Responsible Politicians: Is there such a thing?
The affairs of a country are not unlike the affairs of a major corporation, and of course the most important issue of peacetime prosperity is solvency and sound financial management. We need politicians who can comprehend that the essentials of one life apply to one thousand, and to one billion. Those we select win our confidence by showing they understand and can work with an integrated view of existenceâhow social interaction can only follow free individual action, and that our institutions must respect the sound fundamentals of both. A friend of the people does not provide men with freebies at any level. He frees them from the slavery of providing those freebies to other men.
Many Presidents have become historic names, while others are all but forgotten. George Washington was historic even while he lived; there has never been another President like him. Lincolnâs calm honor and intelligence shined through the catastrophic realities of the Civil War, while Franklin D. Rooseveltâs memory survives mainly due to the trauma surrounding his periodâthe Great Depression and World War II. John F. Kennedy stood for all that a sound, loyal American should stand forâhe was another Lincoln, while Johnson fed our people into the furnace, starting with his own predecessor. Then there is Andrew Jacksonâmy favorite Presidentâthe man who killed the private banking monopoly and paid off the national debt, both which must be done again. He flaunted the power of the Presidency as a true grass roots American, supporting tariffs and dodging bullets; my kind of guy. He knew exactly what he was doing as chief executive, exactly who the greatest threat to our freedom was, and he wasnât afraid to face it, and that is just the kind of leader we need today.
A man fit for office has seen enough of the world to encompass an experienced view, so he is at least in his thirties. He has a solid legal, business, and military background so that he is wise, realistic, profit and freedom oriented, and is conservatively attuned not to risk it. He is fully accountable, honestly using State funds for State obligations. He is passionate about America, respects the Republic, respects American sovereignty, our moral standing, and our leadership example among nations. He understands the truth of banking history and sound economics and watches the countryâs checkbook closely. He has seen it all, and he is no patsy. He knows when he is being lied to. He knows who is pulling whose strings, and he is not about to spend his life as a puppet or a fool for evil. He is not a master liar, but a master of reason. His job is to uphold the Constitutionâan obligation by moral choiceâand regardless of his party affiliation, his protection of the strong, independent, stable, and healthy living flow of the people is his highest awareness and responsibility.
Regardless of whether he ever attains the presidency, a responsible politician shows his respect for the Republic by never undermining due process. He knows his role as Congressman or Senator is critical to the Republic; that there is a balance of power to guarantee public representation, and his fully coherent dedication is necessary to assure that the conscious deliberation of issues and others are checked. He knows how cowards use power, and he isnât one of them.
Political priorities in brief are first and foremost, orderâto secure the internal and external safety of the citizens. Second is the financial health and credit of the government, which assures the longevity and independent grasp of its power structure. Third is political sovereignty, or purity from foreign or corrupt influences detrimental to national security, prosperity, and political integrity. Since the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913, we have had only one stable leg on the floor.
No private interest should be granted a power which threatens the prevailing order. The conviction of our Forefathers should never be lost, and should remain at the base of any legislation proposed. âManâs motive power is his moral code.â âAtlas Shrugged. It was our Founding Fatherâs dedication to moral values that made our society possibleâa system designed to protect the human spirit, which has manifested itself as skyscrapers, spacecraft and long, peaceful, happy lives. I have never encountered a more honorable group of leaders, nor a better fundamental system of economics; certainly no politician today attempting to alter the system can compete. It is crucial that the founding principles of our country be preserved in their morally sound, original form.
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN
Franklin was a man who respected existence and consciousness, verbatim. He knew that existence itself required him to practice specific processes in order to advance, and he held it in his best interest to support a country that respected this requirement. In many other countries at the time and even today, rational cognition was considered treason, but his thoughtful innocence as a holder of public trust stuns me even now. He made every piece of reasoning complete in itself, bringing deliberation to an art form, and showed how any man, no matter how modest of intellect, can grasp and follow the moral path when those of strength have the honor to present it. With so straight-forward, calm, and thoughtful an approach, he stands as a monument to what is meant when we think of an American.
