Blooddha

Truth

2008-09-26T07:33:00.001-07:00

UPDATED!!

This is a sample introduction into the world of 9/11 Truth,
Fluoridation, Globalism & The New World Order

9/11 :

Unusual Activities

9/11 Coincidences

More of these Here.

Zeitgeist, 9/11 Part 1

Part 2

Zeitgeist Full Movie

WTC 7, 9/11 Smoking Gun

Win The War

Alex Jones Exposing Michael Moore

Vendetta For 9/11

Using Nuclear Weapons In Iraq

9/11 Links

Top 40 Reasons To Doubt 9/11 Official Story

The Shortest Path To 9/11 Truth

Beginners Guide To 9/11 Truth

911 Truth.Org

The Big Movie Post

InfoWars

Fluoride :

Fluoride Deception

Good Fluoride Links :

50 Reasons To Oppose Fluoridation

Fluoride Alert

Fluoride Contents Of Various Water

Fluoride Toxicity

Fluoride Status By Country

Fluoride,Teeth & The Atomic Bomb

Fluoride Info

Fluoride & Cancer

New World Order :

Aaron Russo & Rockefeller

EndGame Full Movie

TerrorStorm Full Movie

American Dictators

IBM, Verichip & The Fourth Reich

Technocracy

The New World Order Full Movie

Medical Marijuana User Refused Transplant, Dies

2008-05-03T03:29:00.000-07:00

Tim Garon lies in his hospital bed as his girlfriend, Leisa Bueno, leans over to give him a kiss before he died. He was refused a liver transplant because he was a medical marijuana user.

This is utterly disgusting. I am dumbstruck. I cannot believe that the Medical Profession have stooped to such a despicable low.

A musician who was denied a liver transplant because he used marijuana with medical approval under Washington state law to ease the symptoms of advanced hepatitis C died Thursday.

The death of Timothy Garon, 56, at Bailey-Boushay House, an intensive care nursing center was confirmed to The Associated Press by his lawyer, Douglas Hiatt, and Alisha Mark, a spokeswoman for Virginia Mason Medical Center, which operates Bailey-Boushay.

Dr. Brad Roter, the physician who authorized Garon to smoke pot to alleviate for nausea and abdominal pain and to stimulate his appetite, said he did not know it would be such a hurdle if Garon were to need a transplant.

The case has highlighted a new ethical consideration for those allocating organs for transplant, especially in the dozen states that have medical marijuana laws: When dying patients need a transplant, should it be held against them if they've used pot with a doctor's blessing?

Garon died a week after his doctor told him a University of Washington Medical Center committee had again denied him a spot on the liver transplant list because of his use of marijuana, although it was authorized under Washington state law.

"He said I'm going to die with such conviction," Garon told an AP reporter at the time. "I'm not angry, I'm not mad, I'm just confused."

Garon believes he contracted hepatitis C by sharing needles with "speed freaks" as a teenager. In recent years, he said, pot has been the only drug he's used. In December, he was arrested for growing marijuana.

He had been in the hospice for two months and previously was rejected for a transplant at Swedish Medical Center for the same reason he later got from the university hospital.

Swedish said he would be considered if he avoided pot for six months and the university hospital offered to reconsider if he enrolled in a 60-day drug treatment program, but doctors said his liver disease was too advanced for him to last that long. The university hospital committee agreed to reconsider anyway, then denied him again.

UK : Lisbon Treaty On Hold

2008-05-03T03:16:00.000-07:00

Businessman wins Judicial Review Of UK's decision to ratify the Lisbon Treaty

Stuart Wheeler

Calls were made for the ratification of the EU Reform Treaty (the Lisbon Treaty) to be put on hold pending a High Court challenge over the Government's refusal to subject it to a referendum.

The calls came immediately after millionaire businessman Stuart Wheeler, a major Conservative Party donor, won permission from a senior judge to seek a judicial review.

He claims that he had "a legitimate expectation" that Gordon Brown would hold a public vote.

The Prime Minister has refused on the grounds that the Lisbon Treaty, introduced after proposals for a EU constitution were voted down by the French and Dutch in 2005, did not alter the UK constitution.

This is brilliant news. Mr. Wheeler may just be a Labor-hater ( so what! ) but this is exactly the kind of action that needs to be taken. Well done sir!

Watch this space for more developments on this case.

GMO Vote

2008-05-01T02:01:00.000-07:00

ALERT FROM GREENPEACE

Dear friends,

An important vote on GMOs is due to take place on 7 May in Brussels. The agro-chemical industry wants to get EU permission to grow pesticide-producing maize plants and a GM potato that contains an antibiotic resistant gene. We want EU Commissioners to say NO when they discuss the applications on 7 May. Our petitions, postcards, emails, blog comments and actions have helped bring the EU to this historic moment. Now, this is it!

Can you join us in writing directly to all the European Commissioners this week?
Click Here.

The agro-chemical industry is already bombarding the Commission with lobbyists and messages. Greenpeace activists and campaigners are on the ground in Brussels, too. But with your voice, and your network of friends, we can deliver a louder, more direct message to Europe's top politicians.

We have contact details for all 27 European Commissioners, talking points you can use in your message to them, and links to further reading. The vast majority of EU citizens are opposed to GMOs, and emails direct from people who care ? in Europe, around the world ? can really work.

Please click here to take action.

Thank you for taking action before 7 May and for campaigning this far with us already.

Truth Tuesday

2008-04-28T17:01:00.000-07:00

Today here @ ..Spotlight... is
" Truth Tuesday "

Here's the third vid in my Truth series.

The Third Truth

Truth Number Two :

Truth Number One :

9/11 & The American Empire :

This post will be updated throughout the day...

Weird Wide Web

2008-04-27T10:43:00.000-07:00

Today is " Weird Wide Web Day " here @ ..Spotlight...

It's the second week of links, pics, vids & weird shit in my
" Weird & Wonderful Web " series.

Last Monday's theme was DMT and today's theme is David Lynch.

His web site is here.

David Lynch Speaks Out About 9/11 Truth :

Dutch TV Interview With David Lynch :

The David Lynch Foundation (Link)

“In today’s world of fear and uncertainty, every child should have one class period a day to dive within himself and experience the field of silence—bliss—the enormous reservoir of energy and intelligence that is deep within all of us. This is the way to save the coming generation.” These words from the great educator and scientist of consciousness, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, simply and beautifully describe the urgent need in education today.

Senses Of Cinema / David Lynch (Link)

In 1988 David Lynch painted "Shadow of a Twisted Hand Across My House" and in 1990 "Suddenly My House Became a Tree of Sores". They are simple childlike images painted over a dark background, reflecting the darkness and fear a child can experience within their home. When asked about the recurring theme of the house in his paintings and films, Lynch replied that rather than being concerned with global issues, he is more interested in what happens in the surrounding neighbourhood. He portrays houses so threateningly because "the home is a place where things can go wrong". (1) Lynch uses surreal, non-traditional narrative, and symbolism, to portray communities that represent a dysfunctional society at large.

The Iconic Eraser Head

Full Movie : Eraser Head

David Lynch: Consciousness, Creativity and the Brain - 109 min - Nov 6, 2005

24 lies A Second : David Lynch Folds Space & Time (Link)

There is a sense in which all of David Lynch’s films are a kind of science fiction. But Dune is the only one of his films that is expressly in that genre, and he uses it as a kind of manifesto of his own approach to film making, as well as to set the stage for the space-folding that follows.

To put it another way, Dune’s “explanation” of travel without movement, of the folding of space, is a sly announcement of not only the vision but the technique that David Lynch brings to the screenwriter’s and film director’s art.

One cannot fold the space between two points, causing them to coincide, unless one begins by properly assuring and establishing those two points. It’s no coincidence that Lynch’s films are defined by their sense of place: Eraserhead’s post-industrial wasteland (inspired by Lynchs's memories of Philadelphia, and pointing toward his recurrent use of images of factories), the Industrial Revolution London of The Elephant Man (whose Victoriana folds nicely into the costumes and design of Dune), the Southeastern and Northwestern lumber towns of Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks, the corrosive, decaying Hollywood of Mulholland Dr. The Dream Dwarf who anomalously counterpoints the otherwise well-defined spatial environment of Twin Peaks is identified in the cast credits as “the man from another place”—not from another time or from a dream, as one would more likely have expected.

A Conversation With David Lynch :

A Funny Interview With David Lynch :

Hope you liked this...

Stumble or Digg! it if you did...

Thanks.

Tuesday is Truth Tuesday here @ ..Spotlight... & Friday is Fucked-Up Friday, so drop by again...

Fucked-Up Friday

2008-04-25T09:07:00.000-07:00

Today & every Friday here @ Spotlight.. will be
" Fucked-Up Friday "

Anything goes but Truth & the Truth Movement will of course always be an underlying theme.

Today will be mostly cool as fuck vids.

Vid #1 : Tell The Truth

Vid #2 : Truth Number Two

Vid #3 : Imagine By A Perfect Circle

Vid #4 : Lies By Ministry

Vid #5 : False Flag By Massive Attack

Fucked-Up Friday News :

US Ship Fires At Iranian Vessels

WASHINGTON - A cargo ship contracted by the U.S Military Sea-lift Command fired "a few bursts" of warning shots in the Gulf at small boats believed to be Iranian, U.S. defence officials said on Friday.

Iran quickly denied the alleged confrontation, according to a report on Iran Press TV, an English-language Iranian-funded station.

The Westward Venture, a cargo ship chartered by the U.S. Department of Defence, was travelling north in international waters in the central Gulf at around 8 a.m. local time on Thursday when the incident took place, said Commander Lydia Robertson, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet.

NY Post Smears Activist For “Wheelchair Assault”

Paul Joseph Watson

The NY Post is facing a lawsuit after it brazenly smeared a 9/11 truth activist for attacking a wheelchair-bound woman in New York last night, when in fact it was the activist himself who was beaten up by the girl’s father according to eyewitnesses.

In the most disgusting, inaccurate and bias hit piece we have seen to date, Post writer Philip Messing claims that 18-year-old Maureen Lovetro, who has cerebral palsy, was assaulted by We Are Change member German (Gary) Talis in an article entitled BUSH BASHER SMASHES DISABLED TEEN: COPS during an event attended by Laura and Jenna Bush.

The story even features photos of the wheelchair-bound Lovetro in a crass attempt to elicit more outrage towards Talis.
The libelous smear has also been picked up by Neo-con cheerleader Michelle Malkin on her Hot Air blog.

The fact that numerous eyewitnesses, who were ignored by New York police, assert that it was Talis himself who was the victim of an assault metered out by the girl’s father - John Lovetro - leaves Talis with no option but to pursue a lawsuit against the New York Post, as he stated on The Alex Jones Show today.

Both articles depict Gary as a heartless villain, attacking a handicapped girl—all of which is the furthest from the truth," states a We Are Change press release. "Gary did not and has never lifted a hand toward any citizen, as confirmed by all witnesses. We will be releasing a video interview of Gary after his release from central bookings explaining exactly what took place, followed by the witnesses, all of whom corroborate his statement.

John Lovetro, the girl’s father, struck Gary leaving a flesh wound under his right eye. Gary, aware of his rights, did not at any time defend himself and yet remains the victim, now facing charges of 3rd degree assault. We Are Change will pursue legal action against all individuals and organizations that violate our civil rights. We will not be physically assaulted, and we will not stand for slander and lies, concludes the statement.

We Are Change are asking civil rights attorneys to contact them at pursuitofliberty@gmail.com to offer help.

Eyewitness Dianne Lipson told this website that John Lovetro made aggressive gestures towards Talis, cocking and waving his fist, before pursuing Talis into the side of a building.

Lovetro began punching Talis repeatedly as Lovetro’s wife begged him to stop and the girl in the wheelchair began crying.

"The man punched Gary over and over again," states Lipson, adding, "From what I observed, the man who assaulted Gary was looking for a fight, and he actually exploited his physically challenged daughter, steering her wheelchair toward Gary, in order to fabricate an excuse to physically vent his anger."

Lipson attempted to submit a witness statement to police but was ignored.

The NY Post article also states that Talis shouted obscenities, which is completely contradicted by witness testimony.

The controversy follows a similar incident last week where a member of We Are Change Ireland was attacked by an MEP, only for the mainstream media to later report that the MEP had been the victim of the assault.

A smear campaign is in full-swing on behalf of the Neo-Cons and the corporate media to demonize 9/11 truth and anti-war activists as dangerous, when in fact they are the victims of physical attacks and abuse on behalf of authorities and individuals like John Lovetro.

Contact the New York Post and demand they offer an immediate retraction.

webeditor@nypost.com

letters@nypost.com

E mail the writer of this disgusting hit piece - philip.messing@nypost.com

Nuclear Greenpeace

2008-04-25T08:04:00.000-07:00

What the fuck??!!

Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore has rightly said that there is no real proof of global warming, this I agree with but he also now says that we should build hundreds of nuclear power plants all across the globe.

What the fuck is this guy on??

He has dissed all nature driven forces including wind, solar, hydroelectric, geothermal & other renewable sources.

Has he lost his mind?
Have the neo-con globalist fascist elite paid him off?

Greenpeace arose out of the whole questionable use of nuclear power & nuclear weapons.
Now their founder turns around and says this??

I am astounded.

Here's the article:

Greenpeace Founder: No Proof of Global Warming, Let's All Go Nuclear

ROCKY BARKER
Idaho Statesman
April 25, 2008

Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore says there is no proof global warming is caused by humans, but it is likely enough that the world should turn to nuclear power - a concept tied closely to the underground nuclear testing his former environmental group formed to oppose.

The chemistry of the atmosphere is changing, and there is a high-enough risk that “true believers” like Al Gore are right that world economies need to wean themselves off fossil fuels to reduce greenhouse gases, he said.

“It’s like buying fire insurance,” Moore said. “We all own fire insurance even though there is a low risk we are going to get into an accident.”

The only viable solution is to build hundreds of nuclear power plants over the next century, Moore told the Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday. There isn’t enough potential for wind, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal or other renewable energy sources, he said.

10,000 Year Old Tree

2008-04-24T07:51:00.000-07:00

Swedish Tree Is The Oldest In The World

Scientists in Sweden have uncovered a new record-holder for the title of "world's oldest tree." Previously, the oldest tree known to the world was a bristlecone pine tree in California called the "Methuselah tree." At 4,768 years of age, the Methuselah tree is indeed venerable, but compared to this spruce it's still just a young whippersnapper. The newly discovered tree is estimated to be 9,950 years old!

You might expect a tree this old to be tall, thick and majestic, much like a less talkative version of Treebeard the Ent in The Lord of the Rings. However, this tree is actually rather puny-it looks more like Charlie Brown's Christmas tree than one of the oldest living organisms on the planet.

The tree appears so small and unremarkable because the trunk itself is actually very young. The roots, however, have been around since the end of the Ice Age. As the BBC reported on April 17, the tree has gone through a series of trunks or stems, with each one lasting approximately 600 years. Every year, heavy winter snow pushes the lowest branches of the tree into the ground, where they take root. Whenever the old trunk dies, one of these clones rises up from the old rootstock to replace it.

10,000 years

10,000 years is a very, very long time. So, to put this tree's lifespan into perspective, here is a timeline of events that have taken place since it first took root and began to grow:

7,542 BC - Spruce tree takes root on Fulu Mountain in Dalarna, Switzerland

7,500 BC - The world's first known city, Catalhoyuk, was founded around this time.

6000 BC (approximately) - Agriculture arrives in Europe

3500-3200 BC - Cuneiform, the first writing system, is invented in Sumeria. Also, the earliest known use of the wheel dates to this time. The first known instance of a wheel being used was for throwing pots in 3500 BC, but archaeological evidence shows that people were using for transportation by 3200 BC.

2,600 BC - The first Egyptian pyramid, the Pyramid of Djoser, was constructed by the architect Imhotep. For this accomplishment, Imhotep was deified after his death.

1,500 BC - Stonehenge completed

700-800 BC - The Iliad and The Odyssey date to this time. According to tradition, these Greek classics were both composed by a blind poet named Homer.

399 BC - In Athens, the philosopher Socrates was forced to drink a fatal dose of hemlock for "corrupting Athenian youth."

333 BC - Alexander the Great conquers Persia

44 BC - Julius Caesar is appointed dictator of Rome; Rome ceases to function as a republic and becomes an empire

30 AD - Cleopatra, the last Queen of Egypt, commits suicide along with her lover, Roman general Marc Antony.

27 BC-180 AD - The Pax Romana, a period of widespread peace and prosperity throughout the Roman Empire

476 AD - The last Roman Emperor loses his throne

800 AD - Vikings begin to plunder and pillage their way into the rest of Europe

1000 AD - Leif Erikson becomes the first European to "discover" North America

1215 AD - King John is forced to sign the Magna Carta

1334 AD - The Black Plague begins to spread, killing anywhere from 30-50% of the European population

1370 - The Great Wall of China is completed

1477 - Invention of the printing press in Europe

1420-1600 - The Italian Renaissance revolutionizes European art, architecture and literature

1492 - Columbus sails the ocean blue, Europe rediscovers America

1517 - Martin Luther launches the Reformation, and Protestants break with the Catholic Church

1776 - America declares independence from Britain

1914-1918 - World War I devastates Europe

1937-1945 - World War 2 devastates Europe and Asia

1961 - First Human in Space

1969 - Neil Armstrong becomes the first human to set foot on the surface of the moon

2007 - Swedish scientists discover the ancient spruce tree while conducting a tree census in the mountains of Sweden.

Isn't that amazing?

The roots of this one tree have been growing since before the dawn of recorded history! In fact, ancient Sumer, the first human society that had all the characteristics that anthropologists and historians call "civilization," was established around 6000 BC. So, unless an older civilization is discovered sometime in the future, this spruce tree is actually older than civilization itself by more than 1000 years!

From LogBlog

Waterboarding

2008-04-23T14:43:00.000-07:00

Amnesty unveils 'Waterboarding' film

An American expert in torture techniques has denounced his government for allowing "waterboarding" to be practised against terror suspects, just as a graphic advertisement showing the brutal reality of the technique is unveiled to British cinema-goers.

Malcolm Nance, who trained hundreds of US servicemen and women to resist interrogation by putting them through "waterboarding" exercises, demanded an immediate end to the practice by all US personnel.

He said: "They seem to think it is worth throwing the honour of 220 years of American decency in war out of the window. Waterboarding is out-and-out torture, and I'm deeply ashamed President Bush has authorised its use and dragged the US's reputation into the mud."

Mr Bush faced criticism recently when he vetoed a Bill that would have outlawed such methods of "enhanced interrogation" – the White House refuses to describe it as torture.

Mr Nance said: "You have a purpose-built table with straps in a pattern so that people can be strapped and unstrapped quickly. The head is strapped down in such a way so they cannot resist the water. The head is elevated so the water goes down the oesophagus.

"The water is poured very carefully over the nose – you keep a constant pour. You are drowning in water but you don't have the ability to hold your breath. You feel the water going in, you understand that water is filling your lungs."

Mr Nance, who is now an independent consultant, said the technique was also futile, as well as barbaric, as the prisoner would say anything to survive – regardless of its truth.

Amnesty International is leading the campaign to persuade the US to abandon the practice – a form of torture used as long ago as the Spanish Inquisition – and is stepping up its efforts with the release of a graphic and disturbing advertisement.

The broadcast begins with images of glistening clear liquid, suggesting it could be promoting a new brand of vodka or gin. But the camera pulls back to show water is being poured over the face of a desperate man strapped to a table.

Kate Allen, the UK director of Amnesty International, said: "Our film shows you what the CIA doesn't want you to see – the disgusting reality of half-drowning a person.

"For a few seconds, our film-makers did it for real. Even for those few seconds, it's horrifying to watch. The reality – in a secret prison with no one to stop it – is much, much worse."

The advertisement can be seen at here and at selected cinemas from next month onwards.

Arrested For Asking A Question

2008-04-23T10:05:00.000-07:00

We Are Change Members Arrested For Asking Laura Bush A Question

Two members of We Are Change were arrested in New York last night for asking Laura and Jenna Bush a question. Reporter Matt Lepacek was dragged out during Laura Bush’s speech and physically assaulted by police, according to Luke Rudkowski.

News of the incidents has not been reported by the corporate media as of this morning.

A We Are Change member named Gary reportedly refused to move from a sidewalk when asked by the Secret Service. When Gary attempted to ask Laura and Jenna Bush a question, a plain clothed man escorting someone in a wheelchair started a fight. Both men were taken to a local police precinct and the man who started the fight was released, while Gary was held and later charged with 3rd Degree Assault.

According to Rudkowski, "This unknown individual was much taller and larger than Gary. For no reason this individual started to lunge at Gary and punch him and beat him. Gary did not defend himself or fight back. Gary was the victim and did not strike once at the unknown individual. This provocateur provoked an attack by trying to instigate a fight and now Gary was arrested and is now facing third degree assault charges by this unknown provocateur. Gary will be arraigned tomorrow morning."

"Please call the 19th Precinct and ask them why Gary was unlawfully arrested and charged with a third degree assault charge when he is innocent and obviously the victim," asks Rudkowski.

Inside the event, We Are Change reporter Matt Lepacek attempted to interrupt a Laura Bush speech with a question before he was quickly dragged away by police.

Luke Rudkowski reports that the police intentionally bashed Lepacek’s head against a door or wall as they removed him from the scene. Lepacek recorded the incident on his cell phone but this was quickly confiscated by police.

Lepacek was subsequently released with a summons for disorderly conduct and will go to court in the future.

Matt Lepacek previously made headlines when he was arrested for asking a question of one of Rudy Giuliani’s staff members during a press conference last June.

"Phone calls from this office to Precinct 19 in attempt to obtain accurate information about the charges resulted in rude behavior and several hang-ups, as well as a transfer to the NYPD’s Dept. of Public Information (a dead end)," writes Rudkowski.

We Are Change are urging supporters to call the police precinct and politely ask that all charges be dropped against Matt Lepacek and Gary.

19th Precinct

153 E 67th Street

3rd & Lex, New York, NY 10065

(212) 452-0600

NYPD Dept. of Public Information

(646) 610-5000

Disclaimer: Please when calling the precinct please be polite and courteous to the police officers. We Are Change does not advocate any threats of violence of any kind.

From InfoWars

Lisbon Treaty Pig

2008-04-22T12:24:00.000-07:00

Prionsias de Rossa is a pig.

A lying, cheating pig.

He is not fit to represent reptiles let alone the Irish people.

I've written about him on this blog before, see Here
and Here.

I've also emailed him in the past to express my disgust at his vote against the Irish People. His reply to that & other emails was infantile.

He needs to go.

Here is Alex Jones talking to We Are Change Ireland about more of Pig de Rossa's lies

Here's a vid I made for We Are Change & the No To Lisbon group Libertas

See Here for The Lisbon Treaty Facts.

Proinsias De Rossa Contact Details :

Dublin Office
Room 1410
Liberty Hall
Dublin 1

Tel: +353 1 874 6109
Fax: +353 1 874 6096
Brussels Office
Tel: +32 2 2847681
Fax: +32 2 2849681
Strasbourg Office
Tel: +33 3 88175681
Fax: +33 3 88179681
E-mail
pderossa@europarl.eu.int

Let the prick know how much we hold him in contempt for his vote against the people.

End McCain's Presidential Bid

2008-04-22T04:27:00.000-07:00

FEC Violation Can End McCain's Presidential Bid

On March 21st Mathew Mosk of The Washington Post,
see here, reported that Sen. John McCain has officially broken the $54
million dollar spending limitation imposed by the presidential public financing system.

At the link below you will find a Microsoft Word document drafted
by our Connecticut Coordinator. It is formal complaint to the
FEC to investigate McCain's violation. If we flood the FEC with
complaints they will have to take notice. Do not delay and file
your complaint with the FEC TODAY!!! If McCain gets bumped out of
the race... Ron Paul could rise to the foreground! ... and it only
takes one print out and a $0.41 stamp.

CLICK HERE TO GET MCCAIN KICKED OUT!!

If you are a Ron Paul Meetup group member, notify your meetup of
this action immediately.

Yours in Freedom and Truth,

Gary Franchi
National Director
RestoreTheRepublic.com

Weird & Wonderful

2008-04-21T08:45:00.000-07:00

Hey all!

From now on, Mondays @ Spotlight On The Cockroaches will be
" Weird & Wonderful Web Day "

I will post info, pics, vids & links to weird, wonderful & interesting web sites.

Feel free to contact me & put forward your own site, or sites that you feel may be fitting for Weird & Wonderful Web Day.

Today, I have chosen a DMT (DiMethylTryptamine) theme.

You can find info on DMT Here & Here.

Site Number 1 :

Rick Strassman MD. DMT: The Spirit Molecule

In 1990, he began the first new human research with psychedelic, or hallucinogenic, drugs in the United States in over 20 years. These studies investigated the effects of N,N-dimethyltryptamine, or DMT, an extremely short-acting and powerful psychedelic. During the project's five years, he administered approximately 400 doses of DMT to 60 human volunteers. This research took place at the University of New Mexico's School of Medicine in Albuquerque, where he was tenured Associate Professor of Psychiatry.

Navigate to the Sample Chapters section for some very interesting reading.

Site Number Two :

The Spirit Molecule

Keep an eye on this site. It will host a new DMT Documentary very soon...

Site Number Three :

MAPS : Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies

The Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) is a membership-based, non-profit research and educational organization. They assist scientists to design, fund, obtain approval for and report on studies into the risks and benefits of MDMA, psychedelic drugs and marijuana.

Vid 1 :

Joe Rogan talks about DMT

Vid 2 : Terence McKenna ( RIP ) on DMT

Site Number Four :

Make Your Own DMT

Well, why not??!!

Watch out, tomorrow is Truth Tuesday here @ Spotlight.

More themed days will be announced soon...

