Jun 24, 2012
Source:PressTV
Egyptian protesters have remained in Cairo's Liberation Square, protesting what they see as a power grab by military rulers.
The results of the second round, which had been held on June 16-17, were originally set to be announced on June 21, but the ruling military postponed the announcement, prompting demonstrations, with angry protesters accusing the junta of manipulation and fraud.
Press TV has conducted an interview with Mohsen Saleh, professor at the Lebanese University, to hear his opinion on this issue. The following is a rough transcription of the interview which was conducted a day before Mohammed Morsi was elected as Egypt’s new president.
Press TV: Mohsen Saleh, let’s go back a little bit here regarding the last round of these votes. I mean are we to believe these vote results from the last round and then now from this round showing how close the race is in this case of course the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammed Morsi and Ahmed Shafiq?
I mean everybody in Egypt pretty much does not want remnants of the former regime in place and here we have the last prime minister, former general, siding to be so close in terms of having the votes of Egyptians. Do you believe in these vote results? Are we looking at what many have said a delay in the announcement as something that has been negotiated rather than being counted?
Saleh: Absolutely what you have mentioned is exactly true and everybody probably one of the observers would say well what is going on in Egypt if the army, the military council is backing really the revolution then should take the step in order to announce the results promptly without any delay because the voters and the election show that Morsi is in advance of Shafiq and it is probably a reasonable result because of the majority of the people who voted for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt during the council of representatives in the council of the people or Majlis al-Shaab.
The people in Egypt are scrupulous about the delay of this result and they think that probably the military council is really kind of [in] coalition with Ahmed Shafiq in order to bring the status quo into the political theatre in Egypt.
And that would flame the revolution because even if the Muslim Brotherhood are not convinced that they should go into a revolution while some of them probably, I heard your correspondent from Cairo saying that they won’t go to violence, of course they won’t go to violence but the Egyptians are not convinced that this kind of delay is without any aim, without a political aim.
If they want to go to a new rapprochement with the Muslim Brotherhood, then they should not really allow these violations from Shafiq’s team in order to destroy the whole operation, the electoral operation in Egypt and declare the real winner who is really Morsi and numbers show that Morsi is the winner.
Press TV: If we look at what SCAF has done, these ruling generals, really walk this through for us because I do not quite understand it. They come, they dissolve parliament and then they come and they issue this constitutional declaration giving them sweeping powers basically stripping the president of any authority.
I mean that is not what Egyptians wanted and basically you are looking at the ruling generals dictating to them which in essence brings about another dictator if Shafiq was to come into power with the ruling generals obviously ruling the country. That is what it appears, doesn’t it?
Saleh: Yes it seems so, you are absolutely right because when they dissolved the parliament and they issued a new kind of legislative declaration and probably they absorbed the whole legitimate power and authority from the council and from the parliament and from other parties and they declared themselves sort of a council dictatorship and they allowed the Ahmed Shafiq’s team to go and have the freedom instead of isolating Ahmed Shafiq and all these bunch of the Mubarak’s regime to go into the political life.
They allowed them to participate forcefully and tried to hinder the revolution from accomplishing its goals in order to create a kind of a new milieu, political milieu would assure people of social justice and of course cut all kinds of relations with the Israelis and the Americans and it seems to me that I have heard some news that the United States is paying about 600 civil associations in order to deteriorate the situation in Egypt.
I guess the military council should have this kind or they have this kind of information and they have already detained 19 Americans who have been found that paid money in order to make troubles inside Egypt.
I guess it is about time for the military council to sit frankly and really give the authority to the people and to Morsi and the real representatives, I would say to the Egyptians in order to create this new political environment and also create a kind of feeling of peace and tranquility in Egypt not to create this kind of volatile sensations inside Egypt. Everyday people go to the [Tahrir Square] and to the other squares and this would not bring Egypt into what the revolutionaries wanted.
They are bringing really a kind of chaotic intellectual scene I would say to create trouble in Egypt. For whose sake they are doing so?
Press TV: Mohsen Saleh, when we look at a third party it almost makes me point to the direction of what former US President Jimmy Carter said this past winter after the meeting he had with the ruling generals and he said that there is no intention by the ruling generals to relinquish power.
How much of an influence do you think United States is playing regarding the way that this has transpired in the past week to evolve to this point where they have made these moves such as the stripping the president of his powers and the declaration, dissolving parliament etc. I mean after all Ahmed Shafiq would be the preferred candidate for the United States, for Israel, wouldn’t it?
Saleh: That is true, that is what I am afraid of. The military council should show that the Americans and the Israelis are not part of this political game in Egypt and I guess there are parties in Egypt deserve to participate in the political life and I guess they are able to bring Egypt out of this dilemma and the crisis.
