Rep. DeLauro Slaps FDA for Bad Tomatoes

They’re great at protecting industry, judging from the way they treat raw dairy farmers versus BigAgra growers.

Source: Jesse A. Hamilton, On Background.

People all over the country have been getting some pretty rotten tomatoes contaminated with salmonella (making another wholesome food the object of fear and harkening to bad 1978 cinema.) It’s caused dozens of hospital visits and, in one case, may have contributed to a far more serious result.

Contimated food has been a particular area of work (and frustration) for Rep. Rosa DeLauro, who is chairwoman of the House appropriations subcommittee that controls the budget for the Food and Drug Administration.

Already a congressional bane of the FDA, DeLauro launched a letter today criticizing the vast bureaucracy for failing to keep consumers safe — again. Her letter suggested the FDA has “an emphasis on protecting the industry, and a lesser concern with protecting the consumer who may be at risk.”

Her letter asked a series of questions, including:

“The FDA was able to publish a list of states, territories, and countries where tomatoes are grown and harvested which have NOT been associated with this outbreak. If the agency possesses evidence that would allow it publish such a list, why did the FDA not compel a recall of tomatoes from the other regions that were not listed?”

David Gumpert: Here’s a Prediction: Organic Pastures Will Still Be Around When the AP Is a Footnote in History

David’s take on the slanted AP article on OP is similar to mine.

Source: The Complete Patient Blog.

My first job in journalism was with the Chicago Daily News, a proud bastion of American journalism. I got hired while I was still in college as a copy boy. My job was to sit at the front of the vast newsroom with two or three other copy boys. Each time a reporter or editor yelled “Boy!”, one of us would jump up and scoot over to to grab freshly written or edited copy and deliver it around the building to the next editor or typesetting station for processing. (It didn’t matter that one of my co-workers was a girl, she responded to “Boy!”)

When I worked the four-to-midnight shift, my job sometimes included running over to the grungy Billy Goat Tavern (today it would be considered “funky”) down under Michigan Avenue, and picking up some whiskey for a columnist on deadline.

My favorite part of the job, though, was standing outside the press room, and watching through the clear glass the huge printing presses, which stretched for what seemed like a city block, humming and turning the rolls of newsprint into the next day’s “news.” I loved the smell of newsprint and ink, the mammoth size of the presses, the whole aura. Most of all, I think I loved the idea of being there on the inside as the day’s “news” was being packaged for shipment out to the community at large.

When the Chicago Daily News went out of business in 1978. I was very sad, just as I was for a number of years afterwards as other metropolitan papers failed or struggled. But as the trend has accelerated in recent years, I’ve come to realize that these behemoths of the establishment probably deserve to fail.

I know everyone blames the Internet, but the Chicago Daily News went out of business for the same reason the Associated Press will eventually fold of its own weight, and eventually most of the nation’s metropolitan papers will bite the dust: they lost contact, if they ever had it in the first place, with their readers, whom we might refer to today as “the end users.” I bring up the Associated Press because it just published a major article about raw milk, and the best I can say for the article is that it is pathetic.

It says the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considers Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures, to be “a snake oil salesman,” without citing a source. It says parents of five children sued Organic Pastures, when in fact, two sued.

There’s also disagreement about the interview process. Mark says the reporter hasn’t been in touch since at least mid-April, and then it wasn’t clear the reporter was working on a story about the grand jury investigation. The reporter, Paul Elias, told me he had “three distinct interviews” with Mark, having spoken with him most recently a week-and-a-half ago.

I would guess that the real situation is somewhere in between, but what’s key here is that Mark seems not to have been kept in the loop about what was happening, and what was happening was extremely important. When the Associated Press does a major story about you, it’s still a huge event (despite the old media’s decline), because that story could be picked up by any of more than 1,700 newspapers and 5,000 television and radio outlets that are members of the AP. It’s much bigger than a single paper doing a story, so the reporters owe it to a subject like Mark to be upfront about what they’re doing.

The bottom line, though, is that the article represents the government’s viewpoint much more than the consumer viewpoint or Organic Pastures’ viewpoint in that its main purpose is to scare people about raw milk. It comes at the story from the viewpoint that if the government is investigating you, it must be because you did something wrong, not because possibly the government is conducting a vendetta against you. Fortunately, increasing numbers of people understand that they can’t believe much of what government mouthpieces like the Associated Press publish, which accounts for the fact that Mark’s business increases each time such a smear comes out, and Associated Press’ business drops.

