning. The Government among other wrongful acts manufactured false evidence, withheld evidence and coerced witness. We now know that the FBI used confidential informant sources to compromise attorney/client communications they illegally used to develop strategies for conviction. The FBI permitted informants to attend both my trial and that of my co-defendants. The FBI however refuses to produce the name(s) of their informants and has been given unfettered discretion by the courts to keep this information from my legal team.

On June 8, 2007 my legal team, attorneys, Ron Kuby and David Pressman filed with the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit an appellate brief asking the Court to review and release some 11,000 pages of documents that have been withheld for over 30 years.
Indeed, a document recently produced by the FBI and recently introduced to a Magistrate Judge established that the FBI intentionally took actions to try to avoid producing documents in discovery in my case. But again, this seems to have had no impact on the Court. The United States Federal Courts have recognized overwhelming evidence of FBI misconduct in my case which has already been revealed, yet it has continued to allow the FBI to use exemptions under FOIA to shield its illegal tactics in this case, depriving me of my rights to a fair trail.

I urge all of you who believe in justice to join my fight and cry out for the production of all documents related to my case. Why is the FBI still withholding documents? Why won't they produce all documents to me? To me the answer is obvious. I believe the answer is obvious to you also.

The new legal team, attorneys Ron Kuby, and David Pressman, the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee and I thank you for your support and help.

In the Spirit of Crazy Horse,
Leonard Peltier

Toni Zeidan-Co-director, Leonard Peltier Defense Committee
email: info@leonardpeltier.net
website: http://www.leonardpeltier.net/
Address: 3800 N. Mesa
A2
El Paso, Texas 79902
Online donation site:
http://www.freedomwalk.com/


posted by Leonard @ 7:49 AM



Website: www.leonardpeltier.net

360: More RFID: August 23, 2007

From California Consumer Newsletter: Summer 2007



"Tiny computer chips called radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags that transmit information about us can be embedded in driver's licenses, student IDs and other government issued cards without our knowledge.



These chips allow government agencies to track our whereabouts, are susceptible to a hacker with an RFID scanner and expose us to the threat of privacy violations, identity theft, property theft, and stalking. Even protected RFID systems have been hacked, some in a matter of minutes. When the system has been breached, the device holder won't know it and therefore won't know to take steps to protect themselves.



A rural school district in Calif. embedded tiny transmitters in student id cards without notifying parents. The district claimed the RFIDs were introduced to protect child safety. Parents were in an uproar when they learned that a stalker could hack into these devices and follow a child's every movement. The school district removed the devices after parents complained.



Last year the US State dept. began issuing passports with RFIDs that transmit to a reader the bearer's name, date of birth, gender, place of birth, dates of passport issuance & expiration, passport number, and a digital image of the bearer's photograph.



RFID technology poses a clear privacy and information security risks that threaten individual and public safety as well as our personal liberty."



The article goes on to talk about California SB 28, 29, 31 & 388...all which limit the use of such devices in California.



The Berkeley Public Library had a huge argument, last year, in favor of using these tracking in their library materials!



Just think, the government or anyone with a tracking device could find you...anytime, anywhere you happen to be!

360:RFID-Big Brother IS Watching-Kiss Your Privacy Goodbye: August 22, 2007

For me this is Not about identity theft so much as Big Brother Is Watching....

Shades of an Interment Camp!

From California Consumer Newsletter: Summer 2007


"The federal REAL ID Act would force states to standardize drivers' license cards across the nation into a single national ID card and database. It does this by stipulating that state DLs and ID cards will not be accepted for "federal purposes"---including boarding an aircraft or entering a federal facility--unless they meet all of the law's numerous conditions.


States and the federal government would share access to this national database--one that could include images of birth certificates, marriage licenses, divorce papers, court ordered separations, medical records, and detailed information on the name, date of birth, race, religion, ethnicity, gender, address, telephone, e-mail address, and Social Security number (ALL New Passports issued since 2006 have this embedded in an RFID tag) for more than 240 million people. REAL ID will make it possible to look up DLs and other personal information on a Californian (or anyone else) at any DMV office in any state in the nation.


The REAL ID Act was slipped through Congress in May 2005 in an urgent "must pass" Iraq War/Tsunami relief supplemental bill...(this is known as a rider). In the us senate, not even a single hearing was held to consider the sweeping implications of REAL ID.


On may 1st the department of Homeland Security he;d a national town hall meeting in Davis-the ONLY public forum scheduled in the nation-to discuss the implementation of the Act.


Richard Holober, Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California (CFC), testified in opposition, calling the national database a "one-stop shop" for identity thefts. "You're compromising the documents of 240 million Americans in the system is broken into," Holober said. "This information is all that a criminal needs to steal someone's identity. Instead of remaining under an individual's control, they'll be housed in the DMV at risk of being taken by hackers, burglars, or the way much ID theft occurs, through inside jobs. Because they're stored as digital images, anyone with a color printer will be able to produce high quality forgeries of these documents."


The privacy implications and the onerous requirements of the REAL ID Act have led a half dozen states to consider legislation that would refuse cooperation with the law's rules. this year Maine became the 1st state to pass such legislation. US Senators Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) and John Sununu (R-NH) have introduced legislation to repeal the federal REAL ID Act. If California and other states join the rebellion, this federal privacy legislation will have a good chance of passage."


Well...if this doesn't make you pissed enough to take action...I don't know what will! Because..FYI, this IS NOT Freedom nor Democracy! But It IS a Wake-up Call!


Mi Takuye Oyacin