California Say No To GMO, Say Yes To Prop 37 : David vs. Monsanto Documentary

http://articles.mercola.c...

Californians can view this documentary and learn about GMOs and the intimidation Monsanto is wielding over farmers before voting (YES hopefully) on Prop 37.Dr. Joseph Mercola is being attacked and smeared in negative ad mailers, but he posted the documentary link so people can view it for free before that privilege expires on November 10, 2012.



Percy Schmeiser, a feisty and savvy farmer, battled with Monsanto. In the process he has brought to light not only Monsanto’s attempt to control the food supply, but the pitfalls of any company being allowed to have the right to put a patent on higher life forms including birds, fish and human beings.

29:40 minutes in, Percy explains the damage seen from GMOs. He says GMOs are not based on proven science. “We do not want any more GMOs.”… “The corporations want total control of the seed supply which will then give them total control of the food supply. That’s what GMOs are all about; not more food to feed a hungry world but control of the seed supply.”

The second half of the documentary addresses the quality, technology and science associated with GMOs.

http://www.percyschmeiser.com/Ar...

Hemp legalization added to Senate farm bill

By Stephen C. Webster
Thursday, June 7

In a last minute addition to the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has submitted an amendment that would legalize the production of industrial hemp, a potential new bumper crop for U.S. farmers.

“Industrial hemp is used in many healthy and sustainable consumer products. However, the federal prohibition on growing industrial hemp has forced companies to needlessly import raw materials from other countries,” Wyden said in prepared text. “My amendment to the Farm Bill will change federal policy to allow U.S. farmers to produce hemp for these safe and legitimate products right here, helping both producers and suppliers to grow and improve Oregon’s economy in the process.”
Allowing American farmers to produce industrial hemp, which is different from its more notorious cousin marijuana, would yield significant and immediate profits the first year, according to an analysis conducted in 1998 (PDF) by the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Kentucky. (CONTINUE READING)

Geoengineering: Our Environment Under Attack

The greatest public health threat can no longer be denied
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Monday, November 14, 2011

The fact that the planet is being bombarded with chemicals from high-altitude spraying as part of numerous geoengineering programs being conducted by U.S. government agencies and universities that have been approved with no oversight whatsoever can no longer be denied.

The re-classification of global warming, a highly contentious and often scientifically fraudulent pseudo-science, as a “national security threat” has been exploited by governments as an excuse to play God, green lighting secret experiments on a massive scale that carry innumerable dangers to humans and their environment.

However, now that increasing awareness of geoengineering as a result of the chemtrails phenomenon has propagated widely, authorities are slowly being forced to disclose certain aspects of the program. We are now not far away from full disclosure of the true extent of geoengineering experimentation.

Scientists now admit that vapor trails from aeroplanes are creating “artificial clouds” that block out the sun. This is no longer a matter of debate. The chemtrail “conspiracy theorists” were proven correct.

Reading University’s Professor Keith Shine told the Daily Mail last year that the clouds “formed by aircraft fumes could linger ‘for hours’, depriving those areas under busy flight paths, such as London and the Home Counties, of summer sunshine.”

“Experts have warned that, as a result, the amount of sunlight hitting the ground could be reduced by as much as ten per cent. Professor Shine added: “Over the busiest areas in London and the South of England, this high-level cloud could cover the sky, turning bright sunshine into hazy conditions for the entire area. I expect the effects will get worse as the volume of air traffic increases.”

The report also makes reference to a 2009 Met Office study which found that high-level winds did not disperse contrails that later formed into clouds which covered an astonishing 20,000 miles.
Of course, only the completely naive would suggest that there is no connection between chemtrails that block out the sun, a phenomenon that has been ongoing for over a decade, and open calls on behalf of scientists to ‘reduce global warming’ by injecting the atmosphere with aerosols.