JFK

2008-04-20T03:46:00.000-07:00

Here's a sneak peek at InfoWars & Alex Jones' new documentary about
the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

I can't wait to see the finished piece.

Keep an eye on THIS You Tube Channel for more goodies.

GMO Consequences

2008-04-18T02:27:00.000-07:00

New Website Lays Bare the Unintended Consequences of Genetic Engineering

Research reports from the mainstream technical literature may change
the tenor of the public conversation about biotechnology.

Ghent, New York (April 14, 2008)

The Nature Institute has unveiled a new website designed to set the public debate about genetic engineering upon a more accessible scientific foundation. Distilling a voluminous technical literature, the website gathers together -- often in the researchers' own words -- information about both the intended and unintended consequences of transgenic experiments. The emerging picture tells a dramatic story -- one that has scarcely begun to inform the public conversation to date. The website, available here , is part of The Nature Institute's ongoing project on "The Nontarget Effects of Genetic Manipulation."

Nontarget effects have proven both extensive and unpredictable. The evidence for their occurrence, while mostly buried in the technical literature, is not disputable or even particularly controversial. It's simply not widely known. Once it is known, the frequently heard claim that genetic manipulation of organisms is a "precise science" without dramatic risks will either be voiced no more or will be recognized as dishonest.

As project director, Craig Holdrege, describes, "if you manipulate one or more genes in an organism using the techniques of biotechnology, the so-called side-effects -- which are not side-effects at all, but include direct responses by the organism to the invasive actions of the engineer -- can occur anywhere and everywhere in the organism. They are not predictable, are little understood, and have mostly unknown consequences for health and the environment. The intended result may or may not be achieved in any given case, but the one almost sure thing is that unintended results -- nontarget effects -- will be achieved."

Holdrege, whose most recent book, Beyond Biotechnology, deals with the practical and philosophical implications of genetic engineering, maintains that a great deal of the discussion of genetic engineering practices can become calmer and more focused once the basic facts revealed by the extensive research to date are more widely known. Holdrege believes that "we can hardly fail to acknowledge a need for caution when we are dealing with a powerful technology that is changing organisms and environments around the globe -- organisms and environments that cannot simply be restored to their previous state when we discover the unpredicted results of transgenic experiments."

French Senate Approve GMO Law

2008-04-18T02:20:00.000-07:00

France's upper house of parliament has passed a bill laying down conditions for the growth of crops using genetically modified organisms (GMO) after changing a key amendment aimed at limiting their cultivation.

The measure, passed by the upper house, or Senate, late on Wednesday, is a response to European Union demands that member states formulate laws on GMO use.

The bill has the backing of the ruling centre-right government and the main farmers' union, but has been fiercely criticised by campaigners opposed to the use of the technology.

It will return to the lower house of parliament, or National Assembly, in the second half of May before becoming law.

Under an amendment proposed by Communist deputy Andre Chassaigne to guard against contamination by GMO crops, the law makes it compulsory for farmers to "respect agricultural structures, local ecosystems and non-GMO commercial and production industries."

But a modification introduced in the Senate would leave it to a government-appointed High Council on Biotechnology to fix limits on what would constitute "non-GMO" production for crop varieties, pending a ruling on the issue by the European Union.

Critics said the change would weaken the amendment but Greenpeace campaigner Arnaud Apoteker, an opponent of the bill, said the fact it had not been scrapped entirely was positive.

"We may have avoided the worst because ... the amendment was in danger and that was what we feared," he said.

He said there was concern it could be further watered down when it returned to the National Assembly for a second reading.

As well as attracting condemnation from the left wing opposition, the GMO bill has caused deep divisions within the ranks of President Nicolas Sarkozy's centre-right government.

Junior Environment Minister Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, who favoured tighter restrictions, accused members of her own party and her own senior minister Jean-Louis Borloo of "cowardice" over the issue.

Full story here.

Truth Number Two

2008-04-16T16:28:00.000-07:00

Here's another vid in my Truth series. Feel free to comment on it or any of the others that I've made. I'd appreciate any suggestions, thanks.

Truth Number Two

Truth Number One

2008-04-14T04:37:00.000-07:00

Here's a vid that I made, called Truth Number One. I'm going to make a series of these.

Feel free to spread it around.

UN Official Wants 9/11 Investigation

2008-04-10T11:38:00.000-07:00

UN Human Rights Official Wants Investigation Into US Government Role In 9/11

From InfoWars

An official in the newly formed UN Human Rights Council has called
for a fresh investigation into the events of 9/11 in order to examine the possible role that neoconservatives may have played in the attacks.

The New York Sun picked up the story today, explaining that

Richard Falk, a professor of international law emeritus at Princeton University, and an expert on human rights was assigned to a new position within the council on March 26.

His role is to report on human rights in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. Two days prior to the announcement, Falk appeared
on former University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett's radio show and spoke of how he is keen to see a fresh investigation into 9/11 in order to address inconsistencies in the official account of what happened.

Mr. Falk told Barrett, "It is possibly true that especially the neoconservatives thought there was a situation in the country and in the world where something had to happen to wake up the American people. Whether they are innocent about the contention that they made that something happen or not, I don't think we can answer definitively at this point. All we can say is there is a lot of grounds for suspicion, there should be an official investigation of the sort the 9/11 commission did not engage in and that the failure to do these things is cheating the American people and in some sense the people of the world of a greater confidence in what really happened than they presently possess."

Falk previously penned the preface to Professor David Ray Griffin's groundbreaking 2004 book The New Pearl Harbor, in which the theologian catalogued scores of unexplained facets surrounding 9/11 and inconsistencies in the official
government version of events.
Falk has also published a number of notable books and essays analyzing the legality of the Vietnam War and other military operations, including the Iraq invasion.
A year ago he played a prominent role in a Citizens' hearing on the legality of the Iraq War as a tribunal testifier.
Of the Invasion he has previously written:

" ...inescapable that an objective observer would
reach the conclusion that this Iraq war is a war of aggression,
and as such, that it amounts to a Crime against Peace of the
sort for which surviving German leaders were indicted, prosecuted
and punished at the Nuremberg trials conducted shortly after
the Second World War. "

Falk's appointment to the Human Rights Council has also hit headlines due to the fact that he has previously slammed the Israeli occupation of Palestine and compared the Zionist government's treatment of Palestinian Arabs to the Nazi treatment
of Jews in the holocaust.

The Israeli government announced
Tuesday that it will deny Falk a visa to enter Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

Despite this and the now customary attacks from the Anti-Defamation League, Falk has stood by his comments, telling the BBC: "If this kind of situation had existed for instance in the manner in which China
was dealing with Tibet or the Sudanese government was dealing with Darfur, I think there would be no reluctance to make that comparison."
The New York Sun reports that former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton commented on Falk's recent appointment to the Human Rights Council: "This is exactly why we voted against the new human rights council."

Bolton is clearly worried that like Falk, some of the officials within the council are legal experts that recognize war crimes when they see them and may actually attempt to do something about it.

Last month Japanese member of Parliament Yukihisa Fujita told the Alex Jones Show that a potential new investigation of the 9/11 cover-up may be coordinated by individuals within the United Nations.

It remains to be seen whether the Human Rights Council is composed of enough well meaning individuals to have a significant impact or whether, like much of the rest of the UN, it becomes a part of the establishment left arm of the global elite system.

Vaccines & Autism

2008-04-10T10:42:00.000-07:00

Don't believe a word of Government sponsored "Public Health" studies

This week, a study proported to reveal that vaccines do not cause Autism.
Today it was revealed that the CDC was forced to admit that the MMR vaccine HAD caused Autistic symptoms in a 9 year old girl. See here.

Vaccines have caused AIDS, Cancer, Autism & Polio among others.
Major drug companies, Rockefeller & Bill Gates' funded " initiatives " have intenionally poisoned & infected people worldwide. See here.

You must watch this video!!

Mercury, Autism & The Global Vaccine Agenda

Funny Pics

2008-04-08T13:43:00.000-07:00

A little break from the heavy shit...

Enjoy this humorous pict-o-licious ensemble...

Monsanto Land

2008-04-08T13:38:00.000-07:00

The World According To Monsanto

A very good documentary by ARTE, a French/German TV production.

GMO Truth

2008-04-06T07:32:00.000-07:00

Here are some excellent articles & GMO studies

GM SEEDS CAN 'LAST FOR 10 YEARS'

BBC News, 1 April 2008. By Richard Black, Environment correspondent.

Seeds of some genetically modified crops can endure in soil for at least 10 years, scientists have discovered.

Researchers in Sweden examined a field planted with experimental oilseed rape a decade ago, and found transgenic specimens were still growing there.

This was despite intensive efforts in the intervening years to remove seeds.

No GM crop has been found to endure so long; and critics say it shows that genetically modified organisms cannot be contained once released.

Tina D'Hertefeldt from Lund University led the team of scientists that scoured the small field which had hosted the GM trial 10 years ago looking for "volunteers" - plants that have sprung up spontaneously from seed in the soil.

"We were surprised, very surprised," she told BBC News. "We knew that volunteers had been detected earlier, but we thought they'd all have gone by now."

Continued HERE.

MONSANTO'S HARVEST OF FEAR

Vanity Fair, May 2008. By Donald L. Bartlett and James B. Steele.

Monsanto already dominates America's food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation's tactics - ruthless legal battles against small farmers-is its decades-long history of toxic contamination.

Gary Rinehart clearly remembers the summer day in 2002 when the stranger walked in and issued his threat. Rinehart was behind the counter of the Square Deal, his "old-time country store," as he calls it, on the fading town square of Eagleville, Missouri, a tiny farm community 100 miles north of Kansas City.

The Square Deal is a fixture in Eagleville, a place where farmers and townspeople can go for lightbulbs, greeting cards, hunting gear, ice cream, aspirin, and dozens of other small items without having to drive to a big-box store in Bethany, the county seat, 15 miles down Interstate 35.

Everyone knows Rinehart, who was born and raised in the area and runs one of Eagleville's few surviving businesses. The stranger came up to the counter and asked for him by name.

"Well, that's me," said Rinehart.

As Rinehart would recall, the man began verbally attacking him, saying he had proof that Rinehart had planted Monsanto's genetically modified (G.M.) soybeans in violation of the company's patent. Better come clean and settle with Monsanto, Rinehart says the man told him—or face the consequences.

Continued HERE.

SEEDS OF WORRY

The McGill Daily, March 31 2008, Volume 97, Issue 45. By Charles Mostoller.

Charles Mostoller, a former Daily editor, reports from Mexico's movement against genetically modified corn.

After 14 years of the North American Free Trade Agreement's devastating effects on the majority of Mexican farmers, Mexico's food system now faces another serious threat. Illegally planted and unknowingly imported since the late nineties, genetically modified (GM) corn has contaminated farms all over Mexico, threatening the livelihoods of small farmers, endangering consumer health, and putting at risk the incredible genetic diversity of native Mexican corn.

But for over a year now, farmers, scientists, and activists all over Mexico have been mobilizing under the banner Sin maìz, no hay paìs without corn, there is no country. The campaign has been organizing protests against the import of GM corn and in support of maiz criollo, known in English as "Indian corn" or maize.

At a recent Sin maìz, no hay paìs event in Huajauapan, Oaxaca, longtime indigenous-rights activist and honorary Zapatista Commander Don Felix Serdán called for the prohibition of GM corn, saying that it represented a threat to food security and to Mexico's sovereignty.

"If we lose our corn, we lose our sovereignty, our very dignity," he says. "We will depend on the U.S., we will have to buy their GM seeds. That will be slavery. Now, we're no longer self-sufficient and there is no food security.... We have the responsibility to avoid the contamination by GM corn, to protect our communities."

Continued HERE.

Many thanks to Laura & GM Free Ireland.

A Drunken Dream To The Tune Of Cat Power

2008-04-02T17:22:00.000-07:00

This is something I made because I had to make something...

You can be the judge & jury..

GMO Action

2008-04-02T00:31:00.000-07:00

ACTION ALERT: PLEASE HELP KEEP GM CROPS OUT OF EUROPE

Dear friends and colleagues,

This is an urgent appeal for a few moments of your time to prevent the European Commission from approving two new GM crops for cultivation in the EU.

Last November, members of the GM-free Ireland Network were among 130,000 Europeans who signed a Greenpeace petition requesting the Commission to support a proposal made by the Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas, to refuse the authorisation of two new Bt maize varieties in the EU. If authorised these would be the first GM crops approved for commercial release in Europe since 1998. (The only GM crop currently allowed in Europe, Monsanto's MON810 maize, is already banned in France, Austria, Hungary, Poland and Switzerland.)

Unfortunately, EU President Barroso caved in to pressure from the US Government and the agri-biotech companies. He refused to host a broad Commission "orientation debate" on GMOs, and has requested Mr Dimas to withdraw his proposal. That is why we need to take action again now.

Given the amazing public response to last November's petition (130,000 signatures in four weeks), the aim of our follow-up action is to put huge public pressure on Barroso (to convince him that he cannot deal with GMO issues behind closed doors), and to support Mr Dimas (by showing that Irish citizens wholeheartedly back his proposal to reject the Bt maize).

This time we invite you to send a picture postcard to Dimas:

You may be tempted to avoid the hassle of all the required steps (buy the postcard, buy the stamp, write a message and post it). But making this small effort will provide Mr Dimas with the opportunity to present Barroso with a mountain of postcards to indicate the support he has from the public. It will aso send a clear signal to Mr Barroso that the Commission's continued anti-democratic disregard for European citizens' objection to GM crops is not acceptable.

Action instructions:

Please send your picture postcard to EU Commissioner Mr. Stavros Dimas at the following address:

Mr Stavros Dimas
Commissioner for the Environment
European Commission
Rue de la Loi 200
1040 Brussels
Belgium

What to write on your card:

Tell Mr. Dimas you support his proposal to not legalise any more GM crops. It could be a postcard you buy or a photo you took of something important in your life such as Ireland's beautiful landscape. Urge and encourage Mr. Dimas to continue standing up to giant corporations determined control the world's food supply through patented GM crops. Express your concerns about their economic impacts on contaminated farmers. If you can't find the words, try drawing it.

Please circulate this email to friends and colleagues:

We need to spread this message as broadly as possible, since only a large number of postcards will have the desired impact on the Commission.

If you are a member of one of the 130 farm groups and other organisations in the GM-free Ireland Network, it would be great if you can distribute pre-addressed postcards to all your members. Even buying some postcards for your family, friends, and office colleagues to sign and send would make a difference.

As Mahatma Gandhi said, you have to be the change you want to see in the world!

Thank you!

Some good news! France has upheld it's ban on GMO

FRANCE UPHOLDS GMO CROP BAN
+
EU GMO FEED BATTLEGROUND

* Opponents of genetically modified crops win victory in France

International Herald Tribune, 19 March 2008.

* French council upholds decision on GMO crop ban

Reuters, 19 March 2008.

* French Farmers Lose Bid To Overturn GMO Corn Ban

AFP, 19 March 2008.

* French state body upholds decision on GM crop ban

Reuters, 19 March 2008.

* EU GMO feed battleground

Truth About Trade and Technology, 19 March 2008.

OPPONENTS OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS WIN VICTORY IN FRANCE

International Herald Tribune, 19 March 2008. By James Kanter.

PARIS: Opponents of gene-altered crops won a victory in France on Wednesday when the country's top court upheld a ban - for the time being - on a corn variety produced by the U.S. seed company Monsanto.

Growers had argued that the economic harm they faced was serious enough for the month-old ban to be lifted immediately, before the start of the spring planting season. In addition, proponents said allowing plantings could benefit consumers at a time of rising food prices.

The Conseil d'état maintained the ban on the variety, known as MON810, until it could rule on its scientific underpinning. Hearings in that case are expected to be held in the coming months.

In his ruling, Judge Jean-Marie Delarue pointed out that a report, issued in January by a committee of French experts, had called for more studies on the product's safety.

French officials were correct to have paid attention to "new elements brought to light by the committee that could be seen as posing a grave risk to the environment," Delarue wrote.

Continued here>>>>

Lots more info HERE.

Global Warming?? Wrong!

2008-03-31T11:42:00.000-07:00

New derivation of equations governing the greenhouse effect reveals "runaway warming" impossible

Miklós Zágoni isn't just a physicist and environmental researcher. He is also a global warming activist and Hungary's most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Or was.

That was until he learned the details of a new theory of the greenhouse effect, one that not only gave far more accurate climate predictions here on Earth, but Mars too. The theory was developed by another Hungarian scientist, Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Langley Research Center.

After studying it, Zágoni stopped calling global warming a crisis, and has instead focused on presenting the new theory to other climatologists. The data fit extremely well. "I fell in love," he stated at the International Climate Change Conference this week.

"Runaway greenhouse theories contradict energy balance equations," Miskolczi states. Just as the theory of relativity sets an upper limit on velocity, his theory sets an upper limit on the greenhouse effect, a limit which prevents it from warming the Earth more than a certain amount.

How did modern researchers make such a mistake? They relied upon equations derived over 80 years ago, equations which left off one term from the final solution.

Miskolczi's story reads like a book. Looking at a series of differential equations for the greenhouse effect, he noticed the solution -- originally done in 1922 by Arthur Milne, but still used by climate researchers today -- ignored boundary conditions by assuming an "infinitely thick" atmosphere. Similar assumptions are common when solving differential equations; they simplify the calculations and often result in a result that still very closely matches reality. But not always.

So Miskolczi re-derived the solution, this time using the proper boundary conditions for an atmosphere that is not infinite. His result included a new term, which acts as a negative feedback to counter the positive forcing. At low levels, the new term means a small difference ... but as greenhouse gases rise, the negative feedback predominates, forcing values back down.

NASA refused to release the results. Miskolczi believes their motivation is simple. "Money", he tells DailyTech. Research that contradicts the view of an impending crisis jeopardizes funding, not only for his own atmosphere-monitoring project, but all climate-change research. Currently, funding for climate research tops $5 billion per year.

Miskolczi resigned in protest, stating in his resignation letter, "Unfortunately my working relationship with my NASA supervisors eroded to a level that I am not able to tolerate. My idea of the freedom of science cannot coexist with the recent NASA practice of handling new climate change related scientific results."

His theory was eventually published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in his home country of Hungary.

The conclusions are supported by research published in the Journal of Geophysical Research last year from Steven Schwartz of Brookhaven National Labs, who gave statistical evidence that the Earth's response to carbon dioxide was grossly overstated. It also helps to explain why current global climate models continually predict more warming than actually measured.

The equations also answer thorny problems raised by current theory, which doesn't explain why "runaway" greenhouse warming hasn't happened in the Earth's past. The new theory predicts that greenhouse gas increases should result in small, but very rapid temperature spikes, followed by much longer, slower periods of cooling -- exactly what the paleoclimatic record demonstrates.

However, not everyone is convinced. Dr. Stephen Garner, with the NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL), says such negative feedback effects are "not very plausible". Reto Ruedy of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies says greenhouse theory is "200 year old science" and doubts the possibility of dramatic changes to the basic theory.

Miskowlczi has used his theory to model not only Earth, but the Martian atmosphere as well, showing what he claims is an extremely good fit with observational results. For now, the data for Venus is too limited for similar analysis, but Miskolczi hopes it will one day be possible.

Processed Meat = 20% Increased Risk Of Cancer

2008-03-31T10:29:00.000-07:00

Eating just one sausage or approximately three rashers of bacon a day can increase the risk of developing bowel cancer by a fifth, an expert warned yesterday.

Studies show that just 50g of processed meat daily increases the chances of getting bowel cancer by around 20pc.

The charity, World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), said more needed to be done to get across the message that people who eat processed meat regularly are putting their health at risk.

Professor Martin Wiseman, medical and scientific adviser for the WCRF, said there was convincing evidence of a link between processed meats and cancer.

Processed meat is defined as that which is preserved by smoking, curing, salting or the addition of preservatives.

Examples include ham, bacon, pastrami, salami, hot dogs and processed sausages.

Hamburgers and minced meat count if they have been preserved with salt or any chemical additives.

Prof Wiseman said "We are more sure now than ever before that eating processed meat increases your risk of bowel cancer and this is why WCRF recommends that people avoid eating it.

"The evidence is that whether you are talking about bacon, ham or pastrami -- the safest amount to eat is none at all.

"When you consider that eating 50g of processed meat a day can increase your risk of bowel cancer by about a fifth, it is clear that you can make a positive difference by cutting out as much as possible.

"We do recommend that people avoid it completely, but it is not a case of all or nothing.

"Cutting down the amount of processed meat you eat can also reduce your risk of developing bowel cancer.

"But we need to do more to get this message across because if two thirds of people don't know about the link between processed meat and bowel cancer, then they are not in a position to be able to make informed decisions about whether to eat it or not."

In October, a major WCRF report warned that red meat such as beef, pork and lamb is also strongly linked to bowel cancer, although it is not as harmful as processed meat.

The report carried the recommendation that people consume less than 500g of cooked red meat per week and avoid processed meat altogether if possible.

However, red meat is also a valuable source of nutrients so the WCRF does not recommend cutting it out altogether. Bowel cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the UK, with almost 100 new cases being diagnosed every day.The charity also said there is limited evidence suggesting that processed meats may increase risk of cancers to the oesophagus, lung, and stomach.

Mobiles Phones : More Dangerous Than Smoking

2008-03-31T10:22:00.000-07:00

Mobile phones could kill far more people than smoking or asbestos, a study by an award-winning cancer expert has concluded. He says people should avoid using them wherever possible and that governments and the mobile phone industry must take "immediate steps" to reduce exposure to their radiation.

The study, by Dr Vini Khurana, is the most devastating indictment yet published of the health risks.

It draws on growing evidence – exclusively reported in the IoS in October – that using handsets for 10 years or more can double the risk of brain cancer. Cancers take at least a decade to develop, invalidating official safety assurances based on earlier studies which included few, if any, people who had used the phones for that long.

Earlier this year, the French government warned against the use of mobile phones, especially by children. Germany also advises its people to minimise handset use, and the European Environment Agency has called for exposures to be reduced.

Professor Khurana – a top neurosurgeon who has received 14 awards over the past 16 years, has published more than three dozen scientific papers – reviewed more than 100 studies on the effects of mobile phones. He has put the results on a brain surgery website, and a paper based on the research is currently being peer-reviewed for publication in a scientific journal.

He admits that mobiles can save lives in emergencies, but concludes that "there is a significant and increasing body of evidence for a link between mobile phone usage and certain brain tumours". He believes this will be "definitively proven" in the next decade.

Noting that malignant brain tumours represent "a life-ending diagnosis", he adds: "We are currently experiencing a reactively unchecked and dangerous situation." He fears that "unless the industry and governments take immediate and decisive steps", the incidence of malignant brain tumours and associated death rate will be observed to rise globally within a decade from now, by which time it may be far too late to intervene medically.

"It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking," says Professor Khurana, who told the IoS his assessment is partly based on the fact that three billion people now use the phones worldwide, three times as many as smoke. Smoking kills some five million worldwide each year, and exposure to asbestos is responsible for as many deaths in Britain as road accidents.

Late last week, the Mobile Operators Association dismissed Khurana's study as "a selective discussion of scientific literature by one individual". It believes he "does not present a balanced analysis" of the published science, and "reaches opposite conclusions to the WHO and more than 30 other independent expert scientific reviews".

Source: The Independant

Censored News Of 2007

2008-03-29T12:45:00.000-07:00

Here's a very good list of links to stories that you most likely did
not hear about last year.

Thanks to Project Censored.

(Open links in a new tab for ease of navigation)

1. Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media

2. Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran

3. Oceans of the World in Extreme Danger

4. Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US

5. High-Tech Genocide in Congo

6. Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy

7. US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq

8. Pentagon Exempt from Freedom of Information Act

9. The World Bank Funds Israel-Palestine Wall

10. Expanded Air War in Iraq Kills More Civilians

11. Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed

12. Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines

13. New Evidence Establishes Dangers of Roundup

14. Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US

15. Chemical Industry is EPA’s Primary Research Partner

16. Ecuador and Mexico Defy US on International Criminal Court

17. Iraq Invasion Promotes OPEC Agenda

18. Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story

19. Destruction of Rainforests Worst Ever

20. Bottled Water: A Global Environmental Problem

21. Gold Mining Threatens Ancient Andean Glaciers

22. $Billions in Homeland Security Spending Undisclosed

23. US Oil Targets Kyoto in Europe

24. Cheney’s Halliburton Stock Rose Over 3000 Percent Last Year

25. US Military in Paraguay Threatens Region

Fuck The Olympics

2008-03-29T07:54:00.000-07:00

I for one will be boycotting this sham.

Up Tibet!
Free Tibet!
Fuck the Neo-Con Chinese Government.

2012 : What's All The Fuss About??

2008-03-29T05:00:00.000-07:00

Everyone hears about the different prophecies on how humanity will end. From the Bible predictions of the rapture and the Antichrist, to Nostradamus's prediction of the Planet Comet, people hear theories and see evidence of our civilization coming to an end. However, the most striking of these prophecies lies in the predictions of an ancient, but highly sophisticated Mayan calender. The deciphering and understanding of the calender is whole other story in it's own, so I'll get straight to the point.

The Mayan calender is actually a combination of 3 calenders. The religious calender, the solar calender, and the Long Count. For the sake of this discussion, i wont get into detail about the whole calender and just stick to the Long Count. The Long Count can record any day in history because it is supposedly the measure of days from the beginning of humanity to the end.

The number system used for the Long Count is completely different than our decimal, 10 based number system. Instead, the Mayans used 5 sets of numbers separated with a decimal. A typical Long Count number would look like this:

12.15.14.16.14

The first day of the Long Count is labeled 0.0.0.0.1 which is the equivalent to August 11th, 3114 BC. on our current Gregorian Calender. The Long Count calender ends at 12.19.19.17.20 which is the equivalent to December 21, 2012. Now this doesn't necessarily mean that humanity will come to an end on this date, but it is the date when the calender ends.

