Post-Brexit Agrochemical Apocalypse for the UK?
Colin Todhunter
The British government, regulators and global agrochemical corporations are colluding with each other and are thus engaging in criminal behaviour. That’s the message put forward in a new report written by environmentalist Dr Rosemary Mason and sent to the UK Environment Agency. It follows her January 2019 open letter to Werner Baumann, CEO of Bayer CropScience, where she made it clear to him that she considers Bayer CropScience and Monsanto criminal corporations.
Her letter to Baumann outlined a cocktail of corporate duplicity, cover-ups and criminality which the public and the environment are paying the price for, not least in terms of the effects of glyphosate. Later in 2019, Mason wrote to Bayer Crop Science shareholders, appealing to them to put human health and nature ahead of profit and to stop funding Bayer.
Mason outlined with supporting evidence how the gradual onset of the global extinction of many species is largely the result of chemical-intensive industrial agriculture. She argued that Monsanto’s (now Bayer) glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide and Bayer’s clothianidin are largely responsible for the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef and that the use of glyphosate and neonicotinoid insecticides are wiping out wildlife species across the globe.
In February 2020, Mason wrote the report ‘Bayer Crop Science rules Britain after Brexit – the public and the press are being poisoned by pesticides’. She noted that PM Boris Johnson plans to do a trade deal with the US that could see the gutting of food and environment standards. In a speech setting out his goals for trade after Brexit, Johnson talked up the prospect of an agreement with Washington and downplayed the need for one with Brussels – if the EU insists the UK must stick to its regulatory regime. In other words, he wants to ditch EU regulations.
Mason pondered just who could be pulling Johnson’s strings. A big clue came in February 2019 at a Brexit meeting on the UK chemicals sector where UK regulators and senior officials from government departments listened to the priorities of Bayer Crop Science. During the meeting (Westminster Energy, Environment & Transport Forum Keynote Seminar: Priorities for UK chemicals sector – challenges, opportunities and the future for regulation post-Brexit), Janet Williams, head of regulatory science at Bayer Crop Science Division, made the priorities for agricultural chemical manufacturers known.
Dave Bench was also a speaker. Bench is a senior scientist at the UK Chemicals, Health and Safety Executive and director of the agency’s EU exit plan and has previously stated that the regulatory system for pesticides is robust and balances the risks of pesticides against the benefits to society.
In an open letter to Bench, Mason responded:
That statement is rubbish. It is for the benefit of the agrochemical industry. The industry (for it is the industry that does the testing, on behalf of regulators) only tests one pesticide at a time, whereas farmers spray a cocktail of pesticides, including over children and babies, without warning.”
It seems that post-Brexit the UK could authorise the continued use of glyphosate. Of course, with a US trade deal in the pipeline, there are major concerns about glyphosate-resistant GMOs and the lowering of food standards across the board.
Mason says that glyphosate causes epigenetic changes in humans and animals: diseases skip a generation. Washington State University researchers found a variety of diseases and other health problems in the second- and third-generation offspring of rats exposed to glyphosate. In the first study of its kind, the researchers saw descendants of exposed rats developing prostate, kidney and ovarian diseases, obesity and birth abnormalities.
Glyphosate has been the subject of numerous studies about its health effects. Robert F Kennedy Jr, one of the attorney’s fighting Bayer (which has bought Monsanto) in the US courts, has explained that for four decades Monsanto manoeuvred to conceal Roundup’s carcinogenicity by capturing regulatory agencies, corrupting public officials, bribing scientists and engaging in scientific fraud to delay its day of reckoning.
Kennedy says there is also cascading scientific evidence linking glyphosate to a constellation of other injuries that have become prevalent since its introduction, including obesity, depression, Alzheimer’s, ADHD, autism, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, kidney disease, inflammatory bowel disease, brain, breast and prostate cancer, miscarriage, birth defects and declining sperm counts.
In her new document sent to the UK Environment Agency, Mason argues there is criminal collusion between the Department for Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Chemicals Regulation Division and Bayer over Brexit.
She also claims the National Farmers Union has been lying about how much pesticides farmers use and have ignored the side effects of chlorpyrifos, chlorothalonil, glyphosate and neonicotinoids. The NFU says farmers couldn’t do without these inputs, even though they destroy human health and the environment.
Of course, farmers can and do go without using these chemicals. And the shift away from chemical-intensive agriculture is perfectly feasible. In a recent article on the AgWeb site, for instance, US farmer Adam Chappell describes how he made the shift on his 8,000-acre farm. Chappell was not some dyed-in-the-wool organic evangelist. He made the shift for financial and practical reasons and is glad he did. The article states:
He was on the brink of bankruptcy and facing a go broke or go green proposition. Drowning in a whirlpool of input costs, Chappell cut bait from conventional agriculture and dove headfirst into a bootstrap version of innovative farming. Roughly 10 years later, his operation is transformed, and the 41-year-old grower doesn’t mince words: It was all about the money.”
Surely there is a lesson there for UK farmers who in 2016 used glyphosate on 2,634,573 ha of cropland. It is not just their bottom line that could improve but the health of the nation. Mason says that five peer-reviewed animal studies from the US and Argentina released in July 2020 have focused minds on the infertility crisis being caused by glyphosate-based herbicides.
Researchers at The National University of Litoral in Sante Fe, Argentina, have published three concerning peer-reviewed papers including two studies on ewes and rats and one review. In one study, researchers concluded that glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides are endocrine disruptors. They also stated that glyphosate-based herbicides alter reproductive outcomes in females.
But such is the British government’s willingness to protect pesticide companies that it is handing agrochemical giants BASF and Bayer enormous pay-outs of Covid-19 support cash. The announcement came just weeks after Bayer shareholders voted to pay £2.75 billion in dividends. The fact that Bayer then went on to receive £600 million from the government speaks volumes of where the government’s priorities lie.
According to Mason, the new Agriculture Bill provides a real opportunity for the UK to adopt a paradigm shift which embraces non-chemical farming policy. However, Defra has stated that after Brexit Roundup Ready GA21 glyphosate tolerant crops could be introduced.
It is also concerning that a post-Brexit funding gap could further undermine the impartiality of university research. Mason refers to Greenpeace, which notes that Bayer and Syngenta, both sell neonicotinoid insecticides linked to harmful effects on bees, gave a combined total of £16.1m to 70 British universities over five years to fund a range of research. Such private funding could create a conflict of interest for academics and after Brexit a potential shortage of public money for science could force universities to seek more finance from the private sector.
Neonicotinoids were once thought to have little or no negative effects on the environment because they are used in low doses and as a seed coating, rather than being sprayed. But evidence has been mounting that the chemicals harm bees – important pollinators of food crops. As a result, neonicotinoids have been banned by the EU, although they can still be used under license.
According to Bayer’s website, academics who reviewed 15 years of research found “no adverse effects to bee colonies were ever observed in field studies”. Between 2011 and 2016, the figures obtained from the 70 universities – about half the total in the UK – show Bayer gave £9m to fund research, including more than £345,000 on plant sciences. Syngenta spent nearly £7.1m, including just under £2.3m on plant sciences and stated that many years of independent monitoring prove that when used properly neonicotinoids do not damage the health of bee populations.
However, in 2016, Ben Stewart of Greenpeace UK’s Brexit response team said that the decline in bee populations is a major environmental and food security concern – it’s causes need to be properly investigated.
He added:
But for this research to command public confidence, it needs to be independent and impartial, which is why public funding is so crucial. You wouldn’t want lung cancer studies to be heavily reliant on funds from tobacco firms, nor research on pesticides to be dependent on the companies making them.”
Stewart concluded:
As Brexit threatens to cut off vital public funds for this scientific field, our universities need a cast-iron guarantee from our government that EU money will not be replaced by corporate cash.”
But Mason notes that the government long ago showed its true colours by refusing to legislate on the EU Directive (2009/128/EC) on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides. The government merely stated that current statutory and voluntary controls related to pesticides and the protection of water, if followed, afford a high degree of protection and it would primarily seek to work with the pesticides industry to enhance voluntary measures.
Mason first questioned the government on this in January 2011. In an open letter to the Chemical Regulation Directorate. The government claimed that no compelling evidence was provided to justify further extending existing regulations and voluntary controls.
Lord Henley, the Under-Secretary of State for Defra, expanded further:
“By making a small number of changes to our existing approach we can continue to help feed a growing global population with high-quality food that’s affordable – while minimising the risks of using pesticides.”
In her numerous reports and open letters to officials, Mason has shown that far from having ‘high-quality food’, there is an ongoing public health crisis due to the pesticides being used.
She responded to Henley by stating:
…instead of strengthening the legislation, the responses of the UK government and the CRD have considerably weakened it. In the case of aerial spraying, you have opted for derogation.”
Mason says that, recently, the day that Monsanto lost its appeal against Dewayne Lee Johnson the sprayers came around the Marina in Cardiff breaking all the rules that the EU had set for Roundup.
We can only wonder what could lie in store for the British public if a trade deal is done with the US. Despite the Conservative government pledging that it would not compromise on the UK’s food and environment standards, it now proposes that chlorine-washed chicken, beef treated with growth hormones, pork from animals treated with ractopamine and many other toxic foods produced in the US will be allowed into the UK. All for the bottom line of US agribusiness corporations.
It is also worth mentioning at this point that there are around 2,000 untested chemicals in packaged foods in the US.
Ultimately, the situation comes down to a concentration of power played out within an interlocking directorate of state-corporate interests – in this case, global agrochemical conglomerates and the British government – and above the heads of ordinary people. It is clear, that these institutions value the health of powerful corporations at the expense of the health of the population and the state of the environment.
Readers can access Mason’s new paper ‘Criminal collusion between Defra, the Chemicals Regulation Division and Bayer over Brexit Agenda’ via academia.edu website (which cites relevant sources), where all her other documents can also be found.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
This post isn’t about the post Brexit collapse of British agriculture but my personal experience working in organic market gardening in France for a few years. We were part of a cooperative of organic growers who sold most of their produce to the chain of organic food shops across France called the Biocoop – organic in French is biologique, bio for short (pronounced be-o), which itself is a cooperative, today there are over 600 shops. Plus there are independent organic shops.
So I know nothing of pesticides as we didn’t use them, instead after the first year the natural predators eg ladybirds, built up and ate of any beasties that ate the crops. Any waste, yes unfortunately there is a lot as customers buying bio as in pesticide-agriculture expect straight cucumbers and carrots, tho maybe less so, (or is it the management that demands conformity of shape?), but the unharvested crops were rotivated in to add to the fertility of the land (green manure). Bio is far healthier for the workers too. Insects and birds thrived.
Organic food was becoming increasingly popular and more growers were needed, the cooperatives were working on getting organic food in schools and hospitals. There were meetings to work towards saving the seeds from old varieties of fruit and veg that are hardy, and diverse in form and taste. But along with the expansion came a new management ethos that we had to compete with the supermarkets who were moving in to the organic sector as they could see it increasing in its share of the market, so the message was we have to work harder, no sitting around chatting, as the supermarkets were threatening the cooperatives profits, which we all had a stake in, though the risk was minimal as it is a big organisation. The pressure was for bigger farms employing more workers, there were grants for putting up massive tunnels, grants for conversion to bio, some farmers converted not out of ethics but because it was more profitable than pesticide-agriculture.