Mainstream science and academia has gone from dismissing chemtrails as a fantasy of paranoid conspiracy theorists to now accepting that they exist but claiming that they are natural and not artificially induced, despite numerous patents and scientific proposals that focus around using man-made dispersal of aerosols to alter the atmosphere. (CONTINUE READING)

Health department tyrants raid local 'farm to fork' picnic dinner, orders all food to be destroyed with bleach

Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

naturalnews.com
November 11, 2011

It is the latest case of extreme government food tyranny, and one that is sure to have you reeling in anger and disgust. Health department officials recently conducted a raid of Quail Hollow Farm, an organic community supported agriculture (CSA) farm in southern Nevada, during its special "farm to fork" picnic dinner put on for guests -- and the agent who arrived on the scene ordered that all the fresh, local produce and pasture-based meat that was intended for the meal be destroyed with bleach.

For about five years now, Quail Hollow Farm has been growing organic produce and raising healthy, pasture-based animals which it provides to members as part of a CSA program. And it recently held its first annual "Farm to Fork Dinner Event," which offered guests an opportunity to tour the farm, meet those responsible for growing and raising the food, and of course partake in sharing a meal composed of the delicious bounty with others.

But when the Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD) got word of the event and decided to get involved, this simple gathering of friends and neighbors around a giant, family-style picnic table quickly became a convenient target for the heavy hand of an out-of-control government agency. And Monte and Laura Bledsoe, the owners and operators of Quail Hollow Farm, were unprepared for what would happen next.

CONTINUE READING AND WATCH VIDEO AT: http://www.naturalnews.com/034125_food_freedom_picnic.html#ixzz1dQ5PdN7v

Organic farmers sue Monsanto

Organic farmers sue Monsanto

permalink email story to a friend print version

Published: 28 July, 2011, 20:50

Organic farmers are taking on corporate America.

TAGS: Health, USA, Corporate news, Agriculture, Culture

Nearly 300,000 organic farmers are filing suit against corporate agriculture giant Monsanto, who have in recent years squashed independent organic farms from coast to coast.
270,000 organic farmers filed a lawsuit in March 30 in an attempt to keep a portion of the world’s food supply organic. The plaintiffs in the case are members of around 60 family farms, seed businesses and organic agricultural organizations.
Led by the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, the suit lashes out at Monsanto to keep their engineered Genuity® Roundup Ready® canola seed out of their farms. Organic agriculturalists say that corn, cotton, sugar beets and other crops of theirs have been contaminated by Monsanto‘s seed, and even though the contamination has been largely natural and unintended, Monsanto has been suing hundreds of farmers for infringing on their patent for incidentally using their product.
Not only are organic farmers trying to keep things — well, organic — but now many of them are being forced to throw in the towel as Monsanto unfortunately continues a successful war on the competition by suing indie growers that run organic farms. In recent years, Monsanto has acquired more than 20 of the biggest seed producers and sellers in the country, and The Street reports that they have instituted a policy whereas their customers are forced to use their bionengineered seeds — and purchase them each and every year — lest they want to be blacklisted forever.  (CONTINUE READING)

USDA trying to run organic leafy green growers out of business

Sunday, July 17, 2011 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Results of the passage of S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, are beginning to come into play -- and in this case the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), rather than the FDA, has decided to take the helm.

A recent Action Alert posted by the Cornucopia Institute (CI) warns that current efforts by handlers and marketers of green leafy vegetables are attempting to formulate one-size-fits-all "food safety" standards for the entire industry that threaten to put small, organic growers at a competitive and economic disadvantage. They may even put small, family-scale growers out of business.

NaturalNews and many other news sources put out repeated warnings last year about the ill intentions of S. 510, including that the small growers would be uprooted by its provisions if it passed (http://www.naturalnews.com/S_510.html).

Now that it has, we are beginning to see the consequences of this bill come into play. Difficult guidelines for all growers, are being proposed.

According to the alert, corporate agribusiness is attempting to form a "National Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement" with the USDA that will allegedly set standards to help prevent contamination and disease outbreaks. But as many NaturalNews readers already know, leafy greens are not dangerous. It is large-scale factory animal farms that pollute air and water that are mostly to blame. (CONTINUE READING)

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033021_leafy_greens_food_safety.html#ixzz1SNufc0N4

The worlds largest human experiment: GMOs, Roundup and the Monsanto monstrosity – part one

Madison Ruppert, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Informed consent is one of the most basic aspects of patient-physician relations, as well as subject-researcher relations in the case of research studies. This involves making the patient aware of and verifying that they understand the risks, benefits, facts, and the future implications of the procedure or test they are going to be subjected to.