But who cares what an ancient civilization thinks? They didn't have any of the scientific knowledge, nor did they have any of the technology that we have now. Why should we be worried? Let's look at this date from a scientific point of view.

First of all, every 11 years our Sun goes through what's called a solar cycle (pole shift, magnetic reversal). During the peak time of the cycle, the Sun's magnetic poles switch. The magnetic field of the Sun does a 180. But remember, this is a 180 degree magnetic flip. The physical part of Sun doesn't actually flip. Anyway, during the peak time of this "flip" sunspots and solar flares become more frequent. This is what's called the "solar maximum".

"Solar flares are pieces of the sun which leap into space, discharging radiation and strong electrical currents that travel outward into space. They often fall back to the surface of the Sun. Sometimes, a very strong flare, called a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME), actually leaves the Sun and this deadly mass shoots out from the Sun towards the planets like a bullet. They usually don't hit anything, but they occasionally hit a planet like Earth. Most flares are small, but even a small flares can be dangerous. In 1989 a flare hit the North American continent and fried electric lines, zapped power grids in the US and Canada, and created large power blackouts. Flares can also effect our moods and physical health. In theory, a large flare impacting the Earth could zap the ionosphere and irradiate the surface, killing every living organism that it touched."

During early 2001, the Sun's solar cycle was completed and the Sun switched magnetic poles, so the Sun is due for another cycle in the year 2012.

Well, who cares if the Sun flips again? it flips every 11 years so why should should the next flip be any different?

The solar cycle of 2012 is more significant than any other for several reasons:

1. During this time the two biggest planets in our solar system, Saturn and Jupiter, will be in line with each other. The gravitational effects of the two planets on the Sun will cause it to wobble during it's pole shift. This can have huge effects on the magnitude of the CME's the Sun will be tossing into space. The Earth regularly gets hit with small CME's and research says that the increased magnitude of these CME's are one of the major causes of global warming, and changes in the ecosystem.

2. Right now the Sun's south magnetic pole is in line with the Earth's north magnetic pole. Since opposites attract, the Sun, along with it's gravitational influence from Saturn and Jupiter, may cause the Earth to switch magnetic poles too! With the magnetic field of the Earth switching in a matter of minutes, there can be huge disruptions in the Earth's geological and ecological system. It can cause mass earthquakes and volcano eruptions all over the world. After it's all done, compasses will point South, the Sun will rise in the West and set in the East. But remember, this is a magnetic switch only.

3. The most far fetched possibility and probably the most catastrophic is the phenomenon called "polar wander". Polar wander is a result of the Earth's outer crust shifting at a rapid rate. The magnetic poles stay put but Antarctica becomes the equator and the tropics become the North Pole. I really don't have to stress why a polar wander could be catastrophic because if you picture a phenomenon like this happening in a matter of minutes, you can understand why. There is evidence of a polar wander occurring before in the distant past due to the fossils of Coral in Greenland and Woolly Mammoth bones found in Central America. Of course, in order for a polar wander to occur, it would take a huge amount of imbalance, like an asteroid collision, in the Earth to trigger it.

4. The final event that will occur on December 21, 2012 will be at 11:12 GMT. It's a phenomenon that the Mayans referred to as the "Sacred Tree" and it happens every 25,800 years. At that time our Sun will line up directly with the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. For thousands of years, our solar system has been hovering around the top of the galactic plane and this galactic alignment could have huge effects on our solar system.

"The ecliptic cross over the Milky Way at a 60 degree angle near the constellation Sagittarius. As such, it forms a cross with the Milky Way, and this cosmic cross was called the Sacred Tree by the ancient Maya. (The cross form was also known as the "crossroads." Amazingly, the center of this cosmic cross, that is right where the ecliptic crosses over the Milky Way is exactly where the December solstice sun will be in A.D. 2012. This alignment occurs only once every 25,800 years."

There is supposedly a black hole in the middle of the Milky Way holding everything together. Our solar system is around the outer edge of the disc. When our solar system lines up with center of the galaxy, we will be at the strongest part of the galaxy's magnetic field where there is maximum gravitation. So, with the Sun's solar cycle being at it's maximum, the alignment of Saturn and Jupiter, and the alignment of the sun with the equator of the Milky Way, this will REALLY cause an increase in the magnitude of the Sun's solar flares. Of course the gravitational complexities will also have an influence on whether or not the Earth will undergo a magnetic pole shift. There is also speculation that the Earth may reverse its rotation since we'll be in the opposite hemisphere of the galaxy!

"According to the Mayas, the center of the Galaxy is the cosmic womb; The place of dead, transformation, regeneration and rebirth. This moment shows the end of their calendar."

There are a lot of questions that will be answered in the year 2012. Although the Mayan calender has a mystery on a specific date, some of the scientific complexities will gradually become observable. Depletion of the ozone, increase in volcanic activity, and changes in weather patterns are all natural results of some of the events explained. However, whether or not the Mayans had some sort of insight into the future will remain a mystery.

By Richard Lowe

The GMO Deception

2008-03-18T13:10:00.000-07:00

Yet more evidence that Monsanto & the like are
lying to, deceiving & killing us with their poisons.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Please take a look at these detailed documents.

With many thanks to Laura for passing all of this onto me.

Where The Buffalo Roam

2008-03-15T16:41:00.000-07:00

You gotta love Hunter. S. Thompson

Full movie starring Bill Murray as Hunter.

The End Of Nations

2008-03-11T15:11:00.000-07:00

End Of Nations
A New Documentary By Wise Up Journal

I was holding off posting this until I had watched & digested the
whole thing.
Well, now I have & here it is.

Good job guys.

The sound is a little sloppy but that's not important,
what is important is the content.

The Lisbon Treaty is another step towards One World Government &
The New World Order.
It takes away more of our rights & say & places our future
into the hands of corrupt, money & war hungry shadow government entities.

This documentary is essential viewing, so please watch it.
Your future may very well depend upon it & the information
contained within.

I have to say that it is one-sided on the interviewee front
but that does not in any way change the hard facts.

Watch this, gather the facts & vote "NO" to Lisbon.

Protest, Resistance & Dissent In Native Americans

2008-03-09T15:35:00.000-07:00

This is a really good vid made by IncendiaryDan about Native
American Indian Resistance.

It features the song "Exile" by Blackfire, a great Diné ( Native American )
punk band.

Blackfire are a punk-rock family — brothers Klee and Clayson Benally and their sister Jeneda, on guitar, drums and bass, respectively.
CJ Ramone produced their 1994 EP, and Joey Ramone’s final recordings were his guest vocals on 2002’s One Nation Under.

Fight The Fascist Censors!!

2008-03-08T12:40:00.000-08:00

This vid was heading for number 1 spot on YouTube
when it mysteriously disappeared from the listings.
YouTube is owned by Google & this sort of thing has
happened before.

Show your distaste for censorship & underhandedness
by embedding & spreading this vid around.

It features a lot of Alex Jones, who is in my
opinion, an amazing guy. Tireless in his efforts to
expose the truth & a force majeure in all respects.
To you Alex, I owe much of my new knowledge.
Thank You.

The Doors Of Perception

Do your bit
Don't let "them" win

every little counts
every "sin"

fight the law
fuck the power

not in our name
we'll never cower

Blooddha '08

This Film Is Not Yet Rated

2008-03-07T16:26:00.000-08:00

Very interesting this. The MPAA are part of the NWO in my opinion.

A documentary film about a guy who enlists the help
of private investigators to track down who actually censors
& rates the movies that we watch.

What is uncovered is a group so secretive that one is left
wondering - Who the fuck is behind all of this??

Full Movie:
This Film Is Not Yet Rated

Link-O-Licious Flick-O-Rama

2008-03-05T05:57:00.000-08:00

The Sick State Of So-Called " Media "

2008-03-05T01:13:00.000-08:00

Mainstream Media Whore Calls For Truthers To Be Locked-Up
In " Secret Prisons "

In response to the arrest of a 9/11 demonstrator during a Bill Clinton appearance in Corpus Christi, corporate media shill and former Republican Congress critter Joe Scarborough and his co-hosts demanded 9/11 truthers be tasered and taken to detention camps. “Where’s the taser?” Joe wants to know as MSNBC runs footage of the man’s arrest. “Tase him!” His co-host adds: “Led away in handcuffs and hopefully taken to one of those secret prisons in eastern Europe and never to be heard from again… I hope we have a special prison for 9/11 conspiracy theorists.”

In other words, the corporate behemoth MSNBC believes people who disagree with the government not only do not deserve First Amendment rights and protection, but also believe demonstrators should be kidnapped by the CIA and taken to a “special prison” to be tortured and ultimately killed, as this is the fate many who disappear suffer.

Is it possible the United States is about to become like Pinochet’s Chile? In 1973, thanks to the CIA and U.S. corporations, Chile became a brutal police state. Chileans were subjected to systematic and massive violations of their most basic human rights. Official figures indicate that nearly 3,000 people were executed, disappeared or lost their lives as a result of torture and political violence. It would seem “Morning Joe” would enthusiastically welcome the installation of a fascist state where those he disagrees with are disappeared, tortured, and murdered.

Last October, CNN host Glenn Beck called 9/11 truthers “insane” and “dangerous anarchists” in response to 9/11 truthers infiltrating the Real Time with Bill Maher show. “These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation’s foundation, tear us apart and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us… [this is] the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from,” declared Beck, setting a precedence followed this morning by the scurrilous Joe Scarborough and his complaisant minions.

“In thousands of 9/11 protests over the course of the last six years, not one person has been arrested for violent conduct,” Steve Watson wrote at the time. “To cart blanches suggest that the truth movement is dangerous, ‘a threat to children’ and intent on violence is extremely inflammatory and indicates just how afraid of investigating and debating the facts people like Glen Beck actually are.”

The core of the 9/11 truth movement is composed of highly educated and progressive individuals who are strictly opposed to violence and are intent on protecting a free and peaceful society which has been under dire threat ever since the attacks of 9/11 and the ensuing cover up.

Furthermore the movement represents the very antithesis of anarchism in that it is actively seeking to restore and protect our traditional form of government which has been usurped by an unaccountable cabal that continues to operate outside of Constitutional law and with little restraint using 9/11 as justification.

Indeed, Beck and Scarborough are calling for such draconian measures simply because the 9/11 truth movement is comprised “of highly educated and progressive individuals who are strictly opposed to violence” and because of this they must be demonized as a threat to national security and thus the government must kidnap, torture, and murder them. Although Scarborough did not suggest 9/11 truth “idiots” be murdered, this is of course the ultimate fate of those who oppose militarized fascism, now gaining speed in the United States.

Story From Kurt Nimmo @ InfoWars

Desperate Smear Campaign

2008-03-03T03:30:00.000-08:00

Desperate Smear Campaign Against Actress Who Dared To Speak The Truth

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Oscar-winning French actress Marion Cotillard’s comments regarding her doubts about the official 9/11 story have already provoked an international media smear campaign despite the fact that she is merely echoing a plethora of other highly respected public figures in questioning the establishment position.

During a French television interview, Cotillard said the public had been lied to about the terror attacks and highlighted the bizarre collapse of the twin towers in comparison with other buildings, specifically Madrid’s Windsor Building, which burned intensely for over 24 hours yet did not implode like the WTC.

"We see other towers of the same kind being hit by planes. Are they burned? They [sic] was a tower, I believe it was in Spain, which burnt for 24 hours. It never collapsed. None of these towers collapsed. And there [in New York], in a few minutes, the whole thing collapsed," said Cotillard.

Hours after the comments were picked up by news outlets across the world, a reactionary media smear campaign was initiated, despite the fact that Cotillard actually made the statements over a year ago, and we were told that Cotillard’s future Hollywood success was apparently "in jeopardy".

Quite how expressing an opinion that matches with hundreds of other professors, scientists, former presidents, high government officials and intelligence veterans puts someone’s career "in jeopardy" is not explained in the myriad of ad hominem hit pieces that have already surfaced over the course of today.

The Parliament of Japan, the former President of Italy, widely-respected CIA veteran Robert Baer and even American music icon Willie Nelson have all questioned 9/11 in recent months.

Since the attacks, a top former member of Tony Blair’s cabinet, Germany’s Secretary of Defense and the founder of Reagonomics have all slammed the official story - along with a cacophony of former government, military, intelligence and political professionals.

The Hollywood Today website cites the comments of 9/11 first responder "Mike Lennon" who calls the comments “ignorant and despicable” and encourages people to picket Cotillard’s upcoming movie with Johnny Depp.

To assert that questioning the official 9/11 story is harmful to the victims is a tired old propaganda ruse that has been tried on many occasions in the past by establishment media hacks.

The fact is that the majority of victim’s family members doubt the official story and have been pushing for a new investigation for years - as attested to by Bill Doyle, head of the largest victim’s family support group.

In addition, 9/11 firemen and first responders were themselves the victims of an admitted government cover-up in the very hours after 9/11 when they were told that the toxic asbestos-laden air was safe to breathe - an official lie that has cost the heroes of 9/11 at best lifelong debilitating illnesses and at worst their lives.

The media’s attempt to make an example out of Cotillard by digging up year-old comments in an organized smear attack campaign smacks of total desperation as the gatekeepers try to act as the little Dutch boy and block up the holes of the gaping official 9/11 story.

FLASHBACK: Ex-Italian President: Intel Agencies Know 9/11 An Inside Job

FLASHBACK: Member of Japanese Diet Doubts Official 9/11 Fairy Tale

FLASHBACK: Former German Defense Minister Confirms CIA Involvement in 9/11

FLASHBACK: Michael Meacher: This war on terrorism is bogus

FLASHBACK: Robert Baer Says Evidence Points To 911 Inside Job

FLASHBACK: Former Reagan Treasury Secretary Questions Twin Towers Collapse

Hundreds of military, political, and intelligence professionals question 9/11

England Wants Treaty Referendum

2008-03-03T03:13:00.000-08:00

Demonstrators have scaled a crane in London's Parliament Square in an apparent protest over the EU Treaty.

Activists climbed the structure shortly after 2am before unravelling banners proclaiming "Referendum Now" and "Give Us Our Vote".

It comes two days before MPs are set to vote on a Conservative amendment to the EU Treaty Bill, calling for a referendum on the issue.

On Sunday, campaigners had claimed they have overwhelming public support for a referendum. The 'I Want a Referendum Campaign' released the results of its own referendum across 10 marginal Labour and Lib Dem constituencies showing 88% backing for putting the treaty to a vote of the public.

The Government dismissed the exercise as a "gimmick", saying that most supporters of the treaty had simply ignored the referendum.

But campaigners said that it sent a "clear message" to MPs that the public wanted to have their say on the treaty.

The 'I Want a Referendum Campaign' said that it sent out 420,791 ballot papers based on the latest publicly available electoral roll. At total of 152,520 - 36% - were returned, of which 133,251 were in favour of a referendum.

The constituencies covered included those of Europe Minister Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire), Home Secretary Jacqui Smith (Redditch), Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly (Bolton West), and Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne (Eastleigh).

Campaign chairman Derek Scott - a former economic adviser to Tony Blair - said that it was a "magnificent turnout" and a "great result". He said that Labour and the Lib Dems should now honour their election manifesto promises to hold a referendum on the EU constitution, which, the campaigners say, is broadly the same as the new treaty.

The Government, however, argues that a referendum is not necessary as, it says, the treaty is substantially different from the now abandoned EU constitution.

Story from AOL UK.

Ah, but it is not! It is virtually the same document.
More propaganda from the English government.
Come on people, stand up & fight their lies & demand that they speak the truth.
England is already the most surveillanced country in the world &
the peoples rights are being shat upon, get up & fight for your vote.

Just Say NO!

2008-03-01T13:29:00.000-08:00

Here be the vid that I made for the good folks over at Wise Up Journal.
It's a compilation for Liam Tiernan's
anti-Lisbon Treaty song " Easy Come, So Easy Go."

Here's the Wise Up YouTube one ( same vid ):

Please embed these & spread 'em around!

I'll hopefully be working on my own original song & vid also.

Cheers!

It's A Battle

2008-02-28T09:52:00.000-08:00

There's a war going on outside

Hi folks, I hope this finds you all well.
Though I feel it may not.
I'm working on various projects right now, so I thought I'd write a
little "some some" to fill the blogging gap.
I'm researching excessive iron in drinking water, anti-depressants,
Irish issues & also more active projects, ie street action & non-cyber
based activism.

I emailed Prionsias De Rossa stating my distaste for his Yes vote to
The Lisbon Treaty. I was factual & honest yet he replied telling me to -
"..grow up & get my facts straight..."
Prick.

My facts were straight.
Just because I had taken the time to actually use my mind & time to look into the facts, I was a child?
Well Mr. De Rossa, I am not your average mindless fucktard.
I look into the truth & actively seek it out.
I wrote a long, coherent, factual & concerned email.
You replied in one line.
You are the one that needs to grow up.
How much do you earn to micturate all over the people that put you there?
How many benefits have you reaped from your M.E.P. status?
Your priorities to the people have been flushed down the European toilet
while you line your pockets with our taxes & the dividends of the European corporate
structure.

I am pissed-off.
I am angry.
We are the ones that the Governments are mandated to serve.
Not the other way round.
Why are so many people so willing to be enslaved & defecated upon?
Wake up!! For fucking freedoms' sake, wake the fuck up.

Democracy??

2008-02-26T06:21:00.000-08:00

Shocking Vote not to Respect Ireland Exposes the EU,
but Ireland can Still Save Europe

Wise Up Journal

25.02.2008

By a huge majority, 499 to 129, members of the European parliament voted not to respect Ireland’s democratic referendum by voting against the amendment which would “Undertake to respect the outcome of the referendum in Ireland.” Even the Irish MEP Proinsias de Rossa voted not to respect the voice of his own people. He undoubtedly does not represent the Irish people and obviously his loyalties lie elsewhere. The people should now bring about his resignation.

Thankfully we are not under full oligarchy governance yet (we still make 20% of our laws) and this EU parliament vote does not change a thing. Under the pre-Lisbon treaty EU, Ireland still has a say and if we vote NO it still stops the Lisbon treaty from passing in all 27 countries. Ireland can still save democracy for half a billion people who don’t have a say.

The bigger story here is how did this issue come about and why did the EU Parliament (that has a minuscule amount influence in the EU power structure) partake in this vote which is not legally binding? Was the purpose to deceive the uniformed members of the Irish public? Since the EU power structure is complex (particularly to the majority of the public who do not routinely follow politics), this vote has manipulated most into thinking their no vote will not count, “so why bother voting at all?”

This scare tactic from the EU (further unmasking it’s true nature) has backfired. The informed members of the Irish public are now frantically spreading the message of this vote to the misinformed. Not only does the higher unelected decision makes of the EU not respect the people, the huge majority of our elected MEPs have now confirmed neither do they!

Not giving 26 members out of 27 a democratic vote on massive EU changes and announcing their opinion not to respect democracy is in contrast to democracy. Least we forget Oligarchy (ruled by a few elite, a government without people’s consent) is in contrast to Democracy (government whose power comes from people). This is the clear mindset of the people running the engine of the EU. Fortunately Ireland can stop their new full oligarchy EU from coming into existence. Then Ireland and the people of Europe can decide what to do next. If we vote yes history has show it would be difficult to get democracy back once you’ve lost it. Which the Irish know all too much about.

A new full length documentary exposing the EU and the Lisbon treaty will be released sometime over the next 11 days and it will be free to view on WiseUpJournal.com and Google videos.

Message from Anthony Coughlan, Secretary of The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre:

The European Parliament has nothing to do with the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. That is a matter for the 27 EU Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

The Treaty requires unanimity amongst all 27 as regards its ratification before it can come into force for anyone of them.

The European Parliament can pass resolutions on anything under the sun, but they are not involved in the ratification process.

This particular vote just shows the arrogance and contempt of the majority of the MEPs for democracy and for national constitutions.

But there is nothing new about that!

The Irish MEPs should not have voted in support of the Treaty until the Irish people had cast their vote on it. They would have done better to abstain.

Proinsias de Rossa acted disgracefully by voting not to respect the Irish Lisbon Treaty result, if it is a vote for No. It shows his profoundly undemocratic cast of mind.

Proinsias De Rossa Contact Details :

Dublin Office
Room 1410
Liberty Hall
Dublin 1

Tel: +353 1 874 6109
Fax: +353 1 874 6096
Brussels Office
Tel: +32 2 2847681
Fax: +32 2 2849681
Strasbourg Office
Tel: +33 3 88175681
Fax: +33 3 88179681
E-mail
pderossa@europarl.eu.int

Let the prick know how much we hold him in contempt for his vote against the people.

Soy Products, Not So Healthy After All.

2008-02-24T13:17:00.000-08:00

Soy, Not a Health Panacea But A Health Risk

Here we go again.
Yet more evidence of widespread dis-information.
How many ads have you seen telling you of the benefits of soy products?
How many bogus studies have claimed the same?
How many lives have been claimed or damaged by these lies?
Scientists at the FDA's own Center for Toxicological Research have warned of soy protein's carcinogenic potential and of the health dangers of excess soy-food consumption.

As if this was not enough soy products also over dose us with Fluoride...

Some of these "health foods" which have high levels of fluoride are found in soy protein isolate, a key ingredient in energy bars, shake powders, veggie burgers and infant formula.

Babies on soy formula are at special risk not only for developing dental fluorosis but the mental fluorosis of ADD/ADHD. Although the fluoride levels of both soy and dairy formulas exceed that of breast milk, only soy formulas exceed safe levels when reconstituted with non-fluoridated distilled water. The levels increase considerably when parents reconstitute soy formula with fluoridated tap water. Worse, these soy bottle-fed infants are simultaneously exposed to high levels of neurotoxic aluminum, cadmium, manganese and plant estrogens. It's bad enough to expose adults to fluoride with its well established links to cancer, thyroid and other endocrine system disorders but unconscionable to expose infants and children whose brain, reproductive and other systems are developing.

Recently the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reported that most of the research carried out on soy to date is “inconclusive.” The scientific literature review, carried out by a team of researchers at Tufts University in Boston, concluded that soy products appear to exert “a small benefit on LDL, cholesterol and triglycerides, but the effects may be of small clinical effect in individuals.”
But the researchers couldn't even determine from the studies how much soy protein might be needed for lipid reduction! The studies alleging that soy might reduce menopausal symptoms were judged to be either of “poor quality” or “their duration was too short to lead to definite conclusions.”
The team failed to find clear evidence that soy causes thyroid damage,
but that's not surprising given their decision to exclude foreign studies from consideration. The key studies showing thyroid damage from soy have been carried out at leading thyroid clinics in Japan.

AND MORE BAD NEWS FOR THE SOY INDUSTRY

Just in time for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (Last October), the Journal of the American Dietetic Association reported that that the studies on soy and cancer are inconsistent and that high soy consumption might increase breast cancer risk.
The authors indicated that this lack of “clear, consistent message” confuses many women and that “health professionals should take an active role and communicating and clarifying such information.”

Many health food snacks contain plant sterols, a type of plant estrogen found in soy oil. Sterols are widely promoted for their supposed cholesterol lowering effects and are used in a wide variety of “functional” foods such as “healthy” margarines, spreads and even some orange juices.
Like isoflavones, the phytoestrogens found in soy protein, sterols can cause endocrine disruption throughout the body.
The Australia/New Zealand Food Authority – though not the FDA – requires that sterol containing functional foods” carry warning labels advising pregnant and lactating women, infants and children not to eat them. In fact, they aren't good for any of us.

So beware! Do the research! DO NOT believe many "studies" purporting to prove the goodness of their products, as they are often carried out by scientists for hire who's results are tempered by the bottom line, money, not your health.

Some Links & References :

The Truth About Soy

Soy Dangers, One Woman's Story

Soy Truth & Myths

The Soy Ploy

Revolution!

2008-02-21T11:31:00.000-08:00

More Than The Sum Of My Words

2008-02-20T12:46:00.000-08:00

Some Poems I Think...

the red-orange glow
of a trap i don't know
and nothing to compare

i know i'm dying
but i'll keep on trying
to sweep away the snare.

_______________

Les Mondes Sans Yeux

please wake up
please see
please hear
you have beauty & magnificence
you have every right
to be whomever you like
but don't fall
you don't need to fall
build steps
not walls
you have love & significance
you have power
and the right to life
live
breathe
see
and hear
you have as much right as any
to be here

_____________

the door of the cage
is open
but the birds have stayed inside.

______________

Never

to the penned
and penniless revolutionaries
of this world

i raise my morning cheer
i hold aloft my woken dreams
in the hope that all shall hear

to pain unknown
and voiceless beats
beaten down by law

to break the camels back
we need only one more straw.

______________

rain like an army
a bombarding liquid song
i shelter in an archway
and dream of summer sun

raining like a fever
i'm soaked, i'm stoned
brain dripping and luminous
whitewashed & honed.

_______________

in search of foundation
a step to the side

in my mind forward
but to others just a ride

in need of resistance
a revolution to the core

to find the reality
that's been buried by their war.

_____________

As deep as any ocean,
but of falling autumn hue

I jump into your eyes,
and dance away the blues.

______________

dawns ass cracks wide open,
revealing a mighty sphere of
burning gas.
all of the wage slaving whores scream in unison -
'Get us the fuck outta here....!'

_______________

A Path Ethic

Pseudo importance
and soul killing rules
regulate
our every move

binding
officious ropes
choke our throats
denying the escape of truth

dogmatised
terror inducing religion
and filth
squeeze our true spirit from us

slimy politicians
become engorged
scraping the last pieces of flesh
from the bones of the starving

as we rot away
in their broadcast armchairs.

