Archive for the Czar Category

Democrats Refuse to Hold Medicare Rationing Czar Hearing

Posted in Berwick, Czar, Death Panels, Health Care with tags , , , , , , , on July 26, 2010 by saynsumthn

H/T – Human Events
by Connie Hair
07/26/2010

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Sander Levin (D-Mich.) is refusing to hold public hearings to examine administration plans to implement a new health care rationing system at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS).

The president’s new Medicare Rationing Czar, Sir Donald Berwick, is a big fan of British health care rationing.

“The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open,” Berwick said in an interview prior to his recess appointment to head CMS.

Will government death panel bureaucrats bar age-related pacemaker surgery for grandma and prescribe a pain pill instead — as President Obama recommends?

“Apparently, House Democrats are really taking Speaker Pelosi’s ‘we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it’ style of governing to heart. Now, we have to hand the reins at CMS over to Dr. Berwick first so we can later find out what direction he will take Medicare and Medicaid,” said Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, after Levin refused to hold a public hearing.

Berwick was given a recess appointment by the President — a process put into place for emergencies that has been abused by this and other presidents.
Of course, Obama has taken this particular abuse of the Constitution to new heights.

Republicans had not blocked Berwick’s appointment. Senate confirmation hearings had not even been held before Obama made the “emergency” appointment during a week-long Senate recess over the 4th of July.

Now Levin, the Democrat chairman of the House committee with CMS oversight responsibilities, is refusing to hold public hearings to question Berwick about his “eyes open” plans to restructure CMS into a health care rationing body.

“At a time when Democrats have implemented the most radical changes ever to the nation’s health care system, they are refusing to conduct the proper and necessary oversight required by the Committee,” Camp said.

Camp also pointed out that Democrats are so secretive about implementing Obamacare that Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius hasn’t been before the committee in over a year.

“Despite the one-half trillion dollars in cuts to Medicare, estimates that health care costs will continue to skyrocket and billions of dollars in increased costs to small businesses as a result of their health care bill, the Committee has not held a hearing with the HHS Secretary in more than a year and has yet to bring the CMS Chief Actuary before the Committee this Congress despite repeated requests by Committee Republicans,” Camp said.

Berwick’s preferred health care model is the British National Health Service (NHS) having said he is “in love with the NHS,” Britain’s government-run health system. Berwick went on to say the NHS is “such a seductress,” that it is “not just a national treasure, it is a global treasure.”

News reports out of Britain over the past week show Berwick’s paramour has further collapsed under her own weight.

The New York Times reported Saturday that Britain is undertaking a massive overhaul to decentralize its disastrous socialized health care system.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.

The new emergency British health care plan — entitled “Liberating the National Health Service” — is downsizing its bureaucracy because socialized medicine costs too much, rations care and limits access.

One of the new goals included in the sweeping changes listed on page three at the link sums up all you need to know about Britain’s big government health care:
4. a. Shared decision-making will become the norm: no decision about me without me. [Emphasis in the original.]

Now I suppose they’ll let you in the room when death panel bureaucrats deny your cancer treatments?

The London Telegraph reported Saturday it had uncovered new cuts at Britain’s NHS including kicking terminally ill patients out of the hospital; rationing even common procedures including hip replacements and cataract surgery; telling dying cancer patients to manage their pain on their own if their condition worsens at night or on weekends so that doctors don’t have to come in to treat them; closing nursing homes for the elderly; slashing the number of hospital beds — including those for the mentally ill — and discouraging general practitioners from sending patients to hospitals.

Just last week the London Telegraph reported leaked documents exposing scandalous shortages leaving patients high and dry and literally on the operating table at cash-strapped hospitals:

The document records: “The trust in different areas had run out of underwater sealed chest drains, epidural packs, gynaecological disposables, radiological disposables, and the response to this was ‘this was a cash flow issue.’”
Doctors told managers “again and again” that consultants were unable to know that equipment was missing until the last item had been used, when their patient was already lying on the [operating] table, according to the minutes of June 16 meeting.

The document states that Chris Streather, the trust’s chief executive said the situation had improved to the extent that the trust could now pay some of its bills, but that he could not promise that the problem would not recur.