And Egyptians are really fed up with this kind of Israeli and American interventions and they have seen a lot of problems and spies and collaborators during Hosni Mubarak and after Hosni Mubarak and I guess the military it should be keen to see Egypt free of the Israelis and the Americans and should allow the Egyptians to create themselves or to recreate themselves in order to be part of this political matrix in the region and create a kind of relation with the resistance movement in Palestine, in Lebanon, with Iran, with Iraq, with Syria because I guess the Egyptian army paid a lot of blood and money and sweat in order to liberate Sinai and also the Gaza Strip.
I guess people of Egypt who paid this kind of price deserve to go into the arena and say it clearly that we want Egypt to the Egyptians. We want Egypt free of the Israelis and the Americans and “no” to Camp David and “no” to any kind of alliance with the West who are conspiring against this region from Afghanistan to Iran, to Palestine. What they have done to Palestine? What they have done to Gaza?
And it is about time I guess people even went to the streets in order to express such kinds of concerns, of problems.
AHK/HGH
Showing posts with label global olicharchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global olicharchy. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Saturday, April 16, 2011
US campus activists facing increased repression
Marwa Katbi
EI, April 14, 2011
Last November, four friends and I -- all of us activists with Students for Justice in Palestine -- were protesting near a Tommy Trojan statue at the University of Southern California (USC) when campus authorities tried to break up our peaceful demonstration. Unfortunately, it is only one of many examples of the discrimination faced by Arab, Muslim and pro-Palestinian students at my campus and at campuses around the United States.
We were protesting the outdoor event "SCSI Fights on for Darfur" as we viewed it to be complicit in whitewashing Israel's criminal occupation. USC Students for Israel and the USC College Democrats were partnering in an effort to raise awareness and money for victims of the genocide in Darfur; USC Students for Israel is a political organization that defines itself solely on the basis of unconditional support for the State of Israel. Its members routinely defend Israel's oppressive policies, which are in clear violation of international law. During this event, USC Students for Israel boasted that Israel is the only country in the Middle East to provide sanctuary to refugees from Darfur, never once mentioning that Israel continues to deny Palestinian refugees their right to return.
I was told earlier in the day by a university official that it was within our right to protest near Tommy Trojan, and next to USC Students for Israel's table, so long as we were peaceful and silent. The five of us stood next to each another, in a row, holding up signs. According to university policy, "dissent (defined as disagreement, a difference of opinion, or thinking differently from others) is an integral aspect of expression in higher education," and is a protected form of "free speech" (University of Southern California Policy on Free Expression and Dissent).
But about 15 minutes into our protest, approximately six Department of Public Safety officers clustered around our group and immediately began yelling "Move! Move! You have to move! We're only gonna tell you this three times, you have to leave!" Threatening to arrest us, the officers harassed and yelled at us for approximately ten minutes while my friends and I tried to remain in place, reiterating that we were standing in a free speech zone, were not going to move, and that they were violating our rights by insisting that we do so. No matter what we said in our own defense, the officers still told us to move. I could hardly speak up without getting cut off by their shouting and it was clear from the beginning that they were going to try their hardest to make us leave.
When that effort alone wasn't enough, a man in a suit approached me and my friends to tell us, once again, that we either had to leave or move over to the other side of the street. I didn't recognize the man, Michael L. Jackson, Vice-President of Student Affairs, at first. He asked my friend Alix Robinson and I for our first and last names and our student IDs. All the while, members of USC Students for Israel were holding up their phone cameras, trying to get footage of the confrontation, or sitting silently on the sidelines next to members of the USC College Democrats. Dr. Jackson then identified himself and said "When somebody like me tells you to move, you move." Hurt and angry by his decision to suppress my free speech rights, I replied: "Your position doesn't matter to me." The two officers standing directly behind him began to laugh while Dr. Jackson looked back at me, stunned, as though he didn't expect me to stand up for myself.
Shortly after that, Dr. Jackson and the officers left the scene and we continued on with our protest. I'm not sure why they left, but I'm assuming that they realized we weren't going to move, and knew that resorting to physical force would result in serious legal consequences. As the last officer was walking away he awkwardly looked over at me, said goodbye, good luck and have a nice rest of the day.
I recently sent an email out to USC students, student organizations and faculty regarding this incident which is exemplary of the discrimination that Arab, Muslim and pro-Palestinian students face at our university. The USC administration has come up with no response, possibly in hopes that a few students, faculty and members of our community will feel upset about the issue for a short period of time, but that the matter will eventually fade from memory. Our campus newspaper refuses to report on the story, claiming that it's old news that was made public months after it happened. Recently, I was contacted by president of the USC College Democrats who insisted "that they support the irrevocable right to freedom of speech and condemn any form of harassment against those exercising their legal right." While his clarification is appreciated, an intervention by their members while the incident was occurring would have been of much greater value.