In the case of genetically modified organisms we have not been made aware of the risks. In fact, the GMO industry has deliberately hidden the real dangers behind the seeds and herbicides they peddle.  The Food and Drug Administration of the United States of America has defined informed consent in the following bureaucratic jargon:  (CONTINUE READING)

New documentary investigates war being waged by biotechnology companies against scientists who expose the truth about GMOs

Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
(NaturalNews)
 In order to maintain its massive charade of deception in claiming that genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) are the safe, practical solution to the world's food problems, the biotechnology industry has had to silence and destroy the lives of many in the scientific community. In the hard-hitting new documentary Scientists Under Attack - Genetic Engineering in the Magnetic Field of Money, German filmmaker Bertram Verhaag explores the heavy hand of the biotechnology industry in steering "science" towards its own interests, and eliminating the actual, legitimate science that exposes genetic engineering (GE) as the fraud that it is.

In the film, Verhaag speaks to various experts in the industry, including two scientists in particular whose lives have been ruined as a result of their inquiry into GE. Going against the flow, Arpad Pusztai and Ignacio Chapela questioned the "science" being peddled by the likes of Monsanto about GE, and instead sought to discover the real truth. In the process, they both ended up being threatened by the biotechnology industry and essentially losing their careers

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032110_scientists_GMOs.html#ixzz1JtcZoiH1

Locavorism: A Passing Trend or Lasting Benefit?

By David Kretzmann  February 28th, 2011

I had never heard the term “locavore” before coming to Berea College in 2010. I have been interested in localism and sustainability for quite some time, but I didn’t realize the local food movement had established its own descriptive term. The locavore movement presents an opportunity for people to reexamine how they live their lives; are people comfortable buying food from halfway around the country or the world? Do people place value on the security of knowing who grows their food? Locavorism’s relatively small-scale success so far has come by appealing to people’s ecological values, and presenting what looks like a viable alternative to highly industrial food systems that make up the majority of food production today. The locavore movement has a good deal of substance, but the movement’s lasting potential is threatened with narrow and rigid goals.
Personally, I find “locavore” to be a limiting term. From my experience growing up in Nevada City, California, many people are interested in localizing their lives far beyond the food they eat. In lieu of the volatility and inconsistency of the U.S. economy, people are attempting to regain control over their finances and banks by joining institutions such as credit unions, which promise more local control and input compared to national corporate banks. It is possible that my perspective is slightly biased having grown up in an area with very independent individuals who seem to constantly investigate new possibilities of engaging in transactions with others. However, it is apparent that more businesses and institutions are succeeding based on their commitment to local ownership and transactions. Daniel F. Agan Jr., President of the Massachusetts Credit Union League, recently explained, “Credit union growth is being fueled by their commitment to the local community.” [i]
Despite the passion and claims of some, I do not believe the locavore or local movement in general will expand primarily because of environmental concerns. People’s environmental concern will play a role in it, but I have my doubts that environmentalism alone will lead to a sustainable route of localism. People have different ideas of what constitutes environmental sustainability and how to achieve those goals. Very few would state that the heart of the environmental movement comes down to the food that we choose to eat. Locavorism can play a major part in environmental awareness and concern, but environmental issues stretch beyond whether we buy our food from the farmer down the street or from farmers in South America. In other words, you are likely some form of an environmentalist if you are a locavore, but you do not have to be a locavore to be an environmentalist. Locavores will limit the potential of local food expansion if they publicize the movement largely on environmental grounds, because there are numerous other environmental movements competing for attention and support from the very same crowd.
Economic influences and preferences drive individual decisions more than anything else. People vote with their dollars and naturally support businesses and systems they value over other current options. For example, just because Wal-Mart offers the cheapest produce doesn’t mean that people won’t support a local farmer for a few extra dollars; if it is fresh, locally grown produce people value, they are probably willing to dish out some extra cash if necessary. Every action comes down to the personal value people place on something. This is what the movement of locavorism must publicize if they want to send a sustainable and lasting message to people. Preserving the environment is great, but if locavores can show people that they can preserve the environment and maybe save a few bucks by supporting local agriculture, the movement will have a much higher likelihood of sticking around for the long haul. If you don’t appeal to the economic interests of people, your movement will have a very difficult time sticking.  (CONTINUE READING)

