ArchiveArchive

Obama’s new policy registration may very well have ended all non-GMO agriculture in the US

January 4, 2017 by Jude Henry Leave a Comment

President Obama’s pen has stayed so busy signing executive orders (EO) that it’s surprising it hasn’t yet run dry, and as his days in the Oval Office wind down, he has added another one to his lengthy list of such orders. The recent “Advancing the Global Health Security Agenda to Achieve a World Safe and Secure from Infectious Disease Threats” EO is particularly significant in that it may have put a halt to all non-GMO agriculture in the United States.

Key points of the EO

Section 1 of the EO includes some disturbing points:

“As articulated in the National Strategy for Countering Biological Threats and implemented in Presidential Policy Directive 2 (PPD-2), promoting global health security is a core tenet of our national strategy for countering biological threats. No single nation can be prepared if other nations remain unprepared to counter biological threats; therefore, it is the policy of the United States to advance the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA), which is a multi-faceted, multi-country initiative intended to accelerate partner countries’ measurable capabilities to achieve specific targets to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats (GHSA targets), whether naturally occurring, deliberate, or accidental.” [Emphasis added]

Coordinated effort with military backup

Section 2 of the EO states that the “Council” will include personnel from a multitude of federal government agencies, including the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, Agriculture, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Department of Defense (DOD) may “facilitate implementation and coordination of Department of Defense programs to further the GHSA, as well as provide technical expertise to measure and evaluate progress in countries the United States has made a commitment to assist.” In other words, the military will enforce this EO if deemed necessary.

Connection to GMOs

How does this tie in with GMOs? The government claims that farm animals are supposedly infected (but typically are not) and must be slaughtered to make way for their “vastly upgraded” counterparts, which are genetically engineered and thus patented and owned by global organizations. The public receives a fear-based agenda riddled with hysteria over disease threats, and they respond to that by willingly going along with the GMO agenda. It’s a convenient agenda for the powers that be, as it allows them to maintain tight control of the food supply while attempting to obliterate small and organic farms.

Unrealistic aims and better alternatives

The EO is titled “Advancing the Global Health Security Agenda to Achieve a World Safe and Secure from Infectious Disease Threats,” but achieving a world like that is unrealistic. Infectious disease threats have always existed on this planet. The title implies a fear of infections, which is portrayed in the popular music video Vaccine Zombie by Mike Adams. As the lyrics say, “I’m afraid of invisible germs … .” Rather than promoting GMOs and toxic initiatives to address infectious disease concerns, a more effective approach involves educating people to lead healthy lifestyles through nutrition and other immune system-fortifying natural strategies.

Action steps

Don’t be fooled by the impressive- and altruistic-sounding title of this EO. Spread the word about GMO dangers by working to inform family and friends through intelligent conversations and the sharing of relevant online content. We can take back our food supply and end the danger of GMOs for ourselves and future generations. Stay tuned as the GMO issue continues to unfold, and be grateful that Obama’s days of signing his name to oppressive executive orders are rapidly winding down as the January inauguration approaches.

Sources:

NaturalBlaze

WhiteHouse

NaturalNews

Honest scientist fired by DOE for not defending Obama’s climate action plan

January 3, 2017 by Ethan Huff Leave a Comment

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is the latest government agency to be exposed for putting politics over principle after it was revealed that a top DOE scientist was fired simply for telling the truth about climate change. Reports indicate that Noelle Metting was basically canned by the Obama administration when she was caught answering questions from a legislative committee honestly, which apparently is a major no-no when it comes to anything related to climate change policy.

The so-called “Climate Action Plan” put forth by Barack Obama has certain goals attached to it that, regardless of their scientific merit, must be met in order for the agenda to move forward. Achieving these goals requires scientists like Metting to first conform to the agenda, then provide “scientific evidence” to back policy proposals that will help move it forward, something that Metting apparently failed to achieve on behalf of the White House.

According to The Daily Caller, Metting was asked certain questions by the House Science, Space and Technology and Senate Energy and Natural Resources committees back in 2014, to which she responded honestly. These questions pertained to pending climate legislation that a congressional committee investigation found the DOE was trying to kill, regardless of what science had to say on the matter.