USC is not the only campus where solidarity activists have experienced disturbing attempts deny their First Amendment rights. Eleven Muslim students at the University of California Irvine are currently facing criminal charges for disrupting a speech by the Israeli ambassador to the US, Michael Oren. The FBI has issued subpoenas to appear before a federal grand jury to several Palestine solidarity activists in the Midwest, some of them students, threatening their right to free speech and engaging in what some are calling a witch hunt.
The context of this repression is the growing success of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, which is challenging Israeli apartheid and its supporters in the US.
On 15 December 2010, C. L. Max Nikias, president of USC, issued a statement dismissing proposed boycott, divestment and sanctions measures against the State of Israel, characterizing this initiative as a "betrayal of our values as a pluralistic university whose students, faculty, and alumni ... represent a diversity of political, cultural and religious beliefs" ("Statement by C. L. Max Nikias"). Our SJP understands this to mean that the University of Southern California respects the diversity of all moral, political and religious beliefs, except for ours.
While Nikias claims to promote open discourse and even-handedness, his statement accomplishes the opposite. It marginalizes the views of students supportive of Palestinian rights by minimizing the nature and scope of domination which characterizes Israeli state aggression against a vulnerable, stateless Palestinian population. Despite repeated UN resolutions condemning Israel's discriminatory policies as illegal, the painful reality is that all forms of negotiation over a twenty-year-long disintegrating peace process have failed, and the call from Palestinian civil society to boycott, divest and sanction the institutions and individuals involved in maintaining their oppression has proven necessary.
Boycotts, among other tools of ethical resistance, have historically challenged racist systems throughout the world. Renowned leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela have advocated these measures. The international community successfully used similar tactics to end the racist policies of apartheid South Africa in the '80s. And a sincere devotion to pluralistic values will often require us to assemble enough courage to participate in nonviolent methods of civil disobedience so long as they are in accordance with international law. In the words of Dr. King, our purpose is to "create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue."
The Israeli government will not end its entrenched system of racial discrimination and segregation against the Palestinian people without concerted pressure from the international community. BDS -- the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement -- is a reflection of the urgency of the matter and a reassurance that Palestinian lives are valuable. A blanket condemnation of boycotts mistakenly judges the oppression they face as unworthy of greater action. As USC students, we expect our campus to remain open to all morally responsible civic and political views. Given the influence of Nikias' word, we believe his statement is inappropriate and, therefore, encourage him to repeal it in an effort to ensure that the University of Southern California, among other US academic institutions, does not contribute to the maintenance of oppressive systems elsewhere and acts in line with its own central mission: "the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit" by nurturing a "pluralistic," "supportive community" that welcomes "men and women of every race, creed, and background."
Marwa Katbi is a Syrian American student at the University of Southern California majoring in creative writing.
EI, April 14, 2011
Last November, four friends and I -- all of us activists with Students for Justice in Palestine -- were protesting near a Tommy Trojan statue at the University of Southern California (USC) when campus authorities tried to break up our peaceful demonstration. Unfortunately, it is only one of many examples of the discrimination faced by Arab, Muslim and pro-Palestinian students at my campus and at campuses around the United States.
We were protesting the outdoor event "SCSI Fights on for Darfur" as we viewed it to be complicit in whitewashing Israel's criminal occupation. USC Students for Israel and the USC College Democrats were partnering in an effort to raise awareness and money for victims of the genocide in Darfur; USC Students for Israel is a political organization that defines itself solely on the basis of unconditional support for the State of Israel. Its members routinely defend Israel's oppressive policies, which are in clear violation of international law. During this event, USC Students for Israel boasted that Israel is the only country in the Middle East to provide sanctuary to refugees from Darfur, never once mentioning that Israel continues to deny Palestinian refugees their right to return.
I was told earlier in the day by a university official that it was within our right to protest near Tommy Trojan, and next to USC Students for Israel's table, so long as we were peaceful and silent. The five of us stood next to each another, in a row, holding up signs. According to university policy, "dissent (defined as disagreement, a difference of opinion, or thinking differently from others) is an integral aspect of expression in higher education," and is a protected form of "free speech" (University of Southern California Policy on Free Expression and Dissent).
But about 15 minutes into our protest, approximately six Department of Public Safety officers clustered around our group and immediately began yelling "Move! Move! You have to move! We're only gonna tell you this three times, you have to leave!" Threatening to arrest us, the officers harassed and yelled at us for approximately ten minutes while my friends and I tried to remain in place, reiterating that we were standing in a free speech zone, were not going to move, and that they were violating our rights by insisting that we do so. No matter what we said in our own defense, the officers still told us to move. I could hardly speak up without getting cut off by their shouting and it was clear from the beginning that they were going to try their hardest to make us leave.