Industrial Farming: Immorality, Subsidized

By David Kretzmann  Feb 7th, 2011

As a lifelong vegetarian, no style of meat production is particularly appealing or justifiable to me. However, despite my herbivore bias, I still see an ethical dilemma present in current industrial meat facilities. Little respect is given to the conditions and treatment of the animals in industrial facilities. Animals rarely see the light of day for any substantial amount of time and they are raised on concrete floors; they are treated as mere products without regard for their status as living, breathing beings. The greatest crime, however, is that industrial facilities survive purely out of price floors, legal code, and other direct government subsidies that hinder competition from natural, local food systems.
A superior product in the marketplace should not require extra help from a government agency, whether it be in the form of a price guarantee for corn (the main substance fed to livestock in industrial facilities), legal code that mandates industrial farming (or heavily restricts other methods of non-industrial farming), or other government subsidies. The fact that industrial livestock facilities rely on government assistance for survival is a testament to their flawed, unnecessary, and undesirable business practices. (If they don’t require government assistance for survival, why continue providing subsidies and other competitive advantages to these corporate industrial livestock giants?) If people prefer to purchase industrial livestock meat over locally grown free range meat, there is no need for subsidies or other governmental involvement. Clearly, subsidies are needed only when a corporation or industry (such as industrial livestock producers) offers a lousy product that people won’t normally desire.
Government subsidies merely provide the illusion of cheap prices, which goes a long way in distorting the prices and actions of people in the marketplace. The fact that industrial meat is the cheapest does not mean it’s a better product or business model, particularly when you account for the government assistance needed to lower the price in the first place. Of course, it is us, the taxpayers, who are providing the subsidies, so the cost we pay for “cheap” food at the grocery store isn’t actually very cheap. We pay taxes to provide farm and grain subsidies, fund the bureaucracies who regulate and administer fines to farmers who don’t cooperate with the industrial system, among other taxpayer-funded programs.

Society is not bearing the cost of water pollution, of antibiotic resistance, of food-borne illnesses, of crop subsidies, of subsidized oil and water- of all the hidden costs to the environment and the taxpayer that make cheap food seem cheap. No thinking person will tell you they don’t care about all that. I tell them the choice is simple: You can buy honestly priced food or you can buy irresponsibly priced food. – Joel Salatin [i]

Clearly the industrial food system has government tilted in its favor; its products are cheap not because of their superior taste or flavor, but because they have managed to successfully crawl into bed with government to dismantle other legitimately competitive businesses. The philosophy of the industrial food system can be summed up in this statement: if people won’t buy your lousy, nauseating product, lobby government for subsidies and other protectionist interventions to dismantle competitors who actually offer a product desirable to the public. (CONTINUE READING ARTICLE)

The Organic Elite Surrenders to Monsanto: What Now?

• By Ronnie Cummins
  Organic Consumers Association, Jan 27, 2011
  Straight to the Source
  www.organicconsumers.org
  

"The policy set for GE alfalfa will most likely guide policies for other GE crops as well. True coexistence is a must." - Whole Foods Market, Jan. 21, 2011

 In the wake of a 12-year battle to keep Monsanto's Genetically Engineered (GE) crops from contaminating the nation's 25,000 organic farms and ranches, America's organic consumers and producers are facing betrayal. A self-appointed cabal of the Organic Elite, spearheaded by Whole Foods Market, Organic Valley, and Stonyfield Farm, has decided it's time to surrender to Monsanto. Top executives from these companies have publicly admitted that they no longer oppose the mass commercialization of GE crops, such as Monsanto's controversial Roundup Ready alfalfa, and are prepared to sit down and cut a deal for "coexistence" with Monsanto and USDA biotech cheerleader Tom Vilsack.

