Terminator Seeds 2: Plot to Control our Food Supply?

Terminator Seeds 2: Control and Decline of Organic Seeds

“Rockefeller Foundation funding was the Gene Revolution’s catalyst in 1985 with big aims – to learn if GMO plants were commercially feasible and if so spread them everywhere. It was the “new eugenics” and the culmination of earlier research from the 1930s. It was also based on the idea that human problems can be “solved by genetic and chemical manipulations….as the ultimate means of social control and social engineering.”

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/usda-now-in-the-tree-and-biofuel-business-property-owners-pay-attention/

Food is Power

By Stephen Lendman
Rockefeller Foundation funding was the Gene Revolution’s catalyst in 1985 with big aims – to learn if GMO plants were commercially feasible and if so spread them everywhere. It was the “new eugenics” and the culmination of earlier research from the 1930s. It was also based on the idea that human problems can be “solved by genetic and chemical manipulations….as the ultimate means of social control and social engineering.” Foundation scientists sought ways to do it by reducing infinite life complexities to “simple, deterministic and predictive models” under their diabolical scheme – mapping gene structures to “correct social and moral problems including crime, poverty, hunger and political instability.” With the development of essential genetic engineering techniques in 1973, they were on their way.

They’re based on what’s called recombitant DNA (rDNA), and it works by genetically introducing foreign DNA into plants to create genetically modified organisms, but not without risks. London Institute of Science in Society chief biologist, Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, explained the dangers because the process is imprecise. “It is uncontrollable and unreliable, and typically ends up damaging and scrambling the host genome, with entirely unpredictable consequences” that might unleash a deadly unrecallable “Andromeda Strain.” Research continued anyway amidst lies that risks were minimal and a promised future lay ahead. All that mattered were huge potential profits and geopolitical gain so let the good times roll and the chips fall where they may.

One project was to map the rice genome. It launched a 17 year effort to spread GMO rice around the world with Rockefeller Foundation money behind it. It spent millions funding 46 worldwide science labs. It also financed the training of hundreds of graduate students and developed an “elite fraternity” of top scientific researchers at Foundation-backed research institutes. It was a diabolical scheme aiming big – to control the staple food for 2.4 billion people and in the process destroy the biological diversity of over 140,000 developed varieties that can withstand droughts, pests and grow in every imaginable climate.

Asia was the prime target, and Engdahl explained the sinister tale of a Philippines-based Foundation-funded institute (IRRI). It had a gene bank with “every significant rice variety known” that comprised one-fifth of them all. IRRI let agribusiness giants illegally use the seeds for exclusive patented genetic modification so they could introduce them in markets and dominate them by requiring farmers be licensed and forced to pay annual royalty fees.

By 2000, a successful “Golden Rice” was developed that was beta-carotene (Vitamin A) enriched. It was marketed on the fraudulent claim that a daily bowl could prevent blindness and other Vitamin A deficiencies. It was a scam as other products are far better sources of this nutrient and to get enough of it from any type rice requires eating an impossible nine kilograms daily (about 20 pounds). Nonetheless, gene revolution backers were ready for their next move: “the consolidation of global control over humankind’s food supply” with a new tool to do it – the WTO. Corporate giants wrote its rules favoring them at the expense of developing nations shut out.

Unleashing GMO Seeds – A Revolution in World Food Production Begins

Argentina became the first “guinea pig” nation in a reckless experiment with untested and potentially hazardous new foods. No matter, potential profits are enormous so concerns for public safety and human health are ignored. Let the revolution begin in real time. See link below for a closer review of local info

Argentina: Countryside No Longer Synonymous with Healthy Living

By the end of the 1980s, a global network of genetically-trained molecular biologists were ready to kick it off, Argentina was their first test laboratory, and it was hailed as a “Second Green Revolution.” Look what followed. From 1996 to 2004, worldwide GMO crop planting expanded to 167 million acres, a 40-fold increase using 25% of total worldwide arable land. An astonishing two-thirds of the acreage (106 million acres) was in the US. By 2004, Argentina was in second place with 34 million acres while production is expanding in Brazil, China, Canada, South Africa, Indonesia, India, the Philippines, Colombia, Honduras, Spain and Eastern Europe (Poland, Romania and Bulgaria). The revolution was on a roll and looks unstoppable.

