Anonymous Freedom Information: Illuminati NWO GM Financial Bankers Investors FBI Wants “Food Activists” Prosecuted as Terrorists

FBI SPY Citizens

FBI FEDERAL BUREAU INVESTIGATION TURNED FEDERAL BUSINESS INCREMATION CORPORATE MAFIA INFORMATION
CITIZENS INCRIMINATION FEDERATION CORPORATIONS GREED IMPOSER

A recent Freedom of Information Act request has revealed that the FBI wants what it calls “food activists” prosecuted as terrorists, perhaps because nothing could more terrifying than exposing where our so-called food comes from and how it is manufactured.


BOYCOTT WARREN BUFETT MC DONALDS COCA COLA

Most Americans don’t really care where their food comes from or how it is made. All that matters is that it’s cheap and tastes good.


Unfortunately for the food industry, not everyone is that stupid anymore. There is a growing desire to eat food that is healthy and produced in a cruel-free, sustainable way, stemming in part from the efforts of the food activists who have revealed the brutal, unnatural way our food is manufactured.

Warren Buffett investments and owned companies,
great way to visualize the power of Berkshire Hathaway.

Boycott Mc Donalds

Thus, the FBI wants them classified as terrorists.

Potential Terrorrists

In the the brave new world of 21st century America, terrorism has evolved to mean anything that threatens the status quo or challenges the standings or profits of the corporate entities that have reduced our government agencies to the status of a pawns.

Think about it for a second: if you take a picture of a chicken suffering in tiny, filthy cage, the FBI wants you considered a terrorist, especially if your picture causes ‘economic loss’. Nothing terrifies a corporation more than economic loss.

Why, people may see that photo, have a crisis of conscience, and spend their dollars elsewhere, thereby reducing the power of animal-torturing corporations. Such a thing should only happen in a free market, not in America.

The Freedom of Information request comes just as the Center for Constitutional Rights has filed a lawsuit challenging the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA).


The AETA is a law designed to to suppress activism and speech regarding the industries which brutalize animals with horrific conditions and/or pump them full of chemicals and drugs. Activists who expose such things very likely would cause economic loss due to the fact that many people would not eat what they eat if they actually knew what they were eating. Therefore, it is vitally important that they never find out.

Dont Drink NAZI COKE Coca Cola

Similar repressive laws are being introduced throughout the emerging fascist state that is America in the 21st century. In Florida for example, an ‘Ag Gag’ law has been introduced that would define taking pictures of the way corporations manufacture food as ‘terrorism’. Nothing says “We have something to hide” like saying “You are a terrorist if you take pictures of it.”

Anyway, Happy New Year and have another slice of corporate ham.

—– Sorce Information credits:
Michael Kindt on Cagle post

Original Title: "Open Up and Say “Ahh”

Michael Kindt is writer living in South Dakota whose work has appeared in College Times, Midwest Lit Review and in the poetry anthology “It’s Dark & Scary In Here.” He’s the author of “Early Onset of Night, Volume One” and blogs at Early-Onset-of-Night.tumblr.com. Twitter: @MichaelKindt

Revolution Times Take The Square: GM Study You’re Eating Insecticide

GMO Study: You’re Eating Insecticide…

Most Europeans and Americans remain blissfully unaware (or don’t care) they are eating genetically-modified (GM) poison organisms every day. Passivity and blind faith in the EU, USDA, FDA and EPA have largely contributed to this attitude. Hope that will change now that a new study reveals an insecticide produced in GM corn actually gets absorbed into the human body.

If you haven’t been paying attention to your food lately, biotechnology giants such as Monsanto thank you for that. Because behind your back, they’ve succeeded in replacing 86% of US corn with their patented insecticide-producing “frankencorn”.

The industry name for this is “Bt corn” and the insecticide is actually produced inside the plant, so it is impossible to wash it off. This is accomplished by inserting genes from the bacteria Bacillus Thuringiensis into the corn.

Up until now, scientists and multinational corporations such as Monsanto and DuPont have spent billions in lobbying, campaign donations and “testing” in an attempt to convince world governments that GMOs are safe. In the case of Bt corn, they stated the insecticide produced within the corn posed no danger to human health because it was broken down in the digestive system.

Despite corporate assurances, many have been skeptical. Non-GMO advocates such as Jeffrey Smith from The Institute For Responsible Technology and the Organic Consumers Association have long been concerned about the potential impact this Bt toxin could have on human health.