In that vein, it’s worth pointing out that since the Chicago Daily News folded in 1978, the Bill Goat Tavern has grown from a single bar to a city-wide enterprise with seven locations, and one in Washington, DC. My guess is that in thirty years, we’ll be able to say the same thing about the AP and Organic Pastures–AP will have folded and OPDC will be thriving. Yes, whisky and raw milk will outdo slanted government propaganda every time. Maybe Bill Marler and I can drink to that sometime.

***

As Bill Marler points out following my previous posting, the Centers for Disease Control has come out with its report on the six California children who became ill in September 2006. It’s heavy-duty reading, in part because it seems almost designed to confuse in terms of who got sick from what. Or is that because they just aren’t sure what happened?

And they state, once again, that a boy got sick after consuming raw milk at a friend’s house. Wasn’t that the story of Lauren Herzog, a girl?

Also, the timing of this release and its admonition to avoid raw milk is intriguing. The events are nearly two years old, yet here it is being released on the eve of hearings and debate in California over AB 1735 and the newly proposed SB 201. Normally, I’d say I’m being at least a bit paranoid, but having seen the lengths to which both state and federal authorities are willing to go to so as to frighten people and derail Organic Pastures, I have to say such conjecture seems eminently reasonable.

Update on Thursday, June 12, 2008 at 11:08PM by The Complete Patient

No sooner had I voiced my concerns about the impact of the Associated Press, when its story shows up in The Wall Street Journal.

Oh, and the CDC report? That’s now used as anti-raw-milk fodder in U.S. News and World Report. Yes, if it comes from government scientists, it must be accurate, right?

Good question from Steve Bemis. How did Bill Marler know in advance about the CDC report?

Bugs never exposed to antibiotics still show resistance against them

Now what, Big Pharma?

Source: FreshNews.in.

Scientists have found that bacteria that existed in the soil in 1960s and 70s have developed resistance to an antibiotic they ‘have never seen before’.

The team looked at three strains of bacteria that showed extreme resistance to six common antibiotics, including ciprofloxacin, which was first sold in 1989.

“You can pretty safely say that there is no way these bacteria have seen them before,” New Scientist quoted Cristiane San Miguel, a microbiologist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey, US, as saying.

Researchers believe that the soil plays a critical role for bugs to develop antibiotic resistance.

It possibly creates such defences as part of the evolutionary change going on for billions of years between soil-dwelling microbes.

For the study, the team led by San Miguel revived three strains, two of them were opportunistic pathogens called Klebsiella pneuomoniae that were isolated from dirt in 1973 and 1974, then frozen and the third one was a bug called Alcaligenes, last tasted agar in 1963.

They found that all the strains thrived when San Miguel exposed them to a range of antibiotics, however, the bacteria became resistant to a lethal dose of rifampicin, an antibiotic introduced in 1967, and Cipro, a 19-year-old drug that resembles nothing seen in nature.

“I was certainly expecting the Cipro to have an impact and it did not,” she said.

“The origins of many of the antibiotic resistance genes that are floating around in the clinic are out in the environment and have probably been out there for thousands and millions of years,” said Gerry Wright, a microbiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

San Miguel would be conducting further studies to determine the genes responsible for the resistance

The findings were presented at the American Society for Microbiology’s annual meeting in Boston, US. (ANI)

“Big Brother” Presidential Directive: “Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security”

By Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research.

The latest Big Brother police state measure emanating from the Bush administration, with virtually no press coverage, is NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) entitled Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security [Complete text of NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) in Annex below]

NSPD is directed against US citizens.

It is adopted without public debate or Congressional approval. Its relevant procedures have far-reaching implications.

NSPD 59 goes far beyond the issue of biometric identification, it recommends the collection and storage of “associated biographic” information, meaning information on the private lives of US citizens, in minute detail, all of which will be “accomplished within the law”:

“The contextual data that accompanies biometric data includes information on date and place of birth, citizenship, current address and address history, current employment and employment history, current phone numbers and phone number history, use of government services and tax filings. Other contextual data may include bank account and credit card histories, plus criminal database records on a local, state and federal level. The database also could include legal judgments or other public records documenting involvement in legal disputes, child custody records and marriage or divorce records.”(See Jerome Corsi, June 2008)

The directive uses 9/11 as an all encompassing justification to wage a witch hunt against dissenting citizens, establishing at the same time an atmosphere of fear and intimidation across the land.

It also calls for the integration of various data banks as well as inter-agency cooperation in the sharing of information, with a view to eventually centralizing the information on American citizens.

In a carefully worded text, NSPD 59 “establishes a framework” to enable the Federal government and its various police and intelligence agencies to: “use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law.”