Argentina was an easy mark when Carlos Menem became President. He’s a corporatist’s dream, a willing Washington Consensus subject, and he even let David Rockefeller’s New York and Washington friends draft his economic program with Chicago School dogma at its heart – privatizations, deregulation, local markets open to imports, and cuts in already reduced social services.

By the mid-1990s, Menem was “revolutioniz(ing) Argentina’s traditional productive agriculture” to one based on monoculture for global export. He took office in July, 1989. By 1991, Argentina was already a “secret experimental laboratory for developing genetically engineered crops” with its people unknowing human guinea pigs. In effect, the country’s agriculture was handed to Monsanto, Dow, DuPont and other GMO giants to exploit for profit with untested and potentially hazardous new products. Things would never be the same again.

In 1995, Monsanto introduced Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans with its special gene gun-inserted bacterium that allows the plant to survive being sprayed by the glyphosate herbicide, Roundup. GMO soybeans are thus protected from the same product used in Colombia to eradicate drugs that also harms legal crops and humans at the same time.

Foreign investors have large land holdings in Argentina, the late 1990s – early 2000s economic crisis made vast more amounts available, and bankrupted farmers had to give it up for pennies on the dollar. Corporate predators and Latifundista landholders took full advantage, but look what for.

After Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybeans were licensed in 1996, “a once-productive national family farm-based agriculture system (was turned into) a neo-feudal state system dominated by a handful of powerful, wealthy” owners to exploit for profit. Menem went along. In less than a decade, he allowed the nation’s corn, wheat and cattle diversity to be replaced by corporate-controlled monoculture. It was a Faustian sellout, and it helped Monsanto’s stock price hit an all-time high near year end 2007.

Earlier decades of diversity and crop rotation preserved the country’s soil quality. That changed after soybean monoculture moved in with its heavy dependence on chemical fertilizers. Traditional Argentine crops vanished, and cattle were forced into cramped feedlots the way they are in the US. Engdahl quoted a leading country agro-ecologist predicting these practices will destroy the land in 50 years if they continue. Nothing suggests a stoppage, and by 2004, nearly half the nation’s crop land was for soybeans and over 90% of it solely for Monsanto’s Roundup Ready brand. Engdahl put it this way: “Argentina had become the world’s largest uncontrolled experimental laboratory for GMO” and its people unwitting lab rats.

Mechanized GMO soybean monoculture took over, the country’s dairy farms were reduced by half, and “hundreds of thousands of workers (were forced) off the land” into poverty. Monsanto was on a roll and used various exploitive schemes. Included were ploys to ignore Argentine law against collecting royalty payments. Smuggling Roundup soybean seeds illegally into Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia and Uruguay also went on sub rosa. In addition, the company got Menem to allow it to collect “extended royalties” in 1999 even though Argentine law prohibited the practice.

Monsanto then pressured the government to recognize its “technology license fee.” A Technology Compensation Fund was established and managed by the Ministry of Agriculture. It forced farmers to pay a near-1% fee on GMO soybean sales. Monsanto and other GMO seed suppliers got the funds. By 2005, Brazil’s government relented. It legalized GMO seeds for the first time, and by 2006, the US, Argentina and Brazil accounted for over 81% of world soybean production. It “ensure(s) that practically every animal in the world fed soymeal (is) eating genetically engineered soybeans.” It also means everyone eating these animals does the same thing unwittingly.

Argentina experienced more fallout as well that threatens to spread. Its soybean monoculture affects the countryside hugely. Traditional farmers close to soybean ones are seriously harmed by aerial Roundup spraying. Their crops are destroyed as that’s how this herbicide works. It kills all plants without gene-modified resistance. It also kills animals with farmers reporting their chickens died and horses were gravely harmed. Humans are affected as well and show violent symptoms of nausea, diarrhea, vomiting and herbicide-inflicted skin lesions. Other reports claimed further fallout – animals born with severe organ deformities, deformed bananas and sweet potatoes, and lakes filled with dead fish. In addition, rural families said their children developed “grotesque blotches on their bodies.”

Forest lands were also damaged as vast acreage was cleared for soybean planting. Their loss “created an explosion of medical problems because Roundup is toxic, kills every non-GMO plant that grows and, it harms animals and humans as well that come in contact with it.