Many politicians were shocked that Benjamin Franklin did not tuck public money away from the war effort into his own private accounts as so many other generals did. It wasnât that Franklin put the countryâs interest ahead of his own; Franklin knew that an act of cowardice was not in his own best interest. He knew that the fate of a Republic that secured his freedom was his highest self-interest, and that becoming a petty thief was not. Having brought so many ideas in politics, science, and societal flow that are still in use, his use of moral energy was phenomenalâand timeless. In salute to him, his soldiers often drew their swords; a display that enraged inferior generals. That so purely moral a man has ever walked the Earth surely means a trail exists for the rest to pick up on.
Clean Government: Does Capitalism Qualify?
âIt is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.â âThomas Paine
What do we want from our government? First of all, a safe, secure environment; a sound base from which we can build and grow. We imagine an army that runs to our defense and noble individuals dealing with foreign officials to protect us and guarantee fairness between nations. But often, we straddle the dilemma of assuring government effectiveness versus suffering government interference. The expected result is peace and stability; our pleasant contemplation of never-ending tomorrows, enjoying today and looking forward to every step we take along the path of our lives. What do our freedom and stability depend on?
The birth of our country was the birth of an idea of how men were to engage each otherâfor once having the courage not to cannibalize. No two philosophies are more desperately needed or are more intentionally subverted than morality and economics (and the subversion of the first makes the subversion of the second possible). A proper code of ethics focuses on the entity it protects: the individual. Sound economics focuses on the proper interrelation of individuals (not sociology, democracy, Communism, or any governmental body, as is often taught). Capitalism simply stands for the right of an individual citizen to make his own economic decisionsâto use his own judgment in deciding what to offer, what to buy, and who to trade with. Any other system denies him these rights (and the use of cognition), tells him what he needs, and forces him to accept it.
Why Socialism could gain acceptance by totally violating the natural requirements of the entity it governed isnât unfathomable anymore, but it is certainly unforgivable. Self-made man would say, âUnder capitalism, I can work as hard as I want and keep the results? Awesome!â While Fear-driven man would say, âUnder socialism, whether I work or not, I get a cut of what others make? Awesome!â Capitalism rewards the best foot anyone puts forward. Socialism declares that society as a whole should own everything to assure equalitarian distribution, without addressing the equality of effort. They attempt to sustain the unproductive by harnessing the productive, but the good of others, or the âpublic good,â can never violate the good of an individual. The individual is the measure. Look at Marxist dogma and you wonât see any complex or carefully deliberated laws, but only threats and reproachesâthe result of an uneducated and undisciplined consciousness looking to defy itself. At this time in history, you will see socialists decrying the failure of capitalism as a confirmation of their own agenda, but it is not capitalism that has failed. Capitalism in its purest form is called laissez-faire, meaning unregulated free-enterprise. But morally speaking, âwithout government regulationâ does not mean without standards. Industries are expected to self-regulate and guarantee quality in graduated levels. High standards were thought to be the natural result of competition, but with a heavily-indebted populace, the cheapest product that promises more than it can deliver wins, bringing us right back to âslick-salesman and suckerâ cannibalism. Capitalism is a sound institutional structure and has not failed us. Fraud on an enormous scale is what failed us; fraud in the financial markets and a mutated business culture of executive embezzlementâmen who strip the lifeblood out of companies in defiance of their proper operation. These men are NOT the Self-made, and deserve no moral protection in his name. They are world-robbing pirates deserving time and restitution.
That you can find a job that matches your own interests, that both you and your employer have a choice in the matter of arrangements and that you work steadily to receive a regular paycheck, the world has a political label for you: Capitalist, and a corresponding hate group. But in fact, capitalism is the only socioeconomic system that completes the pattern of life, respecting Manâs nature and securing the land for his potential stature. It leaves him free to choose his own loyalties, free to test his adult capacities, and to do it all alone, without the fear of being devoured. To answer the age-old question fought over since the Cold War, âWho is going to build a better world?â Thatâs right, the builders.
