In 2007, Carol Goland drove home from a meeting of the Dairy Labeling Advisory Committee in Reynoldsburg feeling optimistic. There had been heated debate over a seemingly simple issue: the fairest and most informative way to label dairy products made from cows that have not been injected with a controversial growth hormone intended to increase milk production.

The farmers using the hormone — commonly known as rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone), but also rBST (recombinant bovine somatotrophin) — were worried about losing business to competitors labeling their products as “rBGH-free.” Goland, executive director of the Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association, could empathize. Still, she’d argued — successfully, it would turn out — that Ohio consumers have the right to know how their food is produced.

But the matter did not stay settled. In February 2008, Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) head Robert Boggs issued a ruling that tilted the labeling issue in favor of farmers using rBGH.

Since 1994, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has recommended that labels touting “rBGH-free” also state that the FDA has determined that “no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rBST-supplemented and non-rBST supplemented cows.” But the FDA remained silent on details like size and placement of the disclaimer.

this article is VERY long… read more:
http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/got-artificial-hormoned-milk/Content?oid=1638383

Treasury Dept. Admits Mega-Billion Dollar Global Warming Tax

Documents obtained this week from the U.S. Treasury Department reveal the Obama administration’s plans for a massive global-warming tax through “cap and trade” legislation that has already passed the House. The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) requested the Treasury documents (PDF) under the Freedom of Information Act and was given an edited version of five records that indicated the cost to American taxpayers would be from $100 – $200 billion per year.

This is just an estimate, since the Treasury had blacked out the end of the following sentence: “It will raise energy prices and impose annual costs on the order of….” Opponents of the plan maintain that the average household would end up saddled with an estimated one to two thousand dollars in added energy consumption costs annually, costs that are corroborated by the Treasury’s estimate since there were 105,480,101 households as of the last census.

If passed, cap-and-trade legislation would set up government rationing of industrial carbon dioxide emissions. Obama’s plan involves granting, selling, and/or auctioning carbon dioxide-emission permits to the industrial sector, which will translate to higher prices for household and business energy consumers.

“The cost of a cap-and-trade plan to businesses and consumers will be huge, which the Treasury Department internally acknowledges,” said CEI Senior Fellow Christopher Horner. “The documents represent what the administration expects ‘cap and trade’ to cost, and raise. It’s a candid perspective that must be told with as much openness to the American public as administration staff discuss with each other. Therefore, we call on the Administration to immediately release complete, un-redacted copies of these documents for all to see. No more hiding.”

Environmentalists disagree with CEI’s conclusions, claiming that Obama plans to use cap-and-trade revenue to cut taxes. Tony Kreindler, spokesman for the Environmental Defense Fund, explained, “That math ignores the redistribution of revenue back to consumers. It only looks at one side of the balance sheet. It would only be true if you think the administration was going to pile all the cash on the White House lawn and set it on fire.”

The Treasury Department goes even further. “The reporting on the Treasury analysis is flat out wrong,” said Alan B. Krueger, Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy. “The reporting and blogging on this issue ignores the fact that the revenue raised from emission permits would be returned to consumers under both administration and legislative proposals.”

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are not convinced. “The current administration claims to be the most transparent in American history, yet it’s been hiding a report showing its cap-and-trade energy plan would cost up to $200 billion every year,” argued Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.). “American families can’t afford a new $1,761 yearly energy tax, and our economy surely cannot afford the 1-percent drop in productivity this big-government bill would cause. The best step we can take right now to lower energy costs, boost the economy, and clean our air would be to rely on a technology we created: nuclear power.”

Others warn this legislation would likely offshore more American jobs, since countries like China and India do not levy greenhouse-gas taxes. In a February interview with the New York Times, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said, “The concern about cap-and-trade in today’s economic climate is that a lot of money might flow to developing countries in a way that might not be completely politically sellable.”

Source: The New American

Would obama shoot down israeli jets after what he promised AIPAC?

obama’s top foreign policy advisor in an interview talking about an israeli air strike on Iran (as planned in the 1996 “clean break” document signed by dick cheney’s middle east foreign policy advisor david wurmser who holds dual-citizenship with the USA and the country he signed that war plan for). israel had been begging bush to let them fly over Iraqi airspace to drop 3 ILLEGAL nukes on LEGAL Iranian nuclear energy facilities (that were pushed on Iran by cheney). brzezinski is advising SHOOTING DOWN ISRAELI JETS!!! keep in mind brzezinski’s TWO SONS were each policy advisors for obama AND mccain BEFORE the election.

Daily Beast: Is the fallout as bad if Israel preemptively strikes Iran?

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Absolutely. That is the way, more importantly, how the Iranians would view it. They really can’t do much to the Israelis, despite all their bluster. The only thing they can do is unify themselves, especially nationalistically, to rally against us, and the mullahs might even think of it as a blessing.