It describes “significant risks” to patient safety because of shortages of beds, and “chaotic” failures dealing with such crises at the trust, which also runs Queen Mary’s Hospital in Sidcup, in Kent, and Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Woolwich, London, and NHS units in Orpington and Beckenham, in Kent. Patients affected include a woman who had undergone major cancer surgery who could not be found a bed.

These are not isolated incidents in the system our new Medicare Rationing Czar finds “seductive.”

American Medicare is already rationing health care through denial of certain tests and procedures — and when Medicare denies coverage, they’re not talking about denying payment. Unlike private insurance, when Medicare denies payment, the government blocks the patient from undergoing the procedure.

Medicare patients today are barred from paying their own doctors with their own money for any procedure Medicare denies. That’s called rationing. Ask your doctor about it.

And while you’re asking questions, call your member of Congress and ask why Democrats won’t allow Sir Donald Berwick to talk about his new scheme for America’s Medicare system in public.

________________________________________
Connie Hair writes daily as HUMAN EVENTS’ Congressional correspondent. She is a former speechwriter for Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) and a former media and coalitions advisor to the Senate Republican Conference. You can follow Connie on Twitter @ConnieHair.

Florida abortionist on Haiti, “Stew in your own juices”

Posted in Abortion, birth control, Black Genocide, Black History Month, Czar, Ehrlich, Forced Sterilization, Haiti, Holdren, Joyce Tarnow, Maafa21, Obama, Politics, Population Control, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Racism, Sterilization with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 13, 2010 by saynsumthn

In the film Maafa21 Black Genocide in 21st Century America, Florida Abortion Clinic owner, Joyce Tarnow makes some stunning comments on population control. Among those statements are disturbing comments regarding Haiti, which she made to a local Florida newspaper.

In the interview below of Tarnow from Maafa21, she quotes population control author, Paul Ehrlich who co-authored books with Obama’s Science Czar, John P. Holdren. Tarnow clearly advocates Darwin’s “Survival of the fittest” and says that the US should not help those nations who “cannot help themselves.”

Watch Tarnow Interview at .20 seconds into this:

In a July 15,2004 News Times article , they quote former abortionist Joyce Tarnow as saying:

America “can’t take all the people in the world,” “We need to help nations that can subsist and let others wither on the vine.”

And how about this sensitive approach to countries like Haiti, which, she says, “has denuded the whole land“? “Stew in your own juices,“.

This is the way these pro-abortion people feel about people of “color” in my view. Just like recent comments by Harry Reid, it is time African Americans and minorities wake up and see how these supposed liberal progressives view them.

Is abortion clinic owner, Joyce Tarnow’s wish coming true after the Haiti Earthquake?

In the same News Times article Joyce Tarnow reveals her true motives:

Fertility is an environmental issue,” she says. “That’s why I try to get as many people sterilized as are in my way!”

Tarnow, is the former owner of the Women’s Clinic in Fort Lauderdale, Florida: which performed approx 800 to 900 abortions per year, with many clients being low income of Haiitian. Tarnow was a proud member of the National Abortion Federation.

Tarnow works tirelessly to make sure that the ones she didn’t get through abortion are NEVER allowed into this country through immigration. She is president of the anti-immigration group: Floridians for a Sustainable Population.

She is also listed on the anti-immigration group FAIR as one of their “local contacts” . FAIR stands for the Federation for American Immigration Reform and they are run by former “Zero Population Growth” and “Planned Parenthood” members.

A group which opposes Tarnow states that, “To pursue this agenda, Ms. Tarnow founded and leads the fringe population control group called Floridians for a Sustainable Population. A close reading of the group’s Web site reveals more of their agenda: they call for limiting families to two children; cutting benefits for newborns; higher taxes on families; severe restrictions on legal immigration; and more. “

Get the film – Maafa21 and watch it in full and see how the rest of the abortion industry views minorities:

UPDATED COMMENTS ON JOYCE TARNOW AND HAITI HERE

FCC Petition: ReEducation for “Conservative Talk Radio”

Posted in Czar, Fairness Doctrine, free speech, Glenn Beck, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , , on December 10, 2009 by saynsumthn