__________

Pigs

and the world is full of death today,
as it is every day.

i've got my own deaths to deal with,
but i try to make them small.

i write them down,
on pieces of paper,
and throw them from a moving car.

there's so much weight,
that my shoulders hurt.

i feel like i want my spare time to be spent
fucking, drinking,
laughing and writing.

there's just too much bullshit,
too many small deaths that are allowed
to roam free and shoot moments of happiness.

but there's a bigger picture.
an army of poisonous swine,
creeping in every cup of water
and every mainstream broadcast.

so i dedicate my time,
between enlightenment and wine,
and the destruction of these pigs.

________

Can you feel it?

The time has come,
the light is shone,
born freedoms lay in mourning

Arise from the dirge,
this deathly stinking verge,
herding us to their calling

Primal resurrection,
from this myre of decption,
raise us to our truth

No more shall we sit,
at your table of shit,
slaughtering our youth

Imbibe no more,
their repugnant lore,
but wake and see the might

We the people,
not the sheeple,
shall awake and win this fight

freedom in sight,
bated breath,
heartbeats thunder like drums

minds collide,
great forces meet,
the worm begins to turn

fleeing oppression,
forcing aggression,
to bow to it's knees

we as one,
begin to hunt,
no masters shall we please

force their hand,
wake the many,
numbers are the key

alive! we cry,
awake! we scream,
the dawning of a future,
free.

Blooddha '08.

The Irish Government Is Poisoning You

2008-02-20T06:19:00.000-08:00

The Irish Government (wankers) called for a ban on bottled water yesterday, stating that they were environmentally unsafe. They told the reporter that we should all drink tap water. Fluoridated, poisonous, brain, kidney, thyroid damaging tap water. At the meeting they had, low and behold, they were drinking bottled water. Canvas your local politicians, newspapers, radio stations & complain about this blatant attack upon our health. Get fluoridated water banned for good.

The now minister for the environment John 'Bend Over For Bertie & The CFR' Gormley(Gormless), who is advocating drinking tap water,was once against such a dangerous activity.
In this vid he debates with Dr.Jacinta 'Spawn Of Satan' McLoughlin about the
dangers of Fluoride.
How things change, eh?
Once becomming part of the Government (Enslave & Poisonment),he completely changes his mind & tells us that he's going to ban that which isn't destroyed by fluoride.
'Ah, go on, ya will, drink dat poison now and sure you'll be grand,so ya will.'
Go fuck your CFR and Bilderberg lovin' self, you wormy fuck.

For more see Here.

A Real Social Networking Site

2008-02-20T03:27:00.000-08:00

At last! A real networking site for real truth.

I urge you all to join this one.
This site offers a real chance for all truthers,
revolutionaries, freedom-seekers, carers,
greeners, artists, musicians, film makers,
activists & good people to get
together & organise.

Click Here to join now!

This site is censored on MySpace!
Rupert Murdoch now owns MySpace.
Vote with your fingers & go join InfoWars now!

Show Murdoch & his NeoFascist cronies how you feel.

The Truth About The Treaty

2008-02-19T15:53:00.000-08:00

WHAT THE EU TREATY OF LISBON DOES (legally accurate) *

National Platform EU Research and Information Centre
15.02.2008

This document has been prepared by the National Platform EU Research and Information Centre, 24 Crawford Ave., Dublin 9; Tel: 01-8305792; Secretary Anthony Coughlan. It has been vetted for legal accuracy by authorities on Irish constitutional and EU law. Please copy it or adapt it as you please and pass it on to others, without any need of reference to its source.

“France was just ahead of all the other countries in voting No. It would happen in all Member States if they have a referendum. There is a cleavage between people and governments…There will be no Treaty if we had a referendum in France, which would again be followed by a referendum in the UK.”
- French President Nicolas Sarkozy, at meeting of MEP Group leaders, EUobserver, 14 November 2007

“Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly … All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.”
- Former French President V.Giscard D’Estaing, Le Monde, 14 June 2007

“The substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact.”
- German Chancellor Angela Merkel, speech to the European Parliament, 27 June 2007

An EU Constitution: The Treaty of Lisbon is a revamped version of the treaty which gave the EU its own Constitution over and above the constitutions of its Member States, but which the peoples of France and Holland rejected in referendums in 2005. Instead of accepting that decision the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents decided to give the EU a constitution indirectly rather than directly, but not to call it a constitution, and on no account to hold referendums on it for fear people would reject it again.

Why an Irish referendum?: A referendum must be held on it in Ireland however because the Supreme Court laid down in the 1986 Crotty case that sovereignty in this State rests with the Irish people and that only they can surrender sovereignty to the EU by referendum, or else refuse to surrender it as the case might be. The purpose of the referendum would be to change the Irish Constitution so as to make EU law superior to Irish law in the areas set out in the Lisbon Treaty.

Lisbon gives the EU a constitution indirectly rather than directly: The two current basic European Treaties are called “The Treaty on European Union (TEU) and “The Treaty on the Functioning of the Union”(TFEU). These two documents include all the previous treaties from the 1957 Rome Treaty to the 2002 Nice Treaty. The EU Constitution which the French and Dutch rejected would have repealed these two treaties and replaced them with a document called “A Constitution for Europe”. The Lisbon Treaty implements 96% of the legal content of this “Constitution for Europe” by proposing amendments to the two basic EU Treaties and thereby turning them into the effective constitution of the new Federal EU that Lisbon would bring about.

The following are the main changes Lisbon would make in the EU’s two constituent Treaties:

1. Lisbon makes the EU Constitution superior to the Irish Constitution in all areas of EU law: We would still keep the Irish Constitution, but “Declaration 17 concerning Primacy”, which is attached to Lisbon, makes clear that EU law would have primacy over and be superior to the Irish Constitution and laws in any case of conflict between the two. EU law and national law deal with different areas and matters, but the EU now makes the majority of our new laws each year. The Lisbon Treaty would give the EU the power to make laws binding on us in many new areas and would take that power away from the Irish Dáil and from Irish citizens who elect the Dáil.

2. Lisbon gives the EU the constitutional form of a supranational European Federal State and turns Ireland and the other Member States into regions or provinces of this Federation: It does this in three legal steps: (a) giving the new European Union which it would bring into being its own legal personality and independent corporate existence for the first time, separate from and superior to its Member States; (b) abolishing the European Community which we have been members of since 1973 and replacing it with the new Union; and (c) bringing all spheres of public policy either actually or potentially within the scope of the new Union. From the inside this new post-Lisbon EU would seem to be based on treaties between States. From the outside it would look like a State itself. Lisbon would then make us all real citizens of this new Federal EU for the first time, owing to it the normal citizen’s duty of obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority. One can only be a citizen of a State and all States must have citizens. We would still retain our Irish citizenship, but the rights and duties attached to that would be subordinate to those of our EU citizenship in any case of conflict between the two. The EU’s authority would be superior. Post-Lisbon, we would be like citizens of Virginia vis-a-vis the USA or citizens of Bavaria vis-a-vis Federal Germany. This new Federal EU would sign Treaties with other States, would have its own political President, Foreign Minister and foreign and security policy, its own diplomatic service and voice at the UN, and its own Public Prosecutor. It would make most of our laws and would decide what our basic rights are in all areas of EU law.

3. Lisbon shifts influence over law-making and decision-taking in the EU towards the Big States and away from the smaller ones like Ireland: It does this by replacing the voting system for making EU laws that has existed since the 1957 Rome Treaty by a primarily population-based system which would give most influence to the Member States with big populations and reduce the influence of smaller ones like Ireland. Under Lisbon a “weighted” or “qualified” majority vote (QMV) for making EU laws in future would be 15 States out of 27 as long as they included 65% of the EU’s total population. When Ireland joined the then EEC in 1973 we had 3 votes in making European laws as against 10 each for the Big States, a ratio of one-third. Under the current Nice Treaty arrangements we have 7 votes as against their 29 each, a ratio of one-quarter. Under Lisbon Ireland would have 4 million people as against Germany’s 82 million, a ratio of one-twentieth, and an average of 60 million each for France, Italy and Britain, a ratio of one-fifteenth. Under Lisbon Ireland’s voting weight vis-a-vis the other 26 Member States would fall to one-third its present level, from 2% to 0.8%.

4. Lisbon removes Ireland’s right to a permanent EU Commissioner: The Commission is the body which has the monopoly of proposing all EU laws, which are then made by the Council of Ministers, with some powers of amendment for the European Parliament. Under Lisbon Ireland would have no member on the Commission for one out of every three Commission terms. This means that for five years out of every fifteen, laws affecting all our lives would be put forward entirely by a committee of EU officials on which there was no representative from Ireland. The Big EU States would lose their right to a permanent Commissioner also, but their size and weight give them other means of exerting influence on that key body. As Dr Garret FitzGerald and others have emphasised over the years, being represented on the EU Commission is especially important for smaller States like Ireland.

5. Lisbon deprives the Irish Government of its right to decide who Ireland’s Commissioner would be when it comes to our turn to be on the Commission: It provides that Ireland’s present right to “propose” a national Commissioner and to have that proposal accepted by the others, would be replaced by a right to make “suggestions” regarding a name, but with no guarantee that a particular suggestion would be accepted by the 27 Prime Ministers and Presidents who would decide the list of Commissioners as a whole by qualified majority vote. If the Irish Government were to suggest someone as its EU Commissioner who had, for example, antagonised the government of some other Member State in the past, or who was regarded as not enthusiastic enough for further EU integration, it could be asked to suggest another name as more acceptable. The Commission President, appointed by vote of the Prime Ministers and Presidents, would decide in practice who Ireland’s Commissioner would be. The new Commission President could ask a Commissioner to resign at any time, just as a Taoiseach has full control over his cabinet. The new Commission would be like an EU Government, except that this government would not be elected by the citizens.

6. Lisbon gives the European Union the power to make laws in 32 new areas that are removed from the Dail and other National Parliaments: These new areas of EU law-making include civil and criminal law, justice and policing, immigration, public services, energy, transport, tourism, space, sport, culture, civil protection, public health and the EU budget. There would be majority voting also by EU Foreign Ministers in some areas of foreign policy. The EU Council of Ministers would obtain power to take decisions by qualified majority vote on many matters other than EU laws - up to 68 in all - so that Member States would no longer exercise a veto regarding them.

This increase in EU powers simultaneously increases the personal power of the 27 national politicians who make up the EU Council of Ministers by enabling them to make further laws behind closed doors for 500 million Europeans, while taking power away from the citizens and national Parliaments which elect those politicians and which have made these laws for their own countries up to now. Each shift of power from the national level to the EU entails a further shift of power from the Irish Dail and people to Irish Government Ministers at EU level. It hollows out our national democracy further. The Treaty also increases the power of the non-elected Brussels Commission, which has the monopoly of proposing European laws to the Council of Ministers, by giving it many new policy areas to propose laws for.

7. Lisbon is a self-amending Treaty which would open the way to harmonising Ireland’s company taxes: Lisbon inserts a new Article 48 into the “Treaty on European Union”, the “simplified revision procedure”, which permits the Prime Ministers and Presidents by unanimity to shift most areas of the treaties where unanimity now exists to qualified majority voting without the need for new treaties or referendums. This is called the “escalator clause”, which former French President Giscard d’Estaing said was “a central innovation” of the EU Constitution he helped draft. The laws cover areas such as company taxation, but exclude defence and military matters. A National Parliament can veto this mechanism, but citizens can not, as we would have accepted this method of rule by agreeing the Lisbon Treaty. After Lisbon is ratified there would be no need, practically speaking, for further EU referendums.

If the Taoiseach of the day has not objected to his fellow Prime Ministers and Presidents, the switch to majority voting on company taxes would go through. If he has not objected, the National Parliament could revolt against him and object, but it is not required to vote for the use of the “escalator”. This leaves the citizens in the position of depending entirely on the backbone of the current Taoiseach or his successor to continue defending Ireland’s company tax position, which has been so important in bringing foreign firms to Ireland and is central to our modern economic development. Already the EU Commission has drafted proposals for introducing a Common EU Tax Base for Company taxes, but has postponed its publication until after the Irish referendum. Does this encourage confidence that the “escalator clause” will not be used to bring in EU tax harmonisation?

Lisbon opens another door to EU tax harmonisation if national differences in company tax lead to “distortion of competition“(Art.93 TFEU). This would enable the EU Court of Justice to apply the internal market rules on competition matters, where majority voting applies, to matters of company tax. This could be another way around the present unanimity requirement for such taxes.

Lisbon also permits the EU to raise its “own resources” by means of any kind of EU tax to finance the attainment of its many objectives(Art.269 TFEU). The 27 EU Prime Ministers and Presidents would have to decide unanimously what taxes to impose and once National Parliaments approved, that would be that. There would be no need of a referendum in Ireland or anywhere else in the EU, for we would have permitted this development by voting for Lisbon. It is hard to imagine the 27 EU Prime Ministers and Presidents refraining from exercising this power to give the new Union its own major tax revenues once it is up and running under their political direction.

8. Lisbon gives the EU the power to decide our human and civil rights: The new Treaty gives the EU the final power to decide what our rights are in all areas of EU law, including Member States when implementing EU law. It would do this by making the rights set out in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding for the first time (Art.6 TEU). This would make the 27 judges of the EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg the final decider of our rights in many areas, instead of the Irish Supreme Court or the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which decides these rights at present. If Lisbon gives the EU Court of Justice the power to decide what our rights are in the large area of EU law, it is likely that the Commission will in time propose laws to ensure their uniform application across all EU States, as has happened in the case of the other Treaties up to now. The EU Court of Justice has laid down in several court cases that National Law must be applied in a way that is consistent with EU law, for the latter has supremacy in any conflict between the two. This principle must logically apply to rights issues also. This raises the real possibility of clashes over rights standards in sensitive areas where there are significant national differences between the Member States at present: for example, the right to life, the right to marry and found a family, the right to strike, rules of evidence in court, the rights of children and the elderly, trial by jury, censorship law, the legalisation of hard drugs and prostitution, rights attaching to State churches, conscientious objection to military service, succession, property, family law, labour law.

9. Lisbon provides that if one-third of National Parliaments object to the Commission’s proposal for an EU law, the Commission must reconsider it, but not necessarily abandon it: It might reword the draft law, as happened with the Constitution, or if it considered the objection was not justified, it might ignore it.

The European Parliament cannot propose a single European law, but it gets more influence under the new Union’s Constitutional structures. It can put down amendments to draft laws coming from the Council and Commission in the 32 law-making areas that would be transferred to Brussels from the National Parliaments, although the Commission and Council must agree them if they are to pass. National Parliaments would of course lose their power. Ireland has only 12 members out of 750 in the European Parliament. When Ireland was part of the UK in the 19th century it had 100 members out of 600 at Westminster, where all UK laws were both proposed and made.

The Lisbon Treaty also provides for a right of petition to the Commission by one million European citizens asking it to propose a new EU law, but there is no obligation on the Commission to do anything apart from “considering” such a request. It can ignore it or reject it. In other words the citizens, if they get a million signatures, have the right to complain and then hope for the best.

10. Lisbon militarizes the EU further: The Treaty requires Member States “to progressively improve their military capabilities”. It introduces a “start-up” fund for common foreign policy and military operations to be financed by Member States outside the Union budget (Art.28). It contains an Article which the current Slovenian EU presidency has admitted is a “mutual defence clause” (Art.28A.7): “If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all means in their power.” This is a new departure for the EU and would commit all Member States including Ireland. In the light of this mutual defence clause there would be no constitutional need for a further referendum in Ireland before we committed ourselves operationally to the military defence of other EU countries, for Lisbon would be that referendum. Lisbon also allows sub-groups of Member States to embark on military missions on behalf of the EU, without a UN mandate, while the others “constructively abstain”.

Is Lisbon necessary to make the EU more efficient? The advent of 12 new Member States has not made the negotiation of new EU laws more difficult since they joined the EU. On the contrary, a study by the Science-Po University in Paris calculated that new rules have been adopted a quarter times more quickly since the enlargement from 15 to 27 Member States compared with the two years before enlargement. The study also showed that the 15 older Member States block proposed EU laws twice as often as the newcomers. Professor Helen Wallace of the London School of Economics has found that the EU institutions are working as well as they ever did despite the enlargement of the EU from 15 to 27 members. She found that “the evidence of practice since May 2004 suggests that the EU’s institutional processes and practice have stood up rather robustly to the impact of enlargement.” The Nice Treaty voting arrangements thus seem to be working well.

If we reject the Lisbon Treaty will we be forced to vote on it again? Europe Minister Dick Roche has stated that if we vote No to Lisbon, we will not be asked to vote again on the same Treaty, as happened when people voted No to the Treaty of Nice. Nor can we be ostracised or thrown out of the EU - anymore than that happened to the French and Dutch when they rejected the EU Constitution, of which Lisbon is a revamped version. We need to send Lisbon back to the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents and tell them that we want a better deal - for Ireland’s sake and Europe’s sake. We want a more democratic, not a less democratic EU. Ireland can do it, on our own behalf and on behalf of all the peoples of Europe, if we have confidence in ourselves and resist the misrepresentations of what Lisbon is really about, and all the bullying and threats. A Vote No is a Yes to something better!

Baby Dies While Being Detained By Homeland Security.

2008-02-19T05:32:00.000-08:00

WTF?? This is too much. These people need to be hanged.

(Picture is not this baby)

PAGO PAGO, American Samoa - American Samoa's delegate to the U.S. Congress is calling for an investigation into the death of a baby at Honolulu International Airport.

Delegate Eni Faleomavaega has asked the Department of Homeland Security to begin an investigation into death of 14-day-old Michael Tony Futi last Friday.

The baby had been flown to Honolulu for emergency heart surgery. He died while detained inside a customs' room at the Honolulu airport with his mother and a nurse.

A lawyer for the family announced plans to sue the federal government over the baby's death.

Faleomavaega called for the probe in a letter issued to Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff.

From AP.

What has become of the governing bodies that this can be allowed to happen?
Homeland Security is not there for your benefit.
A baby! Dead. Because of these scum.
Wake up!
I said WAKE UP!

Toxic Teeth

2008-02-18T01:30:00.000-08:00

The World Health Organization's own research about dental amalgam fillings and the toxicity of the vapour that they emit.

Why are the Dental Associations continuing to use
such toxic substances?
The evidence is not new, yet still they carry on
as if nothing were wrong. The same situation is
happening with Fluoride.

We the people need to stay informed & let our
so called Health "Professionals" know that we
do not want to be poisoned any more.

What is the problem here?
Is it that once they finish college & start
their (mal)practices, they no longer care or keep
informed about the toxic nature of the substances
that they use?
Or are we all guinea pigs, part of a widespread
experiment that we did not agree to?

The toxicity of Mercury has long been known.
The harmful effects of Fluoride have been known
even longer. Yet still we continue to be
poisoned by these substances, in our teeth,
our water, our processed foods, our toothpaste,
our medicines, our tea...

The pattern of abuse & misuse is so widespread
& so endemic that the only conclusion to be drawn
is that we are, in fact, their Lab Rats.

We cannot allow this to continue.
Lobby the politicians.
Complain to your dentist.
Stand up for your rights.
Please!

Full PDF study into amalgam fillings Here.

See here for the press release of Sweden & Norways ban on amalgam fillings.

The Bilderberg Group: The Irish Connection.

2008-02-16T11:50:00.000-08:00

Skeletons in the Closet:
Bilderberg and Irish Powerbrokers.

1.EXPOSURE

So just who are the Irish (or Irish-related) guests at the annual Bilderberg conferences since 1991?

Peter D. Sutherland (Goldman-Sachs International, former head of AIB, E.U. bright button and GATT man): 1991, 1992, on steering committee 1993-1998, attended 2000, 2002, 2003... along with Sen. Myles Staunton, Sutherland also features big in the Trilateral Commission.

Conor Brady (editor of the Irish Times): 1993.

John Bruton (then leader of Fine Gael): 1998, 2000, 2001.

John Bruton (on the left) with Peter D.Sutherland-

Dermot Gleeson, former Irish Attorney General, now AIB head buckshot: 1995, 2003.

John de Chastelain (Chairman, Independent International Commission on Decommissioning, oversaw N.I. decommissioning): 1999.

Michael McDowell, our former Minister for "Justice" (then Chairman of the PDs): 1992.

Lochlann Quinn, then AIB head: 1997.

Pat Cox (President of EU Parliament): 2001, got his big job soon after.

2. THE RELEVANCE

So why are John Bruton (Ireland's anticipated guiding light in European affairs) and Michael McDowell (the man who pleaded for armed Gardai) rubbing shoulders with war criminals like Donald Rumsfeld and Henry Kissinger?
Why are leading figures in Irish politics and economics staying in the same hotel as Zionist crazies like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz? And why did a gutter journalist and MEP like Pat Cox, after attending the 2001 conference, suddenly become one of Europe's leading powerbrokers? Similarly, it could be asked why the Progressive Democrats suddenly became central to successive Irish governments since chairman McDowell's attendance in 1992?

Many similar questions have been asked of foreign leaders.
Why was Tony Blair's attendance in 1993 quickly followed by his ascent to British political stardom? How did Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton, who attended the 1991 conference, end over twelve years of Republican presidency by becoming U.S. top dog in 1993?

The answer is simple. The secret, high-security annual Bilderberg conferences are where souls are sold, wars hatched and deals made. It is where leaders from politics, business, the elite media and the arms industry join hands with monarchs, strategists and political wannabes to decide the fate of billions. It is a coven of the few, shrouded in secrecy, press silence, and ruthlessly guarded by soldiers and anti-aircraft missiles.

It is where nations are doomed and the process of globalisation accelerated. It is where the so-called protectors of Ireland shake hands and share a drink with U.S. neocons, Jewish financiers. It is where souls are savaged by the corrupt, and where ambition turns into an insatiable appetite for power. As Irish patriots, I think it is up to us to expose these Irish high priests of globalisation for what they really are - especially McDowell. Why should we trust a Bilderberger to be Minister for Justice?
For more information, visit Here.

Bilderberg Organiser is Head Mason's PA

Tony Gosling - 19th February 2004: See Here.

It appears Bilderberg is a masonic summit.

The Duke of Kent is the 'Grand Master' of freemasonry's governing body, the United Grand Lodge of England. Here.
Interesting then that it is the Duke's Personal Assistant, Andrew Palmer, that organised the Turnberry Bilderberg conference, the last one to take place in the UK. See Here.

Though it has been suspected by many, the formal link between the highest levels of freemasonry and the elitists who meet at Bilderberg is finally out. No wonder there's such secrecy at these conferences. It could be that Palmer is simply a highly trusted man? Or it could be that he knows how to keep his mouth shut.

And the masonic connection shouldn't come as such a big surprise. The political class and professions featured at Bilderberg: banking; industry; royalty; the law; politics, are all associated with freemasonry. The chief mason's trusted PA has been organising secret conferences of European royalty and the heads of the Western world's oil and banking cartels. Any self-respecting democracy would put them under investigation for criminal conspiracy, treason at least.

Labour MP Chris Mullin's brave attempts to lance the boil of secret societies from British Government has been substantially thwarted. Promised lists of freemasons in the criminal justice system, a good place to start, never materialised. But there is some good news, all freemasons in local government are about to be forced to declare their crooked hand.

As Carl Jung said "The maintenance of secrets is like a psychic poison, which alienates their possessor from the community." Maintainers of secrets such as these can not take part in community life honestly. High public office is logically impossible for a mason, yet masonry is the glaring ommission from the register of members interests in the Lords and Commons. Without masonic membership being required the register of members' interests is a farce.

Anti-Palestinians, Neo-Cons and other elements at Bilderberg 2003 - a veritable who's who of skullduggery.

Jacob Wallenberg (supposedly Swedish) - Chairman of the Board, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken
James D. Wolfensohn - World Bank President
Moskow, Michael H. - President, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
Perle, Richard N. - Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Rumsfeld, Donald H. - Secretary of Defense, war criminal
Siegman, Henry - Council on Foreign Relations (U.S.)
Rockefeller, David - Member, JP Morgan International Council
Prestowitz, Jr., Clyde V. - President, Economic Strategy Institute (U.S.)
Kissinger, Henry A. - Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc., war criminal
Krauthammer, Charles - Columnist, The Washington Post
Greenspan, Alan - Chairman, Federal Reserve System (U.S.)
Feldstein, Martin S. - President and CEO, NAtional Bureau of Economic Research (U.S.)

How fitting it was that King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia of Spain also attended the 2003 conference. Months later, Spain became the centre of new "terrorist outrages" which have allowed the E.U. to set its system of social control in motion. A new government, more suited to the E.U. agenda for hegemony, has also manifested itself.

Thanks to The Irish Nationalist for bringing some of this to my attention.

Blooddha.

The Lisbon Treaty. Vote " No " For Freedom.

2008-02-16T09:21:00.000-08:00

The Lisbon Treaty is one of the most serious challenges
facing anyone who cares about social justice.

The treaty,if passed,will undermine democracy,lead to a greater militarisation and centralise power into the hands of a Euro elite.

The Lisbon Treaty,in its earlier form of the EU Constitution,was already rejected in the summer of 2005 by the people of France and the Netherlands.
However,the European Council and Commission ignored this democratic rejection.In response they fashioned the Lisbon Treaty,which is essentially the same document.

As Bertie Ahern,the Corporate puppet said,"Thankfully,they have not changed the substance… 90 per cent is still there."

Irish voters have been given a unique opportunity to give their opinion on the future of the EU.

We should protest at an undemocratic procedure which has denied the rest of the people of Europe a chance to vote.We should also oppose the treaty in its own right.

1. The Lisbon Treaty will lock Europe into a straight jacket of neo-liberalism.
It makes little provision for a social Europe.

2. It does nothing to address the lack of democracy in the EU and helps
create thebasis for an EU super-state.

3. It gives legal support to EU battle groups and NATO.
It also forces countries to increase military spending.

Europe's Constitutional Treaty.