What was revealed is that Metting was essentially punished for not towing the DOE line, refusing to conform to what the investigatory body found to be “predetermined remarks” by the DOE. Instead, she provided “candid and complete information” as any legitimate scientist would, which simply wasn’t acceptable in the eyes of the Obama administration.

“Instead of providing the type of scientific information needed by Congress to legislate effectively, senior departmental officials sought to hide information, lobbied against legislation, and retaliated against a scientist for being forthcoming,” Science, Space and Technology committee Chairman Lamar Smith, a Republican from Texas, said in a statement about the matter.

“The DOE’s actions constitute a reckless and calculated attack on the legislative process itself, which undermines the power of Congress to legislate. DOE’s disregard for separation of powers is … an institutional problem that must be corrected.”

Will scientific truth once again prevail under Donald Trump?

It is certainly a sad state of affairs in the United States when scientists acting on behalf of the public interest are bullied into suppressing the truth in order to push a political agenda. In this case, that agenda is climate change policies that aim to further control the lives of ordinary people under the guise of “protecting the environment.”

For folks like Metting, telling the truth is now a consequential offense punishable by a retaliatory firing — at least for the rest of Obama’s term. Many are hopeful that under a Trump administration, truth might once again prevail in the realm of science in the public interest, though that remains to be seen.

This type of scenario — the truth being actively suppressed in order to push an agenda — is something with which Americans have had to grow uncomfortably familiar. Whether it takes place at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or some other lettered agency, it has become commonplace for politics to trump truth, for special interests to overtake the public interest.

This could all change in the coming years, but only time will tell. In the meantime, recognizing the problem and informing the public about it is the best way to bring about real and fundamental change. Telling the truth shouldn’t cost you your job, especially when that job is simply to inform Congress about the facts of something in order to help steer policy for the betterment of all people.

Sources:

DailyCaller.com

Investigation finds proof of Obama document forgery with profound implications

December 20, 2016 by Natural News Editors Leave a Comment

It is one of the most, if not the most under-reported, misreported and mis-characterized story in recent history.

An official investigation conducted by law enforcement officials have concluded that the document known as the Certificate of Live Birth of U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama II, uploaded to and published on the White House website on April 27, 2011 is a fraudulently created document. It is a digitally manufactured forgery.

(Article by Douglas J Hagmann, republished from HagmannReport.com)

That is the official and final conclusion of a five-year long investigation performed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, using the expert analysis of a certified document examiner based in Hawaii and a digital forensics laboratory located in Europe. The findings of this investigation were detailed by lead investigator Mike Zullo under the direction of Sheriff Joe Arpaio in a press conference held on December 15, 2016. Additional details were provided in a subsequent two-hour interview with lead investigator Mike Zullo and Carl Gallups on The Hagmann Report the following day.

Due to the swirl of confusion and often mind-numbing mischaracterizations of the facts of this issue and the nature of the investigation, it is critically important to understand with precision exactly what has been addressed and ultimately determined by this investigation. Only then will the profound and disturbing implications be fully understood, and the magnitude of this issue be realized.

Trump is condemned for talking to liberty-loving Taiwan President… but Obama cozied up with dictators

December 9, 2016 by Don Wrightman Leave a Comment

On Sunday, ABC program “This Week” was commenting on the controversy regarding a phone call between Donald Trump and Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen. Mike Pence said it was mystifying that Obama could have talks with Cuban dictator Raul Castro and be hailed a hero. So essentially there is nothing wrong with Obama talking to brutal dictators, but when Trump does the same outrage ensues.

Pence said that they will deal with policy issues after January 20^th, when the duo are officially in the White House. The phone call from Taiwan’s leader was a courtesy call. American’s should appreciate the fact that Trump is taking calls and reaching out to the rest of the world in preparation to lead America.

Cuba isn’t the only example of Obama talking to brutal dictators. In late July Obama went to Cairo, Egypt to meet with brutally repressive President, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. The spectacle was a triumph that symbolized the General’s militaristic powers in Egypt, and a victory over the American president who had tried to punish him prior to surrendering to the harsh realities of geopolitics. Obama was appalled after a massacre where some one thousand pro-Morsi protesters were gunned down. “We can’t return to business as usual” Obama continued, “We have to be very careful about being seen as aiding and abetting actions that we think run contrary to our values and ideals.”