As for higher promised yields, results showed reduced harvests of between 5% and 15% compared with traditional soybean crops plus “vicious new weeds” that need up to triple the amount of spraying to destroy. By the time farmers learn this, it’s too late. By 2004, GMO soybean plantings spread across the country, they cost more to produce and yield less, and Engdahl summarized farmers’ plight: “A more perfect scheme of human bondage would be hard to imagine,” and it was even worse than that. Argentina was the first test case “in a global plan that was decades in the making and absolutely shocking and awesome in its scope.”

Iraq Gets American Seeds of Democracy

Democracy for Iraq meant erasing the “cradle of civilization” for unfettered free market capitalism. Iraq was conquered for its oil but also to make the country a giant free trade paradise. The scheme was diabolical, elaborate and ugly – blitzkrieg “shock and awe,” elaborate PsyOps, fear as a weapon, repressive occupation, mass detention and torture, and the fastest, most sweeping country remake in history. It happened in weeks, Iraq no longer exists, the country is a wasteland, its people are devastated, and a blank slate was created for unrestrained corporate pillage on a near- unimaginable scale.

Part of the scheme was for GMO agribusiness giants to have free reign over that part of the economy – to radically transform Iraq’s food production system into a model for GMO seeds and plants. One hundred swiftly implemented Bremer laws mandated it, but Iraqis had no say about them as the country is now governed out of Washington and its branch office inside the heavily-fortified Green Zone in the largest US embassy in the world by far.

Bremer laws imposed the harshest ever Chicago School-style “shock therapy” of the kind that devastated countries around the world since first introduced in Chile under Pinochet in 1973. The formula was familiar – mass firings of state employees in the hundreds of thousands; unrestricted imports with no tariffs, duties, inspections or taxes; deregulation; and the largest state liquidation sale and privatization plan since the Soviet Union collapsed.

Corporate taxes were lowered as well from 40% to a flat 15%, and foreign investors could own 100% of Iraqi assets other than oil. They could also repatriate all their profits, had no obligation to reinvest in the country and wouldn’t be taxed. They were further given 40 year leases, and the only Saddam era laws remaining were those restricting trade unions and collective bargaining. Foreign transnationals, mainly US ones, swooped in and devoured everything. Iraqis couldn’t compete, and the occupation laws assured it.

The recent Food Labeling Act passed by the corrupt Congress allows further relaxation of labeling requirements on what is in your food, essentially letting the corporate food conglomerates to poison you at will!

GMOs (genetically modified organisms), rather than feeding the world as Bill Clinton — responsible for the FDA approval of these poisonous products — would have us believe are cash cows for Monsanto, ADM, DuPont and Dow, et al, and a way for the New World Order (NWO) to control the world’s food supply. As an example, Paul Bremer, former Viceroy of Iraq and Medal of Freedom recipient, issued 100 orders before fleeing the country. Order 81 specifically dealt with prohibiting the saving of seeds as they have in Mesopotamia (Iraq) — the cradle of civilization and agriculture — for thousands of years and required that they instead buy and use GMO seeds from Monsanto, DuPont and Dow.

William Engdahl’s articles on this subject are a must read: “Iraq and Washington’s ‘seeds of democracy’” and “WTO, GMO and Total Spectrum Dominance.”

Bremer’s illegal orders also call for the privatization of all Iraq’s state owned industries and services with multinational (American) corporations getting them for pittance. This is predatory globalization. Have you ever heard these 100 orders discussed in the corporate media? Of course not.

What will Iraq look like if the new “government” succumbs to US dictates and Bremer’s Orders? “A small sampling of the most important orders demonstrates the economic imprint left by the Bush administration: Order No. 39 allows for: (1) privatization of Iraq’s 200 state-owned enterprises; (2) 100 percent foreign ownership of Iraqi businesses; (3) ‘national treatment’ — which means no preferences for local over foreign businesses; (4) Unrestricted, tax-free remittance of all profits and other funds; and (5) 40-year ownership licenses,” wrote Antonia Juhasz, a project director at the International Forum on Globalization in San Francisco (LA Times, August 5, 2004).

http://www.knowthelies.com/?q=node/3457

Consider Bremer Order 81. It covered patents, their duration and stated: “Farmers shall be prohibited from re-using seeds of protected varieties or any variety” the edict covered. It gave plant varieties patent holders absolute rights over farmers’ using their seeds for 20 years.

They’d be genetically engineered, owned by transnationals, and Iraqi farmers using them had to sign an agreement stipulating they’ll pay a “technology fee” as well as an annual license fee.