Bad Business: Employers and Employees Acting Out
While a free system of exchange is what we should honor and preserve, history has recorded countless abuses inflicted when the Fear-driven gain control. All men in positions of authority work to actualize their own psychological bias towards life or death. As Iâve said in trying consultations, âWe can work to advance your business, or I can help you run it into the groundâwhatever the hell you want to do.â As employees, we are just limbs. Such an arm can be alive and well, just wiggling away, while the rest of the company is on its deathbed. If the head is faulty, it will die, and it should die.
It never ceases to amaze me that the biggest contributor to a profit and loss statementâhuman resourcesâhas nothing to do with profit and loss. Company presidents leave it in the hands of some amiable ink-blot specialist, restricts the hiring budget, and closes his door to the issue of manpower. Employees are then hired by the âlow pay and high hopesâ method. Quality is driven out while schooled incompetence and fresh inexperience is then allowed to destroy the company.
Many companies hire by degree, saving themselves the trauma of personal evaluation. But degrees donât make money. How will a business fail if MBA is after the presidentâs name? Will it spiral to the left instead of the right? Smart managers assemble teams of the best available, whose selection is based on ability. To attract it, you must be able to identify it. To keep it, you must have the deepest regard for it.
Irrational Employers
Bad managers tailor their management style to their own cowardice, seeking the protective exoskeleton of a companyâs structure to unwittingly obey. Fear impairs his ability to distinguish essential profitable actions from inessentials, so company policy and supplication replace his judgment. They bow above and backstab below, undermining those abler and training their subordinates to do likewise. Corporate dysfunction reveals the same elements found in Communismâthe manic pursuit of the sure thingâwhich is what all Fear-driven men do when they are in control. Its people become dysfunctional due to low morale and misguided objectives, and no one can figure out why. The problem persists because often, upper managers were products of the âlow pay and high hopesâ formula as well.
Bad managers expect supplicationâthe King and Queen syndrome of old. They expect to be bowed to and to command the whip-driven slave worker who is not to be relied on to think. With no internal frame of moral reference, the fear-based mind panics and operates by the latest business fad. When spooked, he breaks that direction and goes off in another, leaving everyone lost without clear expectations. Employees must respond to his constantly shifting center of gravity.
He crawls before his customers, submitting to their will, rational or not. He rapes his suppliers, violating agreements and bullying, resulting in lower quality and stronger competitors. To him, no violation of ethics is out of the questionâlying, pressuring, even annoying his customers to gain a sale, with deception, telemarketing, and personal invasion. He lobbies for unfair advantages and exploits international slave labor, to bar others from reaching markets he wishes to hold captive. This is predation instead of creationâusing others up instead of respecting the universal pattern of life in turn.
If you are a manager, ask yourself: how many people did my company throw out of work in the last recession? Is my business now geared to shed employees fast, or to properly weather downturns without disrupting lives? Is there any reason to expect loyalty as a result?
Irrational Employees
Employees are equally prone to functioning from fear. The submissive employee acts like a captive, relishing any excuse to despise those above him. He seeks an exoskeletal frame as well, such as strict adherence to company policy, rank, or seniority, as substitute for his productive value to the company. He lies, steals, cheats time, and takes credit for the work of others, and when hostilities arise, he is defeated in advance, acting like a child being dragged away for a spanking.
Ultimately, rational employers pay for ability, so there is no need for employees to feel they hold a weaker position. We need each other. It doesnât matter if employees are replaceable; employers are, too.
Arts that Leads to Atlantis
We see the most moral controversy in the subject of art and entertainment, and rightly so. It is hard to describe the reactions we have to it, but our artistic likes and dislikes are very important. They show how we feel about human beings and how we feel about our world. What we all prefer in art indicates the future advance or decline of America, and how quickly we can change things.
Everyoneâs life should feel like a work of art. Those who seek fulfillment by achieving the best within themselves will wish to experience and express it through every physical sense and their guiding power: our deepest understanding and emotions. We need to bring the deepest meaning of our lives as well as our most passionate expression towards it into our immediate awareness. Since our pursuit of values is lifelong, we need regular spans of time where we can experience a sense of completionâthe reward of our values having been achieved. Romantic art satisfies this desire. What is truly ideal? What should we be? What is worth working for and striving towards? Romanticism is a sanctuary for the best within usâwhere the results of our effort are loved, encouraged, and fostered. Such art gratifies living effort, stylizing every facet of Man and of existence, every kind of thought, every shade of emotion, every shape of detail, and the grace in action of all living things.