This is from National Religious Broadcasters

http://www.nrb.org

Last Friday I attended a meeting in Washington co-sponsored by the Federal Communications Bar Association. The subject was a petition that had been filed with the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) back in January, just as the new Obama Administration was taking over the reins of power. The petition is asking the FCC to launch a formal investigation into “hate” over the airwaves. The targets in the petition are conspicuous radio conservatives, but it is clear that Christian broadcasters would all be in the cross hairs if the FCC were to take this petition seriously. The petitioners are a coalition spearheaded by the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC), and also includes the United Church of Christ. One of the speakers at last Friday’s meeting was Jessica Gonzalez, an attorney for the petitioners. When asked by the attendees about the end-game of their petition to the FCC, Ms. Gonzalez declined to say that they want to see new anti-hate regulations t o control broadcast content. Yet the petition itself would certainly lend itself to that result, citing as it did the FCC’s supposed “public interest” power to eradicate slanted and unfair broadcast characterizations of people or groups. Instead, Ms. Gonzalez cited the need for a national dialogue on what her group perceives as the problem with some conservative commentary, particularly as it deals with the immigration issue.

Aside from the obvious point that the FCC has no business firing-up investigations merely to create a useful public dialogue on an issue, and the even more obvious First Amendment objections to this hate speech petition, what is most revealing is the specific remedy the petitioners’ attorney says they really want: namely, that the federal government should launch a public “education” and “awareness” campaign focusing on the problem with some of the rhetoric contained in conservative broadcasts. I can just envision public school curricula being devised on this subject as an example. Or PSA’s required to be carried on every radio or TV station identifying those opinion-makers who are deemed to be purveyors of “hate”; a whole generation being schooled that certain opinions should be shuffled outside the city gates and treated with universal condemnation. When I wrote recently that this kind of public indoctrination could well be one of the most dangerous consequences of recently passed “hate crimes” legislation, the gay-rights blogs considered me an extremist. But in our constitutional Republic, when the federal government is being asked to create an official orthodoxy of opinion on matters of politics, religion, and social morality in the form of “hate” inquisitions, and then to enforce it upon the citizenry through massive public “education,” who, I might ask, are the real extremists?

READ: Obama’s Diversity Offensive Against Talk Radio

Czar Kevin Jennings, Fistgate, and Planned Parenthood

Posted in Czar, Obama, Planned Parenthood with tags , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2009 by saynsumthn

Fistgate11 High School Students giving “Fisting Kits” AT
Kevin Jennings’ 2001 GLSEN Conference

by Jim Hoft
http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/08/fistgate-ii-high-school-students-given-fisting-kits-at-kevin-jennings-2001-glsen-conference/

In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money. During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During another workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?”

The clip is from a lecture by Scott Whiteman from Mass Resistance. Scott attended the GLSEN conference on March 25, 2000 undercover. He recorded this clip at the GLSEN Conference.
Here is the full exchange:

Male Teacher: … Spit versus swallowing – I don’t know about the calorie count of cum. All right. Is it rude? Let’s ask this question: Is it rude not to swallow?

Students: No! Oh, no! [Many “no’s” from the children.]

Male Teacher: No. So it’s in good bedroom etiquette … [unclear] to spit out?

You just heard a public employee ask 14-year-olds if it was rude to spit rather than swallow during oral sex. Kevin Jennings who ran GLSEN is now Barack Obama’s Safe Schools Czar.
Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings is the founder of GLSEN. He was paid $273,573.96 as its executive director in 2007. Jennings was the keynote speaker at the 2000 GLSEN conference.

Photo: This kit for fisting was distributed by Planned Parenthood at Fistgate II.

At Kevin Jennings’ 2001 GLSEN Conference an estimated 400 student attendees were given their own “fisting kit.”
Mass News reported on the 2001 conference:
Fistgate II was held on Saturday in the same building at Tufts University as last year with the same message about how to practice homosexual sex.

More students attended this year. Out of approximately 650 attendees, about 400 of those were students.

Kits of plastic gloves intended for “fisting” or oral sex were distributed at Planned Parenthood’s table in the lobby.