When that effort alone wasn't enough, a man in a suit approached me and my friends to tell us, once again, that we either had to leave or move over to the other side of the street. I didn't recognize the man, Michael L. Jackson, Vice-President of Student Affairs, at first. He asked my friend Alix Robinson and I for our first and last names and our student IDs. All the while, members of USC Students for Israel were holding up their phone cameras, trying to get footage of the confrontation, or sitting silently on the sidelines next to members of the USC College Democrats. Dr. Jackson then identified himself and said "When somebody like me tells you to move, you move." Hurt and angry by his decision to suppress my free speech rights, I replied: "Your position doesn't matter to me." The two officers standing directly behind him began to laugh while Dr. Jackson looked back at me, stunned, as though he didn't expect me to stand up for myself.
Shortly after that, Dr. Jackson and the officers left the scene and we continued on with our protest. I'm not sure why they left, but I'm assuming that they realized we weren't going to move, and knew that resorting to physical force would result in serious legal consequences. As the last officer was walking away he awkwardly looked over at me, said goodbye, good luck and have a nice rest of the day.
I recently sent an email out to USC students, student organizations and faculty regarding this incident which is exemplary of the discrimination that Arab, Muslim and pro-Palestinian students face at our university. The USC administration has come up with no response, possibly in hopes that a few students, faculty and members of our community will feel upset about the issue for a short period of time, but that the matter will eventually fade from memory. Our campus newspaper refuses to report on the story, claiming that it's old news that was made public months after it happened. Recently, I was contacted by president of the USC College Democrats who insisted "that they support the irrevocable right to freedom of speech and condemn any form of harassment against those exercising their legal right." While his clarification is appreciated, an intervention by their members while the incident was occurring would have been of much greater value.
USC is not the only campus where solidarity activists have experienced disturbing attempts deny their First Amendment rights. Eleven Muslim students at the University of California Irvine are currently facing criminal charges for disrupting a speech by the Israeli ambassador to the US, Michael Oren. The FBI has issued subpoenas to appear before a federal grand jury to several Palestine solidarity activists in the Midwest, some of them students, threatening their right to free speech and engaging in what some are calling a witch hunt.
The context of this repression is the growing success of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, which is challenging Israeli apartheid and its supporters in the US.
On 15 December 2010, C. L. Max Nikias, president of USC, issued a statement dismissing proposed boycott, divestment and sanctions measures against the State of Israel, characterizing this initiative as a "betrayal of our values as a pluralistic university whose students, faculty, and alumni ... represent a diversity of political, cultural and religious beliefs" ("Statement by C. L. Max Nikias"). Our SJP understands this to mean that the University of Southern California respects the diversity of all moral, political and religious beliefs, except for ours.
While Nikias claims to promote open discourse and even-handedness, his statement accomplishes the opposite. It marginalizes the views of students supportive of Palestinian rights by minimizing the nature and scope of domination which characterizes Israeli state aggression against a vulnerable, stateless Palestinian population. Despite repeated UN resolutions condemning Israel's discriminatory policies as illegal, the painful reality is that all forms of negotiation over a twenty-year-long disintegrating peace process have failed, and the call from Palestinian civil society to boycott, divest and sanction the institutions and individuals involved in maintaining their oppression has proven necessary.
Boycotts, among other tools of ethical resistance, have historically challenged racist systems throughout the world. Renowned leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela have advocated these measures. The international community successfully used similar tactics to end the racist policies of apartheid South Africa in the '80s. And a sincere devotion to pluralistic values will often require us to assemble enough courage to participate in nonviolent methods of civil disobedience so long as they are in accordance with international law. In the words of Dr. King, our purpose is to "create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue."
The Israeli government will not end its entrenched system of racial discrimination and segregation against the Palestinian people without concerted pressure from the international community. BDS -- the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement -- is a reflection of the urgency of the matter and a reassurance that Palestinian lives are valuable. A blanket condemnation of boycotts mistakenly judges the oppression they face as unworthy of greater action. As USC students, we expect our campus to remain open to all morally responsible civic and political views. Given the influence of Nikias' word, we believe his statement is inappropriate and, therefore, encourage him to repeal it in an effort to ensure that the University of Southern California, among other US academic institutions, does not contribute to the maintenance of oppressive systems elsewhere and acts in line with its own central mission: "the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit" by nurturing a "pluralistic," "supportive community" that welcomes "men and women of every race, creed, and background."
Marwa Katbi is a Syrian American student at the University of Southern California majoring in creative writing.