A romantic artist shares the reward of his own mental state, revealing his deepest view of our stature and our environment. What he chooses to present in colors, in landscape, in words, in musical harmony, or in form, is what he finds most significant. To the extent that an artist is rational, his work will reflect living values. His style will reflect his intelligence and his skill will reveal the effort he brings to achieve his values.
An irrational artist will be just as passionate about destroying values as we are about enjoying them. History is littered with the distortions of those at odds with existence in every artistic medium. They corrupt beauty, purpose, and discipline in preference to the repulsive, the aimless, and the indefinable. Such artists are made popular by their spiritual equivalents and are tolerated by the rest of us through moral confusion.
Parents have been concerned for eons about the effect rock stars and movie heroes have on our children, and they are right to be concerned. What kids are shown gives them alternatives they wouldnât otherwise have had, and they can be constructive or destructive. We need to be aware of its moral impactâbe it a movie, a video game, or a CDâto counter or underscore its influence. That understanding also reveals the integrity of the businessmen behind the product. It is fascinating to see the exact moral countenance of those whose work you are observing. By acquiring it, when you encounter offensive nonsense, you will never be speechless in this regard again.
Those conscious of the virtue in their own lifestyles can remain aware of this artistic link at all times, allowing romanticism to accent their every endeavor. This fulfillment can be enjoyed any time you look to see that your choices are the right choices. All human ideals have artistic value and emit a sense of glamour; and if you stay true to them, you deserve to bask in the light of this most precious reward.
Poison by Land, Sea, and Air
âMistakes of this size are never made innocently.â
âAyn Rand
Nowadays, we see jets fly high overhead leaving long contrails; but instead of dissipating quickly as normal, the contrails expand wider and wider until they become a general haze. As described by Professor David Keith on the BBC show HARDTalk, jet-sprayed aerosols, known as chemtrails, are the governmentâs attempt to control climate change. But what is in this haze?
Environmentalists and concerned citizens around the world have been monitoring a buildup of heavy metals in air, rainwater, and soil in areas of heavy chemtrail activity. Soil samples in Alberta show aluminum 7 times higher than safe limits. A 2008 air quality report in Phoenix showed barium at 278x toxic limits, copper at 98x toxic limits, manganese at 5,820x toxic limits, zinc at 593x toxic limits, cadmium at 126x toxic limits, chromium at 282x toxic limits, nickel at 169x toxic limits, aluminum at 6,400x toxic limits, iron at 28,000x toxic limits, magnesium at 5x toxic limits, potassium at 793x toxic limits, and sodium at 16x toxic limits. Forty more samples have been tested since then, most showing high levels of aluminum. Several websites and organizations are now collecting reports on elevated toxin levels from around the world in soil, air, water, and blood samples.
Should a group wish to choke off all life on the planet, this seems like a good way to do it. The Naziâs deceived people to their deaths by herding them into a box and gassing them. We spray hornetâs nests and spiders to keep them at bay, and now we are being sprayed like bugs. The cover story is geoengineering to help the environment or weather modification for military purposes, but the results are poisons, well above safety limits, raining down on all plant, animal, and human life, polluting the entire food chain. In these areas, plants are dying, wildfires are raging, and nothing will grow. More recent reports involve the jet-aerosol spraying of lithium and freeze-dried blood over cities. Lithium is highly toxic and is prescribed by psychiatrists as a mood stabilizer. Why not Prozac? Or maybe eggs and toast? Breakfast anytime: just step outside.
We experience yearly cyclesâspring, summer, fall, and winterâbut there are 1000 year cycles, 10,000 year cycles, and more. Some Earth cycles are so big we cannot yet comprehend their sources. They could have multiple causative factors working in conjunction to yield specific conditions, none of which we can control. What can we control? Limiting pollution is inherently sound; there is direct evidence that all living things benefit. Get close to an exhaust pipe and you start coughing; easy enough to validate. So generating pollution on an industrial scale, such as spraying megatons of noxious chemicals and nano-metals into the atmosphere that are detrimental to all life, is not rational. To ascribe some loopy scientific justification for it just defies belief over what is not addressed.