So I am completely 100% for organic agriculture, it’s healthy, and once you’ve eaten organic veg, conventional veg is like tasteless plastic. And there are far fewer hidden costs to the environment, it costs a bit more to the consumer but tax payers aren’t paying for the polluted rivers to be cleaned up for example.
But it does need a massive shift in how people spend their money on food. Basic organic food is not that much more expensive eg potatoes, carrots, onions, mushrooms, flour, pasta, rice, so if you stick to them or find a veg box scheme, that is the most economical way to eat, as you need less food as the quality is there, its not pumped full of water or pesticides and it makes eating more pleasurable (if you have a simple diet and don’t chuck a load of sugary salty sauces all over it!)
Another part of my life I worked in a well known supermarket in the UK (yes it was hell tho the people who worked there were lovely and had a great sense of humour). I was earning not much more than minimum wage but still bought as much organic as I could. One day a co worker asked me how I could afford organic food, I said, it’s a choice, I forego other things eg I could make a pint of beer last quite a while! So it’s a choice but many people are physically and emotionally hooked on the quick energy fixes of sugary, fatty food and it’s really hard to change that, tho it can be done eg since having to wear masks to go to the supermarket I’ve given up on chocolate and biscuits, as I refuse to wear a mask, I never thought I’d ever survive without chocolate but after 5 days the cravings went away and I’m now chocolate-free! Other food I can buy at outdoor markets and online.
So the viability of organic depends on government policies rather than questioning whether organic farming is viable as a system of agriculture. And the occupying power in Britain today is a puppet for big pharma and companies like Bayer who long to plant themselves on British soil (and their death-dealing crops).
We are entering an era in which corporations shape the world in their own image. We still see national or regional resistance but we must understand who is resisting. The European Union “opposes” U.S. corporations because it answers to its own.
First, we must be honest about origins. The EU is thoroughly corporatist, that is to say it exists primarily to benefit corporations. They fix boundaries for policy and have dominant political and economic influence (just compare the “rights” of individuals with the rights of corporations under EU rules).
The “Commission” is a faceless bureaucracy, appointed, not elected. The “Parliament” is purely advisory and has no power. Policy is made behind the scenes. It is a lobbyist’s dream. Unlike the U.S. Congress, it does not even pretend to represent the people.
When Britain’s minister for technology Tony Benn went to Brussels eager to get his hands dirty shaping European industrial policy, he was met with blank stares. The decisions had already been made and the ministers were just there for show.
Corporatist first (and primarily German – note who’s kept their manufacturing base) the EU then set up a mechanism to deliver customers to the hungry corporations at its core.
The Euro was set up as a wholly artificial monetary system (the right to create money without control over taxes and spending – no European treasury, because Germany would not cede that control: it just wanted to flood Europe with credit) offering unsustainably-low interest rates to countries like Greece and Ireland, leading to credit booms. Result: Greece and Ireland had the highest rates of Mercedes Benz ownership in the world.
Magically, we were told, the wealth would somehow “equalize” around Europe. Reality: Germany had an export boom, financed by German, French and Austrian banks – who made loans to customers who lacked the wealth or fiscal discipline to sustain such borrowing. When those customers defaulted, the banks got bailed out by European taxpayers. Wealth was sucked from periphery to core.
To simplify the money thing: to borrow and be sure of paying it back, you must be wealthy or have tight control over your spending. Germany has both. Greece has neither. When the Euro system lowered interest rates to levels that were sustainable for Germany, they were always going to distort the economy of Greece. The Euro Gnomes knew that from the start. No deception was required on the part of the Greeks or Italians or Irish or Spanish or Portuguese.
From a German Perspective: This was always the plan. Consider if WW2 had not happened. Britain had already appeased German companies who wanted access to cheap Czech labour and resources. Chamberlain would have offered Poland next.
European mega companies (German-Franco-Belgian, there was always a French industrial-political lobby that sought to unite with Germany. See France: The Dark Years, 1940-1944, by Julian Jackson) would have got access to cheap Eastern European labour, along with natural resources and markets.
Fast forward some decades and western European countries are complaining that they are competing with cheap Czech and Polish migrant labour – that must ring a bell to the most plugged British ears. The goal has been achieved, hasn’t it?
War is the continuation of politics by other means “and nothing to get hung about”. It’s risky and expensive. Better to rise above borders than drive tanks through them. European corporations now roam freely across the continent, getting access to cheap labour and resources. Note that the EU treaties give far greater freedoms to corporations than to individuals.
From the U.S. perspective: The Wilsonian Plan was a Europe strong enough to be a trading partner but not a rival. So Germany has freedom of action within wide bounds – but so long as it does not threaten the US.
Why does the European Union stop at Russia? Because with Russia it would become a much more important world power. Friedman (was it Thomas or George?) says what US has always feared is a German Russian rapprochement – like at Rapallo (1922) and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (1939). When Germany and Russia get together the world trembles.
In 1948 the U.S. established The American Committee for a United Europe, chaired by William Donovan, founder of the OSS. “Funding came from the Ford and Rockefeller foundations as well as business groups with close ties to the US government.
“All along, the CIA-run front group was funding the so-called European Movement.” Founder Józef Retinger, the lawyer Robert Schuman who was one of the first to lay out the narrative of the destruction of Jews, and the former Belgian prime minister Paul-Henri Spaak, “were all treated as hired hands by their American sponsors” .
A memo from the European section, dated June 11, 1965, advises the vice-president of the European Economic Community, Robert Marjolin, to pursue monetary union by stealth, suppressing debate until the “adoption of such proposals would become virtually inescapable”. — described in a 15-year-old article in the Telegraph…
The end goal of unifying Europe under a single regime, then, was to eventually build a transatlantic union merging the United States with the European superstate. In fact, that is the very same agenda envisioned in Obama’s extraordinarily unpopular “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” or TTIP, with the EU.
From a European Perspective: Where does this go?
The mismanagement and corruption of the European Union was enough to justify Brexit – but that does not rule out a U.S. motive.
Possible drivers: Driver One: TTIP was failing. Perhaps split off Britain to join a new NAFTA.
Driver Two: The Climate Change Project had run into the buffers politically. The 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Conference was a failure. Credibility had collapsed. U.S. evangelist Michael Mann of the hockey stick had been thoroughly discredited in court. U.K. evangelist Phil Jones had been exposed for falsified data and bullying peers.
Even though lots of money was being made — from emissions taxes, carbon credit trade, and subsidies for recycling so-called green projects, from lithium batteries to solar panels — the Climate Change Project had collapsed as a political force for social engineering.
Driver Three: The Zion Hub: Rebuilding the NWO around the U.S., Britain and Israel – the founders and funders of the Zionist project, who are in turn heavily controlled by the Zionists. Germany and the Reich played a big role in creating Israel but a) that conflicts with the Holocaust narrative so German leadership is a no-no b) Germany has its own destiny and is always cast in the role of antagonist.
This brings us full circle to the question: who is driving The Great Reset? My money is on a combination of all three drivers, leaning towards the third, but with pushback from a fourth.
We are seeing a German-French-UN-Chinese bloc pushing for a worldwide order — competing with the Anglo-Zionist-WEF hub who believe they can build a cybernetics and systems approach to government based around Israeli technology. Thus a new nexus of power is being constructed; but it is facing resistance from the eastern globalists.
For all the talk of a Fourth Reich, there is a split. The Nazi, Ashkenazi interest that worked together in Germany (Transfer Agreement, Stern Gang) is now firmly embedded in the U.S.-British-Israeli bloc.
German politicians, controlled since WW2 through the CIA-Gehlen/BND, who opposed closer ties to Russia, are on the back foot. German business has always believed the realization of its potential lies in the east: huge markets containing the raw material and labour upon which Germans can work their undoubted technological and bureaucratic skills. Now corporations are in the driving seat, pushing their version of a NWO.
A couple of links: https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/23120-the-real-agenda-behind-the-cia-spawning-the-eu
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1356047/Euro-federalists-financed-by-US-spy-chiefs.html
Rosemary Mason is correct. Like many “governments”, the British government has been colluding with agrochemical corporations for decades. Most readers know governments are always for sale, and that’s why liability for human carnage and environmental damages should rest on the end user. The suppliers of carcinogens and poisons generally own public officials, so good luck with prosecuting Bayer or other corporate/capitalist ghouls.
Here are a few informational tidbits for entertainment purposes only:
“Effects of Surfactants on the Toxicitiy of Glyphosate, with Specific Reference to RODEO”
http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/pesticide/pdfs/Surfactants.pdf
Glyphosate induced cell death [Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2012 May-Jun] – PubMed – NCBI
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22504123
Death by Multiple Poisoning, Glyphosate and Roundup
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/DMPGR.php
Transcriptome profile analysis reflects rat liver and kidney damage following chronic ultra-low dose Roundup exposure
Environmental Health 2015, 14:70 doi:10.1186/s12940-015-0056-1
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at:
http://www.ehjournal.net/content/14/1/70
There are hundreds of scientific studies available, but “governmental” agencies remain clueless and well paid…
New Counterpunch black propaganda of nonsense.
Yes, ignoring Dr. Ioannidis one of foremost epidemiologist in the world and recent admission by CDC and WHO epidemiologists that what we are dealing with is not extinction of human race but just effects of bad flu is really suicidal for brainwashed by fear and genocidal for millions of innocent under terrorist threat unleashed by governments and fascist COVID storm troopers and their ideologues also are Counterpunch.org.
And no, asserting fundamental unalienable rights of individual freedom is not suicidal. It is utmost expression of upholding human dignity. If we give up that we turn into animals and that would be suicidal to human race.
Counterpunch now is aggressively punching innocent being paid with state terrorists silver coins.
Fauci is a Government gangster. The pinstriped mafia. How long has he been in his job- 35 – 40 years ? It will be a well paid position I’m sure. But, after living expenses and general spending , and the occasionally tax bill- a multi billionaire net worth ? He’s a parasitic worm gnawing at various economies and extracting blood( figuratively as well as literally) through pharma patents and from the corpses of a million plus HIV / AIDS victims like a vampire.
Counterpunch falls for the fallacy, the appeal to authority. Fauci has climbed to the top of the bureaucratic tree — and more ominiously, has done what it takes to stay there for 30 years… That makes him a ruthless bureaucrat. It does not make him right.
Trofim Lysenko held a similar sway under Stalin. He destroyed whole fields of research. He ended careers, packed the academies with his own people, controlled the press — all the while promoting pseudo science that profited him and the politicians.
Lysenko was a brutal opportunist, a highly political bureaucrat and a scientific fraud.
One of secret soviet projects in early ninety fifties was to cheaply mass produce gold from base metals via CHEMICAL REACTIONS “. Pure alchemy in the age of real scientific discoveries as charlatans were funded while geniuses were sent into scientific oblivion.