Public funds were used for the event with at least two school buses being used to transport students, from Methuen High School and Marblehead Public Schools. Adam Glick, Conference Coordinator, said he did not know how the buses were paid for. Other children were transported by public school teachers in private cars.

More HERE

and

HERE

National Health Care, Death Panels, Eugenics, and Population Control? Think Twice !

Posted in Abortion, Alveda King, American Birth Control League, American Eugenics Society, Anti-abortion, birth control, birth control in water, Black Genocide, Black Panthers, Brian Clowes, Charles Davenport, Civil Rights, Clenard Childress, Cold Spring Harbor, compulsory birth control, Concentration Camp, Connie Eller, Czar, Darwin, Davenport, Death Panels, Elaine Riddick, Eugenics, Euthanasia, Euthanesia, Evolution, Fascism, Forced Sterilization, Frederick OSborn, Galton, Garrett Hardin, Ginsburg, Glenn Beck, Guttmacher, Health Care, Hilda Cornish, Hitler, Holdren, Infanticide, Jesse Jackson, Joyce Tarnow, Life Dynamics, Lothrop Stoddard, Maafa21, Margaret Sanger, Mark Crutcher, NAACP, Nazi, New World Order, Obama, Pastor Stephen Broden, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, pro-choice, Pro-Life, Racism, Religious Coalition of Reproductive Choice, Richard Nixon, Robert Reich, Rockefeller, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Yette, Seniors, Slavery, Sterilization, Sterilizing agents in Drinking Water, Sterilizing agents in water, Supreme Court, William Bouie Haden, William Shockley with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on November 11, 2009 by saynsumthn

The recent uproar about Obama’s plan to nationalize health care has spurred much controversy. Hidden within the thousands of pages in the Bill is language that most scholars and lawyers can barely understand and includes legislation which, has scared many citizens. The mere suggestion that an elderly or dying patient would be required to appear before a GOVERNMENT employee to help them with “end of life issues” has sent Obama’s “Plan” into a tailspin.

What I would like to examine here is not the actual language, or whether the bill is really suggesting some sort of a “death panel” for euthanasia or rationing, but whether this type of idea is possible.

To understand some of what drives the fears, we need not look to far beyond the President’s own pick for his Science Czar, Paul Holdren. In the 1970’s Holdren published many books, several which were co-authored with radical population control guru, Paul Ehrlich. Although Holdren may not have absolutely stated that he wanted to add sterilizing agents to the nation’s water supplies to keep the population down, he did say that if the population did not “voluntarily” decrease, this could be one option. And Holdren should know, because he was on panels and in touch with high level government officials, birth control pushers, pro-abortion enthusiasts, and Zero Population Growth experts who were, in fact, espousing this type of coercion. Holdren stated officially that one of his mentors was a Professor he had by the name of Paul Harrison.

Harrison suggested that infanticide was a legitimate form of population control when he wrote this in his book, The Challenge of Man’s Future, from page 87 . ” In the absence of restraint abortion, sterilization, coitus interruptus, or artificial fertility control, the resultant high birth rate would have to be matched at equilibrium by an equally high death rate. A major contribution to the high death rate could be infanticide, as has been the situation in cultures of the past.

Holdren asked this question in an article authored by him, which was published a book entitled, No Growth Society,

Why, then, should we compound our plight by permitting population growth to continue?” He stated clearly that in the 1970’s the US had already exceeded its “optimum population size of 210 million” (pg. 41) and concluded that , ” it should be obvious that the optimum rate of population growth is zero or negative…

Many people are not aware of the fact that State GOVERNMENTS within the United States openly supported Eugenics. In fact, as early as 1907 Indiana had established the first GOVERNMENT “eugenics court” and the last GOVERNMENT Eugenics court was not closed until 1984, that was in Oregon. These Eugenics Courts, were GOVERNMENT Boards and they required the poor, the infirmed, “feebleminded” and minorities, which, included a large population of black people to appear before them to decide who could and could not pro-create. Remember, Eugenics Boards and GOVERNMENT Boards – were one in the same. Many of these underrepresented people groups were forcibly sterilized and coerced into birth control clinics in order to keep their GOVERNMENT welfare! Recently a well-documented film, called, Maafa21, produced by Life Dynamics in Denton, Texas, has exposed much of this abuse. You can get a copy here: http://www.maafa21.com. You can also google Eugenics in North Carolina, and read the GOVERNMENT documents which that state has opened up and get just a sneak peak of what a run-away GOVERNMENT board with this kind of power can do to people.