At a climate geoengineering conference in 2009, solar expert Dane Wigington questioned, âNumerous air quality studies including from the California Air Quality Resource Board have named sub-micron sized particulates as being particularly harmful for human respiration. Through all the discussions today, I have not heard any mention of this fallout and has this been studied? And also the effects of a highly reactive metal like aluminum on toxifying soils and waters?â Professor David Keith responded, ââŠitâs not even close to being an issue.â Mr. Wigington replied, âSo ten megatons of aluminum dumped into the atmosphere would have no human health impacts?â Professor Keith responded, âWe havenât done anything serious on alumina and so there could be something terrible we find tomorrow; we havenât looked at it.â Professor Keith maintained that this was all theoretical and had not progressed beyond mathematical calculations, but evidence suggests they have been spraying such aerosols since the 1990âs. Government agencies are dumping these compounds in the sky around the world but claim they have performed NO studies to see if it may be harmful to human and animal life, plant life, and crops, and that they may have a big problem down the roadâŠthey simply donât know. They have no idea if aluminum is harmful to Man? Barium? Strontium? This is not blissful ignorance; this is science fraud and attempted mass murder. Toxic heavy metals are bad for people; in nano form, they are devastating. Saving the atmosphere requires human poisons? I donât think so. Getting rid of humans requires human poisons.
The cover story isnât even sound. Professor Keith claims the haze hides the earth from the sun, helping it to cool, when like sitting in a hot car with the windows rolled up, it does the exact opposite. Climate scientist Joyce Penner explained that thin clouds such as those produced by the jet-sprayed aerosols will warm the atmosphere (accelerating the effects of global warming), a viewpoint backed by data and the governmentâs own reports. It should be noted that Professor Keithâs work extends beyond applied physics, as he also serves as Professor of Public Policy. It is not surprising a media spokesman has been assigned to reinterpret this homicidal program for public consumption.
What we breathe, eat, and drink needs to be clean. All safety norms for toxins we encounter need to be front and center and monitored openly and carefully. If anything is out of line, it is our constitutional right (those reserved by the people) to stop what is being doneâby tax revolt or other government boycottâuntil the imbalance is corrected. Our founding fathers inserted such a statement to address what they could not anticipate. We should add an amendment to the Constitution to ban the dumping of toxins by any organized group in our air, water, or land.
Honest Labeling
âThe very word âsecrecyâ is repugnant in a free and open society. ⊠We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. â
âPresident John F. Kennedy
The FDA press release on genetically-modified salmon is heavy on marketing and light on facts. It states, âAfter an exhaustive and rigorous scientific review, FDA has arrived at the decision that AquAdvantage salmon is as safe to eat as any non-genetically engineered (GE) Atlantic salmon, and also as nutritious.â This is quite a loaded sales pitch for a scientific establishment to engage in. In another thesaurus-inspired statement, âThe FDA scientists rigorously evaluated extensive data submitted by the manufacturerâ, but the extensive raw data was not shared with the public. So how can the public know the data was not cherry-picked, or that any bad results werenât just left out? So they tell the public it was sound rather than demonstrate: âBased on sound science and a comprehensive reviewâŠâ Compare this to FDA conduct on any cost-effective treatment such as EDTA for heart patients and they slow to a snailâs pace. Their tone becomes riddled with doubt and obfuscation in equally non-specific language to keep it in trials indefinitely while Big Pharma attempts their own profitable versions in the marketplace (for example, there have been zero reported deaths due to Calcium Disodium EDTA in 45 years vs. Digoxin: widely used and FDA approved with NO clinical trials, yet risks a 21% increased chance of death).