Monsieur D'Estaing's Threat to Democracy

During his life of public Service, the esteemed former President of France, Monsieur Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, has been considered by many to have laboured in the interests of his nation and Europe. Yet Giscard has gone on to preside over a forum of the Brussels élite producing a draft constitution for the future of Europe, which is nothing short of an attack on democracy in Europe and a subversion of Europe’s citizenry. Democracy, the very word is derived from the ancient Greek for ‘the rule of the people’, we in Europe invented it, its ideals have spread to the far corners of the globe, it has become our way of life and something we take for granted. It cannot be taken from us or turned into a symbolic chattel, left to pacify us while Giscard and his élite attempt to grab what they see as the power with real value. However, Giscard should take note that it is the way of history, through the European ages, that those, who attempt to take from the people that which is theirs, ultimately are seen for what they are and fail. His and his like’s usurpation of the European agenda must and will be ended.

The American founding father, Benjamin Franklin said “any society that would give up a little Liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both”. The actions of Giscard in carrying out what the Americans would call a log roll (when you roll your chosen log down a hill, it may pick up some leaves on its way but it will still be your log when it gets to the bottom), producing his leather bound draft constitution for the future of Europe, must one way or another force European citizens to pay attention and act. For unless we do, a serious and stealthy assault will have been carried out by Giscard and the European élite he personifies, which will further encroach on our libertarian democratic society and our ability to hold those that truly govern us accountable for their actions. If Giscard succeeds, Europe’s future may be headed down at best a foolhardy and at worst a very dangerous path.

The draft constitution is the embodiment of a political élite’s attempt to consolidate its oligarchic hold over the decision-making apparatus in the European Union, which affects in fundamental ways the daily aspects of our lives. The result of this constitution, should it come to pass, would be a Presidential Head of Europe, in the role of the President of the European Council, who will have global recognition as President of the Union, that we the people have no say in electing. Your vote, your opinion, is neither required nor desired. Perhaps Giscard, a man without mandate from the people, sees himself as the first Imperator. The plan also creates a foreign minister to oversee that tract in the draft, “member states shall actively and unreservedly support the Union’s common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity. They shall refrain from action contrary to the Union’s interests or likely to undermine its effectiveness.” Of course the unelected President and Foreign Minister would be unlikely to display what Chirac earlier this year identified as the “bad behaviour” and signs of being “badly brought up” of the annoying democratically elected leaders of Central and Eastern European States. The President and Minister will be hand picked by the élite. Our European Minister for foreign affairs, who will suppose to represent our interests as Europeans in the world, again will not have been elected by us nor appointed by any particular individual elected by us. It is already the case that those of us, whose states have adopted the Euro, have no right to elect or reject anyone responsible for the policy that underpins the Euro in our pockets. The Governor of the European Central Bank, another élitist, is not accountable to us the citizenry directly or indirectly. This means that those Europeans living in Western Europe exist in a far less accountable society than they did only a decade or so ago. Sweden’s rejection of the Euro in its recent referendum is a sign that Europeans recognise this fact and require accountability from those setting monetary and other policy. The many areas over which we have or will cede power to this élite at the highest decision and policy-making level, include employment regulation, industry, transport, communications, justice, health, agriculture, fisheries and important aspects of defence. The national veto is to be abolished in no fewer than fifty new areas including immigration and asylum. The draft also sets in stone the fact that EU law will have primacy over member states.

Notice a trend here? Our intelligence is being insulted and our democratic rights, our liberty, those values that so many Europeans and others have fought and died for, are under assault. The fundamental ideals born of revolutionary France are betrayed. Our liberty and democracy are interwoven, try to subvert them and you threaten the success story of liberal democracy in Europe. Giscard and both his witting and unwitting (or witless) cronies must have their subterfuge terminated. The Brussels élite has grown fat and happy off the backs of hard working Europeans, giving superannuated or failed politicians sinecures atop a multiplying bureaucracy. This latest effort is a bridge too far.

It is essential to recognise a key truth and the rightness of at least one aspect of this élites effort, that being the most laudable goal which shrouds their interest, that the ever closer union of Europe and its peoples as aspired to in the 1957 Treaty of Rome, is a wise and desirable objective and what’s more, should be achievable. The European Union has undoubtedly served the people of Europe well, it is most apparent that it is capable of much more, which is why we must jealously guard it from those that would try to snatch its levers from us. A United Europe can, should and probably will provide for European peace, prosperity, strength, quality of life and ability to build not just a better Europe but a better and safer world. A United States of Europe, if structured properly could be great for Europeans and for the world.

It is tragic that Giscard has presided over an élite that has somehow managed to tarnish the image of what a United Europe could mean. They have created a perception in the minds of millions of Europeans, that European federalism stands for centralism, inefficiency, lack of accountability and overreaching control. Classic big government encroaching on the rights and sovereignty of the individual and the last redoubt of old style socialism writ large across our continent. The fact is a federal Europe, possessing an accountable administration with a clear European identity and position on the world stage, which has vested in it only those key disciplines that are best, and most efficiently, managed on a European level, embracing Europe’s precious diversity, devolving as much as possible to Europe’s regions, is a pretty good idea; to think otherwise is to somewhat indulge oneself in romantic nostalgia, enjoyable but not a realistic recipe for the future of Europe or the world. Giscard’s future does not provide the answer. The future of the Union must provide for the devolution of decision making to the regions of Europe and the creation of an environment where its peoples can prosper, while recognising their wider responsibilities and duties in what is today a very small world.

Most importantly, this figurehead for Europe, this President of the European Council, must not be appointed by the collected Prime Ministers of Europe. This little élite club intends to choose from amongst themselves, to appoint one of their retired or retiring own (any name spring to mind?) for the job. Securing what is what I call the ‘triple whammy retirement plan,’ the parliamentary pension, the ministerial pension and then the EU pension. This is a gouge of power and position by a clique. In the late 1700s, the champion of democracy James Madison said, “the censorial power is in the people over the government and not the government over the people”. His words ring true for Europeans today. Power belongs to us the citizens of Europe and can only be delegated by us the people, to any European leadership, we do not require middle men to interpret what is best for us, we are citizens not subjects and Europeans know the difference. This President of Europe must be accountable to us at the ballot box. We will vote to hire or fire him or her. We are not the uninformed, misguided and ignorant, sweaty masses that this élite takes us for. Giscard clearly indicated his attitude to the democratic process many years ago, when his party lost the French election to Francois Mitterand, Giscard quoted with mocking disdain, “French people deserve what they voted for”. We must elect this European President and hold him/her and any European foreign or other minister accountable. Then if we don’t like what we see we can do what democracy does best and at election time, vote to throw them out.

All of these goings on in Europe point to a current flaw in our European system of democracy whose structures are failing us through a combination of self interests, incompatibility with the modern world and inability to adapt. These failing structures are the embodiment of ‘old Europe’. Like the creaking analogue telephone systems of earlier decades, Europe’s system of nationally structured political parties, has now become a legacy system. You can tweak and push the system harder, you can give it a fresh coat of paint and add new parts, but what lies underneath is no longer capable of delivering the high performance that a new generation of Europeans need in this new century and millennium. The overhaul required may be considered by some to be radical. The old ‘analogue’ system must be left behind to wither away over time. European politics needs to go ‘digital’.

It is time for the creation of new truly pan-European political organisations that can provide a vision for a better future, for without them a Europe truly united cannot exist. When looking at America, the historian Clinton Rossiter said “No America without democracy, no democracy without politics, no politics without parties”. The same can be said for a democratic Europe. In the absence of mainstream, truly European political parties, the European political scene has become the plaything of the élites and special interest groups with no broader European vision. Such new parties or organisations would strive to address our needs at the levels where most decisions affecting us are, or should be made, the macro level in Europe, our broader community and at the most local level within the regions of Europe’s States. Europeans almost uniformly hold a low regard for much of the current political leadership in Europe while these so called leaders stumble from opinion poll to opinion poll with little other motive than to stay in power rather than out, whatever it takes.

In addition to protecting our future from power grabs à la Giscard, pan-European parties could start to address a number of issues of interest to all Europeans including genuine free trade, security, education, improved quality of life, improved health and longevity, support and encouragement for the family, justice and the independence of the judiciary, competitiveness, embracing technology and the knowledge economy, stimulating entrepreneurship the driver of quality job creation, providing fair opportunity for the developing world, the protection of fundamental human rights including the right of all of humanity to exercise a democratic choice to select those that govern them and the protection of the sovereignty of the individual. Europe must become something much broader than a physical place, it must become a living idea that others might embrace and eventually join.

The draft constitution does not follow the true path of constitutional liberalism that has served Europe, North America and the Western World so well in recent history. The foundations of libertarianism in the Roman Republic were slowly undone by the undermining of Rome’s own elite: there must never again be laurel crowns on the heads of power-grabbing Caesars. Here and now is a power grab of classical proportions, taking place in the young roots of a potentially great European future. It must be stopped. As political analyst, and Newsweek International editor, Dr Fareed Zakaria states in his book ‘The Future of Freedom’, “the lesson of Rome’s fall is that for the rule of law and liberty to endure, you need more than the good intentions of the rulers, for they may change (both the intentions and the rulers.)”

It is interesting to note that up until a most recent draft, Giscard’s constitution attempted to draw its legitimacy from the roots of democratic and libertarian ideas in ancient Greece and Rome, while failing to make any mention of Christianity’s influence on the make up of Europe’s present or historical character. Giscard’s draft went from Greece and Rome straight to the Enlightenment ideas of the seventeenth century, which is interesting given that period’s tendency of giving more power to central government, when European Christianity, when viewed from a secular perspective, was the champion of separateness from the state and through the age of reformation, the empowerment of the individual. Given his motives perhaps there was more than one reason for his not mentioning Christianity or its influences. As it happens, in the face of some criticism, Giscard and cronies decided to drop any references to the Enlightenment etc. rather than accept a compromise to recognise the beliefs of two thirds of Europe’s population in a supreme Deity by mentioning God in the draft constitution. For those that don’t believe in God there should not have been a problem, my children believe in Santa Claus, no one should take offence. Omitting God from the draft constitution reflects the imposition of the will of that small élite with a great sense of their own superiority. Given their attempt to render the will of the people obsolete, they could at least have pretended to acknowledge that something might outrank them, even if that was only God.

The draft constitution must be seen as one significant ingredient for what could develop into a medium term disaster for Europe. A continuation down the present path could lead to the rejection of the constitution in its present form via referenda in a small number of European States. If Giscard, Chirac, Schroder and co are to be believed, this may well lead the élites down a path to a two-tier Europe given the misnomer of a ‘fast track’ inner core. Such a fast track would only have downward gravity to account for its speed and the train would have no brakes going into a dark tunnel. If Germany and France embark down this siding and at the same time fail to rise to the challenge of reforming their creaking welfare burdens, they will have no choice but to seek shelter for their economies through trade protectionism in order to provide a short term stem to the resultant loss of jobs and investment. Add a few more blunders to the mix, which they are well capable of delivering and within less than a decade you could have a European Union that is disintegrating into something unpleasant and grown farther apart from her old ally the United States. In order to force their version of the constitution upon the people of Europe, the threats from the Brussels élite have already begun. A spokesman for European Commission President Romano Prodi recently stated “if it (the constitution) is not ratified, Europe faces the messy choice of grinding to a halt or having to expel one of its members.” This from a man with no mandate from the people. Europe’s citizens have by and large, become tired, disinterested and ignoring of our political leadership, who are for the most part, devoid of any great vision for our future. Many of Europe’s leaders have taken on a distinctively grey hue. This disillusionment in our leadership has resulted in most people not noticing what has been going on in the convention and how through the familiar drone of weekly political drivel, a coup of sorts has been hatched to snatch away our God given rights.

The forces at work within the Euro political élites and their predication to self-preservation above all else will prove to be a momentous force behind this power grab. Each State’s socialist and centrist senior political figures will call for the draft constitution or ‘treaty’ to be adopted, those on the extreme right and fringe parties will say that it shouldn’t, just making the other fellows look like they must be correct. The ‘grey’ leaders will advocate why the draft constitution represents a ‘fair deal’ a ‘reasonable compromise’ and an ‘historical achievement’. History is full of such historical achievements, from the Athenian’s execution of Socrates to Julius Caesar’s establishment of the Roman dictatorship, undermining the classical Republic, the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition the ascendancy of Josef Stalin to command of the Politburo. The election of the National Socialists as the largest single party in the German Weimer Republic and their being requested to form a government that would make Germany strong.

Giscard and his gang of acolytes can only be countered with a true and fair vision for a United Europe. It is time for those of us in Europe who have until now avoided airing our views, to mobilize and stop this suffocating tide. What’s more it is time for European entrepreneurs, intellectuals, professionals and most importantly, her hard working peoples, to come together under a new banner. Separate and distinct from groupings and parties based on legacy national organisations. Across the member States and the Accession states soon to join the Union plus those that have legitimate aspirations of joining, a new organisation must be formed. That organisation must lay out a clear, articulate and properly achievable vision for a better future for a Europe which will embrace and complement the world and which, rather than try to define itself in a contradistinction to the United States, will act as an equal partner and influence for the extension of real justice and liberty across the globe.

Such a political party, I will for the sake of discussion give it the Latin name ‘Libertas’, will need to challenge the ingrained make up of this codifying élite at the most local level, in local and regional elections, as well as running candidates at Member State and EU levels. The current old structures need shaking up. The silent majority of Europeans whose views and opinions are not reflected in the day-to-day humdrum of European politics are disillusioned. It is almost amusing to hear Giscard, his cronies and established old political parties across Europe, pronounce on how they are concerned with the lack of interest in politics by the young or by the populace in general. What they seem to fail to grasp is that people are tired of the same unimaginative stagnation, a lack of willingness to pursue true reform and a lack of courage to stand up to vociferous special interests groups in pursuit of shortsighted agendas. Politics driven by the daily headline.

The draft constitution is moving a step closer to implementation during the current Italian Presidency. Very fortunately for Europe, a new path to a better and more dynamic future can be divined. Giscard’s constitution can be driven into the darkness where it belongs by the referenda voters in Ireland, Denmark and France who will get to vote on it. The political élites in all the major parties will be advocating adopting the constitution unless between now and then, they embrace something better. I voted yes to the Nice Treaty because I believe in the Union, its expansion and the good it has done. I believe the Union can offer a great future for my four young children. No one is going to undermine their chances of living in a truly free and democratic society with respect for the rule of law and a leadership that is accountable to the people. The people of Europe must and will end Giscard’s escapade and a path for a better future for the Union will have been opened. Giscard’s draft constitution is illegitimate; his European President is illegitimate as legitimacy can only be conferred by us the people. Some in European politics would prefer to deny the Union such legitimacy, in order to protect their jobs and the illusion of control over decision making which is now, sometimes more practically vested in the EU. For the Union to be considered legitimate by its citizenry and the World, its ultimate leaders and figure heads must submit themselves to the rigours of what is a well founded European tradition: law abiding, libertarian, democracy. Giscard hasn’t asked anyone beyond his regional borders for a vote for over twenty years. He should never have presumed to take on a task of leading the charge to force through his constitution, nor should our leaders have let him.

It is time to map out a new and better United Europe. When given the opportunity, let’s start by burying Monsieur Valéry Giscard d’Estaing’s draft in the spot we’ll mark with an X on the ballot paper.

(Thanks to Declan Ganley.)

The Pic Post

2008-02-16T03:26:00.000-08:00

Just a collection of good pictures.

The Ron Paul March

2008-02-14T09:45:00.000-08:00

Grand Rally and March on Washington DC

When: Official date to be determined - Ron Paul has proposed either Memorial Day Weekend or the Fourth of July Weekend.
Vote for the Date Here!

The largest rally and march in recorded history will take place in Washington DC. The march will be peaceful in nature. Find a city near you and pledge to show your support today!

RonPaulMarch.com is committed to mobilizing Ron Paul supporters and like-minded individuals. It also provides a communication hub for members from various meetup groups to chat, post, network and stay informed about upcoming marches.

Discuss your ideas for the march and how to spread the message in the forums.

Update

Message from the campaign: "As Dr. Paul mentioned in his last video message, an official Ron Paul march and rally in Washington, D.C. is in the works. A date has not been set yet. Most likely the event will be in the late spring or early summer. We'll announce details once plans are firmed up and a date is chosen."

Get updates at the march blog.

New InfoWars Social Network Site

2008-02-13T13:23:00.000-08:00

The Truth Will Out...

2008-02-08T12:46:00.000-08:00

Journalist Whistle Blowers Expose Fox News
& Monsanto's Total Lies.

Here's an example of what has been going on
for years & years.
How is your heath as a result of the poisons
that have been hidden & fed to you?
What about your children?
Leukemia, Cancers,
Hormone Imbalances, I.B.S.,
Diabetes, Parkinsons, Thyroid
Disfunction & the list goes on.

There are proven links between these &
many other diseases & viruses that have
been caused (both intentionally or otherwise)
by Governmental, Medical & Industrial
mass deception.

Question everything. Do the research.
Do the maths. Discover for yourself
the lengths to which these people have
gone to, to lie, cheat, steal, poison &
kill you.

The evidence is out there.
Here's some right now -

Blooddha.

John Carpenters "They Live!"

2008-02-08T01:51:00.000-08:00

This was released in 1988.John Carpenters "They Live!"
may be 20 years old but it's subtext &
underlining message are very relevant today.
Greed,destruction of our way of life,threats,shadow forces & plans
to change the world forever.
Just replace the aliens with governments,globalists &
those that really hold the power -
the banking,military & industrial complex and what do you
know? - It's happening now!

Fullscreen Here.

Journalists, Wake Up! What Has Become Of You All??

2008-02-07T17:05:00.000-08:00

Are there no brave,truth-seeking mainstream journalists left?
You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
You should all go join the C.I.A.
It seems that maybe you already have,
judging by your silence on truth & your deafening rants propagating
outright lies.
Go put down your pens,laptops &
pick up your secret service badges at the desk.
You make me sick.

For The Truth See This Post.

After yet another Faux News softcore porn segment,where Bill O’Reilly calls for internet censorship, we are told Willie Nelson is a “pinhead” for going on the Alex Jones show and telling his audience the attacks of September 11, 2001, were an inside job.

Is there a reason Bill calls those he disagrees with “pinheads”?O’Reilly does not believe Mr. Nelson suffers from microcephaly,the neurological disorder in which the circumference of the head is significantly smaller than average for the person’s, often resulting in mental retardation,or does he think the famous country performer works on the side for a circus freak show.

No,Bill simply believes those who are skeptical of the official story — a cobbled together story so obviously irrational and transparently fallacious that it would indeed take somebody suffering from microcephaly and retardation to believe it — are stupid, foolish, even traitors to the nation and thus deserving condemnation, even malicious insults in thirty second segments following the standard Faux News fare of babes showing enough skin to titillate the average viewer, that is to say a sofa-bound geriatric male.

Point is,now that influential people of Willie Nelson’s stature are admitting skepticism with the official fairy tale, the neocons are sincerely worried more people will jettison the duplicitous nonsense they proffer and some of them may actually organize politically to not only get rid of them, but make certain they are prosecuted, marched before the court in orange jumpsuits and manacles, and even sent to the gallows like Nazis convicted at Nuremberg before them, as their crimes are that monstrous.

Thus Bill, the master of slander and the ad hominem attack, is instructed to go after Willie Nelson, a popular American icon few others dare attack.O’Reilly is a hired gun with a vicious streak a mile wide — and a penchant for perversion and domination of women almost as wide — and he is paid handsomely to be vile and unpleasant, so going after Nelson is not a problem for him.

Fortunately, Bill’s days are numbered as fewer people tune in, except maybe to catch a bit of softcore porn, a near perfect match for Bill as he appears to be obsessed with phone sex, vibrators, threesomes, masturbation, the loss of his virginity, and sexual fantasies, as charged by former colleague Andrea Mackris.It is indeed a bad joke that a person suffering from such egregious character flaws would call Willie Nelson a pinhead.

Story from Truth News

Are You Being Watched??

2008-02-07T12:05:00.000-08:00

In search for foreign intelligence,spies turn to YouTube,MySpace, blogs..

With rapidly advancing technology spreading across the globe,US spies are shifting their focus from surreptitiously photographing secret Soviet documents to trolling the Internet for what could be the next key nugget of foreign intelligence.

Among the most valuable sources,one top spook says,are blogs,MySpace and other Web 2.0 hallmarks.

"We’re looking now at YouTube,which carries some unique and honest-to-goodness intelligence,"Doug Naquin,director of the CIA’s Open Source Center said in a recent speech to CIA retirees.

The speech was posted this week on Secrecy News,the blog of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy.

"I would not have thought of YouTube as an obvious source of intelligence,"Steven Aftergood,he project’s director,told InfromationWeek,"but I think it’s a good sign that the Open Source Center is looking at it,and at other new media."

Open source intelligence collection focuses on compiling and analyzing unclassified data from publicly available sources for use by the CIA,policy makers and other law enforcement agencies.Formerly known as the Foreign Broadcast Information Service,the Open Source Center’s mission in recent years has shifted from translating newspaper and television reports from abroad to culling the Web for information on foreign targets. The center trains intelligence agents and others in government.

"This training includes everything from media analysis to advanced Internet exploitation,way beyond Googling,"Naquin said.

The goal of open-source collection is to provide information that goes beyond what appears in the morning newspaper,and analysis of Web 2.0 content has become a key part of that,he said.

"A couple years back we identified Iranian blogs as a phenomenon worthy of more attention,about six months ahead of anybody else,"he said.

Now even Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has his own blog.

"We’re looking at chat rooms and things that didn’t even exist five years ago,and trying to stay ahead,"Naquin said."We have groups looking at what they call ‘Citizens Media’: people taking pictures with their cell phones and posting them on the Internet.Then there’s Social Media, phenomena like MySpace and blogs."

With the end of the Cold War,Naquin said open source collection became a low priority in the Intelligence Community,causing the FBIS staff to be cut in half during the 90s. The terror attacks aimed at New York and Washington changed all that.

"[Nine-Eleven] was sort of a watershed for us,"Naquin said."The 9/11 Commission and WMD Commission both said,‘You know what?There are a lot of open sources out there.We should be putting a lot more attention toward exploiting those sources."

Naquin’s full speech is available here (.pdf).

Story From InfoWars

Cut Internet Cables Could Well Be Prelude To War

2008-02-06T14:58:00.000-08:00

This is a story to watch.
It has happened before many times in order to silence a vast amount of people &
to limit truthful accounts from invaded countries.
Given Americas ( by that I mean the dictator Bush & his cronies ) stance against Iran & other Mid-East countries, this is a major development & quite possibly a prelude to war.
Story from Alex Jones & Steve Watson @ InfoWars.

What these cables look like.
They were not cut by "accident" !

Unexplainable Cutting Of Internet Cables Points To Sabotage.
Is the undoubtedly deliberate damage to communications throughout the Middle East and Asia a warning, or something even more deadly?

The cutting of multiple undersea cables in several different locations hundreds of miles apart continues to arouse suspicion and stir speculation.

It seems that the activity represents, at the very least, a warning shot across the bows of certain Middle Eastern and Asian nations, and may even signify the imminence of a major geopolitical event.

In the space four days the Middle East and Asia has experienced unprecedented mass Internet outages after no less than four undersea Internet cables were cut without explanation.

Internet blackouts were reported in large tracts of Asia, the Middle East and North Africa after the cable connections were severed. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, Pakistan and India, all experienced severe problems.

Reports in the press in the United Arab Emirates have since claimed that the total number of cables now cut is five.

More Here.

Merck Admits Injecting Cancer Viruses Into Millions

2008-02-06T14:02:00.000-08:00

Merck admits injecting cancer viruses (SV40 and others) in millions

Folks, you had better sit down, take a very deep breath. Merck drug company vaccines admits injecting cancer viruses into their vaccines.
This censored interview conducted by medical historian Edward Shorter for WGBH public television (Boston) and Blackwell Science was cut from The Health Century due to its liability–the admission that Merck drug company vaccines have traditionally been injecting cancer viruses (SV40 and others) in people worldwide.
This segment of In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood & Terrorism, produced and freely contributed by consumer protector and public health expert, Dr. Leonard Horowitz, features the world’s leading vaccine expert, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, who explains why Merck’s vaccines have spread AIDS, leukemia, and other horrific plagues worldwide.

Dr. Hilleman, who developed the Mumps, Rubella and Measles vaccines, said: “Vaccines are the bargain basement technology of the 20th century.”
In the taped interview (with about 6 Merck executives in the room, their nervous laughter audible in the tape) Dr. Hilleman explains how in his search for uninfected monkeys, Merck imported green monkeys from Africa. Those monkeys, it turned out, were carrying the AIDS virus: “I didn’t know we were importing AIDS.”

Dr. Hilleman also acknowledged that he discovered that the Sabine polio vaccine (manufactured by Merck) was infected with the SV-40 cancer virus. In the process of developing vaccines Merck scientists are shown to blithely disregarded public safety as they conducted massive tests exposing millions of unsuspecting people to wild viruses. Dr. Hilleman acknowledged that the cancer infected polio vaccine had been tested in massive field trials in Russia, then in the U.S.
The issues raised in this candid interview raise serious doubts about the propaganda the public has been fed about the safety of vaccines. Vaccines that have been promoted as “safe and effective” miraculous cures have been infecting (possibly) millions of people with cancer, leukemia, and AIDS.

The interview was conducted by Dr. Edward Shorter, Professor of the History of Medicine and Professor of Psychiatry, University of Toronto. I checked the authenticity of the tape with Dr. Shorter who informed me that he did it when preparing a PBS series called “The Health Century.” Doubleday published a companion volume of the same title in 1987.

Dr. Shorter deposited the entire tape of the interview, including portions omitted from the book, along with other interviews in the National Library of Medicine.

