US Government wants total control of ALL food!

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by jack404, Aug 11, 2010.

  1. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Jan 11, 2010
    S510 - Illegal To Grow, Share,
    Trade, Sell Homegrown Food
    SB S510 Will Allow Government
    To Put You In Jail ....
    By Steve Green

    S510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. ( )

    "If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public's right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one's choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God." It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food." ~ Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower.

    Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto's Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create without judicial review if it passes.

    S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food AND FARMING.


    In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton's HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization "WTO") meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP.

    In 2008, Hillary Clinton, urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller*, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband's firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510.

    S 510 fails on moral, social, economic, political, constitutional, and human survival grounds.

    1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency. It resembles the Kissinger Plan.

    2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO, thus threatening national security. It would end the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994, which put US sovereignty and US law under perfect protection. Instead, S 510 says:


    Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.

    3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into "the United States." Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, "entry of food into the US" covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and "entering into" it by virtue of being produced.

    4. It imposes Codex Alimentarius on the US, a global system of control over food. It allows the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the WTO to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements. Its bizarre history and its expected impact in limiting access to adequate nutrition (while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc.) threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, since the world knows now it needs vitamins to survive, not just to treat illnesses.

    5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security. See Seeds How to criminalize them, for more details.

    6. It includes NAIS, an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically engineered animals on which corporations hold patents. Animal diseases can be falsely declared. S 510 includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite its corrupt involvement in the H1N1 scandal, which is now said to have been concocted by the corporations.

    7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production put it in corporate hands and worsen food safety.

    8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy. It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economies, out of the hands of the citizenry, and puts them under the total control of multinational corporations influencing the UN, WHO, FAO and WTO, with HHS, and CDC, acting as agents, with Homeland Security as the enforcer. The chance to rebuild the economy based on farming, ranching, gardens, food production, natural health, and all the jobs, tools and connected occupations would be eliminated.

    9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs. This would industrialize every farm in the US, eliminate local organic farming, greatly increase global warming from increased use of oil- based products and long-distance delivery of foods, and make food even more unsafe. The five items listed the Five Pillars of Food Safety are precisely the items in the food supply which are the primary source of its danger.

    10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control. The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postpones defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied. It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country, making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review.

    so soon your 5' x 20' garden is a bigger crime than drug importation??

    good grief...

    well all i can say is

    Welcome to the UN folks
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2010
  2. topper

    topper New Member

    Aug 2, 2006
    deep in the woods
    Catch me if ya can. They got to get past my old pal "CUJO'. He can make it to the gate in three seconds.....I gotta wonder if the feds can make it that quick?

  3. PharmrJohn

    PharmrJohn New Member

    Jun 15, 2009
    Western Washington
    Sounds like scare-mail to me. Like most things I read on the Internet, I would probably give it a 10% chance of being even partially true.
  4. carver

    carver Moderator Supporting Member

    Jul 28, 2008
    DAV, Deep in the Pineywoods of E. Texas!
    Section 101 -
    Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to expand the authority of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to inspect records related to food, including to: (1) allow the inspection of records of food that the Secretary reasonably believes is likely to be affected in a similar manner as an adulterated food; and (2) require that each person (excluding farms and restaurants) who manufactures, processes, packs, distributes, receives, holds, or imports an article of food permit inspection of his or her records if the Secretary believes that there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to such food will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.

    The blue highlight is mine. I highlighted this phrase to show that this bill seams to be not all that bad, but ............

    Here is the part of the bill that affets you, and I.

    Section 406 -
    Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to study the transportation of food for consumption in the United States, including an examination of the unique needs of rural and frontier areas with regard to the delivery of safe food.

    Delivery of safe foods can mean form the garden to your table. This thing is wide open!!!
  5. PharmrJohn

    PharmrJohn New Member

    Jun 15, 2009
    Western Washington
    Yeah, I can see that dude.....but you know that will never happen. They will create a subsection of the bill (that is 37 pages long) to describe exactly what the word delivery means (it will start out at 20 pages, but it will go back and forth and stuff will be added to ensure that the word delivery is correctly defined). Yep.....that's how we do things here....

    ....but for all the shortcomings of our could be worse.....
  6. dianalv

    dianalv New Member

    Aug 3, 2009
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Even if such a bill was on the table, it has virtually no chance of passing in the climate of growing awareness of the toxicity of commercially grown foods. More and more people are going organic and to local farms for produce, or growing their own. It's amazing how much of our produce comes from South America or even China. Consumers are becoming more aware of the dangers of pesticides and the risks of dangerous bacteria on imported commercially grown produce. We are seeing an incredible rise in cancer and diabetes. Many doctors are attibuting the increase to the toxicity of the average American's life. All the sugar, the plastics and the chemicals with which we presumably make our life easier may be killing us. There is also the use of nana technology to improve color and flavor of foods. Manufacterers are not required to inform consumers of it's presence in their products. Studies are showing that nano technology is a carcinogen. Most of us don't even know of it's existence, but it's in many of the products we use or ingest.
  7. Infidel

    Infidel New Member

    Sep 6, 2009
    I just spent an hour(that I won't get back) reading through the entire bill. None of it sounds like the scary stuff in the email.

    What does concern me a touch is, if you scroll down to sources of influence, on the page and look who opposes and who supports the bill, I have to wonder. Most things that big corps back up, mean that somehow they can make a buck off it. And the little guy will suffer.

    Otherwise, it may help to prevent produce from Mexico that has had human waste used as fertilizer, from being imported. You can buy it now at Wal-Mart and they have no way of knowing what it was grown with. Yummy!:eek:
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Australian Government wants Google to filter Youtube and searches Feb 11, 2010
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOUR RETIREMENT Feb 3, 2010
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Government Investigations May 19, 2017
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr The Government Can Feb 6, 2017
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Stupidity plus Government = STUPID GOVERNMENT Dec 7, 2016