In a cleverly worded, but profoundly misleading email sent to its customers last week, Whole Foods Market, while proclaiming their support for organics and "seed purity," gave the green light to USDA bureaucrats to approve the "conditional deregulation" of Monsanto's genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant alfalfa. Beyond the regulatory euphemism of "conditional deregulation," this means that WFM and their colleagues are willing to go along with the massive planting of a chemical and energy-intensive GE perennial crop, alfalfa; guaranteed to spread its mutant genes and seeds across the nation; guaranteed to contaminate the alfalfa fed to organic animals; guaranteed to lead to massive poisoning of farm workers and destruction of the essential soil food web by the toxic herbicide, Roundup; and guaranteed to produce Roundup-resistant superweeds that will require even more deadly herbicides such as 2,4 D to be sprayed on millions of acres of alfalfa across the U.S.
In exchange for allowing Monsanto's premeditated pollution of the alfalfa gene pool, WFM wants "compensation." In exchange for a new assault on farmworkers and rural communities (a recent large-scale Swedish study found that spraying Roundup doubles farm workers' and rural residents' risk of getting cancer), WFM expects the pro-biotech USDA to begin to regulate rather than cheerlead for Monsanto. In payment for a new broad spectrum attack on the soil's crucial ability to provide nutrition for food crops and to sequester dangerous greenhouse gases (recent studies show that Roundup devastates essential soil microorganisms that provide plant nutrition and sequester climate-destabilizing greenhouse gases), WFM wants the Biotech Bully of St. Louis to agree to pay "compensation" (i.e. hush money) to farmers "for any losses related to the contamination of his crop." (READ FULL ARTICLE)

Activist Post: 10 New Year's Re-Solutions For Non-violent Rebellion

Activist Post

"Be the change you wish to see in the world" - Gandhi

As the United States edges closer to becoming a third world country; anger, frustration, and cynicism continue to mount in the minds of the American population. In fact, a recent Pew Research poll showed that 80% of baby boomers are pessimistic about America's future. This pessimism seems warranted as authentic political solutions appear to be in short supply in our corporate state.

The democratic political system is now clearly run by crony cartelism. The multinational banks have hijacked the economy and are openly looting the public. Mounting and impossible-to-pay off debt is crippling local governments. The entire spectrum of our rights continues to degrade. Crimes that would land regular citizens in jail are now openly being committed by the elite and their organizations with no justice. And perhaps most telling, the power structure is establishing a control grid to eliminate due process for the Internet and beyond to stifle any dissent.

 Given the current situation, it can seem impossible to affect real change. However, the exact opposite is the case. The only reason the system is maintained is because the majority still acquiesce to it. However, change won't come by electing new establishment politicians, because no matter how noble they may be they still must play the corrupt game. Change won't come through violent protests or offensive cyber hacktivism, as that only invites and justifies the creeping police state. We must stop accepting and supporting the system, individually, in order to change it.

Because our representative democracy has become a fraud, and the media and courts are clearly shills for the oligarchs, our only action appears to be non-violent rebellion; one person and community at a time. We can expose the crimes and immorality of the corporate state through civil disobedience and conscientious objection. We can punish multinational companies who commit flagrant fouls on humanity and the environment by boycotting them. Additionally, we can peacefully regain our liberty by becoming less dependent on the system for our basic needs.

Here are ten solutions through non-violent activism:

1. Buy Local Food: One of the most powerful cartels that has their tentacles into government is the food cartel. Their agenda has been to control the basic resources of food (corn, wheat, soy, rice). The best way to conquer this cartel is by eating local; produce your own food, join and contribute to local cooperatives, and engage your neighbors and community for more local food solutions. Local co-ops are also a great place to trade locally crafted goods and even services. Obviously, do your best to avoid GMO food and eat organically when you can. Finally, be vocal and active in your opposition to GMO foods and the cartel control of the FDA.