Plant Variety Protection (PVP) was the core of this order. It made seed saving and reuse illegal. Even using “similar” seeds could result in severe fines and imprisonment. GMO seeds got protection to displace 10,000 years of developed plant varieties being sacrificed.

Iraq’s fertile valley between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers is ideal for crop planting. Since 8000 BC, farmers used it to develop “rich seeds of almost every variety of wheat used in the world today.” They were erased through a GMO modernization and industrialization scheme so agribusiness can get a foothold in the region and supply the world market. While Iraqis suffer and starve, GMO giants run the country’s agriculture for export. Iraqi farmers are now agribusiness serfs and are forced to grow products foreign to the native diet like wheat designed for pasta.

Bremer laws mandated it and are inviolable under Article 26 of the US-drafted constitution. It states that the Iraqi government is powerless to change laws a foreign occupier made. To assure it, US-sympathizers are in every ministry with those most trusted in key ones. Engdahl sums up the damage to agriculture: “The forced transformation of Iraq’s food production into patented GMO crops is one of the clearest examples of (how) Monsanto and other GMO giants are forcing (these) crops onto an unwilling or unknowing world population.” They’re infesting the planet with them one country at a time so it’s futile trying to undo the damage they cause.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
He lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com

=============================================================

Related Links:

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/obama-grants-immunity-powers-to-foreign-interpol-over-our-constitutionwtf/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seed-1-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seed-3-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/bilderbergers-creating-a-new-world-order-or-completing-work-of-the-ages/==============================================================

**NOTE to Readers: I first cross posted this on Ireport on March 23, 2009

To view comments and some of the debates over this go to:

Report Part I at: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-233664

Report Part II at: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-234112

View Part III at: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-234051

=============================================================

=============================================================

More Related Links:

The industrial food system is playing for keeps: Another dispatch from the front lines of the North American war on nutrient dense foods

=============================================

Terminator Seed 1: Plot to Control Our Food Supply?

Are the AgroScience companies with the HELP of our government, “really” helping to feed the people giving Hope for the World or are they Greed driven profiteers with plans to Globalize/Privatize our food supply??? This is something to think about.

This is what WE are told about Genetic Modified Organisms: > The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques.

These plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. The enhancement of desired traits has traditionally been undertaken through breeding, but conventional plant breeding methods can be very time consuming and are often not very accurate. Genetic engineering, on the other hand, can create plants with the exact desired trait very rapidly and with great accuracy.

For example, plant geneticists can isolate a gene responsible for drought tolerance and insert that gene into a different plant. The new genetically-modified plant will gain drought tolerance as well. Not only can genes be transferred from one plant to another, but genes from non-plant organisms also can be used. The best known example of this is the use of B.t. genes in corn and other crops. B.t., or Bacillus thuringiensis, is a naturally occurring bacterium that produces crystal proteins that are lethal to insect larvae. B.t. crystal protein genes have been transferred into corn, enabling the corn to produce its own pesticides against insects such as the European corn borer. >

When all the bees are gone what happens next?

Commercial beehives pollinate over a third of North America’s crops and that web of nourishment encompasses everything from fruits like peaches, apples, cherries, strawberries and more, to nuts like California almonds, 90 percent of which are helped along by the honeybees. Without this pollination, you could kiss those crops goodbye, to say nothing of the honey bees produce or the flowers they also fertilize’.

This essay will discuss the arguments and seriousness pertaining to the massive deaths and the decline of Bee colonies in North America. As well, it will shed light on a worldwide hunger issue that will have an economical and ecological impact in the very near future.There are many reasons given to the decline in Bees, but one argument that matters most is the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) and “Terminator Seeds” that are presently being endorsed by governments and forcefully utilized as our primary agricultural needs of survival. I will argue what is publicized and covered by the media is in actuality masking the real forces at work, namely the impact of genetically modified seeds on the reproduction of bee colonies across North America.

See links below for whole story

Bees Decline: (Our natural Pollinators and a MUST HAVE in our Environment)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8436

In the mid-1980s, scientists, with the help of biotechnology, thought they had found the key to mastering the planet, and especially its living organisms. Suddenly, everything seemed possible!

Twenty years later the filmmakers embark on a global journey to explore the effects of the ongoing experiments in the genetic manipulation of plants, animals and human beings.

Some of the results have not been pretty.