Preview of Maafa21:

One other important fact you may not be aware of is the history of the founding of the first group who fought for the legalization of Euthanasia. Most people are not aware that many of the exact same people who originally founded the idea of legalized euthanasia in the US, were the same ones who were on the Board of Planned Parenthood Founder, Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL). To examine this closer – all you have to do is get a copy of the New York Times from January 17,1938.

In 1938, just a few years prior to the American Birth Control League (ABCL) changing it’s name to Planned Parenthood, which today is the largest abortion provider in the nation, a group of American Eugenics Society Members and Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL) members got together and formed the National Society for the Legalization of Euthanasia. Heading this pro-euthanasia panel was a man by the name of Charles F. Potter who, in 1938 was also on the ABCL Committee for Planned Parenthood according to a February 1938, New York Times story. Potter was the leader of the First Humanist Society and organized this entire pro-euthanasia group.

Also on this pro-euthanasia board was: Sidney Goldstein who sat on the American Birth Control League’s National Council and later was on Planned Parenthood’s Board of Directors. Another member was Frank H. Hankins who was a managing editor for Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger’s newsletter called the Birth Control Review. Hankins was also an American Eugenics Society member. Another more famous name who was sat on the advisory board of this pro-euthanasia panel, was Julian Huxley, who was a later recipient of a Planned Parenthood award.

Mrs. F. Robertson Jones was also on this panel, she was an ABCL President, wrote for Sanger’s Birth Control Review , was an honorary board member of Planned Parenthood-World Population and a Board of Director of Planned Parenthood. ABCL Citizen’s Committee for Planned Parenthood member, Dr. Foster Kennedy, was also on the pro-euthanasia panel. American Eugenics Society Member, Clarence Cook Little, who was the President of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), at the same time he was on this pro-euthanasia panel. American Eugenics Society founder and friend to Margaret Sanger, Leon Whitney, also sat on this panel. Whitney advocated forced sterilization, was published in Sanger’s Birth Control Review, and openly praised Adolf Hitler for his Nazi effort. Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger was not on this panel, but she was a member of the American Eugenics Society and many of their members were on this panel. Sanger admitted that she gave a speech to the Klu Klu Klan and in her autobiography , she bragged that she received a dozen invites from the Klan for further speeches. Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest Population Control and some would say “Eugenics Control” organization and they receive millions of dollars from the US GOVERNMENT. Care to ask why????

It is important to know this because the “population Control” , “Zero Population Growth”, “Planned Parenthood” crowds are buzzing around this administration and have been heavily involved in government decision making for years. In fact, Sanger’s Planned Parenthood organization receives over $1 million dollars a day from the Government to sterilize and abort this so-called over-populated society. Planned Parenthood’s own research arm, the Alan Guttmacher Institute , reports that Black Minorities receive 5 abortions to every 1 white baby aborted in this nation. Is this coincidence or a form of racist and eugenic targeting? ( Special Note: Alan Guttmacher was a Planned Parenthood President and was also a Vice President of the American Eugenics Society. ) Remember that when they removed the GOVERNMENT Eugenics Courts, they appear to have replaced them with Federal Funding of Population Control Groups, like Planned Parenthood.

So , could we see potential “Death Panels” in Nationalized Health Care, or Co-op Health Care? You Bet! Look at those who have been advocating for euthanasia and abortion for many years and you will see that they receive large amounts of funding from the GOVERNMENT already. Do you really believe that if we can form GOVERNMENT Eugenics Boards which forcibly sterilized thousand of Americans, murder 50 million unborn children through abortion with the blessing and funding of the GOVERNMENT to the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, and form euthanasia panels to legalize the act, that we would never have GOVERNMENT death panels? Then…think again !

Just Sayn !


Also View: Robert Reich: Honest about Death Panels? “If you are very old – we’re gonna let you die !”