The press release went on, attempting to quickly implement new labeling standards which protect special interests at the expense of consumers: âthe FDA can only require additional labeling of foods derived from GE sources if there is a material difference â such as a different nutritional profile â between the GE product and its non-GE counterpart. âŠthe FDA did not find any such differences.â The genetic makeup is one glaring difference. Our bodies often attack tampered-with cells, treating them as foreign invaders. People need to know exactly what their family is eating, but it is hard to convince an FDA spokesperson who just built a lovely addition to their home paid for by their favorite customer.
On Wall Street, the currency of favor is stock options. In pharmaceuticals, the currency of favor is patent rights. Big Pharma says to the drug approver, âApprove this drug and weâll give you partial patent rights to it. We will then license it from you for 25% of the profit.â So getting the drug approved is a matter of when you want your new income stream to start. CDC Advisor Dr. Paul Offit, who received $29 million (minimum) for a vaccine he helped create a market for, exclaimed âItâs like winning the lottery!â Of course, the gamble taken is with our childrenâs lives. This is part of the revolving door: industry executives may work at the USDA today, but they could work at Monsanto or the FDA tomorrow. On a special project, they may complete the proposal and oversee development at the private company or university, then âquitâ, moving their office to the FDA in the next phase to walk it through the approval process, then move to the USDA for implementation and legal protection to ensure its profitability. There is no objectivity and no independent studies, just horrendous conflicts of interest, lots of creative fraud, and no regulations requiring otherwise.
Nothing shouts âThe FDA is corruptâ louder than the drug commercials we see on TV these days. The first half of the ad is of beautiful people sailing, or laughing over drinks with friends, or a couple holding hands at sunset. The second half of the ad is âIf you are bleeding out of your eyes, if your heart eats a hole through your chest or if you start randomly killing people, Euthanoxin might not be right for you.â Common sense adds âIf this drug requires a thousand disclaimers, the FDA should never have released it, but our partners want profits sooner than later, and we want our kickbacks.â At $100 million for a clinical drug trial, it is easy for a big company to get an unproven experimental drug released for sale. It is almost impossible to get FDA approval for a proven treatment that helps the people but offers little profit, and may pose a threat to products of a large company. Return on investment is their primary focus; the good of the patient isnât even on their radar. This should tell you that these large organizations are not trustworthy and that your health relies on your independence from them.
Monsantoâs website states, âThe American Medical Association (AMA) supports FDAâs approach and approved a formal statement asserting that there is no scientific justification for special labeling of foods containing GM ingredients.â So the AMA, the most morally discredited organization in medicine, agrees that honesty and full disclosure are not scientific requirements? Who is surprised?
Monsantoâs website continues, âWe oppose current initiatives to mandate labeling of ingredients developed from GM seeds in the absence of any demonstrated risks.â Well, as a free-thinking American, I oppose NOT labeling ingredients made from GM seeds in the absence of convincing proof that they are safe: short-term, long-term, for all ages and physical conditions that may encounter the product. They go on to say, âIt could be interpreted as a warning or imply that food products containing these ingredients are somehow inferior to their conventional or organic counterparts.â That is the universal grafterâs wish: to avoid disclosing that their shiny, âhigh qualityâ products are actually Chinese junk. Besides, Monsanto and the Franken-fish enterprise shot themselves in the foot already: telling the public you have done research that shows your products are safe without sharing the research carries the same stigma as outright lying, and passing off responsibility for your productâs safety to a government office or the market itself is even less excusable.
If we continue to permit this axis of evil to rotate, eventually food labels will carry the kind of extensive disclaimers pharmaceuticals do. But such companies are pursuing a way around that as well. Preparing for disaster, Monsanto has simply written self-serving legislation and lobbied for it in every corrupt nook and cranny of Washington. The Monsanto Protection Act grants them legal immunity from the lawsuits that will come when GMOâs are ultimately found to be carcinogenic. Even if they sicken or kill everyone, they want to keep the money and foist damage and recovery costs onto the American taxpayers, just as the vaccine manufacturers did with their Act.