Science is p, as always has been a social institution vulnerable to economic and political pressures like any other institution and was always promoted to serve ruling elite policies and their needs of maintain power.
books.
Rachel Carson silent springs
Matrix III, Volume 1: The Psycho-Social, Chemical, Biological and Electromagnetic Manipulation of Human Consciousness by Val Valerian
the above article is nothing new a such they been doing this since Time immemorial, one must learn the names and the feel of something
intuition very important
Visited a garden center and ask for normal compost everything they sold had chemicals in it some even had the name organic compost food (not certification organic ) but general public none the wise the plants they buy are full of chemicals from thsoes places, compost loaded with gods whats in it
lights/lighting horrific, the water = solution they used there stunk.
I felt really sad for the plants
when you step back it no different what they do to humans, animals. etc
And to the average voter Brexit was meant to deliver beautiful sunny uplands and chase the immigrants away.
I said right from the outset that Brexit was in fact a neoliberal and neocon putsch, rolling out further of the “21st American Century” and intended as the first step in breaking the EU and the Euro apart.
The reason? The EU was / is fundamentally a social democratic block which especially in recent years fined US companies such as Microsoft, Google and blocked on anti-compertitive grounds certain US led mergers of EU companies on grounds of reducing competition.
Yes, there are inreasing neoliberal forces within the EU but the opposing forcers remain strong for the time being. The EU is also responsible for the data privacy GDPR which has transferred our data once held in the USA back to the EU. There’s also the Working Hours Directive which has reduced the exploitation of workers by the corporations throughout the EU, but which Thatcher managed to get significant UK exemptions from.
The bottom line is that EU has a community project, and it’s increasing strenght of the Euro as not only competitive threats to the USA, but removal of the USD as the reserve currency…and incidentally the reason why Hussain was removed as he expressed a plan to price Iraq’s oil in Euros rather than USD. Perhaps Gadafi too.
The US’s divide and conquer approach to Europe will place it in a very strong position as it influences and then corrupts each individual government. We’ve already seen this with the UK and Boris Johnson, who not coincidentally is a US-UK dual national. Rinse repeat in Poland, Hungary…
As far as immigration is concerned, Brxit Britian is already allowing an influx of illegal immigrants to arrive with aiding and abetting of HM Coastgard, as Farage has pointed out. Patel’s Home Office is also preparing to handle a vast influx of “cheap and cheerful” Commonwealth immigrants to replace the much more relatively expensive and workers-rights-aware EU workers.
As for food and environmental laws, God help us.
The EU was a creation of the Third Reich in 1942 after they had occupied most of Europe.The Third Reich planners laid out the EEC plans for Europe.After WW2 the was carried forward by fascist spymaster Allen Dulles and funded by the Ford Foundation.Ford of course being Hitlers best friend in America in the 1930`s.I say no deals with the Fourth Reich.
I have to say I am in two minds about whether glyphosate is dangerous to humans. It’s now a political issue, so I don’t think you can rely on either side – the manufacturers or their detractors – to be entirely honest about it.
I have a degree in chemistry, so perhaps I am less scared of chemicals than most – I don’t know. (I have never been employed by a chemicals company or big pharma.)
With that said, I think it would be certainly be preferable if farming could be practised without herbicides and pesticides. Not being a farmer, I really don’t know if that is practical.
I do a fair amount of walking in the countryside. The fields growing crops have few weeds other than around the edges, so clearly they have been sprayed with something. Would farmers’ yields be sufficient for them to survive in business without herbicides and pesticides? I don’t know. There’s a lot of mouths to feed.
i’m so pretty
ohh so pretty
i’m pretty
im pretty
and gay
you like the drink
pretty boy
then drink it
all of it
empty that bucket
that”s a good
tavistock
psy boy
crops needs soil which is rich in micro-organisms and chemical farming has destroyed our soil.. Food grown in soil which is devoid of micro-organisms is devoid of nutrients and so it isn’t nourishing these human bodies… Regenerative agriculture demonstrates how it should be done to turn it all around and produce more food.
Glyphosate is most definately poisoning humanity and along with the millions of gallons of other noxious chemicals spayed each year, we’ve decimated the insect population…
Fucked up millions of years of biological evolution in a few decades, all because of some Frankenstein scientists with zero intelligence employed by greedy perverts… Clever yes… Intelligent no…
Lot of shareholders to pay, too…
You are trained in seeing life and its environment as pieces of cause and affect, within the context of human arrogance and wilful ignorance.
However I appreciate your honesty in feedback from your current position.
The symbiotic nature of biology (life) is not appreciable or conceivable from a mind in pieces – that is unaware of the wholeness of which it cannot feel but yet cannot BUT be an expression.
Dr Stephanie Seneff phd may interest you as a scientist who has intensively studied the chemistry of glyphosate – is fascinated by the chemistry but deeply alarmed at pernicious and insidious consequence.
The politics of corruption is very evident if you scratch even a little beneath the surface
You mistakenly use the term political for polarised identity – which is not politics but the tool of ignorance and arrogance. If your identity demands you thinks a certain way, your may never realise that it was not science but personal bias that framed your worldview.
Uncovering deep deceits that conceal unthinkable and ongoing crimes is very likely to trigger extreme reactions that may unseat the mind as a calm and centred witness and messenger. While biocides were initiated and employed in search of greater profit to eradicate pests and weeds, the industry of the agrochemical industrial complex runs as a global monopolistic intent to suppress rivals and eradicate any challenge to its control of the market – which is so lucrative as to be able to largely determine the science that is allowed official acceptance and therefore access to restoring regulations that require proof of no harm before a product is released to widespread use.
There is no level playing field here. Engdahl’s ‘Seeds of Destruction’ documents policy of food as control – via corp-gov control of food production and distribution.
It is true that fear can become a self-fulfilling prophecy and render us blind to true causes and thus unconsciously biased to misinterpret and react in ways that then make the fear justified in negative results. But the deeper maskings or levels of the human consciousness are generated exactly to hide, deny, and redistribute toxic fears ‘away’ from a sense of self as control over life. And this then is our ‘normal’ as ‘survival’ and yet dissociation from the true relation that does not cease because it is denied or demonised as rival or threat to a sense of private control set in wilful blindness as if the only way to live.
We can say that everything is ‘chemical’ action and reaction – but this also is electrical bonding at atomic and molecular level. Biology operates a wholeness or balancing act as both an inner and outer terrain. Without this balance, we have either toxicity and malnutrition or lack of life support. Without the ‘gut biome’ the more complex organisms cannot function. Our degradation in terms of immune (life) support, digestive and cognitive function, is attributed largely to faulty genes and infectious diseases – because that’s where the money is as a private ‘life support’ for a parasitic sense of life as war – as distinct from life as a balance of communication in all its parts (you don’t have to manually think this for your life to function).
While adaptive and evolved systems learn to maintain core integrity under change and challenge, the introduction of too much change and challenge operates a negative synergy of a breakdown of communication such as to result in world that reflects our own broken consciousness – running under masking narratives and asserting itself as the normal – as if that can become true nature rather than conditioned reaction.
Operating at odds with what is, will result in dissonance and incoherence, that the mind can persist in its operation is the capacity to map out dissonance or assign it to low priority – so as to prioritise resource on persisting against the odds rather than pausing to take a true account. That this works a depleting and destructive outcome would be evident if not assigned by such a mind to false flagged ’causes’ by which to persist under false premises following false profits. That a reaction occurs that would seek to deny the deniers is part of the war the same underlying energetic transfers by reaction. The reaction of conflict avoidance is not neutral but gives the conflict freedom to operate without shared witness. No-go areas then become corruptions of power that operate a shadow economy beneath a mainstreamed mask of justifications clinging to masking as virtue.
Of course we do not need biocidal farming – but as with biocidal medications, dependencies may sometimes require a transitional support.
Affording anything is about priorities, accepted conscious decision and alignment in purpose. Insofar as we are obliged to give to Caesar – make it a purpose and process of weaning off by leaning to the sense of connection with wholeness – even if in that moment the mind and world block the feeling of what it is to live and to know and share in living.
The chemistry of life is not in a petri dish, a lab or a virtual head-space. The physics of resonance aligns, informs and self-organises the structuring of matter. Things do not exist in themselves – but always in relational and rhythmic exchange. What we give out determines the measure of what we get back. We do this unto our Self – regardless the temporary experience of casting out the hated and feared to denying it, as if to have escaped to a possession of a locked down private control system.
Some thoughts on what lies ahead . . .
Next up, the deliberate starvation of millions. The Holodomor part 2. This time done behind the smokescreen of ‘keeping you safe’ (because only the vaccinated will be allowed to buy food).
It’s totally illogocal that “they” will starve millions because more people means more profit.
Only if you believe that profit is their sole motivation – which it isn’t.
Also, rather than starve, most people will agree to be vaccinated against their will – a thought which undoubtedly has Bill Gates rubbing his hands in glee.
It’s one thing to have principles while all is going well, but when actual starvation threatens, I think we can expect people to adopt a bumper-sticker philosophy along the lines of, “Your principles won’t be any use when you’re dead.”
NOW is the time for strong resistance. By the time starvation confronts people as a real possibility, they will agree to anything, and Stockholm Syndrome will be more contagious than a corona pandemic.
We really do have to grasp how evil our “authorities” have become – or at least the extent to which they have become possessed by evil. This isn’t one policy suggestion against another. It’s the very devil against our species.
Yes now is the time for ordinary people to stop naively thinking the massive, deliberate murder couldn’t happen. It’s happened many times before and will happen again.
Now is the time to resist as if you have nothing to lose. They have taken our freedom so really all we have to lose are material possessions.
It’s depressing. Because not only is the outdoors swilling with toxic pesticides, so are our indoors. Flame retardant chemicals – most untested – are packed into our sofas, mattresses, carpets, TVs and walls (insulation in new buildings). They wear off all the time and get into our blood causing all kinds of health issues. They’re supposed to prevent fires but don’t; in fact they just make home fires even more toxic. The same collusion between government and Big Chem goes on, particularly the Department for Business but also Defra and the Environment Agency.
Around 150m kgs per year of toxic flame retardants (some already banned but still in products) are being illicitly and probably illegally disposed of just in old sofas and mattresses. They’re either thrown into landfill where the chemicals leach out and get into the food supply. Or recycled into new consumer products; or burnt in incinerators that aren’t equipped to remove flame retardant dioxins. The Environment Agency is well aware of this but turns a blind eye because to quote “What else can we do?”.
The joke is that the main reason for so many flame retardants in UK homes is our very strict furniture flammability regulations. However, the Dept. for Business itself proved they don’t even work 6 years ago, but is keeping them in place to preserve the massive profits made by Big Chem.
I thought flame retardants are result of tobacco lobby who didn’t want to remove the chemical added to cigarettes that makes them burn?