Elaine Riddick- Forcefully sterilized at the age of 14, full interview from the film: Maafa21:

Greenies vs. Bill Gates and the abortion/eugenics crowd featuring genetically modified foods

Posted in Abortion, Bill Gates, Black Genocide, Black Victims, Brian Clowes, Czar, Environment, Genetically Modified Food, Guttmacher, Holdren, Life Dynamics, Maafa21, Margaret Sanger, Nazi, Obama, Planned Parenthood, Population Control, Rockefeller, United Nations with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 2, 2009 by saynsumthn

An Interesting article from Frontline Magazine – Personally – I do not trust either side on this one:

Bill Gates vs. the Famine Lobby

Posted by Ben Johnson – Oct 30th, 2009

The left-of-center philanthropist says starving Africans should be allowed to eat genetically modified foods.

Bill Gates took on the Famine Lobby while addressing a forum on the world food supply in Iowa. Speaking at the World Food Prize Symposium in Des Moines, Gates took aim at the chorus of environmental leftists and organic food advocates who believe Africans should starve rather than eat genetically modified (GM) foods. “Some voices are instantly hostile to any emphasis on productivity. They act as if there is no emergency, even though in the poorest, hungriest places on earth, population is growing faster than productivity,” he said.

The opposition is significant, because Gates is left-of-center himself. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, with assets of $29 billion as of 2005, has focused on the “population” side of the “problem” in the past, sending billions of dollars in grants to such pro-abortion groups as Planned Parenthood; Population Action International, Population Services International, the Alan Guttmacher Institute, and the Population Resource Center. Gates has also financed such organizations as the Tides Center, the Tides Foundation, the National Council of La Raza, and has supported a gun control initiative in Washington state.

( My Note – More on Gates and Eugenic/Abortions in Maafa21 )

However, Gates announced he will issue a $120 million grant to increase food productivity in sub-Saharan Africa through the planting of genetically modified seeds. In Des Moines, Gates cited a Stanford study from 2008 concluding African farmers will lose one-quarter of their productivity within 20 years if they continue to plant the same strains of corn. However, “If the seeds perform well, African farmers can expect to produce two-million more tons of maize in a year of moderate drought.” Radio Iowa reports Gates has “committed more than a billion dollars” in all.

Taking on the Green Left

In proposing this initiative, he is standing up to the Green Left, which has long favored environmental “purity” to human well-being. Greenpeace cooked up the term “Frankenfood” to demonize genetically modified foods a decade ago. Jeremy Rifkin called GM foods, “a form of annihilation every bit as deadly as nuclear holocaust” and compared their cultivation to “Nazi eugenics.” So successful was their campaign that many ecological groups have equated the agricultural corporation Monsanto, a leader in biotechnology, with the antichrist.

Dire predictions aside, GM foods not only potentially increase food production but have replaced the need to spray crops with chemical pesticides, which sickened or killed Africans. Those farmers who spray can now streamline the process, saving them much time and money. The modified crops are more resistant to cold, drought, herbicides, pests, and disease. They also supplied nutritional gaps in the consumption patterns of the poor. For instance, so-called “golden rice” spliced Vitamin A into rice, which could stave off blindness among the world’s poor who eat little more than rice. (Giving credit where credit’s due, golden rice was developed with aid from the Rockefeller Foundation.)

The “Nazi” concerns floated by the Green Left have proven more theoretical than actual. Greenpeace has long claimed GM foods increase allergies; however, the World Health Organization – hardly a corporate, capitalist shill – concluded, “No allergic effects have been found relative to GM foods currently on the market.” Although six EU nations ban GM foods, Jaap Satter, a senior policy adviser at the Dutch Agriculture Ministry, has said, “You cannot say anymore that there is a scientific reason to be against genetic modification.” The National Research Council summed up the situation: “no conceptual distinction exists between generic modification of plants and microorganisms by classical methods or by molecular techniques that modify DNA and transfer genes.”

Some environmentalists seem concerned the foods will be too successful at feeding the poor. Al Gore has worried, “The most lasting impact of biotechnology on the food supply may come not from something going wrong, but from all going right…we’re far more likely to accidentally drown ourselves in a sea of excess grain.” Given the environmentalist movement’s hatred of population – best exemplified by Obama Science Czar John Holdren’s justification of compulsory abortion in the United States – this may be the real locus of their disdain.