2. Become More Self-Sufficient: Our modern society has made us dependent on something or someone other than ourselves for most necessities such as electricity, food, water, medicine, security, and education. This dependence puts us at the direction or disposal of the cartel state. Therefore, the only entity that has the power to grant us liberty is ourselves; and we can take back our independence through self-sufficiency. Being self-sufficient means learning skills that will help you and your family survive economic downturns or other emergencies. These skills may also help you to be less dependent on your job as they'll make you a useful independent producer. Lead your neighborhood and community toward production and away from dependence.

3. Get Healthier: The increasing pace of life seems to offer a wealth of distractions from the importance of living a truly healthy and free life. Our modern world offers easy choices like fast-food in place of fresh produce; TV in place of reading, exercise, or meditation; Internet social networks in place of meaningful personal relationships, etc. Identify the areas lacking in your own life and resolve to make the necessary changes that will increase your physical fitness, mental acuity, and your spiritual evolution. These three areas are what truly sustain us in both good times and bad -- not smart phones, computer games, and the virtual world.

4. Buy Silver and Gold: America desperately needs a monetary revolution before the dollar experiment completely collapses. Like all revolutions this must start from a groundswell of rebellious action. A good place to start is to convert your devaluing dollars to physical gold and silver. This will punish the banks, especially JP Morgan and the Federal Reserve, as well as protect your assets. Furthermore, if the dollar continues to collapse, silver and gold may well become a viable currency in society once again, as it already is in some parts of Michigan. Buying junk silver is something anyone can afford to do and is highly recommended.

5. Expose the Agenda: The "agenda" is one of consolidation of wealth, power, and control in every facet imaginable. The international elite are approaching near one-world control, which they call full spectrum dominance of economies and societies. In other words; national, local, and individual sovereignty is all but gone. It is extremely important to engage your local community, especially community leaders and police, to reiterate their obligation to serve the local community under the Constitution, and not to follow illegal Federal demands. Above all, do not give in to the temptation of apathy as you begin to learn more about the systems of control. These systems first count on your ignorance, then they count on laziness. Finally, say what you stand for such as peace, liberty, and genuine justice with even more force than shouting about what you oppose.

6. Boycott: In the U.S. it has become obvious that a system has taken hold which is economically designed for one thing: consumption. This is the value that each person has been given from birth. So, one key way to assert your power and value in such a system is to vote with your wallet. Every purchase you make either contributes to, or boycotts this corporatist structure. Become aware of who the real owners are and what inhumane practices are behind the products you purchase, so that you can make intelligent choices that support your health and promote justice. Additionally, it is important to learn the true contents of the products you buy, so that you don't fall prey to slick advertising and corporate misdirection. Join or create campaigns to educate shoppers and force better labeling of products so it is easier for others to consciously boycott them.  (READ ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE)

Some thoughts on S510,and the "spin" of all the calls for action

by Katrin Themliitz
Director: Sedona, AZ Farmers Market
sedonamarket@gmail.com

Genetically Modified......WTF!!

   As I am trying to understand the spin of all the calls for action out there on S510 and Codex, here are some things I found interesting. This is a link I found that exposes the spin of Natural Health Solutions and Citizens for Health to mislead public about the application of CODEX -  http://www.nocodexgenocide.com/page/page/3312735.htm

   Also see newsletter  to kill S510 (founded by retired general from Dept.of Homeland Security).
 http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=1200414

    I was confused by different messages by local food activists including why Michael Pollan and some other Food, Inc folks are for S510 (with small farm and manager's amendments)

   Attached is the 400 something page proposed legislation called S510 - check out page 11. It seems that the language leaves everything open for more detailed determinations after the bill is passed and after FDA and Dpt of Homeland Security are given the reigns to our food system. Specifically, farmers markets and CSAs are mentioned and defined as "retail establishments". They will be regulated, but we will not know how till a year after bill is passed into law. Yes - amendments for small farm and ranch and managers amendments are included but the language is vague and the fee structure though scaled is still undefined. I agree with Joe Sigg, our AZ Farm Bureau lobbyist, that "if this passes as is, the impact will depend a great deal upon how the rules are written." We won't know how the rules will be written till a year from when the bill passes as stated in S510. They propose meetings in different states to get feedback before rules are finalized. However, I remember the recent USDA sponsored public "community meetings" that were more like "token" meetings in regards to investigating anti trust violations by large seed companies like Monsanto. Results and public feedback were very poorly documented nor were they covered in the press.