Friday, February 4, 2011
43 MBs arrested overnight with the approach of elections
Thursday, November 11,2010
Once again The government has left no space for citizens and the opposition to express themselves and in this oppressive atmosphere, as the opposition waits for the election period in hope to present its programs to the public the ministry of interior deprives the opposition of this opportunity by arresting them.
The recent crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood members and supporters in a nationwide sweep took place with the arresting, abducting and detaining of many more MB’s.
Security personnel arrested 6 MB members from Kerdasa who were supporters of Abdul Salam Bashendy after storming their houses at dawn.
The constituency of Ismailia witnessed 33 arrests as MB members were hanging posters for elections also supporting the MB candidate.
Forces also arrested 6 MB’s from Alayat Giza, where Dr. Hossam Shendi was nominated after ransacking their houses.
MB member Dr. Mahmoud Abdul Baqy was abducted from the Sharqeya constituency, while Alexandria’s security abducted MB candidate Bushra Alsamny’s supporter Engineer Essam Abu Haby as he accompanied her during her campaigning.
Two more MB’s were arrested from Monofeya after accompanying MB candidate Abdul Fattah Eid during his propaganda campaign.
This is not the first violation committed by the ministry of the interior against the opposition prior to public or presidential elections. The ministry of the interior has become accustomed to launching a harsh crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood thus extinguishing the hope for fair elections that are a reflection of the people's will.
Once again The government has left no space for citizens and the opposition to express themselves and in this oppressive atmosphere, as the opposition waits for the election period in hope to present its programs to the public the ministry of interior deprives the opposition of this opportunity by arresting them.
The recent crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood members and supporters in a nationwide sweep took place with the arresting, abducting and detaining of many more MB’s.
Security personnel arrested 6 MB members from Kerdasa who were supporters of Abdul Salam Bashendy after storming their houses at dawn.
The constituency of Ismailia witnessed 33 arrests as MB members were hanging posters for elections also supporting the MB candidate.
Forces also arrested 6 MB’s from Alayat Giza, where Dr. Hossam Shendi was nominated after ransacking their houses.
MB member Dr. Mahmoud Abdul Baqy was abducted from the Sharqeya constituency, while Alexandria’s security abducted MB candidate Bushra Alsamny’s supporter Engineer Essam Abu Haby as he accompanied her during her campaigning.
Two more MB’s were arrested from Monofeya after accompanying MB candidate Abdul Fattah Eid during his propaganda campaign.
This is not the first violation committed by the ministry of the interior against the opposition prior to public or presidential elections. The ministry of the interior has become accustomed to launching a harsh crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood thus extinguishing the hope for fair elections that are a reflection of the people's will.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Food safety bill invokes Codex harmonization and grants FDA authority to police food safety of foreign nations
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
(NaturalNews) Of all the talk about S.510, virtually no one has actually read the language in the bill -- especially not those lawmakers who voted for it. The more you read from this bill, the more surreal it all becomes. For example, did you know there's a global FDA power grab agenda hidden in the Food Safety Modernization Act? Keep reading and I'll quote text straight out of the bill itself.
Section 305 is entitled "BUILDING CAPACITY OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS WITH RESPECT TO FOOD SAFETY" and it gives the FDA authority to set up offices in foreign countries and then dictate the food safety plans of foreign governments. It says, specifically, on page 217 of the bill (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-...):
SEC. 308. FOREIGN OFFICES OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION.
(a) IN GENERAL. - The Secretary shall establish offices of the Food and Drug Administration in foreign countries selected by the Secretary.
It then goes on to say:
(a) The Secretary shall, not later than 2 years of the date of enactment of this Act, develop a comprehensive plan to expand the technical, scientific, and regulatory food safety capacity of foreign governments, and their respective food industries, from which foods are exported to the United States.
Huh? The FDA is now going to run the food safety programs of foreign governments? Look out, world: I'm from the FDA and I'm here to help!
Homeland Security and U.S. Treasury also involved
So who is involved in creating this? Believe it or not, the global "food safety" plan is to be developed under consultation to the Department of Homeland Security as well as the U.S. Treasury. As the bill states:
(b) Consultation - In developing the plan under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Trade Representative, and the Secretary of Commerce, representatives of the food industry, appropriate foreign government officials, nongovernmental organizations that represent the interests of consumers, and other stakeholders.
You might reasonably wonder "What does the Department of Homeland Security have to do with the FDA's food safety plan?" Or "Why is the U.S. Treasury involved in the food supply?" Learn more about the Federal Reserve and you'll have the answers to these questions. I don't have space for all the details here, but read Ed Griffin's book and visit http://www.realityzone.com if you really want to know what's behind a lot of this.
Codex harmonization, data sharing and more
So what does this global food safety plan actually entail? It's all spelled out right in the language of the law. You can view this yourself on page 195 of the bill text in the PDF file at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-...