The Directive recommends: “actions and associated timelines for enhancing the existing terrorist-oriented identification and screening processes by expanding the use of biometrics”.

“Other Categories of Individuals”

The stated intent of NSPD 59 is to protect America from terrorists, but in fact the terms of reference include any person who is deemed to pose a threat to the Homeland. The government requires the ability:

“to positively identify those individuals who may do harm to Americans and the Nation… Since September 11, 2001, agencies have made considerable progress in securing the Nation through the integration, maintenance, and sharing of information used to identify persons who may pose a threat to national security.

The Directive is not limited to KSTs, which in Homeland Security jargon stands for “Known and Suspected Terrorists”:

“The executive branch has developed an integrated screening capability to protect the Nation against “known and suspected terrorists” (KSTs). The executive branch shall build upon this success, in accordance with this directive, by enhancing its capability to collect, store, use, analyze, and share biometrics to identify and screen KSTs and other persons who may pose a threat to national security.

The executive branch recognizes the need for a layered approach to identification and screening of individuals, as no single mechanism is sufficient. For example, while existing name-based screening procedures are beneficial, application of biometric technologies, where appropriate, improve the executive branch’s ability to identify and screen for persons who may pose a national security threat. To be most effective, national security identification and screening systems will require timely access to the most accurate and most complete biometric, biographic, and related data that are, or can be, made available throughout the executive branch.”

NSPD 59 calls for extending the definition of terrorists to include other categories of individuals “who may pose a threat to national security”.

In this regard, it is worth noting that in the 2005 TOPOFF (Top officials) anti-terror drills, two other categories of individuals were identified as potential threats: “Radical groups” and “disgruntled employees”, suggesting than any form of dissent directed against Big Brother will be categorized as a threat to America.

In a previous 2004 report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios, the enemy was referred to as the Universal Adversary (UA).

The Universal Adversary was identified in the scenarios as an abstract entity used for the purposes of simulation. Yet upon more careful examination, this Universal Adversary was by no means illusory. It included the following categories of potential “conspirators”:

“foreign [Islamic] terrorists” ,

“domestic radical groups”, [antiwar and civil rights groups]

“state sponsored adversaries” ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]

“disgruntled employees” [labor and union activists].

According to the DHS Planning Scenarios Report :

“Because the attacks could be caused by foreign terrorists; domestic radical groups; state sponsored adversaries; or in some cases, disgruntled employees, the perpetrator has been named, the Universal Adversary (UA). The focus of the scenarios is on response capabilities and needs, not threat-based prevention activities.” (See Planning Scenarios )

Under NSPD 59, biometrics and associated biographical information will be used to control all forms of social dissent.

Domestic radical groups and labor activists envisaged in various counter terrorism exercises, constitute in the eyes of the Bush administration, a threat to the established economic and political order.

In the text of NSPD 59, these other categories of people have been conveniently lumped together with the KSTs (“known and suspected terrorists”), confirming that the so-called anti-terror laws together with the Big Brother law enforcement apparatus and its associated data banks of biometric and biographic information on US citizens are intended to be used against all potential domestic “adversaries” including those who oppose the US led war in the Middle East and the derogation of the Rule of Law in America.

It is worth noting that NSPD 59 was issued on June 5, 2008, 4 days prior to the publication of Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment of President George W. Bush by the House of Representatives. Article XXIII of the Articles Impeachment underscore how in derogation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents the military from intervening in civilian law enforcement, President Bush:

“a) has used military forces for law enforcement purposes on U.S. border patrol;

b) has established a program to use military personnel for surveillance and information on criminal activities;

c) is using military espionage equipment to collect intelligence information for law enforcement use on civilians within the United States”

In Article XXIV the president is accused on Spying on American Ctizens without a court-Ordered Warrant , In Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment.

ANNEX

Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security

[Use above Whitehouse.gov link to see the full text of NSPD 59 (HSPD 24).]

Big Pharma Reaches Out To Higher Learning

By Jane Akre, InjuryBoard.com.

Tight budgets affect almost everyone at home and in the workplace. But when does a tight budget at a university invite corporate conflicts of interest that potentially taint professors and their curriculum?

The American Medical Student Association (AMSA) has issued a scorecard on conflicts of interest by pharmaceutical companies on universities across the country.

The research finds most of the 150 medical schools in the U.S. are failing when it comes to erecting conflict of interest policies that ensure pharmaceutical marketing cannot take hold on campus.

The pharmaceutical industry spends large sums of money to market to doctors about drugs, an amount estimated to be about $28 to $46 billion a year.