Ultimately, as long as labels are honest, it is your choice to buy clean, pure, natural foods, or cheap, synthetic garbage that looks like food, but leaves you hollow and kills you slowly. If I see âDistributed ByâŠâ instead of âMade InâŠâ I drop it immediately, aware that they are trying to hide the controversy surrounding its origin. I buy âFree RangeâŠâ and âOrganicâ when I see it. The only reason to fight clear and complete labeling is that corrupt companies are left with the risk of lying about ingredients and processes, and the fraud suits and public relations disasters that follow. If political subversion wins and we are simply not allowed to know, we can do nothing about it except NOT BUY (and a boycott would bring them to their knees). Think of the food allergies kids have today, the careful diets their parents prepare, and that they would be forced to play Russian roulette with their childrenâs health instead. This is unconscionable. Who comes first? Americaâs kids, or monopolies imposing products that nobody wants anyway? Only buy from companies who are 100% transparent with clear, complete, and honest labeling: what the ingredients are, what the packaging is made of and coated with, how products are grown, the living conditions of livestock, etc. If they donât share this information willingly, assume the worst. Make sure the companies you do business with offer public inspection tours of their facilities as well to prove their claims, and open their lab books to scrutiny. If they say âItâs the governmentâs job to make sure our product is safe, not oursâ, dump them immediately.
Lovely, free, inquiring, scrutinizing Americans deserve to know exactly what they are buying at all times. We have to know if a product is artificial and what kind of motives developed it. Domination of the food supply is a perfect biochemical weapon delivery system. With companies who have disregarded public safety so blatantly in the past, there is always the possibility they have baked in some latent gene designed to kill us all (or will at some point), so I for one, would rather eat organic. Spirit Murdering psychosis aside, a large segment of the population believes that genetic modification is the wrong direction for science to be headed in, and the last people they are going to trust are military/industrial chemical companies with extensive histories of developing toxic substances, polluting the world with them, and lying about it. The same goes for any of their like-minded competitors, subsidiaries, associates, suppliers, and past, present, or future owners. Just stay on your side of the planet.
No GMO products should be released for public consumption until long-term independent studies have been done to verify they are non-toxic and to identify any long-term consequences. I for one do not want to eat anything genetically modified, especially when modified by frauds, and I certainly donât want to be tricked into eating it. No unchecked company self-certifications should be permitted regarding issues of public safety. No patents for living organisms. The cost and structure of clinical trials should be reformed to accommodate our sacred American pioneers: individual doctors and scientists from whom truly revolutionary ideas originate. Any group with a large market share, especially those brazen enough to assume police powers, must have public oversight and be held accountable for their actions; not handed passes for misconduct or potential risks to the populace. The People are more important than any depraved revolving door scheme. It is up to us to reform a more perfect union.
Free Our Food
Our food supply is monopolized by a handful of corporations with highly controversial histories. Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, and Dow-DuPont have bought over 200 independent seed companies and now dictate nearly everything that is planted in America. Monsanto, a chemical company rebranded as an agriculture firm, is responsible for developing some of the most toxic substances on earth: Agent Orange, Dioxin, DDT, and PCBâs. They are credited with 50 toxic superfund sites where cleanup is near impossible and environmental devastation has raged on for the last fifty years. Even after Monsanto had clear evidence that the toxins were an extreme health hazard, they hid the knowledge for decades, sacrificing public safety rather than disrupt the income streams generated. Chemical companies with horrific moral atrocities on their records should not be allowed in the food industry at all; and certainly should not be permitted to control it!
I had heard Monsanto was evil for years, but never looked into it. I thought, âFresh eyes for the usual suspectsâ, but quickly found mass opinion to be justified. For example, Monsanto sued farmers when Monsantoâs seeds would blow over into their fields and mix with the farmerâs crops. Believe it or not, they sued for patent infringement! So dishonorable an approach is obvious, but right or wrong, most farmers couldnât sustain the lawsuit and their business as well. They would be forced to settle. Such farmers are morally justified to sue for GMO pollution: the contamination of their fields with unnatural agents, which fortunately, is the current trend of the law. Farmers now have legal protection against this, so the system can work.