(c) Plan - The plan developed under subsection (a) shall include, as appropriate, the following:
• "Provisions for secure electronic data sharing."
This is so that the FDA can electronically track and monitor the food production activities of foreign nations. That way, if somebody in Spain tries to sell raw almonds to the USA, the FDA can make sure those almonds get irradiated or fumigated with chemicals first. Because raw almonds are so dangerous they have actually been outlawed in America (http://www.naturalnews.com/021776.html).
• "Training of foreign governments and food producers on United States requirements for safe food."
This is designed to shove the FDA's "dead food" agenda down the throats of other nations. The FDA, you see, believes that the only safe food is dead food -- that's why, along with the USDA, they have declared war on raw milk, raw almonds and many raw vegetables (http://www.naturalnews.com/023015_f...).
Now, with this law, the FDA will begin pushing its dead foods agenda globally, essentially exporting the FDA's agenda of death and disease by making sure other nations destroy the nutritive qualities of their food supply in the same way the U.S. is doing. It's all great for the global Big Pharma profiteers, of course. The more disease they can spread around the world, the more money they'll make from selling medications.
Codex Alimentarius is also promoted in the bill
The "Plan" described in this bill continues with the following:
• "Recommendations on whether and how to harmonize requirements under the Codex Alimentarius."
This is included so that the FDA will "harmonize" the U.S. food and dietary supplement industries with global Codex requirements which outlaw virtually all healthy doses of vitamins and minerals. Under full Codex "harmonization," America will be left with a dead food supply and the health food stores will be virtually stripped bare of dietary supplements. Selling vitamin D at a reasonable dose such as 4,000 IU per capsule will be criminalized and products will be seized and destroyed by FDA agents who recruit local law enforcement to bring in the firepower.
All this will, of course, ensure a diseased, nutritionally-deficient U.S. population. This actually seems to be the goal the FDA has been trying to achieve all along because the more diseased the population, the more money gets collected by Big Pharma for "treating" sick people with medication and chemotherapy.
It's all right in the bill!
The text mentioned in this article is taken straight from the bill itself. You can search for it at http://thomas.loc.gov by searching for "S.510" as the bill number.
It makes me wonder why some food book authors so wholeheartedly supported this bill. Why were so many progressives on the left so enamored with this law? Didn't they realize this was a huge FDA power expansion that would destroy many small farms and put farmers out of business while subjecting the USA to possible Codex harmonization?
Did they even know the FDA is now on a global food-killing agenda that will seek to pasteurize, fumigate, cook or kill virtually every piece of food that enters the United States?
Did they not know that the bill does absolutely nothing to limit the use of chemical pesticides on imported food? According to the FDA's stance on all this, foods laced with DDT and other pesticides are perfectly "safe" for human consumption, but foods teeming with probiotics -- such as raw milk -- are deadly and dangerous! (Seriously...)
How is it that popular food book authors and food documentary producers could possibly support this bill? Do they also think small dairy farmers who sell raw milk should be criminalized? Do they agree with the Codex harmonization agenda? Do they think the FDA should run the world's food safety systems and that the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Treasury should be shaping our global food safety agenda?
You really just have to shake your head and wonder about the true intentions of some people. I just have to ask: Were the supporters of this bill really so naive that they could somehow believe the FDA would actually seek to protect small, local organic farms? What about raw milk producers? What about the single-family farms that must now apply to the FDA for exemption status by authoring research reports, collecting tax returns and producing a pile of documentation the FDA will soon require?
Let me just say it bluntly: The Food Safety Modernization Act is the destroyer of local organic farming. It will gut small farms and local farms, greatly increasing the price of local organic food while decreasing America's food security. Farmers' Markets will be targeted by FDA agents who raid the operations of local farmers and imprison them for not having the right paperwork. Families will be destroyed, and those who have been successful at local food production will scale back their operations in a desperate effort to duck under the $500,000 / year rule (which can easily be surpassed by producing just ten acres of organic carrots, by the way).
The real agenda behind the bill
From another point of view, however, this bill is doing exactly what it was supposed to do: Destroy small farms, wipe out family farm operations, imprison raw milk producers and centralize food production in the hands of the big corporate food producers whose operations are steeped in pesticides and soil degradation.
This bill should have been called the "Big Agriculture Monopoly Act" because that's what it does. It will ensure that America's food supply will be controlled by Monsanto, DuPont and other agricultural giants who have been at odds with small organic farms for years.
The global food control agenda is a conspiracy, not a theory
It's all part of the global food control agenda that we now know to be 100% true based on the leaked Wikileaks cables which revealed that the U.S. government conspired to push GMOs into Europe and "create a retaliatory target list" for any nation that resisted GMOs (such as France). Read that full report right here on NaturalNews: http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_G...