The uncovered facts should prompt a re-examination of the advisability of US mandatory vaccine policies–

The person who posted this censored portion of the interview on Youtube is Dr. Leonard Horowitz, a controversial and prolific healthcare expert with multiple academic degrees–including 3 doctorates.

In his forthcoming documentary film, “In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood & Bioterrorism,” Dr. Horowitz examines official directives for national preparedness against outbreaks, nuclear explosions, and other disasters. A critical examination of what officials are saying and not telling that impacts the future of public health and urgent life-saving decisions every American is currently being encouraged to make.

In short we have been deliberately poisoned.

Stop The Fascists!! Where's Freedom Of Expression Gone??

2008-02-06T06:59:00.000-08:00

I just discovered that this blog is being blocked by certain
work & domain hosts!
What the fuck??
Why?
I want answers!
Where is my freedom to express myself?
The Irish Government are watching you & they don't
want you to think for yourself.
They want nice little complacent,mindless idiots.
Well Fuck You!
Fuck your Fluoridation.
Fuck your Poisons.
Fuck your Cancer.
Fuck your Drugs.
Fuck your Automoton-creating Education System.
Fuck your Taxes.
Fuck your Draconian Laws.
Fuck your New World Order.
You will Not win.
You shall all come crumbling down.

Thank You for increasing my resolve &
will to bring this shithouse to it's knees.

Willie Nelson Puts His Weight Behind 9/11 Truth

2008-02-05T10:37:00.000-08:00

Please repost this. We need the mainstream media hounds to pick this story up. Repost it, Blog it, Link it, Say it..

More Here.

_______________________________________________

!! UPDATE !! Part 2.
Tuesday 19th February.

________________________________________________

Straight talking American icon Willie Nelson today told a national radio show that he thought the twin towers were imploded like condemned Las Vegas casino buildings, as the country music superstar forcefully voiced his doubts about the official 9/11 story.

Agreeing with host Alex Jones that he questioned the official story, Nelson elaborated, "I saw those towers fall and I’ve seen an implosion in Las Vegas - there’s too much similarities between the two, and I saw a building fall that didn’t get hit by nothing," added Nelson, referring to WTC Building 7 which collapsed in the late afternoon of September 11.

"How naive are we - what do they think we’ll go for?," asked Nelson, pointing out that his doubts began on the very day of 9/11.

"I saw one fall and it was just so symmetrical, I said wait a minute I just saw that last week at the casino in Las Vegas and you see these implosions all the time and the next one fell and I said hell there’s another one - and they’re trying to tell me that an airplane did it and I can’t go along with that," said Nelson.

The former Highwayman, fresh from his appearance at this past weekend’s superbowl, questioned why Afghanistan became an immediate target in the aftermath of 9/11 when the official story posited that mostly Saudi Arabians were responsible for the attack.

"When I get hit I like to look around and see who did it before I start swinging at everybody in the room and that’s kind of what we were doing," said Nelson, "We get hit over here and then next thing you know we’re jumping on everybody in the town - so (if) we got hit from Saudi Arabia, I think we’ve got some questions that need to be answered from those folks," said Nelson.

In light of his viewpoint, Nelson said that recent revelations concerning the impartiality of the 9/11 Commission and its close links with the White House did not surprise him.

"What does it take for us to realize we’re having the wool pulled over our eyes one more time?" he concluded.

Nelson is not the first high-profile public figure to question 9/11. In March 2006, actor Charlie Sheen voiced his doubts and was followed last year by his father Martin Sheen.

Aside from celebrities - professors, scientists and other experts the world over have questioned the inconsistencies in the official story, and the topic was most recently even a subject of serious debate in the Japanese Parliament.

In December, former Italian President Francesco Cossiga told Italy’s most respected newspaper, Corriere della Sera, that the attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad and that this was common knowledge amongst global intelligence agencies.

Former German Secretary of Defense Andreas von Bülow also went public in blaming American intelligence for instigating the attack.

Nelson’s country music contemporaries The Dixie Chicks were savaged by the establishment when they criticized the Bush administration shortly before the invasion of Iraq. It remains to be seen whether the corporate media will dare take on Nelson for his views or whether they will just try to ignore the story as happened with Martin Sheen.

Even if they choose to ignore Nelson’s comments, the power of the alternative media should organize now to get this story out.

Illegal GM Products Entering Ireland & EU.

2008-02-04T04:26:00.000-08:00

Greenpeace & GM-free Ireland demand blockade of all US maize shipments.
Clouds of GM powder contaminate Dublin Docklands.
Fianna Fail’s GM food traceability system in tatters.
Irish farmers plan to phase out GM animal feed.
Photographs available for download Here.
The GM-free Ireland Network and Greenpeace International called today for a blockade of US maize imports following laboratory tests on Friday which prove that a shipment of US animal feed intercepted in Dublin Port and later in Rotterdam entered the EU illegally with a cargo contaminated by unauthorised and toxic varieties of genetically modified (GM) maize.
The certified laboratory analysis showed 2.4% contamination for a GM maize variety called Herculex patented by Pioneer / Dow Agrosciences, which is approved in the USA but illegal in the EU. The tests also showed 20% positive for GM maize MON863 patented by Monsanto; the latter is still approved for animal feed and human food in the EU, even though the European Food Safety Authority has been forced to review its approval following allegations of scientific fraud, cover up, and a recent peer-reviewed study
by French scientists which found it causes serious liver and kidney damage in laboratory animals.
GM-free Ireland and Greenpeace called for the blockade following their discovery of the contaminated animal feed aboard the Pakrac which arrived in Dublin from New Orleans on 2 April. The cargo unloaded here included distiller’s grain probably extracted from a GM maize variety that contains its own pesticide ,
and hulls from GM soya beans thought to contain high level residues of Monsanto’s toxic Roundup weedkiller, which has been found to cause toxicity to human placental cells within hours of exposure, at levels ten times lower than those found in agricultural use. The remainder of the cargo, consisting of GM
maize pellets, was unloaded in Rotterdam.

More Here.

The Movie Post.

2008-02-04T03:16:00.000-08:00

Here are some well made, intelligent, succinct & informative factual movies.
Click The Title above each poster for the movie.

Zeitgeist

TerrorStorm

Road To Tyranny

Matrix Of Evil

Loose Change

American Dictators

Truth & Lies Of 9/11

Martial Law 9/11

Super Cure For Super Bugs. Bird Flu, MRSA, C.Diff & Others.

2008-02-03T03:52:00.000-08:00

Colloidal Silver Rocks!

An eight year study has just confirmed what many people already knew- That a Silver product can cure & protect people from many so-called Superbugs.
The Federal Drug Administraion has tried to suppress many studies because of their
ties to the big pharmasutrical companies such as those that produce antibiotics like Vancomycin, which have become nearly useless against Superbugs.

Here are some links :

Colloidal Silver
Silver
Research PDF
MRSA Man Cured
Ordering
Super Silver
Irish Colloidal Silver Supplier
The following is a partial list of the more than 650 diseases that colloidal silver has been reputed to be successful against: acne, AIDS complications, allergies, appendicitis, arthritis, athlete's foot, bladder inflammation, blood parasites, blood poisoning, boils, burns, cancer, candida, cholera, colitis, conjunctivitis, cystitis, dermatitis, diabetes, dysentery, eczema, fibrositis, gastritis, gonorrhea, hay fever, herpes, impetigo, indigestion, keratitis, leprosy, leukemia, lupus, lymphangitis, Lyme disease, malaria, meningitis, neurasthenia, parasitic infections: viral, fungal and bacterial pneumonia, pleurisy, prostate, pruritus ani, psoriasis, purulent opthalmia, rhinitis, rheumatism, ringworm, scarlet fever, septic conditions of the eyes, ears, mouth, and throat, seborrhea, septicemia, shingles, skin cancer, staphylococcus and streptococcus infections, stomach flu, syphilis, thyroid, tuberculosis, tonsillitis, toxemia, trachoma, all forms of virus, warts, whooping cough, yeast infection, stomach ulcer, canine parovirus and other veterinary uses, and fungal and viral attacks on plants. Simply spray diluted silver on the leaves and add to the soil.

The Great Fluoride Deception

2008-01-31T16:58:00.000-08:00

The Fluoride in our water supply is a toxic waste product
of the Aluminium & Fertilizer Industries.
Prof.Harold Hodge,The University of Rochester,
The Manhattan Project,Kettering,Edward Bernays,
Eugenicists,The Aluminium Industry & every Government that
has a Fluoridation program are all to blame.

Part 1.

Part 2.

Part 3.

More.

Dentists against Fluoride.

FLUORIDE FRAUD AT DUBLIN DENTAL HOSPITAL.

Fluoride Free Water have uncovered a four year old study carried out at Dublin Dental Hospital which exposes the fraud surrounding water fluoridation in Ireland.
The study which investigated the fluoride dose of bottle-feeding infants concluded,"baby formulae should be reconstituted with non-fluoridated water".(1)They also called for "more research work (to) be undertaken on the total fluoride dose and the impications for child health both dental and systemic".This study, although presented to a health board conference, has never been published.The conclusions have never been made public and parents who are using tap water to make up infant formula feed are overdosing their children with fluoride.Dr. Don Mac Auley, Dental Adviser to Fluoride Free Water, explains,"there was no follow up study and the Department of Health continues to state that we are all safe and prescription by thirst is scientific.It is shocking to think that they have known of this problem for many years and done nothing.In my experience of dental fluorosis (fluoride damage to teeth)in my dental practice,90% of children/adolescents have a history of bottle-feeding for longer than 6 months.Doctors know nothing about this.I had a patient in recently whom, after reading an newspaper article,spoke with her GP and he had never heard of any problems with fluoride and infants".Recently, M.E.P., Avril Doyle raised the issue in the Senate.(2)Expressing growing public concern about fluoride, Ms. Doyle continued, "the Minister of State should issue a directive to the effect that fluoridated tap water should no longer be used in the reconstitution of infant formula".
In response to Ms Doyle's concerns, Dr Wayne Anderson, chief food science specialist with the Food Safety Authority (FSAI),revealed that a sub-committee of the Forum on Fluoridation is carrying out a risk assessment on use of fluoridated water to make infant formula.Fluoride Free Water finds it surprising that a press release from the FSAI,one year after the above study, advocates the use of tap water over bottled water
for formula feed, "(m)ineral waters may have a high solute content, may contain inadequate fluoride and should not be used to mix formula or as an infant drink".
(2) This shows the level of ignorance surrounding this issue.Ms. Doyle found it "inexplicable" that there has never been a risk assessment into infant fluoride levels.Ms. Doyle will find it even more "inexplicable" that Professor John Clarkson, a member of this Forum sub-committee, is Dean of Dublin Dental School where the above study was carried out all those years ago.Professor Clarkson recently stated, "the issue of total fluoride exposure needs to be addressed and monitored".3)However, he failed to mention that a study, carried out at his Dental Hospital, had declared Irish fluoridated tap water unsafe for Irish infants.

Fluoride Free Water finds the truth decay surrounding water fluoridation scandalous and unacceptable.The forum on fluoridation is unbalanced,unaccountable and continues to mislead the public and put all our health at risk.We are now calling for an independent public enquiry to investigate the shocking truth behind this mass-medication.Protect our youngest citizens and stop fluoridation immediately.

References:
1. To examine the Fluoride content of popular formulae and milks and to study the Fluoride dose that infants are receiving from these various sources.Dublin Dental Hospital 1997-1998.
Here.

2. Seanad Debates Official report 19/6/2001.
Here.

3. Infant nutrition affects childhood illness and adult diseases.Food
Safety Authority of Ireland report recommends feeding changes.30 August
1999. Search "Fluoride" Here.

4. Minutes of meeting of the Forum on Fluoridation on 10 May
2001 Here.

-------------------------------------------------
Join Irelands campaign for Fluoride Free Water
see our web page Here.

------------------------------------------------------------
This message has been forwarded to you by VOICE of Irish Concern for the Environment,
because you are subscribed to concerns,Ireland's leading environmental mailing list.
for more info, see Here.

------------------------------------------------------------

Good Fluoride Links :

50 Reasons To Oppose Fluoridation

Fluoride Alert

Fluoride Contents Of Various Water

Fluoride Toxicity

Fluoride Status By Country

Fluoride,Teeth & The Atomic Bomb

Fluoride Info

Fluoride & Cancer

The Truth Is Not All That Hard To Find...

2008-01-31T15:42:00.000-08:00

Here are some 9/11 playlist vids that plainly show how
the official story is the "Conspiracy."

And some more.

GMO Articles

2008-01-18T13:19:00.000-08:00

FRANCE UPHOLDS GMO CROP BAN
+
EU GMO FEED BATTLEGROUND

* Opponents of genetically modified crops win victory in France

International Herald Tribune, 19 March 2008.

* French council upholds decision on GMO crop ban

Reuters, 19 March 2008.

* French Farmers Lose Bid To Overturn GMO Corn Ban

AFP, 19 March 2008.

* French state body upholds decision on GM crop ban

Reuters, 19 March 2008.

* EU GMO feed battleground

Truth About Trade and Technology, 19 March 2008.

____________

OPPONENTS OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS WIN VICTORY IN FRANCE

International Herald Tribune, 19 March 2008. By James Kanter.

PARIS: Opponents of gene-altered crops won a victory in France on Wednesday when the country's top court upheld a ban - for the time being - on a corn variety produced by the U.S. seed company Monsanto.

Growers had argued that the economic harm they faced was serious enough for the month-old ban to be lifted immediately, before the start of the spring planting season. In addition, proponents said allowing plantings could benefit consumers at a time of rising food prices.

The Conseil d'état maintained the ban on the variety, known as MON810, until it could rule on its scientific underpinning. Hearings in that case are expected to be held in the coming months.

In his ruling, Judge Jean-Marie Delarue pointed out that a report, issued in January by a committee of French experts, had called for more studies on the product's safety.

French officials were correct to have paid attention to "new elements brought to light by the committee that could be seen as posing a grave risk to the environment," Delarue wrote.

The decision was a success for environmentalists and for farmers opposed to genetically modified food products. They had warned that the corn, which resists pests, could pollute other crops and pose threats to the environment and human health.

Other farmers, backed by the biotechnology industry, argue that the products could help lower costs and reduce the use of pesticides.

"We are disappointed," said Stéphanie Piécourt, a spokeswoman for Monsanto in France. Corn growers "will not be able to benefit from the economic, agricultural and environmental advantages that this product offers."

In January, President Nicolas Sarkozy recommended banning MON810, and on Feb. 7, the French Agriculture Ministry imposed the ban, saying it should remain in place until a review of the product - required every 10 years - was completed by EU authorities.

Efforts to overturn the ban were led by the General Association of Corn Growers in France and a number of biotechnology companies including Monsanto and Pioneer, a division of the U.S. chemical company DuPont.

Cédric Poeydomenge, a spokesman for the French association of corn growers, said farmers had hoped to plant 100,000 hectares, or 247,000 acres, using the pest-resistant corn.

He said farmers would plant nonmodified corn this year, but would face ¤10 million, or $15.6 million, in potential losses from pests and from purchasing large amounts of insecticide.

Poeydomenge said only about 22,000 hectares were planted with MON810 last year although product was appropriate for use on 700,000 hectares of France, in regions affected by pests that include Poitou-Charentes, Midi-Pyrénées and the Rhône Valley.

France plants a total annual crop of about 3 million hectares of corn for food use and for feeding cattle, Poeydomenge said.

Battles over gene-altered crops have been fought across Europe for more than a decade but there now are signs that some governments and policymakers are prepared to ease long-standing opposition.

Nathalie Moll of Europabio, an industry association in Brussels, said she expected MON810 to be cultivated this year in at least seven EU countries including Spain and Germany. MON810 has been used in the United States for more than a decade.

Officials at the European Commission have deemed many genetically modified products safe and want to introduce more of them into the bloc to normalize trade relations with countries like the United States, and to reduce costs for farmers.

But several governments, including those in Austria and France, are extremely wary of softening their stance on genetically modified foods because of continuing distrust among many citizens who consider gene-altered products to be "Frankenstein" foods.

____________

FRENCH COUNCIL UPHOLDS DECISION ON GMO CROP BAN

Reuters, 19 March 2008.

PARIS - France's highest legal authority upheld on Wednesday a government decision to ban the commercial use of the only genetically modified (GMO) crop grown in the country, legal sources said on Wednesday.

"Our case has been rejected, we are studying the conclusions (of the State Council)," one source close to the case said.

French seedmakers, including Monsanto, attacked the government's earlier decision to ban the use of maize seeds using Monsanto's MON 810 technology.

(Reporting by Valerie Parent; Editing by Peter Blackburn)

Comment by GM Watch:

Fantastic news - France's highest administrative body, the state council (Le Conseil d'Etat), has today rejected Monsanto's complaint about the French Government's ban on Monsanto's MON810 corn.

There was massive controversy last year, and a continuing series of protests and confrontations, over the planting of 22,000 hectares (55,000 acres) of Mon810. This year there should be NO Mon810 at all in France which, as it is the only GM crop that can be grown there, means that - barring crop trials - French fields should be completely GM free.

____________

FRENCH FARMERS LOSE BID TO OVERTURN GMO CORN BAN

AFP, 19 March 2008.

PARIS - France's top legal authority on Wednesday upheld a government decision to ban commercial use of the only genetically modified (GM) crop grown in the country by rejecting an emergency injunction filed by the pro-GM camp.

France issued decrees banning the use of MON 810 maize seeds in February after a government-appointed committee said it unearthed new evidence of damage GM products could inflict on the environment.

Ecologists and ordinary consumers hailed the ruling, but seedmakers, including MON 810 creator Monsanto (nyse: MON - news - people ), and maize farmers lodged an emergency injunction in an attempt to overturn the ban.

In a document released on Wednesday, France's State Council shot down arguments put forward by pro-GM groups, saying they did not cast doubt on the validity of the government's stance.

"(Those seeking the injunction) have no foundation to demand the suspension of the decrees banning commercial sowings of MON 810 maize," wrote the judge overseeing the case.

The State Council still has to issue its verdict on a separate appeal from the pro-GMO faction, this time questioning the legal foundation of France's February decrees.

Conclusions for that appeal should come towards the end of the year, well after the close of France's maize planting season which kicks off in April, legal sources told Reuters.

Wednesday's State Council ruling confirmed French farmers will be unable to use maize seeds which incorporate GM technology, created by U.S. biotech giant Monsanto, in 2008.

BITTER DIVIDE

Farmers sowed Monsanto GM maize on 22,000 hectares last year, representing just under 1.5 percent of France's cultivated maize area. The European Union has authorised MON 810 throughout the 27-nation bloc but is set to re-evaluate its use later this year.

In February, France followed through on its decrees by invoking a legal mechanism, known as the safeguard clause, at EU level to secure a more long term ban.

To succeed, France will need to provide new, scientific proof of the risks posed by the GM seed.

While GM crops are common in the United States, France -- Europe's biggest grain producer -- remains highly suspicious of them, like many other European nations.

Supporters say use of GM crops could help feed the world's poor. Opponents, which polls say include a majority of French people, fear they could harm humans and wildlife by triggering an uncontrolled spread of modified genes.

Highlighting deep divides, even within France, leading maize growers' association AGPM, which jointly filed the injunction, expressed hope that future French rulings would favour use of the GM maize seed.

"We are deeply disappointed but that is the decision and we acknowledge it," said Luc Esprit, who heads AGPM.

In the meantime, imports of GM maize would continue to flood into France to feed the country's livestock, Esprit said.

"This doesn't alter the fact that we are confident about the final judgement which will be made later," he said, referring to the State Council's decision on the second appeal.

Greenpeace embraced Wednesday's State Council decision.

"Greenpeace rejoices in the fact that the challenges of protecting our citizens and the environment have been judged more important than the private interests of a handful of multinationals and the pro-GMO lobby," it said in a statement.

(Editing by Valerie Parent; editing by Chris Johnson)

____________

FRENCH STATE BODY UPHOLDS DECISION ON GM CROP BAN

Reuters, 19 March 2008. By Valerie Parent.

PARIS -- A group of French farmers Wednesday lost a bid to overturn a government ban on a strain of genetically-modified corn, a month after it came into force.

France's highest administrative body, the state council, rejected the challenge from nine plaintiffs including a corn producers' association backed by U.S. agribusiness giant Monsanto Co. (MON), which produces the strain.

"The judge has rejected the complaint," said a spokeswoman for the state council. "There are no serious doubts as to the legality of the decisions" to ban the use of MON810 strain of corn, the only GMO crop grown in France.

The French government in February officially banned the GMO crop after a watchdog authority said it had "serious doubts" about the product in a report that has been controversial even among the scientists who put it together.

France's Provisional High Authority on GM Organisms pointed to what it described as "a certain number of new scientific facts relating to a negative impact on flora and fauna."

In its ruling, the state council said the government was right to resort to the ban as a precautionary measure, given concerns about the possible public health effects.

Reacting to the decision, a Monsanto spokesman said he was disappointed but expressed hope the company's arguments will prevail when the state council issues a final ruling in the case at a later date.

France invoked a European Union safeguard clause to bar the corn that gives an E.U. member state authority to ban a GMO crop provided it has scientific evidence to back this decision.

France this month proposed replacing the E.U.'s system for authorizing GMO crops with tougher standards which take into account a wide range of environmental and safety factors.

Last year, 22,000 hectares were sown with the product - less than one per cent of the sown acreage for corn in France.

___________

EU GMO FEED BATTLEGROUND

Truth About Trade and Technology, 20 March 2008.

With most food processing companies unwilling to risk their brand names and the obligation to label products containing GMOs, only very small quantities of the latter are currently reaching the supermarket shelves. At least in Europe.

The battle-ground between for and against, the multi-national biotech companies and consumer groups, is shifting to animal feedstuffs. Under new EU guidelines, since May 2004 it is quite possible to import genetically modified maize and feed animals with it without any obligation to label the resulting meat or products.

Representatives of specialist quality label food processors met in Rodez, Aveyron, in July to discuss their future under the auspices of a new association called Fil Rouge.

Already much of their sales argument has disappeared since the mad cow crisis and the obligation for all meat products to be traceable back to the farm. Referring to the recent curious decision by the French government not to subsidise the final phase of a current study on the question, the president of Fil Rouge expressed disappointment that it is still not possible to detect GM products in animal muscle and called for further scientific research.

Another member, Martin Lajoinie, suggested a publicity campaign stressing the superior quality of grass-fed animals to counter some of the rumours surrounding meat production.

According to an article in 'Le Monde' in May, Syngenta's Bt11 maize may not be canned as sweetcorn for salads as the European consumer is 'not ready' for it. There was, we can guess, some concern that consumers of sweetcorn might get the wrong idea and refuse to buy. France is the world's second biggest producer of maize.

Some of the small communes in the Haute-Garonne, Lanta and Montgeard for instance, are refusing to allow the planting of experimental GMC fields. The maire of Plan, near Cazères, called for the government to restore the moratorium.

GRAIN FARMER CLAIMS MORAL VICTORY IN SEED BATTLE
Ten years after he took on the multinational Monsanto, Saskatchewan man gets $660 and the right to talk about it

Globe and Mail, 20 March 2008. By Matt Hartley With a report from The Canadian Press.

Percy Schmeiser's decade-long legal odyssey has finally come to an end - and he's got a cheque for $660 to prove it. The 77-year-old Saskatchewan farmer and his wife, Louise, became international folk heroes for their legal struggle with agribusiness giant Monsanto Canada Inc., after the company sued them for violating its patent on genetically engineered canola seeds in 1997.

Although the Schmeisers eventually wound up losing their court battle with the St. Louis-based company in a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision in 2004, the couple have now earned a moral victory that they hope will encourage others to carry on their cause.

Yesterday, Monsanto agreed to pay the Schmeisers $660 to settle a small-claims court case they brought against the company for costs associated with removing the patented Roundup Ready canola from their field in 2005.

"After 10 years, finally justice has been served," Mr. Schmeiser said in an interview last night. "I really feel that if a farmer is now contaminated, he has a right to go after Monsanto for liability and to clean up the contamination. By settling out of court, Monsanto now realizes the seriousness of the liability issue."

Monsanto agreed to pay the costs associated with removing the canola back in 2005. However, the Schmeisers refused the offer because the company insisted the couple sign a release stating they would never talk about the terms of the agreement.

"That release form they sent us was a gag order," Mr. Schmeiser said. "We could never talk to anyone for the rest of our lives about what the terms of the settlement were. There was no way we were going to give up our freedom of speech to a corporation."

Several other Western Canadian farmers have agreed to sign Monsanto's standard release form, including 16 in 2007, according to a statement issued by the firm yesterday. The Schmeisers' deal does not stop them from talking about the terms of the settlement.

"Although we are pleased Mr. Schmeiser finally approached us and agreed to settlement terms, it is frustrating that he essentially accepted the same offer we put before him in 2005," Monsanto public affairs director Trish Jordan said. "This entire matter could have been resolved more than 2? years ago and Mr. Schmeiser would have saved himself some legal costs."

The Schmeisers became international causes célèbres because of the David and Goliath nature of the case. Mr. Schmeiser has been invited to speak at universities and parliaments all over the world, and appearance fees have helped to pay for much of the couple's court costs. In December, they were awarded the Right Livelihood Award - unofficially considered to be the alternative Nobel Prize.

The Schmeisers' saga began more than 10 years ago, when Monsanto sued them after plants grown from genetically modified canola seeds were found on the couple's farm near Bruno, Sask., about 90 kilometres east of Saskatoon.

The company said the Schmeisers violated its patent on the seeds, which had been genetically modified to resist Monsanto-brand herbicide, and that the couple knowingly planted them without paying the technology fees. Monsanto's claim sought damages totalling $400,000.

But the Schmeisers denied using the Monsanto seeds, arguing that the seeds blew onto their property from a nearby road or neighbouring farms.

In 2004, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favour of Monsanto, stating that plant genes and modified cells can be patented. Although the Schmeisers lost the case, the court ruled they did not have to pay damages.