DB: How aggressive can Obama be in insisting to the Israelis that a military strike [on Iran] might be in America’s worst interest?

Brzezinski: We are not exactly impotent little babies. They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?

DB: What if they fly over anyway?

Brzezinski: Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a [USS] Liberty in reverse.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-09-18/how-obama-flubbed-his-missile-message/2/

In his new book — “ End the Fed” — released today, Rep. Paul walks through his critique of the central bank and lays out a strategy (briefly) for eliminating it. We sat down with the congressman to hear his views on a money system backed by gold, the Fed’s challenge of withdrawing its stimulus and his legislation to audit the central bank. Excerpts of the interview:

What would a world without the Fed look like?

You’d go back to the day that if you wanted to borrow money to build a house, somebody would’ve had to save some money. You wouldn’t have zero savings and all the credit in the world. That’s just a total distortion of capitalism. Capital comes from savings. The part you don’t use for everyday living which you have left over, you reinvest and you save or you loan it out. We were living with something absolutely bizarre that had nothing to do with capitalism. We had no savings whatsoever yet there was all the credit in the world.

How would an audit lead to ending the Fed?

It’s a stepping stone. I think what’s going to lead to the next step is the destruction of the dollar, just like economic events moved further ahead than my legislative process. I wasn’t getting anywhere. But the economic events demanded that we look into it. So even if this bill passes and we have more information and we’re talking about monetary policy reform, I don’t think that’s the way this system is going to be ended. I think it’ll be ended when it’s a total failure and then it’ll have to be replaced by something. It could be replaced with a more authoritarian government, a more socialistic government.

Do you think the Fed will be abolished during your career?

I always thought the day would come… This economy is going to get worse and this dollar is going to get a lot worse. It’ll take care of itself. My real goal is educating people to the nature of money so that when this system fails, that they’ll know what to do and not just say ‘Well, we need a better manager.’

Economic insight and analysis from The Wall Street Journal

A US “bipartisan think-tank” has urged President Obama to prepare sanctions against Iran and announce publicly that a military strike is likely.

“If biting sanctions do not persuade the Islamic Republic to… give up its enrichment activities, the White House will have to begin serious consideration of the option of a US-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities,” said the ‘Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington’.

The report was put together by Charles Robb, a former Democratic senator from Virginia, Daniel Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana, and retired General Charles Wald, the former deputy commander of US European command.

It is worthy to note that Charles Robb and Daniel Coats, were both well known recipients of financial support from powerful Israeli lobby groups when they served in congress. General Wald has been quite outspoken in acting as a cheerleader for unlimited American support of Israel. He regularly travels to Israel and has also served in the boards of several Zionist “think tanks” and lobby groups in the US.

The group released its assessment as the US, along with other permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, prepares to participate in preliminary talks with Iran on October 1.

The reports claims that by 2010, Iran will have enough enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon, “leaving little time for the United States to prevent both a nuclear- weapons capable Islamic Republic and an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.”

The authors, who support a bill that proposes sanctions against foreign companies that export gasoline to Iran, say the Obama administration should have put together a “sufficient financial, political and military pressure” before agreeing to negotiations.

They say a deadline of 60 days after the start of the negotiations should be set for Iran, adding that the US should adopt tougher sanctions and “prepare overtly for any military option” if it fails to persuade Tehran to bend in the talks.

The proposed preparations include deploying an additional aircraft carrier battle group to Iranian waters and carrying out joint exercises with US allies.

The group claims that in the absence of US military action Tel Aviv is more likely to carry out an attack against Iran, adding that an Israeli strike “entails more risks than a US strike.”

This is while Iran is entitled to continue its uranium enrichment activities based on international regulations as it is conducting the work under the supervision of the UN nuclear watchdog and for peaceful aims.

The ‘think thank’ is proposing the tough measures without considering a recent US spy report update which concluded that Iran has deliberately not taken the critical steps in making a bomb, despite having produced sufficient nuclear fuel for one.

The new information, collected by the Obama administration, once again confirmed the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by asserting that there was no convincing evidence to prove Iran’s nuclear work had military implications.

Despite the deliberate use of classy, professional sounding terms for the name of the “bipartisan think tank,” it is quite evident that the members of the think tank, although from rival parties, have one basic interest in common and that is their unconditional support for Israel, which itself possesses nuclear warheads without being a signatory to any international atomic regulatory agency.

Press TV

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) – In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version… is almost entirely untrue…

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities’ School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

Does Farmer have cooperation and agreement from other members of the Commission? Yes. Did they say Bush ordered 9/11? No. Do they say that the 9/11 Commission was lied to by the FBI, CIA, Whitehouse and NORAD? Yes. Is there full documentary proof of this? Yes.