Thanks to Wikileaks, we now know that the global GMO conspiracy is quite real. It's something that U.S. diplomats and government officials scheme on in order to appease their corporate masters in the agriculture industry. Now, with the Food Safety Modernization Act, this global conspiracy extends beyond GMOs and encompasses the global food supply, too.
It has become clear that U.S. lawmakers and bureaucrats will not stop until they have killed the entire global food supply, rendering living foods, raw foods and dietary supplements illegal or impossibly difficult to grow. You can thank your U.S. Congresspeople and Senators for all this, of course. In the end, every Senator in office today caved in and voted to pass this bill. You can also thank those who publicly promoted this bill even while having no real idea of the horrors they were supporting.
Such begins a new era of global food destruction headed by what can only be called the most dangerous government agency in North America: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration. If they do to your food what they've done to prescription drugs, annual food deaths will increase to over 100,000 a year.
Watch for the FDA to now set up enforcement offices in nations all around the world and start outlawing living foods on a global scale (if they can get away with it).
Also, watch for a new push for Codex harmonization which is a truly evil agenda to criminalize healing foods and nutritional supplements that prevent and even reverse chronic disease.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/030863_food_safety_bill_Codex_Alimentarius.html#ixzz19Wjcz0B2
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
(NaturalNews) Of all the talk about S.510, virtually no one has actually read the language in the bill -- especially not those lawmakers who voted for it. The more you read from this bill, the more surreal it all becomes. For example, did you know there's a global FDA power grab agenda hidden in the Food Safety Modernization Act? Keep reading and I'll quote text straight out of the bill itself.
Section 305 is entitled "BUILDING CAPACITY OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS WITH RESPECT TO FOOD SAFETY" and it gives the FDA authority to set up offices in foreign countries and then dictate the food safety plans of foreign governments. It says, specifically, on page 217 of the bill (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-...):
SEC. 308. FOREIGN OFFICES OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION.
(a) IN GENERAL. - The Secretary shall establish offices of the Food and Drug Administration in foreign countries selected by the Secretary.
It then goes on to say:
(a) The Secretary shall, not later than 2 years of the date of enactment of this Act, develop a comprehensive plan to expand the technical, scientific, and regulatory food safety capacity of foreign governments, and their respective food industries, from which foods are exported to the United States.
Huh? The FDA is now going to run the food safety programs of foreign governments? Look out, world: I'm from the FDA and I'm here to help!
Homeland Security and U.S. Treasury also involved
So who is involved in creating this? Believe it or not, the global "food safety" plan is to be developed under consultation to the Department of Homeland Security as well as the U.S. Treasury. As the bill states:
(b) Consultation - In developing the plan under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Trade Representative, and the Secretary of Commerce, representatives of the food industry, appropriate foreign government officials, nongovernmental organizations that represent the interests of consumers, and other stakeholders.
You might reasonably wonder "What does the Department of Homeland Security have to do with the FDA's food safety plan?" Or "Why is the U.S. Treasury involved in the food supply?" Learn more about the Federal Reserve and you'll have the answers to these questions. I don't have space for all the details here, but read Ed Griffin's book and visit http://www.realityzone.com if you really want to know what's behind a lot of this.
Codex harmonization, data sharing and more
So what does this global food safety plan actually entail? It's all spelled out right in the language of the law. You can view this yourself on page 195 of the bill text in the PDF file at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-...
(c) Plan - The plan developed under subsection (a) shall include, as appropriate, the following:
• "Provisions for secure electronic data sharing."
This is so that the FDA can electronically track and monitor the food production activities of foreign nations. That way, if somebody in Spain tries to sell raw almonds to the USA, the FDA can make sure those almonds get irradiated or fumigated with chemicals first. Because raw almonds are so dangerous they have actually been outlawed in America (http://www.naturalnews.com/021776.html).
• "Training of foreign governments and food producers on United States requirements for safe food."
This is designed to shove the FDA's "dead food" agenda down the throats of other nations. The FDA, you see, believes that the only safe food is dead food -- that's why, along with the USDA, they have declared war on raw milk, raw almonds and many raw vegetables (http://www.naturalnews.com/023015_f...).
Now, with this law, the FDA will begin pushing its dead foods agenda globally, essentially exporting the FDA's agenda of death and disease by making sure other nations destroy the nutritive qualities of their food supply in the same way the U.S. is doing. It's all great for the global Big Pharma profiteers, of course. The more disease they can spread around the world, the more money they'll make from selling medications.
Codex Alimentarius is also promoted in the bill
The "Plan" described in this bill continues with the following:
• "Recommendations on whether and how to harmonize requirements under the Codex Alimentarius."