Donald Trump’s talk with Taiwan’s leader was more brilliant then it was a blunder. The deliberate move was carefully planned and Trump received a full briefing prior to the call. Trump was notifying China that they are dealing with a different kind of president. Trump is an outsider who won’t be encumbered by diplomatic threads that have restrained prior administrations. The message sent was that Trump will talk to whomever he wants if he feels it is in the best interest of the United States. Nobody in China gets to dictate who the new US leader can and can’t talk to.

If China somehow missed Trump’s message, he reinforced it via tweet on Sunday. “Did China ask us if it was OK to devalue their currency (making it hard for our companies to compete), heavily tax our products going into their country (the U.S. doesn’t tax them) or to build a massive military complex in the middle of the South China Sea? I don’t think so!” Trump promised throughout his campaign that he would take a tougher stance with China.

Sources:

Breitbart.com

Politico.com

WashingtonPost.com

New EPA rules will cost Americans $3,080 each

December 8, 2016 by Don Wrightman Leave a Comment

New EPA rules are being implemented on heavy trucks which has boosted the 10-year regulatory burden on America past the $1 trillion mark. 75 percent of that cost was imposed by the Obama administration. New analysis from American Action Forum shows that the cost amounts to an annual cost of $540 per person, or a one-time charge of $3,080.

“In other words, each year every person, regardless of age, in the nation is responsible for paying roughly $540 in regulatory costs. These burdens might take the form of higher prices, fewer jobs, or reduced wages,” said AAF’s Sam Batkins, director of regulatory policy at the watchdog group.

President Obama is scrambling to lock in several new environmental regulations prior to leaving office. Obama has shattered the record for the amount of regulations and added red tape this year, and he still has time to impose many more before leaving office. The staggering amount of money he is costing America is likely to surge even higher. The implementation of new fuel standards for trucks resulted in the new high regulatory costs.

Batkins’ study dates back to 2005, when George W Bush held the oval office. He said that the Obama administration is responsible for about three-quarters of the added regulatory costs. “The Obama Administration surpassed 500 major regulations last summer, imposing $625 billion in cumulative costs. Earlier this year, regulators published the administration’s 600th major rule, increasing burdens to $743 billion. Now, thanks to data from the last term of the Bush Administration and another billion-dollar rule from EPA, the regulatory tally has surpassed $1 trillion. These figures are direct estimates from federal regulators, but it will take more than an effort from these regulators to amend hundreds of major regulations. Congress, the next president, and even the courts must participate in the next generation of regulatory modernization.”

The EPA wants to make it very difficult for the Trump administration to align fuel economy standards with the needs and expectations of Americans. EPA administrator Gina McCarthy has urged the agency’s employees to quickly finish as many rules as possible before Obama leaves the White House. The EPA reported last month that automakers exceeded fuel efficiency standards in new cars, but were unhappy with the agency’s early release of its fuel efficiency study.

Donald Trump has promised to kill more regulations then he will add while he is in office. Hopefully his administration will kill many of the regulatory burdens created by Obama.

Sources:

WashingtonExaminer.com

DailyCaller.com

Obama officials violate ethics pledge, meet with top lobbyist Google

August 24, 2016 by Kurt Nimmo Leave a Comment

On January 21, 2009, Obama issued Executive Order 13490, “Ethics Commitments By Executive Branch Personnel.”

The “Revolving Door Ban” section of the order states appointees “will not for a period of 2 years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.”

The EO is not worth the paper it is written on.

At least four White House staffers who previously worked for tech giant Google met with former coworkers within a year of leaving the corporation, reports Watchdog, a non-profit at the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity.

The officials include Megan Smith, Alex Macgillivray and Mikey Dickerson.

The prohibited meetings were discovered when two databases, the Revolving Door database and the White House Meetings database, were compared.

The data shows four White House officials held at least 19 meetings with Google employees and the meetings occurred within a year of the officials leaving the corporation. Two of the officials met with former coworkers the same month they transitioned from Google to the White House.

None of the officials are on a list of people granted waivers to the pledge.