Scientists from the University of Sherbrooke, Canada, proved the validity of these concerns when they detected the insecticidal protein, Cry1Ab, circulating in the blood of both pregnant and non-pregnant women. They also detected the toxin in fetal blood, suggesting that the toxin can be passed on to the fetus. The research paper has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in the journal Reproductive Toxicology.

Neither the women studied or their spouses worked in agriculture. All reported to be consuming a typical Canadian diet that is virtually identical to the American diet.

“Generated data will help regulatory agencies responsible for the protection of human health to make better decisions”, said researchers Aziz Aris and Samuel Leblanc.

Unfortunately, I don’t feel that polititians will pay attention to this research. The revolving door is growing exponentially and the foxes have taken up residence in the hen house.

Are you pissed? You should be. We’ve let corporate interests turn us into poison-fed lab rats. It doesn’t end at corn either. 93% of both soy and canola are also genetically-modified. On top of that, Monsanto has acres of laboratories containing new mutant species awaiting to slip into your pantry. You’re probably wearing some of their Bt cotton right now. It comprises 93% of US cotton and 68% of Chinese cotton.

Perhaps you’ve heard of the uproar around Bt brinjal, a GM variety of eggplant, in India. When it was approved in 2009, a country-wide protest began and the Indian government applied a moratorium on its release.

Meanwhile, in all World: Europe, Africa, America, Asia and US, GMO crops are getting approved left and right and most people still don’t even know what “GMO” even means.

Want to do something about it? We can’t rely on our regulatory agencies to do it for us and we possess more power than we think. It won’t take much to reach the tipping point of consumer rejection and get these “frankenfoods” out of our lives. Information spreads like wildfire these days with Facebook, Twitter and email. Tell your family and friends and boycote this products, the world’s food supply depends on it! Now that you know, it’s your responsibility to pass it on.

Health Danger Awareness Alert: GM Crops Toxin Found in Human Blood

Study reveals Toxin from GM crops found in human blood

Fresh doubts have arisen about the safety of genetically modified crops, with a new study reporting presence of Bt toxin [The consumption of genetically modified brinjal can make you sick, damage Liver and Kidney. If eaten regularly, it can adversely hit the immune response of the body, cause liver damage and lead to reproductive disorders. This has emerged from toxicity studies done by Mahyco in rats fed on Bt brinjal for up to 90 days, but the company either suppressed these facts or misrepresented them while submitting data to the regulator - the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC).], used widely in GM crops, in human blood for the first time.

Genetically modified crops include genes extracted from bacteria to make them resistant to pest attacks.

These genes make crops toxic to pests but are claimed to pose no danger to the environment and human health.

Till now, scientists and multinational corporations promoting GM crops have maintained that Bt toxin poses no danger to human health as the protein breaks down in the human gut. But the presence of this toxin in human blood shows that this does not happen.

Scientists from the University of Sherbrooke, Canada, have detected the insecticidal protein, Cry1Ab, circulating in the blood of pregnant as well as non-pregnant women.

They have also detected the toxin in fetal blood, implying it could pass on to the next generation. The research paper has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in the journal Reproductive Toxicology. The study covered 30 pregnant women and 39 women who had come for tubectomy at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS) in Quebec.

None of them had worked or lived with a spouse working in contact with pesticides.
They were all consuming typical Canadian diet that included GM foods such as soybeans, corn and potatoes. Blood samples were taken before delivery for pregnant women and at tubal ligation for non-pregnant women. Umbilical cord blood sampling was done after birth.

Cry1Ab toxin was detected in 93 per cent and 80 per cent of maternal and fetal blood samples, respectively and in 69 per cent of tested blood samples from non-pregnant women. Earlier studies had found trace amounts of the Cry1Ab toxin in gastrointestinal contents of livestock fed on GM corn. This gave rise to fears that the toxins may not be effectively eliminated in humans and there may be a high risk of exposure through consumption of contaminated meat.

"Generated data will help regulatory agencies responsible for the protection of human health to make better decisions", noted researchers Aziz Aris and Samuel Leblanc.

Given the potential toxicity of these environmental pollutants and the fragility of the foetus, more studies are needed, particularly those using the placental transfer approach, they added Experts have warned of serious implications for India. Cottonseed oil is made from seeds of genetically modified cotton and thus Bt toxin may have already entered the food chain in India.
"Indian regulators should be immediately called for detailed toxicological studies to know the extent of contamination of the human blood with Bt toxins coming from cottonseed oil, and also ascertain its long term health impacts," said Devinder Sharma, an anti-GM activist.