Farmer states…“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened… I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

The 9/11 Commission head, Thomas Kean, was the Republican governor of New Jersey. He had the following to say… “We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . ” When Bush’s own handpicked commission failed to go along with the cover up and requested a criminal investigation, why was nothing done?

read more…

Written by Gordon Duff, a Marine combat veteran and a regular contributor to Veterans Today.

OPERATION BLACKOUT by World911Truth.org

On April 3rd, 2009 one of the most important and explosive scientific paper was released by scientists from 3 countries. The paper is entitled “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” and demonstrates that unignited explosive residues were found in the dust of the World Trade Center collapse. This highly advanced nano-size explosive called nanothermite, which is not made in a cave in Afghanistan but rather in US defense contractor labs, could be responsible for the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 on September 11, 2001.

This information is not to be taken lightly. It could change the official story of 9/11 entirely. And although this paper was recently handed to Vice President Joe Biden, to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and to several Congresspeople, on record and on video (thanks to WeAreChange), no one in the White House or Congress seems to think these findings are important. Moreover, no major media has ever reported on this story other than a few media in Denmark and Russia.

This is unacceptable and the blackout surrounding the nanothermite paper in the mainstream media needs to stop now.

Therefore, on September 11th, 2009, we will launch a worldwide campaign called Operation Blackout with one major goal. We want to inform a maximum amount of members of the mainstream media about the nanothermite paper and some other crutial facts that were ignored by the 9/11 Commission.

We will send a package to over 1,500 of the biggest news media outlets (TV and newspapers) around the world that will contain key information on 9/11, a copy of the nanothermite paper, two DVDs including the new DVD by Steven E. Jones on Nanothermite as well as a copy of 9/11: Blueprint for Truth by Richard Gage, AIA and the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

We will duly and firmly suggest each media to report on the nanothermite paper. We don’t understand why any of them wouldn’t. We will also ask them to reply to us explaining why they never covered the story and if they intend to, now that they have the information in hand. All responses will be made public on our website. If a media chooses not to respond to us, we will also display it on our website. The public will then be able to judge the type of work our mainstream media does.

A special section on our website for this Operation Blackout will soon be released with all the details. A copy of the documents that we will send to the press will be made public and we will encourage you, the people, to take action in different ways.

It is crucial that the mainstream media do their job and start investigating on one of the most important scientific paper released in a long time. We cannot tolerate a manufactured media blackout surrounding the nanothermite paper. So let’s inform these media and see what they will do with it, on public record.

“Those who have the privilege to know, have the duty to act.”
— Albert Einstein

LEARN MORE ABOUT 9/11 – lots you won’t see on TV!!!

“I can’t believe what I read on Bloomberg.com, “International Paper’s ArborGen joint venture with MeadWestvaco Corp. and New Zealand’s Rubicon Ltd. is seeking permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to sell the first genetically engineered forest trees outside China.” What? International Paper? It can’t be? The world’s largest pulp and paper maker promotes itself as an environmentally responsible company, but now, it appears the company is following in the footsteps of Monsanto and genetically modified crops.”

http://sustainablog.org/2009/09/09/international-paper-growing-genetically-engineered-frankenforests/

(9/9/2009)

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety & Inspection Service and the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has announced a public meeting to provide information and receive public comments on agenda items and draft U.S. positions that will be discussed at the 3rd Session of the Codex Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on antimicrobial resistance to be held in Jeju, Republic of Korea, Oct. 12-16.

The public meeting is scheduled for Thursday, Sept. 24, 2009, from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m., Rm. 107-A, USDA, Jamie L. Whitten Federal Building, 1200 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250. Attendees will be required to present photo identification at the door.

Documents and agenda items related to the 3rd Session of the Codex Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on antimicrobial resistance will be accessible at www.codexalimentarius.net/current.asp.

Codex was created in 1963 by two United Nations organizations, the Food & Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization. Codex develops food standards, guidelines and codes of practice in order to protect the health of consumers, to ensure fair food trade practices, and to promote the coordination of food standards undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations.

The Codex Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on antimicrobial resistance was established by the 29th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in 2006 to help develop science-based guidelines to be used to assess the risks to human health that are associated with the presence of antimicrobial resistant microorganisms and antimicrobial resistant genes in food and feed, including aquaculture, and their transmission through food and feed. The Codex Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on antimicrobial resistance is hosted by the Republic of Korea.

Interested parties may submit written comments at the public meeting, or by e-mail to David G. White at David.White@fda.hhs.gov.

For further information about the public meeting, contact Doreen Chen-Moulec, U.S. Codex Office, FSIS by e-mail at Doreen.Chen-Moulec@fsis.usda.gov or uscodex@fsis.usda.gov or by phone at (202) 205-7760 or fax at (202) 720-3157.

feedstuffs.com