Monsanto claims on their website to have launched under 150 lawsuits against American farmers over the years, wondering why, when they deal with a few hundred thousand farmers, such a small number would have given them so negative a reputation. What they donât mention are the thousands of lawsuits threatened and settled out of court yearly (4,500 in 2006 alone), the risk of which terrorizes their entire customer base. They employ individuals known as Seed Police, who travel the country investigating and intimidating farmers for infractions in seed storing. Farmers are encouraged to report on their neighbors, provoking such queries perhaps for competitive advantage, where accused farmers find it cheaper to pay settlements than to litigate and face Monsantoâs seizure of their land and equipment. Monsanto claims that the proceeds are donated for agriculture scholarships, yet the amount taken from farmers has been as high as $68 million in a year, while the amount given charitably averages less than $1 million per year. This gives decent Americans several thousand if not millions of reasons to despise them.
In a recent folly, claiming Monsantoâs product Round Up is non-toxic, GMO advocate and Monsanto lobbyist Dr. Patrick Moore said in 2015, âYou can drink a whole quart of it and it wonât hurt you.â The journalist then put a glass of the weed-killer in front of him, inviting him to prove it. Refusing, he said âIâm not stupid.â But they think we are? Glyphosate (the active ingredient in Round Up) has since been found to be carcinogenic, and 125x more toxic than regulators claimed. For all the spin and maneuvering Monsantoâs representatives have done to distance themselves from past atrocities, they havenât changed.
Monsanto sues its customer base as a regular course of business, and their competitors are now following suit, leaving farmers nowhere to turn. Imagine being able to do that. That is a coercive monopoly, and we owe no allegiance to those who hold us under threat. It isnât easy to gain monopolizing control of a fieldâfate of mankind type of controlâwithout deep connections. I expect that if you look into the core ownership of the firm, you will find political holding companies controlled by sheiks, kings, military generals, and ex-presidents, such as the Carlyle Group; men accustomed to control without accountability. Planning in advance for environmental lawsuits, Monsanto has layers of shell corporations they shed with each major suit, having one entity admit blame and pay penalties which amount to a small percentage of the overall profit, making it a routine cost of business. This practice should be legally disallowed, 100% or more of the profit relinquished, and the stench of dishonor glued to the executives and owners responsible. If the well-informed health and freedom of mankind means nothing to you, your corporationâs survival means nothing to me.
Warrior Note: Any wealthy group practicing or seeking police powers is ripe for prosecution.
Farming regulations should be determined by a firmâs range of public impact with stiff regulations for large industrial farms and light regulations for small farms. Small farms are the core of American health just as small business is the lifeblood of the American economy. The size of their operation must be considered, placing as light a burden as possible on small businesses operating on a shoestring. Seed patent laws for example have been a disaster for farmers as they have resulted in this Gestapo practice run amok. Legalizing patents for living organisms was an unsound and immoral ruling that should be overturned. Once introduced to the natural environment, seeds are out of their control, and quickly morph into something the company did not create.
By protecting the small farmer, we protect the integrity of the food supply. No one source would be in control of what is contained within the crops planted; no corrupt agenda affecting the masses could succeed. No seed monopolies or patents should be permitted: 10% of market share maximum. No conquest lawsuits that risk the existence of the small farmer should be permitted. If a considerable disparity in the size of the organizations exists (say 5 to 1 or more), all legal fees and any financial disruption that threatens the stability of the smaller should be provided up front by the larger entity that files suit.
To have the best chance to stay healthy and GMO free, buy from local farmers markets. Verify their seeds were not purchased from multinational corporations. We need biodiversity to be safe: a great variety of seeds acclimated to many different environments. Each area has its own conditions that the plants have accommodated themselves to and are best suited for. Farmers must be free to develop their own seeds, to keep them, to store them, and to replant them. This is the foundation of the farming process from its inception in America, and our health, our freedom, and ultimately our lives, depend on it.
The Lifeonaire program: Had I started out with this kind of advice, it would have profoundly affected the approach I used to achieve success, and what I considered to be success in the first place.
Bulletproofing your home certainly sounds like a good thing. When you prep, you have to think of protecting the lives of your family members, and all youâve stored.
The Lost Ways: Americans didnât used to have all we have today: electricity, running water, heat⊠and they survived. Back then, they called it âdaily life.â We should never lose these abilities.