Campaign for Accountability said the meetings “raise questions about President Obama’s commitment to keep business interests from exercising undue influence on his administration,” notes Watchdog.

It isn’t the first time White House officials met with former coworkers. In 2010, Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer Andrew McLaughlin, a former Google employee, was reprimanded for professional email exchanges and for violating restrictions on contacts with the corporation.

Techpresident noted at the time:

Most notable among the latter were a pair of conversations with the Director of U.S. Public Policy for Google about mobilizing Google’s resources to respond to negative press mentions. Those breaches, according to a memo by OSTP Director John Holdren, “implicated” the Federal Records Act and the President’s Ethics Pledge signed by McLaughlin upon his employment as an Obama administration point person on innovation and Internet policy, within the White House Office of Technology and Science Policy.

Google’s relationship with the Obama administration is remarkably close. Over the last seven years, the tech giant has provided expertise, services, advice and personnel for vital government projects, according to a report by The Intercept. “No other public company approaches this degree of intimacy with government,” writes David Dayen.

Over the last few years, Google has pulled out all the stops in its Washington lobbying effort.

In 2015, it spent $16.7 million on government influence peddling, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. It has remained near or at the top of corporations in lobbying expenses since 2012.

“But direct expenditures on lobbying represent only one part of the larger influence-peddling game. Google’s lobbying strategy also includes throwing lavish D.C. parties; making grants to trade groups, advocacy organizations, and think tanks; offering free services and training to campaigns, congressional offices, and journalists; and using academics as validators for the company’s public policy positions. Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, was an enthusiastic supporter of both of Obama’s presidential campaigns and has been a major Democratic donor,” writes Dayen.

Sources:

Blackmail: Aetna Threatened Obamacare Pullout if Humana Merger not Approved

August 19, 2016 by Kurt Nimmo Leave a Comment

Aetna, one of the largest healthcare corporations in America, has threatened to drop out of Obamacare.

In July, the corporation sent a letter to the Justice Department stating it plans to roll back much if not all of its Obamacare business if a merger with rival Humana is not approved. Aetna had announced it would acquire the company for $37,000,000,000 in cash and stock.

“It is very likely that we would need to leave the public exchange business entirely and plan for additional business efficiencies should our deal ultimately be blocked,” Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini said in a letter dated July 5. The letter arrived more than two weeks before the DOJ decided to oppose the merger.

The Huffington Post obtained the letter through a Freedom of Information Act request.

“Specifically, if the DOJ sues to enjoin the transaction, we will immediately take action to reduce our 2017 exchange footprint …. [I]nstead of expanding to 20 states next year, we would reduce our presence to no more than 10 states,” Bertolini continued.

The pullout underscores the fact large corporate health providers are losing money by participating in Obamacare.

“Unless the exchanges get a rapid infusion of healthier customers who pay substantial premiums without using much care, insurers are going to keep pulling out of the areas where they are losing money. Or at the very least, they will demand benefits from the government to make it worth their while to stay,” Bloomberg reported on Tuesday.

According to a McKinsey & Company report issued in February, healthcare insurers lost money in 41 states in individual markets, including Obamacare marketplaces.

Bertolini, however, told investors in April the Obamacare mandate, which forces consumers to purchase expensive insurance or face fines imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, represents a cost-effective way to acquire new customers.

If Obamacare continues in its present form and insurance companies continue to lose money and pull out of marketplaces, the federal government will provide a huge infusion of taxpayer cash to float the system.

“While the costs of providing health care insurance are beginning to skyrocket because of Obamacare, insurance company executives are sleeping very soundly,” writes Joe Salerno of the Mises Institute. “A respected consultant to health insurance companies, Robert Laszewski, reveals that there are two obscure provisions in Obamacare that guarantee that insurance companies will be subsidized and bailed out by Amercian taxpayers. Indeed the Congressional Budget Office estimates that $1.071 trillion will be coercively transferred from taxpayers to big insurance companies over the next decade.”

In the meantime, Aetna and other insurance corporations will use the failure of Obamacare as leverage to further consolidate and monopolize the industry.

Sources

TheHuffingtonPost.com

Reuters.com

Bloomberg.com

Healthcare.McKinsey.com

Reuters.com

Mises.org