So deep is the Green Left’s hatred of GM foods that even an organizations Gates founded has given genetically modified food a chilly reception. “The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa was established by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation” and the Rockefeller Foundation in 2006 “with the objective of improving agriculture in Africa.” However, its leader, former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan, vowed in 2007: “We in the alliance will not incorporate GMOs [genetically modified organisms] in our programmes. We shall work with farmers using traditional seeds.”

The scare tactics and shunning of American and Euro-socialist leftists is theoretical and faulty – but their mania has reaped a deadly harvest among the world’s most vulnerable people.

Let Them Eat Twigs

In 2002, Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa refused to accept tons of U.S. food aid for his starving nation, because the aid contained genetically modified food (maize, specifically). “Simply because my people are hungry, that is no justification to give them poison, to give them food that is intrinsically dangerous to their health,” he said. The deluded president continued, “I will not allow Zambians to be turned into guinea pigs no matter the levels of hunger in the country.”

The levels of hunger were staggering. Nearly one-third of Zambia’s 10 million people faced famine. Some 14 million Africans faced starvation region-wide. Nonetheless, the president privately upbraided officials in the UN World Food Programme for distributing GM foods, which fed 125,000 people in five camps. The WFP reported some impoverished Zambians “resorted to eating little more than twigs and ash from the fire in a brown soupy concoction.” Desperate, rural villagers broke into the palace where the stockpiles were rotting and stole 2,000 bags of maize.

In response, the World Summit on Sustainable Development, held in Johannesburg in 2002, signed a “statement of solidarity” with Zambia. Charlie Kronick of Greenpeace went further, alleging the humanitarian aid constituted a sick capitalist ploy.There is a constant drip of pressure from the U.S. government and biotech industry to make sure Africa is softened up for GM,” he theorized. “Europe is closed to them and they need a market for it.”

Others offered more than ideological support. Zimbabwe joined the boycott, preventing GM grain’s importation. Angola followed suit in 2004. Lesotho and Mozambique milled all such grain so it would not be planted and “infect” other crops.

Not all were limited to the EU and Africa. In 2004, Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez passed “possibly…the most sweeping restrictions on transgenic crops in the western hemisphere.”

Organic Astroturf

At home, the opposition has been remarkably well-heeled. National Review’s Deroy Murdock found:

In 2001, the 30 leading anti-biotech groups…spent $341.4 million, including Greenpeace USA’s expenditure of $23,748,737, Environmental
Defense’s $38,794,150 and the Natural Resources Defense Council’s $41,625,882. Between 1996 and 2001, this crusade’s lavish underwriters included the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation ($11,906,500), the Ford Foundation ($39,978,020) and the Pew Charitable Trusts ($130,996,900).

It also included a large portion of the organic food market. Somehow, this story of an industry trying to spike a competitor did not make MSNBC or the pages of Mother Jones.

Whatever the dangers, the prohibition of GM foods is a moral issue. As Velasio De Paolis of the Pontifical Urban University has said, it is “easy to say no to GM food if your stomach is full.” However misled he is on other issues, Bill Gates deserves credit for standing up against the Green Left on this point.

The question remains, will he do so on the issue that seems closest to his heart: the eradication of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa? In a recent speech on the topic Gates admitted, “two tools helped to bring the death rate down: One was killing the mosquitoes with DDT.” Before Rachel Carson’s crusade – based entirely on scientific theories that never panned out – DDT use had nearly eradicated malaria. Now, according to one report, “there are approximately 350 to 500 millions cases of malaria, killing close to one million people” annually. “Every day, malaria takes the lives of 2,000 children in Africa alone.” Yet instead of backing DDT use, Gates has sought to find a vaccine.

If Gates truly wants to put the well-being of Africans above political correctness, DDT is the best place to start.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Read: BILL GATES’ PLANNED-PARENTHOOD-PRESIDENT DAD INSPIRED PRO-ABORT FUNDING

More on Maafa21

READ: Study: Genetically Modified Foods cause Sterility – EUGENICS ?

Broadband plan: Net effect – Info Control?