AMSA represents physicians-in-training. For this project, the group collaborated with The Prescription Project, funded by the Pew Charitable Trust.

The goal of the Prescription Project is to avoid compromises in patient care resulting from conflicts of interest that erode public confidence in the medical profession.

“The schools that earned ‘A’ and ‘B’ scores are to be commended for setting a high bar and aggressively moving forward to ensure medical education, training and patient care is free of commercial bias,” says RxP executive director Robert Restuccia in a statement.

“While we still have a long way to go, we are optimistic that the growing momentum for reform will change the landscape and there will be great improvement next year.”

Conflict of interest is defined by 11 different criteria: whether the school has a policy on accepting gifts and meals; whether consulting relationships are allowed as well as industry-funded speaking, both on and off campus.

The AMSA grades on whether faculty is required to disclose potential conflicts of interest to supervisors on a regular basis; and on whether they can accept pharmaceutical samples. They also gauge whether there are industry-sponsored scholarships and funds.

A conflict is also defined as adjusting the medical school curriculum to reflect the marketing of pharmaceuticals. Schools are judged on whether there is oversight to prevent such things. Lastly, AMSA asked whether there were explicit sanctions for noncompliance with school policies against conflicts of interest.

Seven schools go to the head of the class, graded with words like “exemplary”, “model”, and “a complete ban.”

They include, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY; University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA; University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA; University of California Los Angeles, CA; Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD.

On the other end of the scale are many universities that didn’t respond.

In January, a published study estimated that U.S. pharmaceutical companies spend twice as much marketing drugs as they spend researching new ones.

“The Cost of Pushing Pills: A New Estimate of Pharmaceutical Promotion Expenditures in the United States,” estimates that U.S. drug sales amount to about $235.4 billion annually.

That translates to $57.5 billion spent on total promotion by pharmaceutical companies in 2004 or about $61,000 per physician in promotion that year.

South Koreans and U.S. beef

The “Questions about adequacy of U.S. beef testing abound” at the end of the article should concern American consumers of mad cow beef.

By Kathlyn Stone, MWC News.

The USDA and the beef industry are strong-arming South Korea to accept its beef even as U.S. scientists, consumer groups, trade associations, businesses, and members of Congress call for improved testing.

More concerned with food safety than economics, South Koreans yesterday expanded their protest of President Lee Myung-bak’s decision to lift the 2003 ban on the importation of U.S. beef over fears of exposure to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or “mad cow” disease.

Mainstream media reports that about 80,000 protestors turned out in Seoul, the capitol city, on Tuesday to demonstrate against resuming imports of U.S. beef. Tuesday’s protest was the culmination of a three-day protest that began June 9 with an estimated 40,000 protestors. Some clashed with police and about 40 were detained, according to local reports.

Protestors and nightly candle-light vigilers have been organizing in ever increasing numbers as concerns spread about the re-introduction of U.S. beef whose inspections are deemed inadequate in several countries, including within the United States.

Those in opposition claim the South Korean government has given in to U.S. demands in exchange for a free trade agreement between the two countries. Protestors are particularly opposed to the inclusion of beef from older cattle.

In a press conference in front of the U.S. Embassy on June 5, the Korean Federation of Trade Unions (FKTU) urged the U.S government to immediately resume full re-negotiations on U.S. beef imports.

“Eighty percent of Korean people want renegotiations on the import of U.S. beef,” said Kim Dong-man, FKTU vice president. “The Voluntary Export Restraint (VER) proposed by the government is only a stop-gap measure to appease the rising public opposition to the beef deal. The only way to resolve the impasse is re-negotiation with Washington.”

FKTU also demanded an apology from Alexander Vershbow, the U.S. ambassador to Korea, who has been accused of condescension in remarking that Korean people should study the science on which the beef agreement was based. On June 10 FKTU president Jang Seok-chun sent a letter to AFL-CIO president John Sweeney requesting U.S. labor solidarity with the Korean people’s protest against U.S. beef imports.

President Lee Myung-bak felt compelled to apologize on national television on May 22 for not taking into account the public’s concerns over mad cow disease when entering into the agreement with U.S. officials on April 18. He promised “to be more humble in approaching the needs of the people.”

“I admit that the government has been lacking in efforts to sound out public opinion and try to seek people’s understanding,” he said in May. “I very much regret all this.”

South Korean cabinet members offer to resign

The seven senior cabinet members’ offers to resign over the president’s unpopular agreement were interpreted by some as an attempt to defuse the crises that has ensued over the decision to resume imports. President Lee Myung-bak’s office has not responded to the resignations, according to CCTV.com.