Health Danger Awareness: GM Food Damage Liver and Kidneys

GM food can damage liver and kidneys


A new study raises questions about the safety of genetically modified crops for human consumption, saying it could cause liver and kidney damage.

According to the study, animals fed on three strains of genetically modified maize created by the US biotech firm Monsanto suffered signs of organ damage after just three months.

This assumes significance as the technology for Bt brinjal--cleared by Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), India's biotech regulatory body for human consumption--has also been supplied by Monsanto. The fate of the new brinjal variety will be known only after the current round of public consultations gets over. Environment minister Jairam Ramesh is holding the consultation process, as he feels that the clearance involved "crucial issues of human safety". The findings only came to light after Monsanto was forced to publish its raw data on safety tests by anti- GM campaigners. They add to the evidence that GM crops may damage health as well as be harmful to the environment. The figures released by Monsanto were examined by Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen.

Seralini is professor of chemistry and molecular biology at the French university.

Seralini has called for more studies to check for long-term organ damage. "What we've shown is clearly not proof of toxicity, but signs of toxicity," he told New Scientist magazine.
"I'm sure there's no acute toxicity but who's to say there are no chronic effects?" The experiments were carried out by Monsanto researchers on three strains of GM maize.
Two of the varieties contained genes for the Bt protein while a third was genetically modified to be resistant to the weedkiller glyphosate.
Monsanto only released the raw data after a legal challenge from Greenpeace. Seralini concluded that rats which ate the GM maize had "statistically significant" signs of liver and kidney damage as compared to rats given a non-GM diet.

Female rats fed one of the strains also had higher blood sugar levels and raised levels of fatty substances caused triglycerides, Seralini reported in the International Journal of Microbiology. The analysis concluded, "These substances have never before been an integral part of the human or animal diet and therefore their health consequences for those who consume them, especially over long time periods are currently unknown." Monsanto claimed the analysis of its data was "based on faulty analytical methods and reasoning, and does not call into question the safety findings for these products." Similar fears have been raised about human safety and the environmental fallout of Bt brinjal, promoted by Monsanto and the Maharashtra-based Mahyco, which contains genes of the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). The bacterium produces certain proteins that kill insect larvae of bollworm, a major cotton pest, and other insects.
The Bt genes responsible for the toxic protein can be transferred into cotton, soya, corn or brinjal--making them produce their own natural pesticides.
Several genetically modified food crops are awaiting test reports and approval in India.
Several Indian states have already rejected the new crops and decided to go GM- free. The latest to join this list is Karnataka.

While rejecting the new variety, chief minister B.S. Yeddyurappa pointed out that "the state is the fifth largest producer of brinjal in the country. We are growing more than 40 varieties of the vegetable. We will not allow anything that may put our farmers in a difficult spot". He acknowledged the concerns of the farmers and consumers and said he would have a discussion with experts and farmers community in this regard.
The issue has also divided the central government. Science minister Prithviraj Chavan has said the genetically altered brinjal--which contains an antibiotic gene--was safe for human consumption. Agriculture minister Sharad Pawar feels the decision of the GEAC is final, while Ramesh says the final decision on the approval given by the genetic engineering regulatory body lies with the government.

While genetically modified corn--which has been found to be toxic--may not have reached Indian shores, many Indians may already be eating the controversial corn through a variety of imported products made out of GM corn. Chips made out of corn are being imported regularly into India by American manufactures via dealers in Singapore and Taiwan.
In June last year, the GEAC was accused of allowing the sale of imported chips with suspect GM material without any testing.

An import consignment of Doritos, a chips brand owned by PepsiCo, was detained by Customs authorities at Nhava Sheva port in Mumbai as it was found to contain genetically modified corn in 2008 as well. Following this, the importer wrote to the GEAC seeking a 'no objection certificate'. The GEAC cleared the consignment based on an undertaking given by the company that the chips did not contain GM corn.

Instead of getting the chips samples tested or going by results of earlier testing, the GEAC merely decided "to convey 'no objection' for release of the consignment subject to the condition that if it is later found to contain genetically modified material, the importer is liable for prosecution under the relevant law". The GEAC merely advised Customs officials at the port to retain two packets of each flavour on a random sampling basis for further verification, if necessary. The Mumbai firm had imported Doritos Chips in three flavours--Nacho, Taco and BBQ--from Brilliant Market Private Limited in Singapore. But the company claims the chips were produced in Taiwan from locally grown corn.