  • Due to a disastrous crop of genetically modified cotton many Indian farmers face ruin, and choose instead to sell one of their kidneys or commit suicide.
  • In Canada genetically modified canola seeds blow onto the fields of neighboring organic farms, thus making organic certification of those farmers’ crops impossible.
  • The Icelandic parliament sells the entire gene pool of its population to a private company which intends to turn over the data at a profit to the pharmaceutical industry and insurance companies.
  • The Human Genome Diversity Project collects blood, hair and saliva samples from 700 groups of people judged to be in danger of extinction on the pretext of preventive health care. The gene samples find their way into the laboratories of industry to provide the basis for valuable patents.

Worldwide only a handful of idealistic scientists are defying industry, doing independent research on the effects of transgenic animals and plants on the environment and our health when we consume genetically modified food.

This leads to the conclusion that not only does genetic engineering pose a serious scientific problem, it also challenges fundamental democratic principles, and deserves the widest possible public discussion.

Life is Running Out of Control: Documentary
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1876901729566469042

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7849
http://www.saltspringnews.com/index.php?name=News&catid=&topic=4&allstories=1

===================================================================

The man that brought you Monsanto’s genetically
engineered bovine growth hormone is now america’s food safety czar

Michael Taylor became the senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA. He is now America’s food safety czar.

If GMOs are indeed responsible for massive sickness and death, then the individual who oversaw the FDA policy that facilitated their introduction holds a uniquely infamous role in human history. That person is Michael Taylor. He had been Monsanto’s attorney before becoming policy chief at the FDA. Soon after, he became Monsanto’s vice president and chief lobbyist. (Click link for more on this story)

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=120594.0

===========================================

Tom Vilsack appointed head of USDA

WASHINGTON, DC – Today’s announcement that former Iowa Governor, Tom Vilsack, has been selected as the new Secretary of Agriculture sent a chill through the sustainable food and farming community who have been lobbying for a champion in the new administration. http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15573.cfm

Genetically Engineered Trees danger to worldwide forests

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/usda-now-in-the-tree-and-biofuel-business-property-owners-pay-attention/

—————————————————————————————-

Related Links:

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/obama-grants-immunity-powers-to-foreign-interpol-over-our-constitutionwtf/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seeds-2-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/terminator-seed-3-plot-to-control-our-food-supply/

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/bilderbergers-creating-a-new-world-order-or-completing-work-of-the-ages/

==============================================================

**NOTE to Readers: I first cross posted this on Ireport on March 23, 2009

To view comments and some of the debates over this go to:

Report Part I at: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-233664

Report Part II at: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-234112

View Part III at: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-234051

===========================================================

USDA: Now in the tree and biofuel business? Property Owners Pay Attention!

Cap and Trade is nothing but a CONTROL GRAB by this incompetent and surreal collection of government officials!

In my opinion, the  truth is becoming more and more clear. The attack on private property ownership is slowly being revealed under the guise of “Our Carbon Foot-print”” for our Nation AND our food supply.  Monsanto gained power under the Reagan Administration and have created, what appears to be,  a monopoly on the seeds and crops that they produce. Now we have Tom Vilsack as Agriculture Secretary, who was not only an advocate of  GMO’s, but now also states that farm and pastureland should be converted to Trees or bio-fuel, further reducing our food supply. This will not only affect our national food availability for human consumption, but also for livestock and pets.

USDA chief says carbon bill won’t hurt farmland

By Charles Abbott

December 15, 2009WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack downplayed his own department’s analysis of U.S. climate legislation on Tuesday, saying “more current” studies do not foresee carbon-capturing trees taking over millions of acres of farmland.

Up to 59 million acres of pasture and cropland could be converted to woodland by 2050 under a cap-and-trade system, according to the Agriculture Department analysis. Trees, to control greenhouse gases, would be more lucrative than crops. (WHAT??? So now we can plan on a FOOD SHORTAGE to go along with the increase in taxes—I’m NOT okay with this, how about you?!)

If farmland shifts to trees, there would be smaller output of crops and livestock. Critics such as Nebraska Senator Mike Johanns say climate legislation means higher energy and feed prices “will likely drive many producers out of business.” (Critics? I would say the senator is speaking POWER OF TRUTH!)

“I think there are other models that are more current and complete, that might lead to significantly, and will be significantly, different conclusions,” said Vilsack when asked about the USDA study. “We think there can be improvements to the modeling that was used in the past.”

The USDA analysis was based on material from the Environmental Protection Agency. (Remember Lisa Jackson, head of EPA? She has based her findings on corrupt data!)