Meanwhile, South Korean opposition lawmakers may boycott parliament over the beef issue beginning Thursday, June 12.

According to CCTV.com, the South Korea government announced last week that it had asked the United States to stop sending beef from older cattle but did not ask for a re-negotiation of the agreement.

A spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab said that the United States would not renegotiate the deal but is willing to work with its Asian ally, according to a Reuters AlterNet report.

In April, the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) issued a statement on its successful negotiation with President Lee Myung-bak. “Our industry has lost between $3.5 billion and $4 billion in beef exports to South Korea since the end of 2003…While this is momentous news for the U.S. beef industry, it also clears one of the major obstacles to the approval of a formal free trade agreement between our two nations,” said USMEF President & CEO Philip Seng.& nbsp; “The U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement, when fully implemented, will deliver significant benefits to the U.S. beef and pork industries as well as to South Korean consumers.”

A quasi-governmental trade association, the USMEF receives both USDA and industry funding and is responsible for developing international markets for the U.S. red meat industry. The USMEF is maintaining that it knows what’s best for South Korean consumers in a press release issued on May 29:

“We look forward to supplying high-quality, wholesome U.S. beef to South Korea,” said USMEF President & CEO Philip Seng, “but this is a volatile situation that changes day by day. We are monitoring events in Korea very closely. We were the preferred supplier of beef for Korean cuisine. Our exports are complementary to the South Korean domestic industry. We understand the products and specifications needed.”

“The U.S. industry wants to win back the trust of South Korean consumers,” said Seng. “U.S. beef exports are accepted by Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Mexico and the European Union. We trust that the facts and sound science will win over Korean public opinion. U.S. beef is safe.”

Questions about adequacy of U.S. beef testing abound

• The USDA is testing only one-tenth of 1 percent of dead or slaughtered cattle, according to ConsumerReports.org.
• An investigative video report released by the Humane Society in February of this year depicted inhumane treatment of sick and ‘downer’ animals at a processing facility that is the second largest supplier of ground beef to U.S. public schools.
• Faced with a possible loss of confidence in the food supply following the video’s release, the USDA was forced to recall 143 million pounds of frozen beef. More than one-third of the recalled beef had gone to school lunch programs, the USDA said on Feb. 22. Some was eaten, some was successfully recalled and officials were unable to account for some of the meat.
• According to USDA data, downed cattle are 58 times more likely to carry mad cow disease than other cattle. Downed cattle also are more likely to carry other food-borne illnesses like E. coli and Salmonella.
• The USDA devotes just 2 percent of its $75 billion budget and 2 percent of its 100,000 staff to “enhance protection and safety of the nation’s agriculture and food supply” according to its web site. Thirty-five percent of its budget goes to “enhance economic opportunities for agricultural producers” and 14 percent to “support increased economic opportunities and improved quality of life in rural America.”
• The USDA announced in July 2006 that it would reduce testing for mad cow disease by 90 percent, to about 110 tests per day. The department based that decision on the finding that fewer than 1 in a million adult cattle were infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
• Medical experts would rather see more testing, not less. If the United States is testing to reassure consumers and overseas buyers that BSE is rare in the US, then the fewer we test, the fewer cases are found, according to Richard T. Johnson, MD, professor of neurology, microbiology, and neuroscience at the Johns Hopkins University and Bloomberg School of Public Health. Johnson chaired the 12-member committee that wrote the 2004 Institute of Medicine report, Advancing Prion Science: Guidance for the National Prion Research Program.
• Finally, just this week the USDA has decided to appeal a March 2007 ruling by a U.S. District Judge who decided that the USDA unlawfully prohibited Creekstone Farms Premium Beef from testing all of its slaughtered cattle. Creekstone Farms, a Kansas beef producer, had filed a suit against the USDA in 2006 for prohibiting the farm from using the same BSE tests used by the USDA. Creekstone Farms says testing all slaughtered cattle would open up new Japanese and other overseas markets for U.S. beef.

“In refusing to allow Creekstone Farms to respond to its customers’ preference for beef from animals that have been tested for BSE, the USDA is doggedly pursuing a course that scientists, consumer groups, trade associations and business, and members of Congress regard as a bad policy,” according to Dennis Buhlke, Creekstone’s president and CEO. “While Creekstone Farms has taken a lead role in this effort, it is not alone in believing that the government should not prevent private companies from voluntarily testing cattle for BSE.”

Be the Media, by ROBERT C. KOEHLER

Source: Common Wonders via Common Dreams.