The following year, more of the genetically modified canola appeared on the Schmeisers' farm. They pulled it out themselves and sent Monsanto a bill for $660.

Mr. Schmeiser doesn't grow canola on his farm any more, only wheat and oats, and he rents out most of the land to other farmers. Although he said he's looking forward to spending more time with his family, he hopes the fight to bring awareness to the issues surrounding genetically modified foods will continue.

"This is a great victory for farmers all over the world," he said. "Now they have at least an opportunity to have some recourse on a corporation when they are contaminated."

__________________

SCHMEISER PLEASED WITH VICTORY OVER MONSANTO

CNW, 19 March 2008.

CALGARY -- In an out of court settlement finalized on March 19, 2008, Percy Schmeiser has settled his lawsuit with Monsanto. Monsanto has agreed to pay all the clean-up costs of the Roundup Ready canola that contaminated Schmeiser's fields.

The issue revolves around unwanted Roundup Ready canola plants that arrived on Schmeiser's fields. Monsanto refused to reimburse or compensate Schmeiser for this contamination unless he signed an agreement to not speak publically on the matter and that he would never sue Monsanto for contamination.

A significant part of the agreement is that there was no gag-order imposed on the settlement and that Monsanto could be sued again if further contamination occurred.

Schmeiser believes this precedent setting agreement ensures that farmers will be entitled to reimbursement when their fields become contaminated with unwanted Roundup Ready canola or any other unwanted GMO plants.

"In an indirect way, Monsanto has acknowledged liability for the contamination of a field by the unwanted appearance of its genetically altered product," stated Schmeiser in reaction to the settlement.

For further information: Percy Schmeiser, + 1 306 369 2520

__________________

SASKATCHEWAN FARMER, MONSANTO CANADA SETTLE $600 SMALL CLAIMS CASE
The Canadian Press, March 19 2008

WINNIPEG -- Percy Schmeiser may have lost his legal battle with Monsanto Canada over the use of genetically modified canola seed, but the multinational giant will have to pay the Saskatchewan farmer for the time it took to pull the offending plants out of his fields.

In a deal reached Wednesday, Monsanto Canada agreed to pay the $660 claim Schmeiser brought against it in small claims court, the final act in a decade-long legal battle watched around the world that turned the Saskatchewan farmer into a folk hero to those opposed to so-called "Frankenfood."

In 1998, Monsanto took the Schmeisers to court for using its patented canola seeds, which were genetically modified to be tolerant to a Monsanto-produced herbicide, without a licence, seeking damages totalling $400,000.

The farmers denied they had used the patented seeds, saying they could have blown over from a neighbour's farm or from passing trucks. Eventually, the Supreme Court ruled Schmeiser infringed Monsanto's valid patent on a gene it ed into canola plants, although he did not have to pay the damages.

But in 2005, more modified canola sprouted on Schmeiser's land and he was ordered to remove it.

"Monsanto ... offered to remove it, but before they did so, they wanted Percy to sign a release with a confidentiality clause," said Schmeiser's lawyer Terry Zakreski. "Percy was not prepared to do that.

"He picked out the weeds himself and sent Monsanto a $660 bill."

Now that that bill will be paid, that's likely the end of Schmeiser vs Monsanto, said Zakreski. An outstanding lawsuit the farmer brought against the agribusiness giant has lain dormant for years.

But Schmeiser found himself an international spokesman for those opposed to genetically modified crops.

Donations from across the continent and speaking fees from conferences as far away as Rome helped pay his legal bills. And last year, the Schmeisers were among the winners of the 2007 Right Livelihood Award, a Swedish award considered an "alternative Nobel" for their efforts to promote peace, biodiversity and renewable energy.

In a release, Monsanto spokeswoman Trish Jordan said the company has assisted many others with removing unlicenced modified canola _ 16 farmers in 2007 alone. None raised concerns with Monsanto's release form, Jordan said.

"It is frustrating that (Schmeiser) essentially accepted the same offer we put before him in 2005. This entire matter could have been resolved more that two and a half years ago."

- By Bob Weber in Edmonton

HEADS MONSANTO WINS, TAILS WE LOSE:
The Genetically Modified Food Gamble

The Huffington Post (USA), 18 March 2008. By Robert Weissman.

There have been few experiments as reckless, overhyped and with as little potential upside as the rapid rollout of genetically modified crops.

Last month, the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), a pro-biotech nonprofit, released a report highlighting the proliferation of genetically modified crops. According to ISAAA, biotech crop area grew 12 percent, or 12.3 million hectares, to reach 114.3 million hectares in 2007, the second highest area increase in the past five years.

For the biotech backers, this is cause to celebrate. They claim that biotech helps farmers. They say it promises to reduce hunger and poverty in developing countries. "If we are to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of cutting hunger and poverty in half by 2015," says Clive James, ISAAA founder and the author the just-released report, "biotech crops must play an even bigger role in the next decade."

In fact, existing genetically modified crops are hurting small farmers and failing to deliver increased food supply -- and posing enormous, largely unknown risks to people and the planet.

For all of the industry hype around biotech products, virtually all planted genetically modified seed is for only four products -- soy, corn, cotton and canola -- with just two engineered traits. Most of the crops are engineered to be resistant to glyphosate, an herbicide sold by Monsanto under the brand-name Round-up (these biotech seeds are known as RoundUp-Ready). Others are engineered to include a naturally occurring pesticide, Bt.

Most of the genetically modified crops in developing countries are soy, says Bill Freese, science policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety and co-author of "Who Benefits from GM Crops," a report issued at the same time as ISAAA's release. These crops are exported to rich countries, primarily as animal feed. They do absolutely nothing to supply food to the hungry.

As used in developing countries, biotech crops are shifting power away from small, poor farmers desperately trying to eke out livelihoods and maintain their land tenure.

Glyphosate-resistance is supposed to enable earlier and less frequent spraying, but, concludes "Who Benefits from GM Crops," these biotech seeds "allow farmers to spray a particular herbicide more frequently and indiscriminately without fear of damaging the crop." This requires expenditures beyond the means of small farmers -- but reduces labor costs, a major benefit for industrial farms.

ISAAA contends that Bt planting in India and China has substantially reduced insecticide spraying, which it advances as the primary benefit of biotech crops.

Bt crops may offer initial reductions in required spraying, says Freese, but Bt is only effective against some pests, meaning farmers may have to use pesticides to prevent other insects from eating their crops. Focusing on a district in Punjab, "Who Benefits from GM Crops" shows how secondary pest problems have offset whatever gains Bt crops might offer.

Freese also notes that evidence is starting to come in to support longstanding fears that genetically engineering the Bt trait into crops would give rise to Bt-resistant pests.

The biotech seeds are themselves expensive, and must be purchased anew every year. Industry leader Monsanto is infamous for suing farmers for the age-old practice of saving seeds, and holds that it is illegal for farmers even to save genetically engineered seeds that have blown onto their fields from neighboring farms. "That has nothing to do with feeding the hungry," or helping the poorest of the poor, says Hope Shand, research director for the ETC Group, an ardent biotech opponent. It is, to say the least, not exactly a farmer-friendly approach.

Although the industry and its allies tout the benefits that biotech may yield someday for the poor, "we have yet to see genetically modified food that is cheaper, more nutritious or tastes better," says Shand. "Biotech seeds have not been shown to be scientifically or socially useful," although they have been useful for the profit-driven interests of Monsanto, she says.

Freese notes that the industry has been promising gains for the poor for a decade and a half -- but hasn't delivered. Products in the pipeline won't change that, he says, with the industry focused on introducing new herbicide resistant seeds.

The evidence on yields for the biotech crops is ambiguous, but there is good reason to believe yields have actually dropped. ISAAA's Clive James says that Bt crops in India and China have improved yields somewhat. "Who Benefits from GM Crops" carefully reviews this claim, and offers a convincing rebuttal. The report emphasizes the multiple factors that affect yield, and notes that Bt and Roundup-Ready seeds alike are not engineered to improve yield per se, just to protect against certain predators or for resistance to herbicide spraying.

Beyond the social disaster of contributing to land concentration and displacement of small farmers, a range of serious ecological and sustainability problems with biotech crops is already emerging -- even though the biotech crop experiment remains quite new.

Strong evidence of pesticide resistance is rapidly accumulating, details "Who Benefits from GM Crops," meaning that farmers will have to spray more and more chemicals to less and less effect. Pesticide use is rising rapidly in biotech-heavy countries. In the heaviest user of biotech seeds -- the United States, which has half of all biotech seed planting -- glyphosate-resistant weeds are proliferating. Glyphosate use in the United States rose by 15 times from 1994 to 2005, according to "Who Benefits from GM Crops," and use of other and more toxic herbicides is rapidly rising. The U.S. experience likely foreshadows what is to come for other countries more recently adopting biotech crops.

Seed diversity is dropping, as Monsanto and its allies aim to eliminate seed saving, and development of new crop varieties is slowing. Contamination from neighboring fields using genetically modified seeds can destroy farmers' ability to maintain biotech-free crops. Reliance on a narrow range of seed varieties makes the food system very vulnerable, especially because of the visible problems with the biotech seeds now in such widespread use.

For all the uncertainties about the long-term effects of biotech crops and food, one might imagine that there were huge, identifiable short-term benefits. But one would be wrong.

Instead, a narrowly based industry has managed to impose a risky technology with short-term negatives and potentially dramatic downsides.

But while it is true, as ISAAA happily reports, that biotech planting is rapidly growing, it remains heavily concentrated in just a few countries: the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India and China.

Europe and most of the developing world continue to resist Monsanto's seed imperialism. The industry and its allies decry this stand as a senseless response to fear-mongering. It actually reflects a rational assessment of demonstrated costs and benefits -- and an appreciation for real but incalculable risks of toying with the very nature of nature.

INVASION OF THE KILLER TOMATOES
Nicole Matthews looks at the debate surrounding the safety and legality of GM crops

Business and Finance magazine, 14 March 2008.

Genetically modified (GM) food continues to be a divisive issue across Europe and when the subject arises the only certainty is that diametrically opposed views will emerge.

In Ireland, there have been calls for a more open debate on genetically modified crops and agricultural biotechnology. Farmers' lobby groups have warned that the rising cost of feed could wipe out Europe's livestock industry unless bans on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are lifted.

Opponents to GMOs argue that if Ireland lifts the ban for GMOs it could lose its hard-earned reputation abroad for producing high-quality beef and natural produce and leave itself open for cross contamination in crops.

There are essentially three different types of approval for GMOs in Europe: something can be approved for importation for animal feed, for food or for cultivation. Currently in Ireland, GMOs and derived products are regulated by a number of Government Departments and agencies. These include the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (food), Department of Health and Children (food), Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (feed and seed), Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (viable GMOs), the Environmental Protection Agency (viable GMOs) and the Irish Medicines Board (drugs).

Critics have argued that the sheer number of Government bodies dealing with GMOs leads to a lack of coherence and coordination. Among the departments themselves, there can often be contradictory goals as for example the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food pursues the dual goals of examining GMO opportunities and organic farming, both generally seen as "mutually contradictory".

Coexistence guidelines, however, have been put in place which will allow organic and GM farmers to grow crops alongside each other, according to Prof Jimmy Burke, head of Teagasc Crops Research.

"We are doing a lot of research into organic farming at the moment, it currently accounts for approximately between 1-2% of total farming in Ireland. While we aspire to increase this figure up to between 7% and 8% in the future, it will remain a niche market and the remaining 90% or so will still be produced from conventional farming. It simply would not be feasible for the whole country to turn organic as it would not be sustainable and the price would collapse," he says.

The most recent position of the Government, according to a spokesperson from the Department of Agriculture, states that Ireland will be a GM-free zone.

"The Government will seek to negotiate the establishment of an All-Ireland GM-free zone. While consideration is ongoing in the relevant departments as to how to give full effect to this commitment, it is generally considered to be more about seeking to negotiate the establishment of an all-Ireland GM-free zone so that we can avoid the release of live GMOs into the Irish environment rather than banning imported feed."

This means that while the Government seeks to avoid the cultivation of seeds in the short-term in Ireland, importing GM animal feed for cattle, pigs and poultry will still be allowed as has been current practice. However, if Ireland declares itself a GM-free zone, it will be in direct violation of EU law.

"This is just a political aspiration of the Government to be a GM-free zone. Ireland is trying to declare itself as a GM-free zone and there are even counties within Ireland declaring themselves GM-free but this is simply political optics as it is essentially illegal under EU law and cannot be enforced. Also Ireland is a hub of biotechnology and has some of the largest biotech companies in the world operating here so if the country were to declare itself GM-free this would have a direct impact on the pharmaceutical industry using GM technology here, so this is a wider and more complex issue than just agriculture," says Burke.

Furthermore, under new labelling guidelines in Europe, Ireland could find it difficult to import GM animal feed and still call itself a GM-free zone. The German government recently agreed to a new label that will declare foods that contain no GMOs "GM-free". Under the new legislation, only dairy, meat or poultry produce not fed on GM animal feed will be labelled as GM-free.

This could be significant for Ireland, the largest exporter of beef in Europe, with export sales in 2006 valued at €1.5bn. Irish beef has achieved significant diversification across the EU marketplace, which now accounts for 97% of exports, up from 50% in 2000. The industry has made significant progress in particular over the last five years, increasing its sales to continental EU markets by 70%. Irish beef is also listed in more supermarket groups (62, up from 27 in 2001) in more markets than beef of any other country of origin, according to figures from Bord Bia.

The German decision has already hit the shelves in German supermarkets allowing consumers to choose between GM and GM-free milk and meat. Further, the biggest association of German food retailers which includes Aldi and Lidl is working to finalise an industry-wide ban on meat and dairy produce from livestock fed on GM feed. That is generally expected to happen in May.

Under current EU legislation, if more than 0.9% of a food or ingredient is derived from a GM source then it must be labelled accordingly. Labelling of GM foods in the EU is required regardless of whether DNA or protein from the original GMO is detectable. In Ireland, a food labelled to indicate that no GM ingredients are present must not contain any level of GM ingredients.

GM crops and GM foods have proved to be one of the most contentious public issues in European society. Technical and economic benefits are offset by perceptions of risk to human health, environmental impact, increase in economic power of multinational corporations, deterioration in food quality, threat to traditional farming and rural society and general moral acceptability.

In a 2005 Eurobarometer poll, opposition to GM food in Ireland was 45% with supporters outnumbering opponents in Spain, Portugal, Italy, Malta, Czech Republic, Lithuania and Ireland. Also 60% of Irish farmers said they would consider GM. Overall, a majority of Europeans think that GM food should not be encouraged. GM food is seen by them as not being useful, as morally unacceptable and as a risk for society. Looking at a section of the Europeans who have a view on four key questions about GM food, 58% oppose and 42% support.

While attitudes vary significantly across member states in the EU, almost all consumers wanted explicit labelling on food produce which would give them the right to choose between GM and GM-free. This led to retailers in Europe taking action, according to Michael O'Callaghan, GM Free Ireland.

"There was a unanimous decision taken by the 60 biggest food brands and retailers in Europe to exclude any food containing GM ingredients from their own brand products. Tesco brands for example do not allow their label on dairy, meat and poultry produce containing GM and have control of their own brand food chain. This has since been extended to meat, dairy and poultry which has been fed GM animal feed," he says. Looking at the largely haphazard and ad hoc progress of the GM debate in Ireland and Europe, it is worth examining the industry as a whole and some of the proposed advantages and disadvantages with each camp.

Global seed industry

The global seed industry is big business and is dominated by a handful of large corporations. Based on 2006 revenues, the top 10 seed corporations account for 55% of the commercial seed market worldwide.

However, the top three companies Monsanto (US), Dupont (US) and Syngenta (Switzerland) account for $8,552m or 44% of the total proprietary seed market. According to estimates provided by industry analysts, Context Network, the value of the overall commercial seed market was $22,900m in 2006.

The US giant Monsanto is the most powerful of these, accounting for more than one-fifth of the global proprietary seed market with 2006 seed sales at $4,028m compared to Dupont in second place at $2,781m.

Currently there are no GM crops grown in Ireland, but it does import GM animal feed. Whether critics like it or not, genetically engineered agriculture is spreading at a very fast rate. According to a report from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agribiotech Applications (ISAAA), the US continued to dominate in biotech agriculture in 2007 with 142 million acres of engineered crops, predominantly soy.

The report highlights that the fastest developers of biotech crops in 2007 were Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India and China. The next most likely countries to approve biotech crops are Egypt, Burkina Faso and Vietnam. Countries are exploring these options in a bid to increase self-sufficiency, especially India, and for Latin American countries the export potential is high especially for protein crops.

Other figures released by consultants Cropnosis show that agricultural biotechnology doubled from $3bn in 2001 to over $6bn in 2006. It is expected to pass $8bn by 2011.

Ireland is currently 52% dependent on imported feed materials which is significantly higher than the UK at 37% and Germany at 27%. The EU as a whole is 35% deficient in proteins for animal feed importing up to 38 million tonnes. Much of these imports come from the major exporters of GM being the US, Brazil, Canada and Argentina.

Burke says that as supplies of GM-free maize by-products are not available elsewhere, the Irish feed industry could be forced to source 800,000 tonnes of replacement products at an additional cost of up to €40m. This will have a serious effect on animal feed prices and on the competitiveness of livestock products on our major export markets.

There is now 100 million acres of GM crops grown worldwide and this has expanded at double-digit growth rates every year since 1996. As cultivation and production grow, the European Commission, in recognising the diversity of farm patterns across Europe, have placed the responsibility on each member state to draw up their own national strategies to ensure the effective coexistence of conventional, organic and GM crop production, in compliance with the legal obligations for labelling thresholds.

"Ireland, like the majority of member states, are in the process of deciding on what strategies should be employed should the farming community decide to commence the cultivation of GM crops in this country," says a spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture.

The advantages generally outlined for doing GM are that countries can secure supply, the crops can be altered, the crops can be altered to add health benefits or overcome food allergies and they can be disease-resistant. Proponents of GM argue that there are no health risks associated, that food poisoning on a global level is more common that GM poisoning and that science and biotechnology can exert greater control over produce.

Critics of GM argue that there are many varied risks involved. O'Callaghan sys that on top of health, economic and legal risks, there are issues of cross-contamination and GM "superweeds" which cannot be destroyed by conventional weedkiller.

"There is an international treaty called the Biosafety Protocol which is attached to the Convention on Biodiversity. Most of the countries in the world are members of it, including Ireland, but not the US and, under that protocol, they have set up an official register of contamination incidents around the world. The latest report which came out last week showed that there were 317 contamination incidents in 57 countries where GM crops have contaminated ordinary crops through pollen drift and seed dispersal of up to 26km. Basically, once you release them you will never get them out again for crops like maize and oilseed rape. The issue then is that neighbouring farmers whose crops have been contaminated could be faced with either patent infringement lawsuits by the company who sells the seeds or may have to pay patent royalties every year," says O'Callaghan.

The EU has its own approval system for GM crops before permitting them into its jurisdiction, according to Tom McLoughliln, senior inspector, office of climate change at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). "A number of GM crops have been approved for use in the EU and some of these crops could be cultivated by Irish farmers provided they are in compliance with the national or EU seed legislation and that national guidelines on co-existence," he says.

In 2005 a genetically modified maize, MON863, produced by US biotechnology firm Monsanto for use as animal feed was approved by the European Commission in spite of opposition from more than half of the EU's 25 governments.

In Europe, the European Food Safety Authority conducts separate risk assessments based on any GM crops. O'Callaghan says the secrecy of these reports does not allow for open and transparent public debate or independent scientific assessment.

"MON 863 maize was approved by the European Commission a few years ago and approval was given based on the risk assessment provided to the European Food Safety Authority provided by Monsanto. The big problem is these companies typically refuse to make the original data on which the risk assessment claims are made public and refuse to provide samples of the pure seed so independent scientists can do their own evaluations. So based on this 'secret study' provided by Monsanto, the EC legalised MON863. Greenpeace got a court order in Germany forcing Monsanto to reveal the original data and the Committee for Independent Research in Genetic Engineering in France re-analysed the Monsanto data and found that there was organ damage and toxic effects in laboratory animals. This was released last year and the information was passed on to the Commission but they said the findings were not significant and it was still safe," says O'Callaghan.

McLoughlin says that, based on the evidence presented, there were no concerns for the safety of MON863.

"At the request of the European Commission, the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) of the European Food Safety Authority has reviewed an evaluation report concerning GM maize MON 863. The GMO panel has given careful consideration to the arguments set out in the report. Following its investigation of the report, and of the retrospective evaluation of renal tissues and data derived from the 13-week rat feeding study performed by independent peer reviewers, the GMO panel concludes that there is no evidence presented in the report that changes the conclusions already reached by the GMO panel earlier this year in its opinions on the safety of the insecd-protected genetically modified maize MON 863 (EFSA 2004a, b). These opinions state that the results of the rodent toxicity study with MON 863 maize did not indicate concerns a bout its safety for human and animal consumption," he says.

Future of GM

The emergence of biotechnology has raised many questions of huge public interest, a key issue being the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food production. While the debate in Europe around the risks and benefits of biotechnology is quite polarised, it is widely accepted by critics and advocates that the debate should be opened up to the public and information made more transparent.

As the Government decides the future of Ireland in GM, the area will remain politically, socially and culturally divisive.

O'Callaghan says that the American, Canadian and Argentinean governments are threatening massive retaliation against European countries that don't vote in favour of fast-tracking the legalisation of more GM crops.

"I see this situation as being like a World War Three that isn't being fought with guns or weapons but fought by crop patents to take over the global food supply. If you think of all the trouble and strife over the control of oil, how much of the world is reliant on oil? Everyone on the planet eats food three times a day so the profits at stake are colossal."

Burke on the other hand sees GM as a means to combat food shortages worldwide.

"We need to double food production by 2050 to deal with an increase in global population and the way to do this is through new science and technology. GM has a significant part to play in this as scientists have the ability to alter food and crops to make them healthier and more disease-resistant."

Global area of biotech crops in 2007 (by country)

Rank - Country - Area (million hectares) - Biotech crops

1* USA* 57.7 Soybean, maize, cotton, canola, squash, papaya, alfalfa
2* Argentina* 19.1 Soybean, maize, cotton
3* Brazil* 15.0 Soybean, cotton
4* Canada* 7.0 Canola, maize, soybean
5* India* 6.2 Cotton
6* China* 3.8 Cotton, tomato, poplar, petunia, papaya, sweet pepper
7* Paraguay* 2.6 Soybean
8* South Africa* 1.8 Maize, soybean, cotton
9* Uruguay* 0.5 Soybean, maize
10* Philippines* 0.3 Maize
11* Australia* 0.1 Cotton
12* Spain* 0.1 Maize
13* Mexico* 0.1 Cotton, soybean
14 Colombia - less than 0.1 Cotton, carnation
15 Chile – less than 0.1 Maize, soybean, canola
16 France - less than 0.1 Maize
17 Honduras - less than 0.1 Maize
18 Czech Republic - less than 0.1 Maize
19 Portugal - less than 0.1 Maize
20 Germany - less than 0.1 Maize
21 Slovakia - less than 0.1 Maize
22 Romania - less than 0.1 Maize
23 Poland - less than 0.1 Maize

* 13 biotech mega-countries growing 50,000 hectares or more of biotech crops
Source: Clive James, 2007.

GMO DEBATE IN NORTHERN IRELAND:

* NI Task Force calls for level playing field

MeatInfo.co.UK, 14 March 2008

* Comment from GM-free Ireland

18 March 2008

______________

NI TASK FORCE CALLS FOR LEVEL PLAYING FIELD

MeatInfo.co.uk, 14 March 2008.

The Northern Meat Task Force called on politicians for a level playing field with its competitors yesterday.

Speaking after the Red Meat Seminar, organised by the Northern Ireland Assembly Agricultural Committee, David Rutledge, chief executive of the Livestock and Meat Commission for NI, said: "One of the most prominent issues that came out of today was that our Task force believes we do not have a level playing field with our competitors."

He cited the example of failing to get approval from the European Commission for Herculex (a GMO maize variety), which the NI agriculture industry estimated had cost it £50m in one year. "The question we put to politicians is what purpose has this delay served when the product is freely available on the market allowing our competitors who use it to undercut us."

Rutledge added that the NI industry had also noted that politicians were calling for more exacting standards from the home meat industry than its competitors and cited the short-term ban on Brazilian beef. "Brazil had 11 reports in five years requiring action by Brazilian authorities and for five years they did nothing. I asked the question whether a NI or GB processor in a similar situation would have been allowed to ignore regulatory requirements for five years."

He continued: "This not an issue on whether the standards should be there or not but about the need for equal standards whether it be on GMO, environment or animal health."

The question about whether the market was right in rewarding suckler beef the same as dairy beef was also posed. "Unless there is a significant differential between dairy and suckler beef then the market is favouring dairy beef. We want the market to explore implications of that. Would those producers producing for the suckler market be better at applying their resources, land, labour and capital to other activities as under decoupling they do have other options," said Rutledge.

COMMENT FROM GM-FREE IRELAND:

David Rutledge's call for a "level playing field" for Northern Irish farmers is welcome. But his strategy for doing so - by lowering the EU standards for GMO approvals to those of the USA - would erode Northern Ireland's share of the lucrative EU beef export markets. Instead of advocating surrender through a race to the bottom for lowest safety standards, the Northern Ireland Assembly should support the powerful American Consumers Union campaign for the US to conduct scientific risk assessments, and for US farmers to grow the GM-free maize which European farmers and consumers want. The best way to achieve a "level playing field" is for the EU to use its considerable trading clout to insist that the USA raise its standard to the EU level, not the other way around!