Flame retardants were already around but the manufacturers made a devils’ pact with the tobacco industry in the US in the 70s and the UK soon afterwards. The US wanted to introduce cigarettes that self-extinguish when you drop them to counter the large numbers of house fires started in sofas and mattresses. But Big Tobacco didn’t want to inconvenience its customers in any way (or put up the costs of development). As it happened, the bromine industry needed somewhere to dump all the bromine that was no longer needed in petrol (after lead was banned). So they came up with a brilliant solution: brominated flame retardants that you douse furniture with so no need for ignition-resistant cigs. Big Chem and Big Tobacco put millions into convincing/bribing the government to introduce tough new furniture flammability laws that required flame retardants. It probably goes without saying that brominated flame retardants are incredibly toxic and regularly get banned (only to be quickly replaced with near-identical new ones).
Some of the many ironies here are that self-extinguishing cigs are now law in the US and the EU but we still have furniture stuffed with flame retardants. A fantastic lobbying effort by green scientists, the Chicago Tribune, US firefighters and the Governor of California got their furniture standard changed in 2014 to cut out flame retardants (although the industry is trying hard to get them back in). No such luck in the UK and here as said the government actually proved our regulations don’t work.
In short, we introduced these regs in 1988. Since then, home smoking has massively decreased; smoke alarm coverage has boomed; and we know the regulations don’t work. But we still have them in place with the result that about 150m kgs of flame retardants go into our furniture every year.
often family members who work for this great company bring product home for cocktail parties.
we are goyim and we do love are round up ready glypho bloody mary.
yes sir
shirley you will not find a more nutrient dense food or drinks
cancer causing chemi cull no no
vitamins for all of you here hare here
The system under which we’re currently living is the very definition of fascism (i.e., the merger of state and corporate power).
The public is still unaware because the word, fascism, has been redefined. Quite deliberately, over the past five years.
Earlier generations — “don’t mention the war” — might have asked, “what did we fight for?”
Dumbed down generations have been told a semi-competent populist in the White House is “literally Hitler”. They don’t know what fascism is. Mind you, many of those who say they want socialism can’t define that either.
You could see it on The Guardian from 2015. Try to insist on an accurate use of the F word* and well-rehearsed Shareblue/ Media Matters types would pounce — insisting that it didn’t matter: it was no insult to those who died fighting fascism to water down the word and use it against Trump.
Where did they get this idea – repeated with such co-ordination in every single news outlet from as early as 2015 – that a man who has no political party and hasn’t yet held any office, who stood no chance of winning — was the embodiment of fascism?
I don’t think Trump was the target. He wasn’t going to win, remember? Hilary had it in the bag. The idea was to re-define fascism. That was Trump’s role. Punch bag Hitler.
The Corporations — IG Farben could plan its return as Bayer-Monsanto — the Corporatist Media and the NeoLiberal MIC could prepare their plan for global fascism, with all the various levers: war with Iran, boots on the ground at home, monetary reset and, of course, the vaccine surprise in which everyone gets a digital ID.
*Insisting on correct definition of fascism is a bee in my bonnet. Boring, I know. The Open Society/Soros types want to define it in terms of human rights/citizenship and this is also worthy of debate: Gaspar Miklos Tamas https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/article_306jsp/ though I insist corporatism has always been the core definition.
I wonder how many of those who see Trump as a new Hitler are aware of US business’ support of Hitler himself. Or of things like Operation Paperclip.
Thanks for the link, by the way.
In 2018, EWG released a report confirming the presence of the harmful pesticide glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, in popular oat-based cereals.
We set up a cereal bar and gave people a choice.
Do you want glyphosate in your cereal?
At least one of Canada’s largest agribusinesses has banned the use of glyphosate in pre-harvest spraying. Appalled to read about this practice, I investigated what happens in Australia and found that all cereal crops, with the exception of barley, as well as chickpeas, lentils, etc. use this method to desiccate crops pre-harvest to make harvesting more efficient. So all bread, unless organic, is contaminated. Perhaps in one product the residue is negligible, but how much is being ingested across all products? This pesticide has been listed as a probable carcinogen – how is it still not banned! There are so many studies now showing that smaller crops, grown sustainably without the use of pesticides and herbicides, provide more and better quality produce, it is perfectly obvious that money rules yet again. No wonder we are getting more depressed! I feel so helpless.
Law courts have held that it is carcinogenic.
And the courts are never wrong, Steve.
I take it you are being sarcastic?
The problem is the growing tendency towards monopoly. Monopoly results in stagnation, just look at the technical world like mobile phones, household appliances, cars etc. The progress towards breakthrough products has slowed to a crawl. Even electric cars, an old idea that is being developed on the back of government “Eco” grants, are nothing special and carbon-wise worse than petrol cars.
We have not seen any life-style enhancing technologies emerge for at least twenty years – something like air conditioning or the mobile phone. Yes, phones have gradually reached the destination that was set for them twenty years ago.
This demise of innovation and new ideas is mostly the result of big companies buying up any small company that has some interesting IP. The big company then has a choice of using that new IP or just carrying on as they are. Basically these companies are run by professional CEOs so they do nothing with that IP, they have effectively neutralised it.
As a result nothing new emerges, no new solutions to problems emerge, nothing that would challenge these huge near-monopolies. But, eventually these companies will die, you can smell them dying already: their need to bribe governments, utilise protectionist laws (pharma and agriculture) and run corona hoaxes in order to make money is a sure sign that they will crash, but unfortunately they will put a lot of third-parties like us through a lot of pain in their process of death while oppressing their neighbours.
While everyone has been hyping The Internet as THE NEW AGE… I’ve had the view for 20 years that it is the conclusion of the era of data-over-wires. This began almost two centuries ago with the telegraph. We are waiting for next great technology … in vain.
During every era a new technology has emerged DURING the life its predecessor… Windmills begat waterwheels and irrigation; waterwheels begat pistons and agricultural technology; mass agriculture allowed the growth of cities; waterwheels+pistons begat the steam engine and mass industrialization; the steam engine begat the hydrocarbon era; which begat the combustion engine and modern transport…
We are waiting to beget. So far, the Internet has destroyed as much wealth as it has created. It has blown open the mysteries of price discovery, thus leveling all with a scythe… reducing products to commodities with ever-thinner margins.
Many more have fallen than have arisen. As a force for cannibalization, eCommerce requires huge mass to be profitable.
Thus the new desire for Monopoly and Oligarchical Collectivism on the part of the internet billionaires.
The Internet has not finished wreaking destruction: main street bricks and mortar is only the first victim.
The World Economic Forum is betting on Artificial Intelligence and Robots as the next technology but this smacks of desperation and wishful thinking. Its main impact is to enslave — but has the WEF come up with a use for these slaves?
I have not seen any compelling argument of how AI and Robots are going to produce an industrial leap forward.
Robots like cheap labour are just another form of the Great Replacement… another form of arbitrage, of labour, same as eCommerce did to produce… a race to the bottom for ever thinner margins.
I do hope you are right. The depressing thing is that they are able to cause so much damage before they cark it. How many thousands of cancers have been inflicted on humans, how many bees are dying and denying pollination to food crops desperate for them. The power and hunger for more, and the obscene amounts of money being poured into the stock market by humans who can’t see through their greed is sickening.
Oh look, some people are making money! No, not the hair salons. A hair salon has to be destroyed because if it opens during a “pandemic” it’s only helping ultra-rich people. Or something convoluted like that, according to the cronyvirus idiots.
https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-365-reportedly-raked-in-20-billion-in-revenue-in-fy20-up-50-from-last-year
“Cronyvirus” — excellent!
“Bayer’s clothianidin are largely responsible for the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef”
I thought I might enjoy reading this article but had to stop when she mentioned the above. Here in the Whitsunday’s, the heart of the reef we know that such a comment at best is disillusion or at worst a great big lie. The Reef is fine, it goes through cycles where one patch “bleaches” and another re-invigorates. Many of the so-called dead zones are a consequence of cyclones, not chemicals. These zones regrow slowly post cyclone which of course is what coral does. Such regrowth happening within the same land environmental conditions prior to the cyclone. Give me empirical over theory any day.
I went to the GBR twenty years ago and then 5 years ago. It is nothing like it used to be and it is not just patches, the whole thing is just not worth visiting any more from a tourism perspective, there are much better dives elsewhere.
GBR dying? Really? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcjaQYcsr-w
This is the usual comment we hear. Unless you travelled through multiple zones you can’t make such a comment. Sure I could take you to an area off Cairns that has been effected today then fly you to the Whitsundays and Mackay where the Reef is near pristine. Enjoy your dives elsewhere, in the meantime I hear hundreds of visitors here in the Whitsundays every week raving about their dives and the quality of the coral.
I haven’t been able to find the actual study – but on ABC RN a few weeks ago it was mentioned that a 4 year scientific study of the ocean along the east coast has found a cocktail of pesticides and insecticides in all samples, and a serious decline in the habitats.
While we’re on the subject of food, here is Billy boy Gates’s wet dream in action. An AP report helpfully annotated by Anti-Empire . . .
https://www.anti-empire.com/lockdown-linked-hunger-tied-to-10000-child-deaths-each-month/
And the Herd is in panic due to an allegedly new very weak RNA virus! Funny as hell!
Till this day no scientific demonstration exists showing that this piece of RNA is an infectious viral particle capable of generating a disease (pneumonia) and eventually kill the weak host!
I’m just waiting for government advice on ‘staying safe’ to include avoiding crossing the road after seeing a black cat and quarantining yourself immediately for two weeks upon seeing a solitary magpie.
Black Cats Matter
Ha! Yes and don’t step on the cracks!
Unless you’re wearing a face mask, of course.
Then you’re completely safe.
Until the next change in narrative, that is.
~Mankind is getting dumber by the day
I admire Ms Mason’s drive and determination to challenge the beast that is Monsanto. But i think the avenues she’s using are not the best choice in the world. She’s becoming little more than an annoying pen pal to her foes. I think she needs to make a noise in public, much the same as Robert Kennedy Jr has been. Really put it in the face of the public. If one man with a knee on his neck can set in motion global hysteria over one death, what can one company’s knee on the neck of the human race cause ? Or do they just want to lose their breath and go to sleep forever.
Monsanto has always been a factory of torture and death.It’s the mad scientist’s wet dream.All those poisons and all that cash and every politician worth his salt up for sale.What a power trip.
Henry Kissinger is known for many unsavoury sound bites in his life.The proud German Jewish American has enjoyed the lofty monikers such as Secretary Of State for his adopted country. A diplomat( seriously) and ‘ geopolitical consultant’. Not bad for a man who can boast nuggets like:
” If it moves, shoot it” and ” They [ elderly and poor] are useless eaters” and his famous ” Control the food and you control the people”.
He’s 97 now and still has the energy to wish death and devastation on the human race.He’s recently been dragged from his crypt for more sound biting and gave us:
” The global population need to be vaccinated”.
The photo op was shared with – wait for it – Bill Gates. That’s Gates -wait for it- the largest investor in Monsanto of recent times. It’s that ‘population control’ again isn’t it. Control by chemical coshing. Food, drink, medication, water, air.