Posted in Czar, free speech, Mark Lloyd, Net Neutrality, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 28, 2009 by saynsumthn

Obama’s Media Control Strategy

By Cliff Kincaid
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.

You may not have noticed that the Obama Administration, in addition to trying to seize control of the health care and energy sectors, is implementing a national “broadband plan” to redefine the media and transform America’s system of government. It’s designed, they say, to provide “open government and civic engagement.” But it looks increasingly like an excuse for the federal government to control the Internet and access to information and even tell us what is truth.

Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute recently explained at a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) “National Broadband Plan Workshop” that it is necessary to have “a common space with shared facts.” Armed with $7.2 billion of “stimulus” money, the federal government is going to provide this. It looks like various progressive groups are lining up at the public trough for their share of the loot. They have in mind what the George Soros-funded Free Press calls “an alternative media infrastructure.”

If you think we already have that, with public TV and radio, think again. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which has received $8 billion in federal tax dollars since it was created in 1967, is not considered radical enough by these folks. The Free Press favors an additional $50 billion “Public Media Trust fund” financed by a tax on home electronic devices. It also wants the federally-funded AmeriCorps to finance jobs for journalists.

A new national broadband plan, combined with the just-announced FCC plan for “net neutrality,” or regulating access to the Internet, provides the opportunity for the federal government to define a “new public square” with a “common space with shared facts,” as Ornstein put it at the August 6 FCC event. He explained, “It’s something that was easier when we had three broadcast channels and virtually everybody in the society tuned into them.”

Those were the days, you may remember, when Walter Cronkite claimed “That’s the way it is,” and many people believed him. We know better now. But Ornstein seems to be pining for the “good old days” when Cronkite and other liberals dominated the dissemination of news and information.

These days we have conservative talk radio, Fox News, and alternatives to the “mainstream” media on the Internet. It is obvious that the Obama Administration and its progressive backers don’t appreciate this new state of affairs.

Ornstein contrasted what can be, under federal direction, to what we are witnessing “now on health reform,” when so many dissenting voices are being heard. He added, “It becomes much more difficult when you have a cacophonous system with fragmented areas of communication.” And that “cacophony and fragmentation” is most apparent on the Internet, he said.

In other words, those naughty conservatives are standing in the way of Obama’s health care reform plan.

While the Internet is apparently confusing people with too much information, Ornstein said that the Internet also offers “multiple opportunities” to “develop a public square.” He made these remarks at an event presided over by Obama’s FCC chairman Julius Genachowski. The assumption of the exercise was that the federal government, under the cover of a national broadband plan, should not only regulate the Internet but provide new media for the public.

Assisting Genachowski is Mark Lloyd, Associate General Counsel and chief diversity officer at the agency. Lloyd used to work at the Benton Foundation, which is assisting this effort and previously issued a report recommending that the Obama Administration “s\should adopt policies to ensure that all Americans” have the ability to:

· “Know when you need information to help resolve a problem;

· “Know from whom, when, where, and how to seek that needed information;

· “Know how to differentiate between authentic and unauthentic information;

· “Know how to organize information and interpret it correctly once retrieved; and

· “Know how to use the information to solve the problem or make the decision.”

The idea of the federal government telling people how to “differentiate between authentic and inauthentic information” is frightening. But this is part of Benton’s “Action Plan for America.”

Not surprisingly, the Benton home page features a tribute to the late Walter Cronkite from President Obama. Like Ornstein, it longs for the days when the liberal media dominated the news business.

Once Mark Lloyd left the Benton Foundation for the Center for American Progress, the two organizations collaborated on a letter demanding that the FCC require that broadcasters meet “public interest” obligations, provide access to the media by various groups, and “enhance political discourse.” All of these measures are designed to give left-wing “progressives” more access to the media.

Now Lloyd is in a position to bring this about through federal regulation.

What we really need in this country,” Lloyd says, “is… a competitive alternative to commercial broadcasting” that would be supported by the public and “fully financed.”

It sounds suspiciously like the “new public square” is the “public option” for the media. But so far there seems to be little debate or even discussion over what they have in store for us, and how they have already obtained $7.2 billion for this extreme makeover not only of our media but our system of government.