This is included so that the FDA will "harmonize" the U.S. food and dietary supplement industries with global Codex requirements which outlaw virtually all healthy doses of vitamins and minerals. Under full Codex "harmonization," America will be left with a dead food supply and the health food stores will be virtually stripped bare of dietary supplements. Selling vitamin D at a reasonable dose such as 4,000 IU per capsule will be criminalized and products will be seized and destroyed by FDA agents who recruit local law enforcement to bring in the firepower.
All this will, of course, ensure a diseased, nutritionally-deficient U.S. population. This actually seems to be the goal the FDA has been trying to achieve all along because the more diseased the population, the more money gets collected by Big Pharma for "treating" sick people with medication and chemotherapy.
It's all right in the bill!
The text mentioned in this article is taken straight from the bill itself. You can search for it at http://thomas.loc.gov by searching for "S.510" as the bill number.
It makes me wonder why some food book authors so wholeheartedly supported this bill. Why were so many progressives on the left so enamored with this law? Didn't they realize this was a huge FDA power expansion that would destroy many small farms and put farmers out of business while subjecting the USA to possible Codex harmonization?
Did they even know the FDA is now on a global food-killing agenda that will seek to pasteurize, fumigate, cook or kill virtually every piece of food that enters the United States?
Did they not know that the bill does absolutely nothing to limit the use of chemical pesticides on imported food? According to the FDA's stance on all this, foods laced with DDT and other pesticides are perfectly "safe" for human consumption, but foods teeming with probiotics -- such as raw milk -- are deadly and dangerous! (Seriously...)
How is it that popular food book authors and food documentary producers could possibly support this bill? Do they also think small dairy farmers who sell raw milk should be criminalized? Do they agree with the Codex harmonization agenda? Do they think the FDA should run the world's food safety systems and that the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Treasury should be shaping our global food safety agenda?
You really just have to shake your head and wonder about the true intentions of some people. I just have to ask: Were the supporters of this bill really so naive that they could somehow believe the FDA would actually seek to protect small, local organic farms? What about raw milk producers? What about the single-family farms that must now apply to the FDA for exemption status by authoring research reports, collecting tax returns and producing a pile of documentation the FDA will soon require?
Let me just say it bluntly: The Food Safety Modernization Act is the destroyer of local organic farming. It will gut small farms and local farms, greatly increasing the price of local organic food while decreasing America's food security. Farmers' Markets will be targeted by FDA agents who raid the operations of local farmers and imprison them for not having the right paperwork. Families will be destroyed, and those who have been successful at local food production will scale back their operations in a desperate effort to duck under the $500,000 / year rule (which can easily be surpassed by producing just ten acres of organic carrots, by the way).
The real agenda behind the bill
From another point of view, however, this bill is doing exactly what it was supposed to do: Destroy small farms, wipe out family farm operations, imprison raw milk producers and centralize food production in the hands of the big corporate food producers whose operations are steeped in pesticides and soil degradation.
This bill should have been called the "Big Agriculture Monopoly Act" because that's what it does. It will ensure that America's food supply will be controlled by Monsanto, DuPont and other agricultural giants who have been at odds with small organic farms for years.
The global food control agenda is a conspiracy, not a theory
It's all part of the global food control agenda that we now know to be 100% true based on the leaked Wikileaks cables which revealed that the U.S. government conspired to push GMOs into Europe and "create a retaliatory target list" for any nation that resisted GMOs (such as France). Read that full report right here on NaturalNews: http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_G...
Thanks to Wikileaks, we now know that the global GMO conspiracy is quite real. It's something that U.S. diplomats and government officials scheme on in order to appease their corporate masters in the agriculture industry. Now, with the Food Safety Modernization Act, this global conspiracy extends beyond GMOs and encompasses the global food supply, too.
It has become clear that U.S. lawmakers and bureaucrats will not stop until they have killed the entire global food supply, rendering living foods, raw foods and dietary supplements illegal or impossibly difficult to grow. You can thank your U.S. Congresspeople and Senators for all this, of course. In the end, every Senator in office today caved in and voted to pass this bill. You can also thank those who publicly promoted this bill even while having no real idea of the horrors they were supporting.
Such begins a new era of global food destruction headed by what can only be called the most dangerous government agency in North America: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration. If they do to your food what they've done to prescription drugs, annual food deaths will increase to over 100,000 a year.
Watch for the FDA to now set up enforcement offices in nations all around the world and start outlawing living foods on a global scale (if they can get away with it).
Also, watch for a new push for Codex harmonization which is a truly evil agenda to criminalize healing foods and nutritional supplements that prevent and even reverse chronic disease.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/030863_food_safety_bill_Codex_Alimentarius.html#ixzz19Wjcz0B2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)