Camera, lights, mike-in-the-face. Hey Bill Moyers, what are you doing at a left-wing, partisan media conference?

That was how Fox News producer Porter Barry tried to ambush television’s most venerable voice of sanity this past weekend, after Moyers spoke eloquently — “Journalism can only exist in a vibrant, democratic culture” — at the fourth annual National Conference for Media Reform in Minneapolis.

But Moyers would have none of it. By standing his ground, reframing the “gotcha” idiocy of the encounter (a bully-boy, “say yes or we’ll crucify you” summons to appear on Bill O’Reilly’s show) and turning it into a dialogue for which Barry was unprepared, he managed to shove the ambush oh so figuratively back down Barry’s throat. What goes around comes around, guys. As the producer retreated, he himself was filmed and peppered with questions by a reporter for the American News Project.

Be the media! This was a real-time demo of the core imperative of the four-day conference: that it’s up to us to turn things around. The flailing and desperate corporate media have prostrated themselves ever more irredeemably before the altar of organized money and, in their compromised allegiance, purvey not actual “news” any longer but a simplistic military-industrial patriotism to a country sick of war and hungry for truth. They’re not going to change; they’re just going to keep staggering, so it seems, toward total irrelevance.

The serendipitous poke in the eye to Fox News notwithstanding, the message of the conference was not part of the zero-sum paradigm of left vs. right and Whose Ideology Is Better? What’s at stake — i.e., human survival — is far bigger than that.

And perhaps no presentation at the conference demonstrated this with more urgency than the screening of “Body of War,” a documentary by Ellen Spiro and Phil Donahue that, in its unblinking honesty, scrapes the platitudes away from “the most sanitized war ever,” as Donahue put it.

Allard, yea. Allen, yea. Baucus, yea . . .

The film, which portrays the day-to-day struggle of Iraq war vet Thomas Young, who became paralyzed from the chest down after he took a bullet above the collarbone in Sadr City in 2004, begins filling in what I call the hole, or responsibility void, at the center of the Iraq war and every war.

It begins with the slow intonation of the Oct. 11, 2002 vote that authorized the use of military force against Iraq: Bayh, yea. Bennett, yea. Biden, yea. This vote, indeed, serves as the backdrop, the canvas, on which the film unfolds. We cut away from the names and suddenly here’s Thomas Young in his wheelchair, sitting at his computer, typing a letter to a paraplegic Q&A Web site. He’s getting married. He wants to know how to avoid having an accidental bowel movement when he’s in his tux.

Brownback, yea. Bunning, yea. Burns, yea.

“The vet’s choice,” says Young, who has become an anti-war activist, “is to tell the truth and be called a traitor or internalize and self-destruct.”

The thought could have served as a catchphrase for the whole conference, sponsored by the organization Free Press (freepress.net), which 3,500 people attended this year. What I felt not only during but between the breakout sessions was an intense concentration of . . . intelligent passion, you might say — creative determination not to self-destruct and not to let this country self-destruct. This may be what a movement feels like, or what the future feels like.

“Every day that Cheney and Bush do not bomb Iran . . . is because of that greater force — all of us working together,” said Amy Goodman of Democracy Now.

While there was plenty of urgent anger at the failings of the corporate media, and plenty of incisive analysis of the government-friendly propaganda they push and call news, what I felt was not despair but an extraordinary sense of purpose. Upheaval is in the air. Maybe it’s partly because of what has happened this year in the Democratic primaries.

On Saturday, as the conference was in full flower, Hillary Clinton conceded to Barack Obama. “What happened today is that someone paid a price at last for supporting the Iraq war,” said author Naomi Klein.

Carper, yea. Cleland, yea. Clinton, yea. . . . Lott, yea. Lugar, yea. McCain, yea.

The accountability is just beginning. But, as Klein noted, weapons companies have given more money to Democrats than Republicans this year. The old system, even with a President Obama at the helm, is geared to perpetuate inequality and generate conflict. A new media is forming, on the Internet and in our hearts, that will be beholden not to the interests of oil and war but to a just, sustainable future.

Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com.

The Existentialist Cowboy: Liberty Betrayed!

This goes to show how much we need viable third parties.

http://existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2008/06/liberty-betrayed.html

Et tu, Democratic Party?

The American people have now suffered what must surely be the ultimate betrayal! Those elected to represent and serve their interests in Congress have ‘winked and nodded’ to Bush’s heinous crimes, abuses, usurpations of unconstitutional power, aggressive war and villainy. Democrats in Congress have quashed a move by Dennis Kucinich to impeach the usurper who still occupies the White House.