Gates senior was instrumental in setting up Planned Parenthood.A lovely misnomer that conjures up images of young and in love couples planning babies and a picket fence.But Gates Sr was a eugenicist until it became officially considered as quackery.He too is a fan of human sterility and abortion if you can’t just kill or maim.But they couldn’t call it Planned Genocide could they. People would talk.
Gates Sr and Kissinger are old school. OK, they may pay Uncle Sam their taxes, but they have that ice – cold Nazi Ideology coursing through their veins. The original Nazis had their target group. Jews. They were to be experimented on. The black race could be used later.They had a programme to bring about their ‘final solution’. We know the rest. Zyklon B etc.
Monsanto predates the Nazi party. But it’s been causing death and crippling millions effectively since around the turn of the 20th century. I’ll return to the list of credits they have to their name in a later post. For now, consider the following. It relates to the last piece of work that invaded The Whitehouse prior to King Trump.
President Barack Obama signed a spending bill, HR 933, into law. The so-called “Monsanto Protection Act” is a giveaway to corporations that was passed under the cover of darkness.
1- The “Monsanto Protection Act” effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of controversial genetically modified (aka GMO) or genetically engineered (GE) seeds, no matter what health issues may arise concerning GMOs in the future.The advent of genetically modified seeds — which has been driven by the massive Monsanto Company — and their exploding use in farms across America came on fast and has proved a huge boon for Monsanto’s profits.
2- The provision’s language was apparently written in collusion with Monsanto. Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, actually worked with Monsanto on a provision that in effect allows them to keep selling seeds, which can then go on to be planted, even if it is found to be harmful to consumers,
3- Many members of Congress were apparently unaware that the “Monsanto Protection Act” even existed within the bill they were voting on.
4- The President did nothing to stop it, either. On Tuesday, Obama signed HR 933. This doesn’t mean that others were not doing their best to express their opposition to the “Monsanto Protection Act.” In fact, more than 250,000 voters signed a petition opposing the provision. And Food Democracy Now protesters even took their fight straight to Obama, protesting in front of the White House against Section 735 of the bill. He signed it anyway.
“I think any time you tweak with the ability of the public to seek redress from the courts, you create a huge risk,” Seattle attorney Bill Marler — who has represented victims of foodborne illness in successful lawsuits against corporations told the New York Daily News.
Monsanto and friends buy people of influence so they can obtain carte blanche to drive their relentless killing machine across the planet maiming most and killing more that stand in it’s way. People petition their leaders and get nowhere.Politicians rebel and get nowhere.And we get told time and again about how lucky we are to live in liberty.In a land where we all have a voice. It’s not really mentioned that nobody listens to it.
Monsanto / Bayer and more are upping the ante now. Just as Gates et al are upping their’s with the grinding down of the people and the preparation of more chemicals.They don’t want to wait for everyone to fall for the innocence of soft drinks and bad milk. The fever’s making them impatient.
Cornell Alliance for Science is a PR Campaign for the Agrichemical Industry.It’s where Gates sank his money.
Unfortunately, the Cornell Alliance for Science relies on propaganda, not science, as a guide for its pro-GMO communication efforts.What a surprise.
The large majority of GMO crops being grown on Hawaii and in the US are herbicide-tolerant crops that are driving up the use of glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup and a chemical the World Health Organization’s cancer experts classify as “probably carcinogenic to humans.” Well, I never…
Excellent roundup (pardon the expression) of the evil that these men – and perhaps women – do, Jura.
Thanks Reg. I could say a lot more. I’d like to drag Rumsfeld into the searchlight at some point.He’s made fortunes across the table and under it from 9/ 11 Monsanto and he’s doing it right now with helping to kill the cures for covid( HCQ) . This is a man who had the respect of Gerald Ford and George Bush ( Sr and Jr). You could blow torch that bastard for a day and he’d still be dirty
I suggest that more people spend more time convincing farmers to go to more sustainable methods by showing them the evidence of what production levels can be possible.
Fighting behemoths is mighty tough.
Engaging with pragmatic farmers is rather easier, I would have thought.
In Italy where a great deal pf pasta is eaten,and because we have become informed that american and canadian wheat is full of glysophates and other preservatives, many of the leading pasta manufacturers are now using only italian flour.
Bayer has offered to settle the USA class action suit against the recently acquired Monsanto for a purported $10 billion while not admitting to anything regarding wrongdoing or danger of the chemical. Yet we have heard nothing from the EPA as to restricting it. Meanwhile our food is flooded with this crappy carcinogenic toxin. Wheat and oats in North America are loaded with it because most farmers have decided to spray it on their grains to kill them prior to harvesting which makes it cheaper for the machines to process it. Perhaps they should just spray it on humans directly to kill them and skip the grain vector?
A fraud based theft in progress? As the ceo and his accomplices cash out.
The Monsanto “settlement” is hush money.
Look the other way money.
Business as usual money.
~ Gotta love capitalism
Trump’s son was banned from the CIA’s twitter today, and is being portrayed as a victim of censorship by an oppressive system, (his dad) and is being denied his freedom of speech.
At the same time his farther orders the military onto the streets of America to attack political protesters complaining who are about social injustice and race motivated attacks from the police.
The question is…..Who is the real freedom fighters ?
the real ones were silenced and buried..
Interestingly, Bayer has reassembled the Third Reich’s IG Farben that was broken up at the Nuremberg (show) trials.
Bayer’s mistake was to buy Monsanto.
I believe they only did so knowing there was a longer term strategy in place. Gain a solid foothold in europe (and what better place to do that in germany where governments have long done everything to support home grown corporations over the interests of citizens) and you gain a solid foothold on the entire planet. Its all about forming global credibility and networks and if it pans out you have a global monopoly. Just look at how the Covid hysteria has developed globally.
What attracted them to Monsanto ?
As a Mexican living in the UK I was stroke by the synchronicity with which both countries started their fight against obesity and crappy food. As a conspiracy theorist, I immediately sensed that there was something else going on. Someone clearly pushed the button.
Last week the Mexican covid boss declared that the growing number of deaths had nothing to do with his ineptitude or the sorry state of Mexican public health institutions, but with the rates of obesity and diabetes of the Mexican population (which are of course very high and a reason for concern). He called soft drinks poison and brilliantly switched the attention to the poor, who are left without clean water sources or nutritious foods, and are now also responsible for the government´s failures for their drinks choices.
But the fact is that the Mexican official, a John Hopkins graduate, might have some conflict of interest in his crusade to tax f.e. sugary drinks to “save lives in this and other future pandemics”. He has received millions from the Bloomberg foundation to lobby for these kind of policies.
And what has Bloomberg to gain from taxing sugary drinks? Well, he, as main donor of the John Hopkins Centre, who hosted the plandemic simulation, is very likely on board with Gates in ventures like Amyris, a company that produces both the healthiest sugar known to man and a novel anti-malaria drug; and is now also involved in developing the experimental RNA covid vaccine. Or Ginkgo, a company who “uses genetic engineering to design and print new DNA for a variety of organisms — from plants to bacteria — that can then be used for anything from killing antibiotic-resistant germs to producing artificial sweetener and cheaper perfume.”
I don´t think that knowing this will schock any regular visitor of this site, but my heart aches for those two or three persons who dropped their coca-colas (instead of puking them) and went for a jog after seeing Boris launching his new crusade for a healthy lifestyle.
The future looks indeed bleak with cancerigenous fertilisers, synthetic, lab grown foods and fat, cognitive deficient prime ministers setting the example for healthy habits.
Forgot to mention. The trade deal the UK will be signing with the US, will probably be very similar to the North American trade deal which the Mexican president signed recently and which involves adherence to the UPOV 91 act, which grants intellectual property rights to plant breeders – mainly transnational seed corporations – and limits the use and exchange of seeds by producers, who cannot replant the product of their harvest without the permission of the company.
The foundations for a total monopoly of food production.
There are already organisations selling heritage varieties of many crops and the quality of those seeds is outstanding.
Corporations can do nothing to stop such activities as no patents can be filed on such seeds.
People need to stop saying the corporations can stop people using heritage seeds. They cannot.
I am not knowledgeable enough and I certainly hope that you are right. But as I understand, the viability of these organisations is threatened as well. See f.e. here:
etc.
I recommend permaculture as a way of life.
Hi Skeptic, i always see your comments around here, I am also from Mexico and I been wanting to open a Spanish news channel were people could read something other than those convencional propagandist infobae, forbes, televisa and pretty much all of them.
Maybe we could share some ideas? Let me know how I can contact you
GRACIAS
Hola Dropthevaxx,
I wanted to do something like that for a while, especially since there is almost a complete blackout of official information coming out from Mexico.
Escríbeme (te lo pongo en código por si acaso) “que tiene cualidades de apoteosis” (la variante con “t”, en masculino) arroba correo caliente punto com.
O déjame un comentario aquí con tus datos (y por favor responde a este mensaje para saber que escribiste, casi nunca reviso aquel correo.
Saludos
Exactly.
What on earth is he going to advocate for healthy eating.
Often the poorer lot can’t afford to get healthy choices and rely on cheap alternatives such as carbohydrate rich pasta products, GM wheat in cheap white bread, etc.
Thus fuelling insulin crises leading to the popular lifestyle conditions of diabetes, hypertension, esophageal reflux and so on.
One has to become a sleuth to find healthy food from healthy soils and not pay a ransom for it.
To understand how nutrition or lack of it affects our very lives is our priority now in spite of the distraction of invisible viral microbes to confuse the issue.
Food security is fast becoming essential for our survival.
And that is another reason to leave GREAT Britain asap. Unless your dream was to live in America of course.
More like a reason to eff these psychos off! Never thought I’d be faced with a war situation at my late-ish stage. Now it looks like I have to fight for the future of the children, mine included, since most adults seem to have gone over to the covid side, albeit unwittingly.
So be it.
You could of course stay, find a weekly organic vegetable box supplier to ensure that what you eat is free of GMO crops, glyphosate spraying etc etc.
They exist and the market for them is increasing.
If you insist on a weekly shop in a supermarket, then fine, perhaps you should emigrate.
But which country has supermarkets with food in them which have not been sprayed?
Yes , the Middle Class if they choose can afford Organic Products,however the Lower and Homeless Class simply cannot do this.Depends where u sit in the food chain,this applies to Australia, a relatively wealthy country.Personally i can afford to buy healthy food,pure good luck there! Nothing brilliant on my part.!
Incidently 40 yrs ago a drive from Darwin where i live,to Katherine 300km at night would neccesitate the Windscreen to be cleaned before the next trip,the insect carnage was massive,today no problem no insects! the occasional one here and there.
The Top End Ag Industry has grown considerably,so maybe there is a link,perhaps!
Dr Rosemary Mason is doing vital work, and thanks for highlighting it. I just wish we had similar crusaders concerned to show how government advisors, civil servants and even elected representatives are generally in the pocket of corporate interests, especially those of big Pharma. Does anyone here seriously believe that Brits were denied HCQ because officialdom really ‘knows’ it to be dangerous for them? O4 was it because advisors beholden to Big Pharma said so? Let me remind posters that HCQ treatments have been routine and massively successful in many countries, especially in places like Taiwan and Singapore, where fatalities remain in the hundreds despite these nations being very densely-populated. Each patient only costs about $10 to treat. By contrast, Gilead’s Remdesivir, which the MSM and officialdom never fear (nor investigate) at all, and which is now proven to be mostly ineffective and possibly even dangerous, will cost about $3,200 per patient.