* Herculex maize is contaminated by another illegal GM variety:

Rutledge's complaint about the "delay" in the EU's legalisation of Herculex ignores the fact that this GM maize has since been found to contain another illegal GM variety called "Event 32" which contaminated farms in Iowa via wind-blown pollen in 2006 and 2007. Animal feed importers, feed compounders, and farming organisations in Northern Ireland and the Republic who continue to use Herculex may thus be introducing yet another illegal GM ingredient into the European food chain for the second time in the past year, in violation of EU law.

* Difference in US and EU approvals process for GM food and feed:

Rutledge's demand for "equal standards" fails to appreciate the difference between the GM food and feed approvals process in the USA (which relies only on safety claims made by the applicant biotech companies themselves) and in Europe (where the European Food Safety Authority must conduct scientific risk assessments to protect farmers and consumers before it recommends approval of GM food and feed).

The USA is not a signatory to the United Nations Biosafety Protocol (which regulates international trade in live GMOs), and the US process for authorising GMOs does not meet the international requirements of the United Nations' Codex Alimentarius (which are considered as the standard by the World Trade Organisation's trade dispute body). As Dr. Gurian-Sherman of the Union of Concerned Scientists said last week, the USA has "a very weak regulatory framework [for GMOs] that should not be relied upon or emulated by anyone".

If the EU were to "synchronise" its approvals of GM products with the USA by dispensing with EFSA's scientific risk assessment process, the result would further erode Ireland's hard-earned reputation for traceability, food safety, and quality production.

* Irish farmers compete on quality, not price, in our European export market:

Rutledge also fails to discriminate between the drivers for Irish beef in the domestic market (where it competes on price against cheap imports from Brazil), and in our main European export market (where it competes on quality, as more and more retailers respond to consumer food safety concerns by excluding meat, poultry and dairy produce from livestock fed on GM ingredients.

70 to 80% of Northern Irish beef (along with 90% of Irish beef) is exported mostly to the European market, where our competitive advantage lies in quality, not price! This island's reputation for quality food rests on a number of factors that influence consumer choice. These include Ireland's famous "green" image, Bord Bía's 'Ireland - the food island' branding campaign, our unpolluted topsoil (said to have the lowest levels of dioxins in Europe), and the superior flavour of our beef, lamb and dairy produce resulting from their mostly free-range grass-based diet.

In 2005 Consumers International representing more than 250 organisations in 110 countries called for a ban on GM food, and the EU's 60 largest food brands and food retailers banned food containing GM ingredients from their own-brand products. Many of these retailers are now extending their bans to exclude meat and dairy produce from livestock fed on GM animal feed (see below).

Increasing the use of GM animal feed in the production of meat and dairy produce will render Irish farmers less competitive in both the export and domestic markets - not more!

* EU retailers banning meat and dairy produce from livestock fed on GM ingredients:

The European market with quality labels for meat and dairy produce from livestock fed a certified GM-free diet now includes the UK (Tesco, Sainsburys, Marks & Spencer and Budgen Stores), France (Carrefour, Cora, Auchan and Monoprix), Italy (Coop Italia), Switzerland (where Migros and Coop ban all GM animal feed in their supermarket brands, and Germany (where the parliament introduced a GM-free label for meat and dairy produce, and where the country's largest retail consortium including Lidl, Aldi and Tegut is expected to announce an industry-wide ban on GM-fed meat and dairy produce in May of this year. Several Italian and French PDOs for cheese are sourcing GM-free animal feed. The same approach is being taken for beef and milk In Austria and the Netherlands. In the UK, standard poultry sold in supermarkets has a label certifying GM-free feed. Poland has imported certified GM-free soya since September 2006 for its pork rearing activities bound for the German market, and intends to ban the use of GM feed from August 2008. Ireland should produce the GM free meat and dairy which the European market demands!

* Irish farmers can phase out GM animal feed more easily than our competitors:

Irish cattle and sheep farmers can phase out the use of GM animal feed more easily than their EU competitors because our mostly grass-fed livestock consume less GM animal feed per capita than they do. The only question is how to secure certified GM feed at a cost-effective price.

* Building the Irish market for certified non-GMO animal feed:

In December 2007, the EU Committee of the Regions and the European Network of GMO-free Regions co-hosted the European Conference on GM-free Animal feed: Quality production and European regional agricultural strategy, in Brussels. Regional Governments, farmers organisations, animal feed importers, feed compounders, food retailers and consumer groups representing 43 European Regions and key players from Switzerland, Brazil, the USA, Canada, India and China met to co-ordinate agreed Quality Agriculture strategies for the production of meat, poultry and dairy produce from livestock fed on certified Non-GMO soya products, including, marketing, supplies, certification, eco-social considerations, retail strategies, and related aspects of CAP reform.

Non-GMO soya meal

The conference found that Europe can meet its requirement for certified GM-free soya feed from global markets for a premium of around € 0.01 or 0.02 (1 or 2 cent) per kilo, but that security of supply requires regional coordination and forward planning. Participants called for CAP reform to include an EC label to support the market for meat and dairy produce from livestock fed on certified non-GMO feedstuffs. See conference report by GM-free Ireland: www.gmfreeireland.org/feed/documents/GMFI-GM-free-Soya-conf.pdf (3.2MB pdf download).

Non-GMO maize gluten and distillers grains

The conference also found that European farmers produce a surplus of GM-free maize, but a shortage of domestic maize gluten is causing an unnecessary dependence on imports from the USA.

The EU should use its considerable trading clout to demand GM-free maize gluten from the US, and/or set up a European system to produce it here.

* Mandatory GM labelling for meat, poultry and dairy produce:

In 2007, a million citizens of EU member states signed a petition demanding a mandatory EU label for meat, poultry and dairy produce from livestock fed on GM ingredients, based on the consumers' right to know. Along with mandatory country-of-origin labelling for retailers and restaurants, a GM food label for produce from GM-fed livestock would encourage consumers to buy locally produced food. With an informed public awareness campaign, Irish consumers will surely choose GM-free meat from Ireland over the lower quality GM-fed produce from Brazil.

* Cheap GM animal feed imports are not sustainable:

US GM maize imports remain artificially cheap because of (a) the collapsing dollar, (b) trade-distorting subsidies which violate the WTO "free trade agreement", and (c) the current lack of indigenous maize gluten production in Europe. The cost of US maize gluten is certain to rise because its production and transportation relies on dwindling fossil fuel inputs which are not sustainable, and the bankrupt US government will no longer be able to subsidise American maize farmers. This, in turn, will push European players to develop our indigenous production of maize gluten.

Instead of trying to "level the playing field" by attempting to lower our EU food safety standards to those of the USA, the Northern Ireland Assembly should support the Irish Government's policy goal to ban GM crops, encourage a voluntary phase-out of GM animal feed, and set up certification / quality assurance system with a GM-free label for meat, poultry and dairy produce from the island of Ireland. This would provide a competitive advantage for farmers and food producers in our domestic and European markets, where a growing majority of consumers and retailers clearly demand safe GM-free food that is ethically produced and ecologically sustainable.

OUTBREAK!

Why is our resistance to antibiotics escalating? The villains may be different than we think. Some scientists say the cause could be the genetically modified E. coli casually used in industrial labs— and high-school classrooms.

This Magazine (Canada), March - April 2008. By Alex Roslin.

Four high-school students from the tony Ridley College boarding school walked among the science teachers, offering pointers. Decked out in lab coats, the teens were helping attendees of the Science Teachers Association of Ontario's conference in Toronto to create a new life form.

Students and teachers started with familiar bacteria, Escherichia coli, the same bug that killed seven people in Walkerton, Ontario, in 2000 and made 2,000 sick, genetically modifying it by inserting a green fluorescent protein from a jellyfish. They were using a strain of E. coli rendered harmless— although how harmless it would remain after the experiment is another question.

The reason for the role reversal at this conference was the pGLO kit, which kids at Ridley have been employing for six years to learn about genetics with their biology teacher Bob Malyk. Ridley, located in St. Catharines, Ontario, is just one of dozens of high schools and colleges where Canadian adolescents are being encouraged to try their hand at genetic engineering. "Any biology teacher who doesn't get involved with this stuff is behind the times," Malyk says.

Sales of educational kits that allow students to work with genetically modifi ed E. coli are hot. Made by Bio-Rad Canada, a subsidiary of Hercules, California-based biotech giant Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., whose revenues last year were $2.4-billion, 110 of the kits were sold in Canada in 2006. Each one is good for a classroom of 36 or more students, says Bio-Rad Canada's marketing manager Avi Wener. That means potentially 4,000 Canadian youngsters have used the kits. Sales in 2006 were up 32 percent from the previous year. "The teachers like it," says Wener. "It's pretty engaging for the students."

Malyk is a convert to the pGLO kit, and enthusiastically proselytizes on its behalf. He volunteered to lead the workshop in Toronto, and led four other presentations for teachers on Bio- Rad's kits in Toronto, Ottawa and Winnipeg, sometimes bringing his privileged young charges along. "It's great for the teachers to see the students there and see how enthused they get," he says.

It's all good fun and, Bio-Rad says, gives the kids a vivid, hands-on education about genetics. But there's one other thing. The teens are inserting something else into their E. coli: a gene that makes the E. coli resistant to an antibiotic called ampicillin. It's called a "marker gene," and it's used to help mark which of the little guys has taken up the genetic transformation. If doused with the antibiotic, only the engineered bacteria will survive.

Malyk says pGLO is "100 percent safe" for his students— so safe, in fact, that he's never asked students' parents for approval for the experiments. "I can't see why parental consent would be needed. There's no way it causes disease. It's totally non-pathogenic."

Bio-Rad's Tumay Basar, who has a Ph.D. in microbiology, agrees. "There are no major safety issues," she says. "If you are in a classroom, it's good to use gloves, but it's not necessary."

This all leaves Joe Cummins stunned. A professor emeritus at the University of Western Ontario, Cummins is one of Canada's most prominent geneticists. He thinks letting teens create drug-resistant bacteria is a very bad idea. "It just makes my skin crawl," he says from his home in London, Ontario. "Regardless of even the best controls you have on kids, there are still bound to be problems."

Cummins says it's not the strain of E. coli used in the kit that is the problem—the risk comes from making the E. coli antibiotic- resistant. If students come into contact with the ampicillinresistant gene, there is a possibility the resistance trait could be transferred to them as well, he says. Additionally, if a student inadvertently carried the drug-resistant bacteria out of the classroom, it's possible the trait could be passed to bacteria in the environment.

And it's not just the kids we have to worry about. Grown-up scientists make mistakes in labs, too. Cummins cites a landmark Dutch study from 1991 that surprised the scientific ccommunity by discovering lab coats were routinely contaminated by genetically modified bacteria, often penetrating to the clothes underneath. The idea that drug resistance could be carried into the environment is troubling, as the antibiotic ampicillin is commonly used to treat bacterial infections and as a last-resort drug against bacterial meningitis and the deadly strain of E. coli that struck Walkerton. If you are resistant to ampicillin, the antibiotic won't help you.

Cummins says high-school biotech experiments also point to a much wider problem of lax attitudes toward trillions of genetically modified bacteria and viruses being engineered with little outside scrutiny in labs around the world: "They tend to be wildly careless."

So far in the debate about genetic engineering, teeny-tiny germs have gone pretty much ignored. The focus has been on big, visible stuff like GM-food labels and the ethics of designer babies or cloned pets. Yet the single most frequently genetically transformed organism isn't canola, sheep or GloFish. It is the minuscule E. coli bacterium, which lives by the billions in every person's guts.

E. coli and other GM microbes have completely transformed the pharmaceutical industry and other microbiological research, including the fast-expanding field of biowarfare experimentation. E. coli is the love machine of the living world. It multiplies so fast that a single organism's offspring could weigh as much as the earth in two days if they didn't run out of food or space. Researchers in corporate, academic and military labs harness this awesome sexual power to study everything from new drugs to biological warfare agents.

New species of E. coli are created every day after being chopped up or reshuffled with genes from people, pigs, jellyfish and even viruses such as HIV. The E. coli is so prolific at passing on its genes, in fact, that it can do so even after it is dead.

So, how do labs make sure the engineered microbes don't escape into the environment and pass on their traits in an unpredicted way? Surprisingly, both Canada and the United States have very few special legal or regulatory requirements for the safety of labs that work with GM bacteria and viruses.

The main confinement and disposal guidelines are voluntary. The hundreds of Canadian and U.S. labs that make GM microbes are for the most part on the honour system. Regulators in neither country know how many such labs exist or what they are creating. And neither country requires labs to report any but the most serious GM lab accidents.

All but the most secure labs that deal with pathogenic microbes are essentially self-policing. What monitoring there is falls to a hodgepodge of agencies and departments that don't seem to communicate with each other, much less exercise any special monitoring for genetically engineered bugs. In Canada, those bodies include the Public Health Agency of Canada, which issues guidelines on lab safety and monitors importation of microbiological material to Canadian labs and Human Resources and Social Development Canada, which monitors worker safety at the labs. Provincially, environment ministries are supposed to monitor discharges from labs, and occupational health and safety bureaus keep tabs on lab work conditions for staff.

Retired in January 2008, Suzanne Wuerthele was a veteran risk-assessment expert at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the EPA's regional toxicologist for six western states. She is also one of a handful of experts worldwide who studies contamination involving genetically engineered microbes.

"There has been a lot of hype about GM plants and salmon," she says, speaking from her office at the agency's regional headquarters in Denver, Colorado. "But microorganisms have much more potential to do things we would not be happy with and to do it without us even knowing about it. There are no [government] inspections, to my knowledge, of the facilities that do this, and we don't even know who they are."

She is especially concerned about how GM microbes are disposed of. It is typical, she says, for labs to flush them down the drain or toss them in the trash after they are autoclaved or sterilized. The goal is, typically, to kill 99.9999 percent of microbes. But Wuerthele says that still means survivors are common because of the huge numbers of germs created. "If you make 50 tonnes of something, you may still wind up with a fairly large number of organisms still alive."

Canadian universities confirm much of the GM microbiological material generated at their labs winds up in municipal landfills. Biology professor Margo Moore, head of the biosafety committee at Simon Fraser University, says Biosafety Level 1 microbes—those that are considered non-pathogenic, like the E. coli in the pGLO kit—are first autoclaved, "then it goes into the regular garbage. It poses no risk to individuals and the community." She says SFU has 82 active permits for work with GM microbes.

What would happen if GM drug-resistant microbes were released into the environment? Cummins believes this has already happened, thanks to the lack of government oversight. As for the effects, he believes the escapes that have already occurred to be one reason for the rise of drug-resistant supergerms around the world over the past 30 years. Supergerms are the monster bugs that are frightening the lab coats off doctors and scientists because they are resistant to most medicines of last resort, and the numbers of such germs are increasing fast.

Cummins' claim is controversial and runs counter to orthodox scientific opinion. Although no one really knows for sure why superviruses are proliferating, the common explanation holds that the main culprit is the overuse of antibiotics in hospitals and cattle feed. But Cummins says antibiotics have been widespread since World War II, while supergerms started appearing in huge numbers only in the 1970s—three decades after the mass use of antibiotics began, but coinciding neatly with the rise of genetic engineering.

This alternative theory was first comprehensively spelled out in a seminal study in the journal Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease back in 1998. The paper was co-authored by several European scientists, including geneticist Mae-Wan Ho, director of the Institute of Science in Society, based in London, England. (Cummins sits on the institute's advisory council.)

Ho's study called for an independent public inquiry into how biotechnology has contributed to the rise of supergerms, and said government regulations on GM bugs were "grossly inadequate" worldwide.

The notion that GM food or microorganisms can pass their traits on to other creatures was flatly rejected for years by biotech proponents. But in 2002, British scientists confirmed that resistance genes present in many GM foods do, indeed, pass their traits on to human gut bacteria. The researchers, commissioned by the British Food Standards Agency, found that DNA genetically modified to be resistant to a herbicide had survived passage to the small intestine, where the herbicide-resistant trait was adopted by existing bacteria in the gut.

"Everyone used to deny that this was possible," British geneticist Michael Antonio told the Guardian newspaper at the time. "It suggests that you can get antibiotic marker genes spreading around the stomach which would compromise antibiotic resistance. They have shown that this can happen even at very low levels after just one meal." This logic also applies to genetically modified bacteria, Cummins says. They, too, can pass on their resistance traits to other germs living hitherto benignly in our bowels or the environment. The same is true, he says, for the vast masses of GM microbiological material being dumped into landfills; they, too, could pass on their traits.

The stakes behind all this are pretty high. The first major study of one of the fastest-spreading drug-resistant microbes, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), found it causes over 94,000 serious infections and nearly 19,000 deaths in the U.S. each year. In the study published last October, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said also that African Americans had two times more chance of catching the bug than the average person, while those older than 65 are four times more at risk. In February, the Canadian government launched a national campaign to reduce MRSA after estimates the superbug now hits 6,400 Canadians each year—an infection rate six times the 1995 level.

Perhaps not surprisingly, no inquiry followed Mae-Wan Ho's 1998 study. In fact, while biotech products have become ubiquitous in the decade since, the last regulatory debate about the safety of GM research took place more than 30 years ago.

The setting was the rustic Asilomar Conference Center at the tip of California's scenic Monterey Peninsula. Here, 140 biologists and regulators gathered in 1975 amid grazing deer and barking seals to debate the safety of the fledgling technology of genetic engineering.

Asilomar was provoked by worries that Frankenstein-type genetic monsters would wreak havoc if they got into nature. The participants formulated strict guidelines that were adopted in 1976 by the National Institutes of Health. They required tight physical confinement of many biotech experiments and forbade genetic research with cancer viruses.

Just a few years later, however, scientists bristling at the controls and eyeing the lucrative new technology started lobbying the NIH to loosen its guidelines. In the early 1980s, under the Reagan administration, the NIH finally gave in to pressure from industry and the scientific community, agreeing to gut its rules and allow genetic engineering to be performed under loose voluntary safety guidelines. The ban was dropped on research on cancer viruses.

Canada adopted similar voluntary guidelines at the same time. Then in 1998 the federal auditor general's office expressed concerns about Canada's lax biosafety standards. It called on federal authorities to do a review of every lab in the country to verify if the safety guidelines were being respected. The review has yet to be done 10 years later.

The lack of controls has remained essentially unchanged worldwide since the 1980s, and the lackadaisical attitude is so pervasive that GM bugs with antibiotic resistance are now actually entering the environment with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's stamp of approval.

In the mid-'90s, Becker Underwood, an Iowa-based agrifood giant, wanted approval for a genetically modified soil bacteria called Rhizobium meliloti. Rhizobium is a naturally occurring soil bacterium that lives on the roots of legumes. The company had engineered it to allow farmers to increase alfalfa yields. The bacteria were also engineered with marker genes that made them resistant to two antibiotics used against tuberculosis, tularemia and the plague. Wuerthele was asked to look at her agency's risk assessment of the new product.

She was flabbergasted when she saw the EPA's risk assessment. "It was a joke—three or four pages—and it didn't ask any questions," she says. Wuerthele discovered that 2,000 species of legumes growing in North America also have Rhizobium on their roots. No one had studied how the product might affect them. To make matters worse, it wasn't even clear the bacteria actually helped increase alfalfa yields—the product's main purpose.

The product was referred to an outside advisory panel, and only one of its six scientist members gave it the thumbs-up. When it became clear the EPA would move to approve the bacteria anyway, one member, Conrad Istock, resigned in protest. "It's just good practice not to leave antibiotic resistance in organisms that you are going to release," Istock said in an interview. "According to risk-benefit analysis, if it has no benefit why take the risk?"

The EPA approved the Rhizobium for sale in 1997. "Nobody's followed up on it or even asked the farmers to see if it improved yields," Wuerthele says. "The EPA has no idea whatsoever what has happened as a result. It was completely irresponsible." While the effects of the first planned release of GM bacteria may not ever be known, a series of lab accidents has made it impossible for the dangers of poor containment of microbes to go unnoticed.

One of the worst cases came in 1977, when lab contamination in Russia is believed by many to have led to the reemergence of the Spanish influenza virus, which killed 20 to 50 million people in 1918 and 1919. In 1979, an accidental release of anthrax at a Soviet military lab in the Ural Mountains killed 64. In 2003 and 2004, SARS escaped high-security labs in Singapore, Taiwan and China, prompting a World Health Organization probe that found few countries have adequate biosafety practices.

And since 9/11, concerns about lab biosafety have heightened, thanks, ironically, to over $45 billion in U.S. and Canadian funding for biowarfare research, much of it involving genetically engineered bugs. As an example of the risks, the Sunshine Project, an Austin, Texas-based watchdog group, reported in 2002 that the U.S. Special Forces had invited scientists to propose ways to create GM bacteria that could be placed on an enemy building and later activated to destroy it through corrosion or to illuminate it for attack planes. The research is part of a U.S. program of studying so-called Genetically Engineered Anti-Material Agents, which have been under study since the early 1990s. The research has continued even though the U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General has ruled it violates the 1972 multilateral Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, which prohibits biological weapons that deteriorate enemy equipment and supplies.

Even the top-security labs doing much of this research have sloppy practices, and the chances of an accident have shot up with all the new research, says the Sunshine Project's Edward Hammond. "The most likely source of some sort of horrible biological incident in the U.S. is not a terrorist, but our own labs," he says.

In 2004, Hammond's group released a troubling survey of 400 high-security GM labs at U.S. universities, private companies and government institutions that received grants for biowar research. Only four percent had fully complied with government guidelines.

"Disregard for federal recommendations is rampant," the study said. "The root of the problem lies in the fact that the United States does not have comprehensive laboratory safety law. The system does not even have comprehensive reporting requirements for accidental releases."

In a follow-up study in 2005, the group found only three percent of scientists studying biowar germs had received a grant to work with such bugs before. "Too many scientists with too little training are handling agents that are too dangerous for their experience," the study noted. The Canadian story is all too similar. The federal government's top-security virology lab in Winnipeg is a veritable Three Stooges performance of what can go wrong at even the safest facilities. The lab was built to study the world's most lethal diseases, like Ebola and SARS. Three weeks after it opened in 1999, the $172-million federal complex, one of only 15 Biosafety Level 4 labs in the world, equipped to handle the deadliest microbes known, accidentally spilled 2,000 litres of unsterilized waste water into the Winnipeg sewer system. The lab didn't disclose the accident for two weeks, prompting angry Winnipeggers to hold a meeting to demand independent oversight of the sprawling complex, which is located in a mixed residential-industrial neighbourhood in the city centre.

The outside oversight never happened—though a "community liaison committee" was formed to reassure locals—and an audit declared the lab was safe. Just months later, in January 2000, another spill released 100 litres of lab waste inside the facility. Other incidents have come to light since then. In 2005, the lab was in the news when a courier truck crashed in central Winnipeg on the way to the facility while transporting anthrax, influenza and tuberculosis. Several blocks were cordoned off before authorities announced nothing had spilled. And last April, 30 lab employees had to be given antibiotics after yet another contamination incident, this time involving material derived from anthrax. Then, in July, a sterilization unit that is used to treat waste from the lab malfunctioned. And those are only the incidents the lab has made public. A CBC inquiry in 2001 found 25 other mishaps where the lab didn't issue a press release, including two in which staff were injured. Moreover, the lab's liaison committee, which is required to issue a yearly report on its work, hasn't issued such a document since 2005.

It all makes Cummins wonder. If the world's most secure labs can have so many screw-ups, what kind of surprises lurk in less controlled environments? He wonders how the lack of regulation, accountability and public debate on genetic engineering and the patchwork approach of oversight can continue in light of everything we now know. "It is as if workers and the public are really insignificant," he says. "We have grown very careless."

By Dr. Doug Gurian-Sherman, Union of Concerned Scientists

Regulation of GMOs is covered by old food safety and environmental laws that were not enacted with GMOs in mind (because those laws preceded GMOs by decades). Those existing laws are often not well adapted to regulate GMOs. Also, in the case of FDA, the weakest part of food safety law is used for regulating most GMOs. Submission of data by a company is voluntary (although so far all seem to have done so), and the kinds of safety testing is determined largely by, and testing done by, the GMO companies. This is in contrast to regulation of chemical food additives, for example, which FDA must approve as safe, and for which many specific types of safety tests are required.

For environmental safety, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) approves most experimental GMO field trials through notifications, which are "acknowledged" by USDA (basically a cursory review requiring no safety data, but which includes information on how the company will contain the crop) or permits (for pharma crops and a few others). For commercialization, USDA goes through a process it calls "deregulation" (not allowed for pharma crops). Deregulation means that after the USDA determines the GMO will not cause undue harm, it is no longer regulated. But to get to this status, it supposedly must show that the GMO is safe. This is a mandatory approval process, but is very weak. It is based on so-called "performance standards," rather than defined safety tests. Essentially, performance standards allow the companies, once again, to determine how to test for safety and prevent contamination. The idea is that the agency determines the performance level - e.g. no contamination (supposedly!) - and the company can come up with the means of meeting that standard (with agency concurrence) in any way it desires. In 2002, our National Academy of Sciences criticized USDA's regulatory oversight of GMOs, saying it was not scientifically rigorous. Recent events show that this has not changed substantially.

Finally, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates both the food and environmental safety of all GMOs that produce pesticidal substances, such as the Bt crops (but not herbicide tolerant crops like roundup ready soybeans). This is also a mandatory safety approval process under U.S. law, but not nearly as strong as for chemical pesticides (also regulated under the same law). EPA requires a handful of human and environmental safety tests for these GMOs, unlike FDA or USDA, but these are few, and mostly of short duration. For example, the main dietary safety test is to feed a single high dose of the GE material to rodents, and follow their health for a month. The further details of these tests are usually left to the companies. So although EPA has the most specific requirements, they also are not very strong.

Overall, it is a very weak regulatory framework that should not be relied upon or emulated by anyone.

Doug Gurian-Sherman, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Food and Environment
Union of Concerned Scientists
1707 H Street, NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20006-3962
USA
UCUSA.ORG