In a single act of cowardice and betrayal, if not treason, the US congress has ’scuttled’ the Articles of Impeachment drawn up and carefully researched by Dennis Kucinich. The US government, therefore, may no longer assert or claim legitimacy. By turning a blind eye to the numerous specific crimes that Kucinich outlined and proved in some 35 Article of Impeachment, the people are left adrift. There is no rule of law!

WASHINGTON – Democrats in the House of Representatives yesterday scuttled a colleague’s proposal to impeach President Bush on a wide range of charges, including lying to the American public about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, torturing war captives, and misleading Congress in an attempt to destroy Medicare. By a 251-166 vote, the House sent the 35-count articles of impeachment to the Judiciary Committee, which is expected to let it die without further action. While the vote technically forces the measure to the committee for consideration, it also means the full House will avoid having to debate and vote on impeaching the 43d president.– Democrats scuttle proposal to impeach Bush

According to Boston. com “no Democrats [sic] voted against the resolution to send the measure to certain death in the Judiciary Committee, but 166 Republicans voted no – a tactic designed to force Democrats to address the measure publicly.” The desires, needs and aspirations of the vast majority of people had long ago been betrayed by the GOP. Now –the Democrats have simply twisted the knife in the wound. Thomas Jefferson would have had this to say:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness….

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Clearly –as Dennis Kucinich proved conclusively and persuasively in some 35 Articles of Impeachment –the government of George W. Bush, his enablers, toadies, and the financial support that he enjoys has ‘broken the peace’ with the American people. The US Constitution is a covenant between the people and those elected to serve them. Bush has broken that covenant, thumbed his nose at it and disdained it, calling the Constitution ‘ …just a goddamned piece of paper!” The case against Bush, indeed this government was documented and proven in Kucinich’s 35 Articles of Impeachment. America, your government has betrayed you!

When the forces of oppression come to maintain themselves in power against established law; peace is considered already broken. –Guerrilla Warfare, Ernesto “Che” Guevara

What will you do without freedom? What will you do about the yoke of tyranny imposed by the war criminal and usurper who now occupies the White House illegally? The Courts have abandoned you. The ‘Presidency’ is lost, perhaps forever to the forces of totalitarianism, greed and villainy.

Americans’ last hope –the Democratic majority in Congress –has, in fact, told you to ‘fuggetaboutit’! The US government is no longer legitimate! Like Bush, your government no longer ‘cares what you think!”

ADDENDUM: I was in the process of annotating Kucinich’s ‘Articles’ when I learned of the Democrats betrayal. Here are the very few that I had assembled:

1. Senate Finds Pre-War Bush Claims Exaggerated, False
   Proof Bush Fixed The Facts
   Lacking Biolabs, Trailers Carried Case for War
   False Pretenses
   Study: Bush Led US To War on ‘False Pretenses’
2. The Nation: Bush’s Lies About Iraq
   BBC: Bush administration on Iraq 9/11 link
   Bush Falsely Claims He Never Linked Hussein To September 11»
   Ex-Bush aides conflate 9/11, Iraq in pro-war ad campaign
   9/11 Linked To Iraq, In Politics if Not in Fact
   Mother Jones: The Lie Factory
   Pro War Ads Falsely Link 9/11 To Iraq
   Bush Misled America about the Threat from Iraq
   Buzzflash: Did George W. Bush Invade Iraq by Lying?
3. A History Of Lies: WMD, Who Said What and When
   President Delivers “State of the Union” (2003)
   Iraq WMD Lies: The Words of Mass Deception
4. Nuremberg Principles:
   

   Principle I Any person who commitsan act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

   Principle II

   The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the personwho committed the act from responsibility under international law.

   Principle III

   The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsibleGovernment official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

   Principle IV

   The fact that aperson acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility underinternational law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

   War of Aggression = War Crime
   Bush Officials Charged with War Crimes: Crimes within the Court’s Jurisdiction:

   • The crime of genocide
   • Crimes against humanity
   • The crime of aggression
   • Crimes against United Nations and associated personnel
   • War crimes
   • Other categories of crimes

Crimes within the Court’s Jurisdiction

Vegan girl, 12, ‘has spine of 80-year-old’

Unfortunately rickets has made a resurgence since the 90s. It doesn’t help that “experts” recommend staying out of the sun, and not to consume liver. Where in the world are people supposed to get their vitamin D, then? Soy milk and other fortified foods usually contain D2, which new research shows is much more inferior to D3, chalciferol. Veg*ns object to taking D3, because it’s often from animal sources like wool. The only other option is to use UV lamps.