‘She argued that Monsanto’s (now Bayer) glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide and Bayer’s clothianidin are largely responsible for the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef and that the use of glyphosate and neonicotinoid insecticides are wiping out wildlife species across the globe.’
This is the kind of hysterical nonsense debunked quite well in Michael Shellenberger’s (a famous 30-year Envionmentalist) new book ‘Apocalypse Never, Why Environmental Alarmism Harms Us All’. He goes into some detail the reasons why Radical Environmentalism has become a dangerous religion and is not in the least ‘Scientific’.
I’m torn; Mason does vital work but also discredits science and those highlighting serious issues with the alarmist, dogmatic claims you describe. She needs to highlight the anti-scientific dogmatism often exhibited by officialdom (eg Chris Whitty’s absurd denialism of the masses of evidence and experts saying HCQ is our best weapon against Wu-flu), not repeat the same mistake herself. Basically, she must be sceptical about her own claims too. As Richard Feynman taught us, science is “belief in the ignorance of experts”. It is the opposite of dogmatic knowledge, which can never change and so never progress.
“…when dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases. ”
― Robert Anton Wilson, 😉
Stephen, have you visited the great barrier reef lately? If you do, i suggest you try some diving and see for yourself the sad destruction of this former world heritage paradise.
Back in 1990, I was a “deer-in-the-headlights” graduate working for Agriculture Canada. During a presentation, at that time, Monsanto was wanting to work together with AgCan using the wheat research department, the WHOLE department, to further the development of “Roundup Ready Wheat”. Monsanto was to invest $9 million for the adventure. The idea alarmed me, not because it was or wasn’t toxic, but for the reason a whole research department was about to be allocated. So… I asked a question.
How much do the taxpayers of Canada fund the Dept. of Agriculture (Ag Can)?
No answer!
My supervisor called me in to his office, yelled at me that I have no business even opening my mouth, and tried to physically assault me, in front of his secretary, which I defended myself quickly and effectively! I put forth a complaint, and subsequently told to, by his super,
“Shut the F**K up! Just go do your f**king job and pay off your student loans!”
I know this is an anecdotal account, but the behaviour of my fellow public servants established a now well founded assertion that GMO was to become just a way of OWNING THE FOOD SUPPLY, as further trade negotiations are proving.
Is “This is the kind of hysterical nonsense” that you are refuting?
@Ernest Judd “Back in 1990, I was a … graduate working for Agriculture Canada.”
Back a century, Farley Mowat recounts a similar tale in “Never Cry Wolf”.
His supervisor told him to go into the wild and prove that wolves caused the declining caribou population. His predecessor had been dismissed for embarrassing the Prime Minister by mentioning the increasing number of gun licences. Mowat was more discreet: he merely wondered why wolves preferred to kill their caribou near hunting lodges.
You may be right to a point,however the Phosphate run off,is known to cause harmful Algal Blooms this is excepted knowledge to the Science Community in Australia,with a few Outliers not accepting this.With those Outliers having Funding/contacts from Ag Fertilizer Corporations.
Then couple this with High Sea Temps ….. the Reef is not in good shape.
I am having trouble understanding this argument. Glyphosate is promoted by the European Union. So, I cannot see how the United Kingdom leaving the European Union presents a danger. By leaving the European Union, the United Kingdom can ban this toxic substance. Moreover, the British parliament is far more open to democratic pressure and accountability than the European Commission.
At least all the European parliament are elected.
The European Parliament does not have the power to initiate or amend legislation; it does not have the power to hold the executive to account. The European Parliament is a pretend parliament designed to give the European Union the verisimilitude of representative democracy, so as to conceal the fact that it is anti-democratic.
Yes the most corrupt in the entire world .the fat slob tried shutting parliament down not long ago, the country is be run by an unelected zealot , cummings, and you talk about democracy, this fat bastard is running brexit on his own with no consideration for anything one big fat lard arse dictator.
The notion that Dominic Cummings is running the country is absurd. Cummings is not even a member of the government. He is merely an advisor; one amongst many.
Is it ? I suppose you think de piffel johnson is running it do you de piffel couldn’t run a bath, cumming does all the grft you must be the only person in the UK who thinks otherwise, why did you think the fat slob didn’t want him to go after his driving sight test
The country is run by the Cabinet. Dominic Cummings is not a member of the Cabinet; he does not make executive decisions.
”A longstanding Eurosceptic who cut his campaigning teeth as a director of the anti-euro Business for Sterling group, Mr Cummings’s other passion is changing the way government operates.”
”In many ways, the government’s agenda has been forged by his ideas and Mr Johnson has relied heavily on his strategic insights into the mood of voters, gathered from focus groups.”
Whereas Boris has done what exactly…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49101464
The BBC engages in propaganda. This is not news.
It’s information.If it’s incorrect, feel free to point out where and why.
It is not factual. It presents opinions as facts, which is a classic tool of the propagandists. And if you have not noticed that the BBC is a propaganda organisation, I suspect I would not be able to persuade you that it is.
I only asked you to point out where it wasn’t factual…
I know the BBC is mainstream and, like all other branches of mainstream, it’s there to push propaganda.But the best way to push propaganda is within real news.That way it gets confused for truth.This, in my opinion, isn’t propaganda.It’s true. But, if Cummings isn’t a eurosceptic and adviser to Johnson then I’ll take it back and then try to figure what the aim of the propaganda is.
The above is not a factual statement. It is an opinion presented as though it is a fact. This is a classic trick of propagandists.
Again opinion masquerading as facts.
I see. So, how do we explain the job description that pays him a nice annual salary as ‘Chief Adviser to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom’ ?. Or his position( held for 7 years) prior to that’ in which he was ‘special adviser to Michael Gove’ ? Or that he was ‘Director of vote leave’ which influenced Cameron to call a referendum which led to Brexit.
Yet to say his passion is changing the way in which the government operates is only opinion you say; propaganda.And to suggest that government decisions have been forged by his influence is also only an opinion; propaganda.
I am left wondering if you know the difference between fact and opinion? I just quoted to you from the quotes you presented, which you had asked where they were not factual, and pointed out that they are statements of opinion. My assertions are facts because the the quotes show that the author was not making empirical assertions. The author has no way of knowing what is in the heart and mind of Dominic Cummings. The author has no way of knowing to what extent (if any) Cummings’ ideas have forged the government’s agenda (apparently one has to be illiterate as well as a propagandist to work at the BBC). As I said, they are not factual statements. They are opinions represented as though they are facts.
I am also wondering why you appear to equate opinion with propaganda? They are not the same thing, at all.
Left wondering or talking in circles..
The quotes i posted were supported by my follow up. That is, his actual job is to advise / shape the PM’s strategies.He gets paid a nice salary to do that.Facts. If his influence and advice shape what the Pm and party do, how is that nor his having an effect on policies and direction ?He was and is a eurosceptic- fact. He was instrumental in Cameron’s decision to call the Brexit referendum.Fact .How is that not his forging the agenda by influencing those who have the power to implement his ideas ? If he wasn’t a eurosceptic and hadn’t suggested Brexit and didn’t influence the way the Tory agenda works through two different leaders in Cameron and Johnson,then the above quotes could be regarded as simply opinions.But facts are facts. You can check facts.
“Cummings is not even a member of the government. He is merely an advisor”
Right.
Like Colonel House, or Rasputin were also ‘advisers’.
I do not live in either Tsarist Russia or the Wilsonian USA. I live in contemporary England, and the constitutional position is as I have stated it.
Maybe posters can agree with Ronald Reagan, who famously said “Government is the problem, not the solution”. Knowing how power corrupts, he sought the smallest, least intrusive kind of government possible. Fewer state employees must mean fewer chances of their corruption and control by those wanting to exploit and/or control the demos. Unfortunately, most governments continue to grow in size and power, and we pay more and more for them, both politically and literally. Brexit can be seen as a popular reaction to all that.
While I agree those that govern least govern best. Mr Reagan was already senile and unfit to govern when he read that off of a teleprompter in the 1980s. His henchmen immediately set to looting the treasury thereafter. Biden will be the new Reagan?
Have any memorable Lionel Stander quotes. At least Stander was not a no talent brown nosing studio hack scabbie.
I think you’ll find that when the current licence expires in 2023 I believe, Europe won’t be renewing it. France has already gone some way towards banning it. If you think the British parliament is more open to democratic pressure than corporate lobbyists, the NFU and DEFRA, you are sadly mistaken.
I find it interesting that you know the future. Perhaps, you would care to tell me how you know that the European Commission is not going to renew the licence?
I’m not an oracle, I just keep abreast with the news and do internet searches, something you could have done yourself. It is no secret that European opinion is widely against renewing the glyphosphate. However, Europe aside, the NFU claims that a ban on glyphosphate would cost the economy £900,000,000. Given we are also currently crawling to America for a trade deal we don’t really need, I think it safe to assume glyphosphate will be with us for some time to come.
I’m not pro-EU by the way.
European opinion was against glyphosate before the European Commission renewed the licence last time. The Commission preferred the interests of Bayer to the expressed concerns of the people.
From what i can gather, It’s being ‘phased out’ in Europe. Germany have already banned it, Italy and France are following.It can’t be done by rubber stamp but has to be a gradual reduction of use for some ridiculous reason.It’s presence in weedkiller is the main argument being raged.In the UK, it’s a ‘cheap and cheerful’ way to get things done and not have to employ extra workers such as farm labourers ( God forbid we lessen the unemployment lines).
It’s also being found in cereals, snacks and things like Soya and rapeseed oil.It’s simply a matter of whether or not our great leader wants to sell our health out in exchange for a large brown envelope containing a big cheque and a new diet sheet.
Where did you “gather” this information that it is being phased out?
I ‘gathered’ it here :
https://www.politico.eu/article/monsanto-glyphosate-pesticide-is-here-to-stay-in-eu-at-least-for-now/#:~:text=Monsanto's%20glyphosate%2Dbased%20weedkiller%20will,in%20damages%20for%20causing%20cancer.
and here :
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-set-to-ban-glyphosate-from-end-of-2023/:~:text=Use%20of%20glyphosate%20will%20be,from%20Environment%20Minister%20Svenja%20Schulze.
I am at a loss to see how a reading of your first link led you to gather that glyphosate is being phased out by the European Union.
I cannot access your second link but it clearly states that Germany is set of ban the herbicide from the end of 2023; not that it has, which is much more likely as the European Union licence prevents member states from banning it.
”I am at a loss to see how a reading of your first link led you to gather that glyphosate is being phased out by the European Union.”
As I said, i gather the ban is close or, at least likely.I didn’t suggest it was already in place or written in stone. I looked at how the votes had panned out and how the law suits had built up against the perpetrators.