As an example, Vilsack pointed to a Nov 11 report by a University of Tennessee think tank that bioenergy crops could blossom under a cap-and-trade system and would not shift cropland to forests.

Agricultural economist Bruce McCarl of Texas A&M told a House Agriculture subcommittee on Dec 3 that if carbon offsets are not widely available, “the market would likely be restricted to increased demand for biofuel and bioelectricity feedstocks.”

USDA concluded 85 percent of the revenue from agricultural offsets for greenhouse gas emissions would arise from afforestation of pasture and cropland, if contracts paid at least $10 per ton of carbon that is captured.

The forestry offsets would be worth $3 billion a year, USDA estimated, while higher crop and livestock prices, due to less farmland, would add an average $20 billion a year to farm income.

There are 920 million acres of land in U.S. farms, with 325 million acres planted to field crops. The USDA analysis said at low carbon prices, tree-planting would occur mostly on pastureland. As prices rise, cropland would account for half, or more of the conversions.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/12/15/2009-12-15T225003Z_01_N1567185_RTRIDST_0_CLIMATE-USA-FARM-UPDATE-1.html

—————————————————————————————————————–

Genetically Engineered Trees danger to worldwide forests

Below is more addressing this issue for those that wish to learn more, along with a report about our Land being used to secure our growing National debt.

World Food Supply under ATTACK?

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-158544


Our Land: Collateral for the National Debt

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-197641

======================================================

Lose your property for growing food?

Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million

Posted: March 16, 2009 By Chelsea Schilling

Some small farms and organic food growers could be placed under direct supervision of the federal government under new legislation making its way through Congress. Food Safety Modernization Act  House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in February. DeLauro’s husband, Stanley Greenburg, conducts research for Monsanto – the world’s leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.  DeLauro’s act has 39 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee on Feb. 4.

It calls for the creation of a Food Safety Administration to allow the government to regulate food production at all levels – and even mandates property seizure, fines of up to $1 million per offense and criminal prosecution for producers, manufacturers and distributors who fail to comply with regulations. Michael Olson, host of the Food Chain radio show and author of “Metro Farm,” told WND the government should focus on regulating food production in countries such as China and Mexico rather than burdening small and organic farmers in the U.S. with overreaching regulations.  “We need somebody to watch over us when we’re eating food that comes from thousands and thousands of miles away. We need some help there,” he said. “But when food comes from our neighbors or from farmers who we know, we don’t need all of those rules. If your neighbor sells you something that is bad and you get sick, you are going to get your hands on that farmer, and that will be the end of it. It regulates itself.”

The legislation would establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services “to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes.”

Federal regulators will be tasked with ensuring that food producers, processors and distributors – both large and small prevent and minimize food safety hazards such as food-borne illnesses and contaminants such as bacteria, chemicals, natural toxins or manufactured toxicants, viruses, parasites, prions, physical hazards or other human pathogens.

Under the legislation’s broad wording, slaughterhouses, seafood processing plants, establishments that process, store, hold or transport all categories of food products prior to delivery for retail sale, farms, ranches, orchards, vineyards, aquaculture facilities and confined animal-feeding operations would be subject to strict government regulation.

Government inspectors would be required to visit and examine food production facilities, including small farms, to ensure compliance. They would review food safety records and conduct surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment. “What the government will do is bring in industry experts to tell them how to manage all this stuff,” Olson said. “It’s industry that’s telling government how to set these things up. What it always boils down to is who can afford to have the most influence over the government. It would be those companies that have sufficient economies of scale to be able to afford the influence – which is, of course, industrial agriculture.”

Farms and food producers would be forced to submit copies of all records to federal inspectors upon request to determine whether food is contaminated, to ensure they are in compliance with food safety laws and to maintain government tracking records. Refusal to register, permit inspector access or testing of food or equipment would be prohibited. “What is going to happen is that local agriculture will end up suffering through some onerous protocols designed for international agriculture that they simply don’t need,” Olson said. “Thus, it will be a way for industrial agriculture to manage local agriculture.”

Under the act, every food producer must have a written food safety plan describing likely hazards and preventative controls they have implemented and must abide by “minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water.”

“That opens a whole can of worms,” Olson said. “I think that’s where people are starting to freak out about losing organic agriculture. Who is going to decide what the minimum standards are for fertilization or anything else? The government is going to bring in big industry and say we are setting up these protocols, so what do you think we should do? Who is it going to bring in to ask? The government will bring in people who have economies of scale who have that kind of influence.” DeLauro’s act calls for the Food Safety Administration to create a “national traceability system” to retrieve history, use and location of each food product through all stages of production, processing and distribution.