Greenpeace has been highlighting the presence of illegal GM food in India. According to Greenpeace, the organisation in May 2008 had provided scientific evidence that Doritos corn chips contained at least two different traces of GM corn varieties, MON 863 and NK 603.
A similar variety of the corn NK 603 was found to cause reproductive disorders by Austrian government scientists in November 2008.

Aspartame Danger Secret Exposed: GM Bacteria Used by Monsanto and Chemical Pharma Multinational Corporations To Create Deadly Sweetener Poison

Aspartame exposed - GM Bacteria used to create deadly sweetener


World's top sweetener is made with GM bacteria


Aspartame is made by combining phenylalanine, which is naturally produced by bacteria, with another amino acid. Monsanto has genetically engineered the bacteria to make them produce more phenylalanine. Scientists fear that other unknown compounds, which may end up in food, are produced by the genetic engineering process.


"Increasingly, chemical companies are using genetically engineered bacteria in their manufacturing process without telling the public," said Dr Erik Millstone, of Sussex University and the National Food Alliance.

The manufacturers of the most prevalent sweetener in the world have a secret, and it`s not a sweet one. Aspartame, an artificial sweetener found in thousands of products worldwide, has been found to be created using genetically modified (GM) bacteria. What`s even more shocking is how long this information has been known. A 1999 article by The Independent was the first to expose the abominable process in which aspartame was created. Ironically, the discovery was made around the same time as rich leaders around the globe met at the G8 Summit to discuss the safety of GM foods.

The 1999 investigation found that Monsanto, the largest biotech corporation in the world, often used GM bacteria to produce aspartame in their US production plants. The end result is a fusion between two of the largest health hazards to ever hit the food industry -- artificial sweeteners and an array of genetically altered organisms. Both have led to large-scale debate, with aspartame being the subject of multiple congressional hearings and scientific criticism. Scientists and health advocates are not the only ones to speak out against aspartame, however. The FDA received a flurry of complaints from consumers using NutraSweet, a product containing aspartame. Since 1992, the FDA has stopped documenting reports on the subject.

The process in which aspartame is created involves combining an amino acid known as phenylalanine with aspartic acid. First synthesized in 1965, aspartame requires bacteria for the sole purpose of producing phenylalanine. Monsanto discovered that through genetically altering this bacteria, phenylalanine could be created much more quickly. In the report by The Independent, Monsanto openly admitted that their mutated bacteria is a staple in the creation process of aspartame.

"We have two strains of bacteria - one is traditionally modified and one is genetically modified," said the source from Monsanto. "It's got a modified enzyme. It has one amino acid different."

Multiple studies have been conducted regarding genetic manipulation, with many grim conclusions. One study found that the more GM corn was fed to mice, the fewer babies they had. Another study, published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences, found that the organs that typically respond to chemical food poisoning were the first to encounter problems after subjects consumed GM foods. The same study also states that GM foods should not be commercialized.

"For the first time in the world, we've proven that GMO are neither sufficiently healthy nor proper to be commercialized. [...] Each time, for all three GMOs, the kidneys and liver, which are the main organs that react to a chemical food poisoning, had problems," indicated Gilles-Eric Seralini, an expert member of the Commission for Biotechnology Reevaluation.

Consumer groups are now curious as to whether or not other products secretly contain genetically modified ingredients. Due to the fact that the finished product`s DNA does not change when using genetically modified bacteria, it is hard to know for sure. With the FDA ruling against the labeling of GM salmon, it is becoming more of a challenge to determine whether or not a product contains GM ingredients. Consumers are voicing their opposition for GM ingredients going incognito, with the largest growing retail brand being GMO-free products.

"The public wants to know and the public has a right to know," said Marion Nestle, a professor in the Nutrition, Food Studies and Public Health Department at New York University.

Unveiling the secret process in which aspartame is created acts as yet another reminder to stay away from artificial sweeteners, and one should choose natural alternatives such as palm sugar, xylitol, or stevia.

Sources:
independent.co.uk: World's top sweetener is made with GM bacteria

biosicherheit.de pdf aktuell zentek studie 2008.pdf - Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice

biolsci.org: A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health

washingtonpost: FDA rules won't require labeling of genetically modified salmon

Global Alert World Awareness: Monsanto GM Maize Contaminates Natural Non-GM Crops in Uruguay

1. GM maize contaminates non-GM crops in Uruguay
2. New study on GM maize contamination in Uruguay
---
---
1. GM maize contaminates non-GM crops in Uruguay
Daniela Hirschfeld
Scidev.Net
09 May 2011
http://bit.ly/kuS0Cy

Contamination of traditional maize crops planted near genetically modified (GM) maize fields may be common in Uruguay, where the cultivation of GM maize has been permitted since 2003, scientists have said.