The first sentence reads :
” Glyphosate is here to stay in EU — at least for now ”
It goes on…
” Mognsanto’s glyphosate-based weedkiller will be used in Europe for years to come, legal experts and campaigners say, despite a U.S. court ruling the company should pay $289 million in damages for causin cancer….The EU last year renewed use of the controversial weedkiller for another five years after a yearslong political debate over its safety and impact on the environment. That means Europe will have to wait until the end of 2022 at the earliest before making any attempt to ban the substance outright.”
The article is from 2018.
” In November of 2017, EU member states narrowly voted to relicense glyphosate for a period of five years. The vote was not without controversy; German Agriculture Minister Christian Schmidt (CSU) entered a ‘yes’ vote for his country without consulting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) on the matter. His unilateral vote disregarded Germany’s Environment Minister, who had instructed Schmidt to abstain from voting. With Germany’s vote, the measure narrowly passed and glyphosate received a new license.”
It seems that enough politicians and human beings support the ban.Whether or not leaders and other billionaires do is the problem.
Like i said, I gather it’s being phased out. I’m not saying it has been or that it’s written in stone. But, apart from the articles to which I’ve linked, the indications are all pointing toward a complete EU ban rather than only Germany.
https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tort-law/monsanto-roundup-lawsuit/where-is-glyphosate-banned/#:~:text=As%20for%20the%20whole%20of,favor%20of%20a%20glyphosate%20ban.
Glyphosate isn’t banned in any European Union member state (notwithstanding your links). And the reason for this is the European Commission decided that it can be used in the European Union.
bayer nazi
what does israel have to say on bayers zyclon b
monsanto agent ornage vietnam
b i s bank is the worlds most important bank set up by hitlers banker
ashkanazi
nazi
hitlers minted gold coin
star of david one side
swastika the other
celebrate the transfer agreement
during the battle of britain spitfire flew using rokerfella leaded fuel technology standard oil
the luftwaffa used standard oil of america technology for the fight
what david irving will not talk about is all sides russia uk and usa where funded by the city of london and new york.
the bankers at the b i s swiss all had a great war
montogue norman the head of the bank of england purchased much stolen nazi gold
all a satanick sham
Quotes
” What would have happened if millions of American and British people, struggling with coupons and lines at the gas stations, had learned that in 1942 Standard Oil of New Jersey [part of the Rockefeller empire] managers shipped the enemy’s fuel through neutral Switzerland and that the enemy was shipping Allied fuel? Suppose the public had discovered that the Chase Bank in Nazi-occupied Paris after Pearl Harbor was doing millions of dollars’ worth of business with the enemy with the full knowledge of the head office in Manhattan [the Rockefeller family among others? Or that Ford trucks were being built for the German occupation troops in France with authorization from Dearbom, Michigan? Or that Colonel Sosthenes Behn, the head of the international American telephone conglomerate ITT, flew from New York to Madrid to Berne during the war to help improve Hitler’s communications systems and improve the robot bombs that devastated London? Or that ITT built the FockeWulfs that dropped bombs on British and American troops? Or that crucial ball bearings were shipped to Nazi-associated customers in Latin America with the collusion of the vice-chairman of the U.S. War Production Board in partnership with Goering’s cousin in Philadelphia when American forces were desperately short of them? Or that such arrangements were known about in Washington and either sanctioned or deliberately ignored?”
trading with the enemy charles higham
http://whale.to/c/trading_with_the_enemy.html
Many thought the mass-murdering Nazis and communists were good and right, and still do. Conversely, some view all Jews or infidels or Muslims or capitalists as eternally evil. Both camps mistakenly treat individuals as sharing and representing the good or evil of their respective groups, and that is morally blind.
i did not mention jews
ashkanazi are khazars who self identify as jews
i mentioned satanick central bankers all working for the goals
the down voters defend
was standard oil of usa coal to fuel technology used by hitlers army
even the color footage of hitler was not made by agfa germany but
kodak kodachrome from rochester new york
bayer purchased monsanto for 66 billion dollars
more satanic kaballa
charles highams book is a stunner yes sir
Charles Higham can’t be trusted to write a coloring book. I read his book on Orson Welles. He pulls stuff from out of arse. Even admits it.
eustace mullins
anthony c sutton
major raceys diaries
douglas reed
joey c
why not read the book it is great mate
as for orson welles he was a ghost a phantom f for fake is his story
he had many secrets and was the master of story telling and mis en scene.
An Expose of the Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949 TRADING WITH THE ENEMY Charles Higham
For almost forty years the facts behind this extraordinary true story of Nazi-America nwartime business relations have been buriedin government files. Now at last Charles Higham, drawing his account from thousands of documents just released under the Freedom of Information Act, has given us a full-scale picture of the American business men who dealt with the Nazis right through World War II. Among those who traded on both sidesof the war were certain executives of StandardOil of New Jersey, the Chase Bank, the TexasCompany, ITT, Ford, and Sterling Products.And helping them with their dealings weresuch government officials as a secretary ofcommerce, an assistant secretary of state,and ambassadors to France and Great Britain. The Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, was Nazi-controlled but presided over by an American, even in 1944. At one of its yearly meetings, the bank’spresident sat down with his German, Japa-nese, Italian, British, and American executivestaff to discuss shipments of 378 million dol-lars in gold sent to the bank by the Nazi gov-ernment for use by its leaders after the war.This was gold looted from the banks ofAustria, Belgium, and Czechoslovakia.
Standard Oil of New Jersey executives shipped the Nazis oil through Switzerland while Alliedforces endured restrictions of supplies and shortages abounded. Ford Motor Company trucks were built for Nazi troops with authorization from Ford directors in the U.S. The chairman of ITT supplied much of Hitler’s communications system. The list of those who chose Business as Usual — even when the business was with their country’s enemy — is long and shocking.
Well why am.i not shocked.
This is just another front in a broad front assault, the object to overwhelm and achieve the objectives before any opposition can even be mobilised. Then it’s just a fait accompli the new normal
.
1. Incorporation must be ended except in specific circumstances. Freedoms come with responsibilities. When corporations acquired the rights of the individual in law, that came with the shared responsibilities of the individual: to pay taxes, act morally and do no harm to others.
2. The same should apply to Non-Profits. Tax-exempt foundations should be recognized as the twin arm of the tax-avoiding corporation when they serve the same corporate interests. The current poster child, the BMGF, is a clear example of this – its activities profit the investments of the supposed “philanthropists”.
3. Many charities are a front for private hunting grounds and private nature reserves. Billionaires aim to corral the population into high-density cities while they live in pristine nature. No! Apply the same logic. There is a limit to how much land a private individual or individuals require.
4. Green living means nothing unless it is available to all. Carbon trading and green offsets are a fraud. Reduce your own pollution. Don’t pretend to pay someone else to reduce theirs. Sustainable means nothing unless it means supporting the population on an equitable basis.
5. Climate change needs to be recognized as a meaningless tautology and the focus switched to pollution.
Now you know why the public is propagandized over Climate Change and not Pollution. The Polluters are profiting. They have no interest in Green Agriculture. While organic farming may work on a farm-by-farm basis the evidence of Bayer (Monsanto) is that “green” is a fig leaf at the level of big agriculture.
Our food, water and air is being poisoned. Talk about recycling and “green this and that” is simply blather for the fools to swallow with their toxin-tainted food.
The only way to change that is to hold the poisoners and the polluters accountable.
Yup. ‘Global warming’ is green-washing.
I’d have to agree with most of your comment. Especially this: > “The only way to change that is to hold the poisoners and the polluters accountable.”
Whilst corporate capitalism is plainly destructive to anything resembling social justice, it’s not “corporations” that apply manufactured poisons to farm lands.
Farmers are idiots who believe they can apply herbicides, pesticides, and industrial waste to farmlands, yet the produce will be perfectly safe for human consumption. Only an idiot would believe this is even possible… ALL known pollutants bio-accumulate. Hello? Anybody home?
Why are they granted exemption of legal accountability when they are the end users of products such as glyphosate?
ALL known pollutants bio-accumulate.
Er, no they don’t. Some may do, but others break down.
This is what happens to glyphosate:
“Glyphosate is readily degraded by soil microbes … [however] glyphosate does have the potential to contaminate surface waters due to its aquatic use patterns and through erosion, as it adsorbs to colloidal soil particles suspended in runoff”
Source: wikipedia.
So glyphosate is broken down in the soil by bacteria, but can persist as it sticks to some types of soil.
Wikipedia is one of the biggest manufacturers of false information to whitewash the gangster corporate cartels. Very few things on Wikipedia can be trusted these days, for there are thousands of activists, typing daily to ensure that no one adds any inconvenient truth to the tainted liturgies they filled the site with.
Yes, I know about wikipedia. Yes, there are problems with it. But at least I state my sources so you can make your own mind up.
The article (which you have clearly not bothered to read) does not promote glyphosate. It struck me as quite balanced.
I actually “bothered” to read it. Just don’t like the way it was put together (like all things controversial in Wikipedia). Looks like a Snopes “fact-check”.
Is that a joke? You use Wikipedia to fact check?
Paul, I don’t seem to be able to vote for your comment
Just because corporations profit from something does not in itself render all attendant issues irrelevant. The profits from a Green New Deal do not make climate crisis a hoax. It’s patently absurd to suppose the Earth has not warmed significantly since the Industrial Revolution began.
Taking just one aspect of climate into consideration, as the ozone layer becomes steadily more depleted – due primarily to aerosol dispersion – the temperature will rise and life itself become more tenuous due to increased UV-C radiation reaching the ground, killing microbes in the soil and thus lessening food production.
People will always find a way to profit from catastrophe. Just because hospitals profit from treating gunshot victims does not mean the bullets are fake.
Tony Heller’s Real Climate Science blog has historical raw data charts and reproductions of old newspaper reports. The facts speak for themselves.
Howard, what is the current average global temperature? What was the average global temperature a hundred years ago?
The average global temperature, unfortunately, is usually given in terms of its increase; and even that is misleading since “average” can never allow for the kinds of variations that truly affect global climate.
For instance, a June 23, 2020 Washington Post article notes a 100 degree F (38 C) temperature in Siberia on June 20, 2020 – an all time high Arctic temperature. Something like this is far more significant than a global average temperature. This is especially true because of the methane deposits in the permafrost.
The entire Arctic and extreme Northern latitudes are warming much faster than the rest of the planet.
Let me update my reply by answering your inquiry literally. The baseline temperature used for comparison (1850-1900) was 13.8 C (56.84 F). The best estimate of the current global temperature is 14.6 C (58.28 F).
As I noted, it’s difficult to find the baseline temperature since that particular statistic is nearly always given in the amount of increase. What really held me up though was converting celsius to farenheit – living in the US, we still do not use celsius primarily.