Olson believes the regulations could create unjustifiable financial hardships for small farmers and run them out of business.  “That is often the purpose of rules and regulations: to get rid of your competition,” he said. “Only people who are very, very large can afford to comply. They can hire one person to do paperwork. There’s a specialization of labor there, and when you are very small, you can’t afford to do all of these things.”  Olson said despite good intentions behind the legislation, this act could devastate small U.S. farms.  “Every time we pass a rule or a law or a regulation to make the world a better place, it seems like what we do is subsidize production offshore,” he said. “We tell farmers they can no longer drive diesel tractors because they make bad smoke. Well, essentially what we’re doing is giving China a subsidy to grow our crops for us, or Mexico or anyone else.”

Section 304 of the Food Safety Modernization Act establishes a group of “experts and stakeholders from Federal, State, and local food safety and health agencies, the food industry, consumer organizations, and academia” to make recommendations for improving food-borne illness surveillance.

According to the act, “Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law … may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such act.”  Each violation and each separate day the producer is in defiance of the law would be considered a separate offense and an additional penalty. The act suggests federal administrators consider the gravity of the violation, the degree of responsibility and the size and type of business when determining penalties.  Criminal sanctions may be imposed if contaminated food causes serious illness or death, and offenders may face fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years.

“It’s just frightening what can happen with good intentions,” Olson said. “It’s probably the most radical notions on the face of this Earth, but local agriculture doesn’t need government because it takes care of itself.”  Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act   Another “food safety” bill that has organic and small farmers worried is Senate Bill 425, or the Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act, sponsored by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Brown’s bill is backed by lobbyists for Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland and Tyson. It was introduced in September and has been referred to the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. Some say the legislation could also put small farmers out of business.

Like HR 875, the measure establishes a nationwide “traceability system” monitored by the Food and Drug Administration for all stages of manufacturing, processing, packaging and distribution of food. It would cost $40 million over three years. “We must ensure that the federal government has the ability and authority to protect the public, given the global nature of the food supply,” Brown said when he introduced the bill. He suggested the FDA and USDA have power to declare mandatory recalls.

The government would track food shipped in interstate commerce through a recordkeeping and audit system, a secure, online database or registered identification. Each farmer or producer would be required to maintain records regarding the purchase, sale and identification of their products. A 13-member advisory committee of food safety and tracking technology experts, representatives of the food industry, consumer advocates and government officials would assist in implementing the traceability system.

The bill calls for the committee to establish a national database or registry operated by the Food and Drug Administration. It also proposes an electronic records database to identify sales of food and its ingredients “establishing that the food and its ingredients were grown, prepared, handled, manufactured, processed, distributed, shipped, warehoused, imported, and conveyed under conditions that ensure the safety of the food.”

It states, “The records should include an electronic statement with the date of, and the names and addresses of all parties to, each prior sale, purchase, or trade, and any other information as appropriate.”  If government inspectors find that a food item is not in compliance, they may force producers to cease distribution, recall the item or confiscate it.  “If the postal service can track a package from my office in Washington to my office in Cincinnati, we should be able to do the same for food products,” Sen. Brown said in a Sept. 4, 2008, statement. “Families that are struggling with the high cost of groceries should not also have to worry about the safety of their food. This legislation gives the government the resources it needs to protect the public.”

Recalls of contaminated food are usually voluntary; however, in his weekly radio address on March 15, President Obama announced he’s forming a Food Safety Working Group to propose new laws and stop corruption of the nation’s food.  The group will review, update and enforce food safety laws, which Obama said “have not been updated since they were written in the time of Teddy Roosevelt.”  The president said outbreaks from contaminated foods, such as a recent salmonella outbreak among consumers of peanut products, have occurred more frequently in recent years due to outdated regulations, fewer inspectors, scaled back inspections and a lack of information sharing between government agencies.

“In the end, food safety is something I take seriously, not just as your president but as a parent,” Obama said. “No parent should have to worry that their child is going to get sick from their lunch just as no family should have to worry that the medicines they buy will cause them harm.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92002

http://www.theroadtothehorizon.org/2008_04_01_archive.html

—————————————————————————————————————

Possible Related Posts:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h875/show