READ THE BILL >>>> BILLS-111s510es.pdf
                                                      453 kb View Download

Below is the newsletter by a very convincing spin machine .---------- From: Natural Solutions Foundation - Health Freedom Portal Date: Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:36 PM 
Subject: Take A Deep Breath: Get Ready For the Next Food Freedom Round.
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/blastContent.jsp

RELATED INFORMATION:
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/the-history-of-health-tyranny-codex-alimentarius-part-1/

http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2009/08/09/in-1999-35-million-small-family-plots-produced-90-of-russias-potatoes-77-of-vegetables-87-of-fruits-59-of-meat-49-of-milk-way-to-go-people/

http://www.natural-health-information-centre.com/codex-alimentarius.html

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/codexalimentarius15jan09.shtml

December 9, 2010 by president@farmtoconsumer.org.

SENATORS, Vote "NO" on Cloture for H.R. 3082 & Oppose the  FDA Food Safety Modernization Act By a 212-206 vote on December 8, the House passed the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (formerly S.510) as an amendment to H.R. 3082 (the "Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011" to fund the government through September 2011). A food safety act should not be part of a spending bill. House Democrats attached what was S.510 (as passed by the Senate on November 30) to H.R. 3082 because they were worried about Republican opposition to it as a stand alone bill. The next step for H.R. 3082 is to go to the Senate for a vote. As this is the Senate, the first vote on H.R. 3082 will be on a cloture motion to limit debate before there is a vote on the bill itself.   TAKE ACTION People need to contact their Senators now to tell them to Vote "NO" on Cloture for H.R. 3082 and Oppose the "FDA Food Safety Modernization Act" (Division D of H.R. 3082). STEP 1 - Send a live fax message to your Senators through the online petition at www.ftcldf.org/stopS510    even if you've already used the petition this week. STEP 2 - Call your Senators and be sure to give your zip code Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121; ask to be connected to your Senator's office.     OR Go to www.congress.org; enter your zip code on the right side under "Get Involved" and click "Go". Click on your Senators' names then click the "Contact" tab to get office phone number(s). If you get voicemail, leave a brief message with your zip code. If the line is busy, keep calling until you get through. TALKING POINTS The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act is fundamentally flawed and is not in the best interest of small farmers, especially those who produce raw milk.  1. FDA does not respect individuals' rights to obtain healthy, quality foods of their choice. The agency has stated as a matter of public record, that:       "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food."      "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish." FDA has even participated in armed raids on small-scale co-ops and membership organizations. This agency should not be given any additional power. 2. FDA has adequate powers under existing law to ensure food safety and effectively deal with foodborne illness outbreaks. FDA has power to inspect, power to detain product and can readily obtain court orders to seize adulterated or misbranded food products or enjoin them from being sold. The problem isn't that FDA needs more power; it's that FDA does not effectively use the power it currently has. The agency has power to inspect imported food yet inspects only 1% of food coming into this country from outside our borders. 3. The Act does nothing to address many significant food safety problems in this country, such as those resulting from confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and various contaminants (e.g., BPA, pesticides, herbicides, etc.). 4. FDA has used its existing power to benefit the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries at the expense of public health (e.g., allowing the overuse of antibiotics in confined animal feeding operations and refusing to require labeling for genetically-modified foods). This Act does not address the fundamental problems at this agency in order to truly protect public health. 5. The Act will expand FDA's involvement in regulating food in intra-state commerce, further interfering with local communities. State and local governments are more than capable of handling any problems related to food in intrastate commerce. All the major outbreaks of foodborne illness involve either imported food or food in inter-state commerce. 6. The Act will hurt our ability as a nation to be self-sufficient in food production because it has more lenient inspection requirements for foreign than domestic producers creating an unfair advantage for food imports. Giving an advantage to foreign producers will only increase the amount of food imported into this country that does not meet our domestic standards. The Act does not address food security--the ability of a country to produce enough food to meet its own needs.