Oh dear, even according the the promoters of global warming alarmism. The position over the past hundred years is: a hundred years ago it was just below 14C; there was a slight warming trend to 1940, when it was just over 14C; there was then a slight cooling trend to 1975 when it was just below 14C; there followed a slight warming trend to 1998, when it was just over 14C; since when it has been flat. The point of this is in all that time there has been a constant increase in carbon dioxide emissions. Yet the average temperature has risen and fallen and risen and flat-lined. There is no correlation between CO2 emissions and average global temperature, and the absence of correlation shows the global warming hypothesis to be flawed.
You overlook one tiny thing. It’s easy to overlook – lots of people do. In case you hadn’t heard of it, it’s called The Oceans. Seawater can absorb and retain many times as much heat as the atmosphere. And because it can, those elusive Oceans can carry immense volumes of heat before they register a demonstrable increase in overall temperature.
But they can only hold so much heat before the CO2 and other emissions are no longer pulled from the atmosphere – and basically that’s what’s happening now. Which is why both seawater and atmospheric temperatures are both rising – and have steadily risen for at least the past decade.
Creating the phenomenon of climate change was useful. Ancient history can be brought up as in ‘the big freeze’ or ‘the great floods’ to give it all credence. When the truth of the matter, as you say, is that the air and the atmosphere is thick with poison that’s damaging the climate and the oxygen. That poison didn’t evolve, it was created and used as a money maker. Now it’s being used to portray the evil,nihilistic psychopaths as superheroes willing to throw their ‘philanthropic’ millions at any amount of solutions. Money is no object for these selfless crusaders who only want to save us ( again).Unfortunately, the powers that be are in on it. They can own shares.They can rubber stamp anything if the money slides under the table, like Obama did with the HR 933- the ‘Monsanto Protection’ act. So, shown the damage that poisons had done and was capable of doing, he gave it a pat on the back. Like he did with water boarding( sorry, ‘enhanced interrogation’ to give it his re-brand)
Read ‘Climate. A new story’ by Charles Eisenstein. Speaks beautifully to what you describe. He offers the work as a gift ( free on his website) along with his other writing.
Thanks for the link. Eisenstein makes the point eloquently but it is both instructive and depressing:
How are people so easily misled that they will ignore the present destruction? The poisoning of rivers and water supplies; wiping out of insects; the fact that the birds don’t sing as they used to…
How can nobody notice where the birds have gone?
Yet they get swept up in theories about what the climate and sea level might do in 100 years, if those theories are even correct, which is mightily disputed.
This is manipulation of belief systems. Something like the hijacking of religion.
The “opposition”, the climate skeptics, help keep the focus on climate change by endlessly debating its terms of reference – the validity of this or that metric. They stop us from seeing that the whole Climate Change Narrative distracts us from the here and now of pollution, poisons and the corporations that profit from them.
Laugh at religion all you like but someone brought up to know the child’s favourite saint, Francis of Assisi, would never overlook the lives of animals and would immediately see that something is very wrong.
For people to ignore what is happening to the Earth, its land, rivers and seas and the animals inhabitants… their mind has to have been reconfigured.
I think of a book I read recently, The Memory Police, by Yōko Ogawa (1994).
One religion has to have been zeroed out and replaced with a new religion: scientism – excessive trust in the rituals and powers of scientists and humans. And then we can sell them any version of science that suits the vested interests.
If climate changes, don’t forget that science does, too.
And there’s no air pollution or chemical contamination of the water table in EU Italy?
This is pro EU shillery. I’m against glyphosates, GMOs, toxic pesticides and chemicals as much as anyone else, but to suggest the EU actually cares is disingenuous.
‘What’s particularly troublesome is particle pollution that pervades Italy, and accounts for breathing and heart problems, causing a whopping 9% of deaths of Italians over the age of 30. … In Northern Italy, including big cities like Milan and Turin, has some of the worst pollution in all of Europe.’
So true. Ultimately, the EU is under the control of the exact same globalists and corporations as the US. The EU and the US, therefore, are opposed; rather, they are oppo-sames.
“pollution that pervades Italy, and accounts for breathing and heart problems”
Which is why they had to invent a fake ‘virus’ (in Wuhan, too) to blame.
We need to get over the EU bad / EU good distraction. Pollution, pesticides, poison don’t recognise borders. We’re all drowning here and too many people are just arguing over the colour of the water. We are in this mess because those we trusted to make our food, took our money and lied; those who we trusted to monitor those who make our food, took our money and lied; and those who write the laws that are meant to protect us, took our money and lied. It wouldn’t matter what any of these people said or did if we didn’t keep them afloat by buy their lies and their products
When I first heard about Bayer intending to buy Monsanto a while back, I wrote a few comments in the Guardian business section, stating that as soon as the deal was done the US ‘justice’ system will open the flood gates to legal claims against Monsanto and demand massive compensation, in the billions.
After the deal was done, my prediction came true and I found myself watching repeated adverts on YouTube calling any American who had used Monsanto’s Roundup and also had cancer to call in and join a class action against Monsanto.
This is the same drumming up of ‘victims’ we saw in the BP oil spill. When calls when out to all businesses in the Mexican gulf area to immediately make a claim. All claims were immediately approved by American judges of course regardless of validity.
The campaign against Monsanto culminated (since overturned) in an award of $2 billion to one cancer sufferer, whose illness was attributed to Monsanto’s Roundup, in a jury trial, where the threshold of proof is extremely low.
Bayer offers almost a bottomless pit of money for the US to extort and they will ultimately attempt to get control of the company, like they succeeded in doing with BP.
The US justice system extracted $65 billion from BP, deposed the British head and put an America CEO in charge. For the failure of a US subcontractor, Halliburton.
They have also extorted 30 billion from VW for the ‘emissions scandal’, which I have no doubt the US regulators passed as acceptable for years, and in the banking sector extracted 27 billion from RBS for crimes facilitated by the US banking system and will no doubt extract similar amounts from Bayer.
The US is a criminal enterprise that uses a conspiracy of Corporate, Judicial and CIA to extort trillions from overseas companies. There have now been so many examples it is obvious pattern but yet you’ll see not a word in the press.
As Putin once said to Macron; ‘I don’t know why you pay the fines’, referring to BNP’s multi billion dollar fine to the US ‘justice’ system. Of course there is no reason to pay money to a protection racket but if you don’t, then there will be consequences, which the victim must be prepared to stomach. They may burn down your precious national monuments, murder people in a concert in your country and call it terrorism, or slap a 20% tariff on all your exports. Mafia, psychopaths are outside the law and outside any notion of conscience.
In my view, whoever arranged the take over of Monsanto in Bayer, needs to be arrested for treason against Germany. Monsanto has been a poison challis for years and only an idiot or a threatened man would take on all that liability, and they haven’t even started compensation for GMO’s.
This article, knowingly or not, is actually adding to the campaign to extort vast amounts of European wealth by the USA, so thanks for helping to make us all that little bit poorer and helping the US, a criminal state, loot our most successful Corporations.
Monsanto is a monster because US regulators let them be. It is so easy to jump on the bandwagon of anti-Corporate campaigning but ultimately Corporations will do what states let them do, so our energy should always be directed at the regulators, not the Corporations.
The result of Bayer’s purchase of Monsanto will be higher price drugs, less tax revenues, less sponsorship of the arts and less research by Bayer, as its hard won profits flow to the US.
Excellent post connecting many of the dots good work.
‘Mah-Cuntory-baa-kkk-BrexShittery’
Feeling confident it’s all done and dusted eh? And can finally be truthfully addressed? Must be great to be released from suicide watch!
I look forward to Kits version.
Farmers wouldnt need such rubbish if they hadnt removed the sites of all the beneficial insects…..There are plenty of organic pesticides such as spinosad but its all about cheap cheap cheap.
Yes I’m very concerned about our insects and spiders and all the crawly things that go missing with the pesticides.
Didn’t know there were organic pesticides.
Yes, there are specific organic pesticides that are good at targetting only nasties if used with precution. for example neem oil, spinsod and pyrethrum (Chrysanthemum). spray your plants on an evening when the bees have gone home and you are all good. Neem and spinosad also work when fed to the plants in the root zone(although not as quickly). Best thing is that you can harvest and eat the same day if you wanted. All these chemicals tend to have up to 90 days before they say it is safe to eat the plant, and some of them people give to their pets imidacloprid, as flea treatment…..nasty stuff…bayer et al have managed to convinced half the world to put this rubbish into their dogs and cats etc.
Thanks for the info.
I had used Pyrethrum in the past, but prefer to hand-search and dispose of my greedy boarders to other patches. Never sure of the toxicity of certain agents so tend to let the less damaging visitors have a feed before pupating. I’d make a very hard working farmer I think, because it seems to me that just like antibiotics, the pesticides wipe out more than is fair and necessary.
“Wilding”, excellent book, halfway through it I am reading how simply stopping weedkiller and insecticides brought back wild flowers and insects which brought back rare birds, such as turtledoves and nightingales, which are no longer heard in most parts of the UK — even better than if these conservationists had planned it.
Nice, is that the one by Isabella Tree?It looks like it could be a godo book that. Teaming with Microbes by Jeff Lowenfells and the other 2 books in the same series taught me almost everything I know about organic growing.
Ælfræd: “is that the one by Isabella Tree?”
Yes, the aptly named Ms.Tree. I rate her book among the great Victorian novels of Country Life: right up there with Thomas Hardy and George Eliot. And what’s more, Tree is numerate; so important when telling a not-so-everyday story of 21st century country folk.
Teaming with Microbes: sounds like a nice name for the Pasteur Legacy. And to acknowledge the long line of genius country folk and monks who brought us bread, beer, kvass, wine, yoghurt, cheese and so many other good things of nano-Life.
haha sounds good I will read it as soon as I have finished Rupert Sheldrakes latest book, taking me ages because Im doing a lot of DIY at the moment. Bread is my treat, every few weeks it makes me very fat if I eat it regularly! 🙁 *fresh french bread + thick creamy butter = my weakness* I’ve not read Thomas Hardy since school – I’m a bit of a heathen when it comes to fiction really…I should broaden my horizons.
Thanks God, the first “India” free article by Todd in ages (forever?).
For once some another nation gets a bucket of Green Apocalypse/Doom over its head.
Thanks for the warning Anton. We should not take our eyes off that “other” nation!
These chaps, right?
https://dissidentvoice.org/2020/07/feeding-a-bedouin-roy-oz-and-israels-outrageous-racism/
Not sure if the brexit BS is news worthy or timely.
All (chemical) multinational corporations are criminal.Big pharma are criminals they lie cheat and kill people with FDA approved unsafe, ineffective drugs and vaccinations for profit.
The fact that these Big bankster owned multinationals have power over the Bankster’s puppet govts is news worthy.
The Big Banksters Govts are criminal, and they do not ever work in the people’s interests.
https://thefreedomarticles.com/5g-induces-coronaviruses-study-shows-millimeter-wave-dna-influence/
Oops! The National Library of Medicine Has withdrawn that paper.
Still available on your link. Thanks.
The author does not know what they are talking about.”Charged electron? Never heard of it.An electron already has a charge which is negative.They must have missed their science lesson out when at school.There is real research on the biological effects of microwaves which have been around for decades.You need to look for the non-linear effects on neurons.