For more information, see Chris Masterjohn’s excellent article, “From Seafood to Sunshine–A New Understanding of Vitamin D Safety.”

By Mark Macaskill, Sunday Times.

Degenerative bone condition thought to be a result of strict diet

A girl of 12 brought up by her parents on a strict vegan diet has been admitted to hospital with a degenerative bone condition said to have left her with the spine of an 80-year-old.

Doctors are under pressure to report the couple, from Glasgow, to police and social workers amid concerns her health and welfare may have been neglected in pursuit of their beliefs.

The youngster, fed on a strict meat- and dairy-free diet from birth, is being treated at the city’s Royal Hospital for Sick Children. She is said to have a severe form of rickets and to have suffered a number of fractured bones. The condition is caused by a lack of vitamin D, which is needed to absorb calcium and is found in liver, oily fish and dairy produce.

Dr Faisal Ahmed, the consultant treating the child, said he believed the dangers of forcing children to follow a strict vegan diet needed to be highlighted. “Something like this needs publicity,” he said. However, he refused to blame the parents, who are understood to be well-known figures in Glasgow’s vegan community: “We shouldn’t name and shame \. Mum feels guilty about the whole thing and feels bad about it.”

Jonathan Sher, head of policy at Children in Scotland, said: “If the consequence of parental behaviour is physical, mental or emotional harm to a child, then the child protection system should become involved.” Bill Aitken, justice spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives, added: “If the youngster is coming to clinical harm, something must be done.”

In 2001, British vegans Hazmik and Garabet Manuelyan, from Staines, were sentenced to three years’ community rehabilitation after they admitted starving daughter Arenai, 10 months, to death. She had been fed nothing but breast milk, raw fruit, vegetables and nuts.

Veganism is becoming increasingly popular due to concerns about animal welfare. There are 250,000 adherents in the UK and the Vegan Society publishes a guide, Feeding Your Vegan Infant With Confidence. A spokesman said: “I would suggest that it is not the vegan diet itself \ but the parents.”

Professor Tom Sanders, head of nutrition and dietetics at King’s College London, warned that while most vegan parents give their children vitamin and mineral supplements, there was a core of hardliners putting their children’s health at risk.

He said: “Some of them think we’re still monkeys that can live on fruit and nuts.”

Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS board declined to comment. A spokesman for Glasgow city council said the matter had not been referred to its social work department.

Kucinich effort to impeach Bush kicked into limbo

Michael Rivero says: “Time to kick the entire government into limbo.”

It would be great to throw out the whole rotten crew.

From Lisa Desjardins, CNN.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – An attempt by Rep. Dennis Kucinich to impeach President Bush was kicked into legislative no-man’s land by members of his own party Wednesday.

The House voted 251-166 to send the Ohio Democrat’s impeachment resolution to committee, a maneuver that allows the Democratic leadership to freeze the measure indefinitely.

The vote largely followed partisan lines, with 225 Democrats voting on Kucinich’s request to send the measure to committee for consideration.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly said she would not support a View Drafts resolution calling for Bush’s impeachment, saying such a move was unlikely to succeed and would be divisive.

All 166 votes in favor of opening up a House impeachment debate came from Republicans, apparently eager to bring up the vote immediately and paint Democrats as political creatures in a time of serious issues.

Kucinich introduced the resolution into the House on Tuesday night.

Most of the congressman’s resolution deals with the Iraq war, contending that the president manufactured a false case for the war, violated U.S. and international law to invade Iraq, failed to provide troops with proper equipment and falsified casualty reports for political purposes.

Kucinich also charges that Bush has illegally detained without charge both U.S. citizens and “foreign captives,” and violated numerous U.S. laws through the use of “signing statements” declaring his intention to do so.

Other articles address global warming, voting rights, Medicare, the response to Hurricane Katrina and failure to comply with congressional subpoenas.

Last year, Kucinich introduced a resolution to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. But the attempt failed in November, when Republicans tried to force a debate on it. Democrats voted to send the resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, where the committee chairman, Rep. John Conyers, has taken no action on it.

An earlier resolution to impeach Cheney has languished in the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties since May 2007.

The House of Representatives has voted to impeach two presidents — Andrew Johnson, in 1868, and Bill Clinton, in 1999 — but both were acquitted by the Senate and remained in office. No U.S. vice president has been impeached.

Kucinich dropped out of the race for the Democratic nomination for president in January to focus on his re-election bid in Ohio. He handily won the Democratic primary in his district March 4 and faces former state Rep. Jim Trakas in the general election.