A study published in Environmental Biosafety Research (25 March) has found GM seedlings in three traditional maize fields. It is said to be the first report of cross-fertilisation between GM and non-GM maize in South America.

Studies on the unplanned presence of GM maize and the contamination of non-GM crops in Latin America have led to some controversial cases, such as a retracted 2001 Nature study from Mexico and a 2007 Peruvian study that led to a libel case against one of the scientists who challenged the findings and a subsequent campaign for freedom of speech for scientists.

And Monsanto's GM maize trial in Mexico has recently re-ignited the debate in the country that boasts the most diverse maize genetic resources.
But, unlike Mexico and Peru, Uruguay permits the cultivation of GM maize. The varieties MON810 and Bt11 were approved for commercial planting in 2003 and 2004, respectively.

Governmental regulations specify that GM and non-GM crop fields should be more than 250 metres apart to avoid cross-fertilisation and ensure their "regulated coexistence", and that 10 per cent of the field should be non-GM to provide a refuge area for biodiversity.

In the latest research, scientists from Uruguay's University of the Republic analysed five pairs of commercial maize fields where farmers planted GM maize at about the same time as a nearby non-GM crop.
Studying commercial fields is better than using experimental plots, which may not correspond to the real-life situation, the scientists argue.

In three cases they detected foreign genes from GM maize, the 'transgenes', in seedlings produced by seeds taken from the non-GM crops. The transgenes were presumably blown over in pollen from the GM fields.

The highest percentage of transgenic seedlings was 0.83 per cent in a field 100 metres from the GM maize field.
In one case, the cross-fertilisation occurred despite a Eucalyptus tree barrier (12 metres high, 30 metres wide) separating the fields, and another case involved cross-fertilisation between fields more than 250 metres apart.

Cross-fertilisation may therefore be "a common situation in Uruguay", the authors said, adding that the area planted with GM maize in the country is increasing.

"These results also show that the current regulation in Uruguay is insufficient and that the actual 'coexistence policy' is not well known among farmers," Pablo Galeano, the study's lead author, told SciDev.Net. "I think that to talk about 'regulated coexistence' without the necessary tools to make it viable is nothing more than rhetoric."

But Galeano cautioned that the findings may not necessarily apply to other crops or other countries.

"Cross-fertilisation depends on topography, size and orientation of fields, type of maize, wind direction during the flowering time, temperature and humidity, so it is hardly possible to generalise our results to other crops, areas or countries," he said.

Daniel Bayce, manager of Uruguay's National Seed Institute, told SciDev.Net that the findings were not representative because cross-fertilisation was detected mostly where the fields were too close, and even then "the frequency of GM contamination was very low".
---
---
2. New study on GM maize contamination in Uruguay
Galeano, P., C. M. Debat, et al. (2011). "Cross-fertilization between genetically modified and non-genetically modified maize crops in Uruguay." Environ. Biosafety Res.
Abstract:
The cultivation of genetically modified (GM) Bt maize (Zea mays L.) events MON810 and Bt11 is permitted in Uruguay. Local regulations specify that 10% of the crop should be a non-GM cultivar as refuge area for biodiversity, and the distance from other non-GM maize crops should be more than 250 m in order to avoid crosspollination. However, the degree of cross-fertilization between maize crops in Uruguay is unknown. The level of adventitious presence of GM material in non-GM crops is a relevant issue for organic farming, in situ conservation of genetic resources and seed production. In the research reported here, the occurrence and frequency of cross-fertilization between commercial GM and non-GM maize crops in Uruguay was assessed. The methodology comprised field sampling and detection using DAS-ELISA and PCR. Five field-pair cases where GM maize crops were grown near non-GM maize crops were identified. These cases had the potential to cross-fertilize considering the distance between crops and the similarity of the sowing dates. Adventitious presence of GM material in the offspring of non-GM crops was found in three of the five cases. Adventitious presence of event MON810 or Bt11 in non-GM maize, which were distinguished using specific primers, matched the events in the putative sources of transgenic pollen. Percentages of transgenic seedlings in the offspring of the non-GM crops were estimated as 0.56%, 0.83% and 0.13% for three sampling sites with distances of respectively 40, 100 and 330 m from the GM crops. This is a first indication that adventitious presence of transgenes in non-GM maize crops will occur in Uruguay if isolation by distance and/or time is not provided. These findings contribute to the evaluation of the applicability of the "regulated coexistence policy" in Uruguay.

Source: GM Watch