permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: permaculture
List archive
- From: Rene Myers <solarkat12@gmail.com>
- To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [permaculture] More on Senate bill S510
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 13:59:26 -0700
As I am quite new to the Permiculture community, recently receiving my PDC, I have been a US Citizen for 36 years. I'd like to acknowledge the lack of citizens rising up to state their desire and need for clean, organic, sustainable food. Many communities are growing local and supporting their local farmers, but these are few and far between. We are not connecting the dots.
As a means for communication, how are we as a united community able to disseminate information, particularly the proposed Senate Bill S510, to non-permies regarding the possibility of growing their own food to be illegal and that the structure for those crimes have not, nor will be determined once the bill has passed. Obviously this is only a small taste of what Bill S510 is offering, yet this is a fundamental ethical issue of human rights that is being prognosticated against the Citizens of the United States. "Land of the Free" is no longer on the minds of the people, but "how can I get more, make more to pay off my debt??
" What avenues do we, as a global PC community have to arm against this proposed agricultural control by corporations with governmental and world authority in their "back-pockets". I ask these questions in hopes that it will generate a discussion and think-tank on methods for communicating to the non-knowers what is happening with our basic rights to nutrition and our lives.
In appreciation,
~Wren
On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:24 AM, permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org wrote:
Send permaculture mailing list submissions to
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
permaculture-request@lists.ibiblio.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
permaculture-owner@lists.ibiblio.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of permaculture digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. More on Senate Bill S510 (Lawrence F. London, Jr.)
2. Re: forward . On the ethics of Mr Skvorak (Annie Pollock)
3. Re: on an ethics of permaculture (and the us military)
(Scott Pittman)
4. on an ethics of Mr Pittman (and the US military) (kevin skvorak)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:35:51 -0400
From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lflj@bellsouth.net>
To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>, Market Farming
<marketfarming@lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: [permaculture] More on Senate Bill S510
Message-ID: <4C5F1527.1090903@bellsouth.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food
News - U.S. News
By Steve Green
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com
S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. It is to
our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money.
?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.? ~Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower
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.
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.
History
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:
COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
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 Organisation 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. It is (similar to C-6 in Canada) the end of
Rule of Law in the US.
< Prev Next >
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 21:56:50 +0100
From: Annie Pollock <anniepollock@tiscali.co.uk>
To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [permaculture] forward . On the ethics of Mr Skvorak
Message-ID: <4C5F1A12.7020009@tiscali.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I'm following this discussion with interest, far from both Afghanistan
and the U.S. and I'd like to add the perspective that sadly, greenwash
is a reality, and is most valuable to organisations, military or non
military.
Surely it.s a good thing to ask questions... and listen to them.
We are human, therefore we have the possibility to make mistakes, and
ethical dilemmas need time and consultation with others to see the
greater picture.
Just my opinion....
Can't write more - am knackered .. the gardening is easy, it's the
infrastructure that's the hard bit! ( I've been trying to get bean poles
in with minimum disruption to everything else! and it starts with first
find some potential bean poles in nearby wood) : )
greetings, Annie
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 20:35:26 -0600
From: "Scott Pittman" <scott@permaculture.org>
To: "'permaculture'" <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [permaculture] on an ethics of permaculture (and the us
military)
Message-ID: <5CB8516E69F24BA1A034B72580650796@ScottPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I feel no need to comment on the first two items of this email since it
didn't contribute anything to the conversation.
I would however like to comment on item 3. which I think is the heart of the
matter and displays a basic ignorance of what has been going on in
Afghanistan.
Comments in Blue
Scott Pittman
Director
Permaculture Institute
www.permaculture.org
-----Original Message-----
From: kevin skvorak [mailto:k.skvorak@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 8:23 AM
To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [permaculture] on an ethics of permaculture (and the us military)
-snip-
3) on the question of social ecology, the trainining of the soldiers did
not go on in a vacumm. there is a context, a context with an extremely
complex social ecology - a war and occupation. an occupation in which the
people on the ground in afghanistan see the US military with absolute and
reasonable suspicion. not a very promising context in which to reach the
hearts and minds of afghan people with PC ideas delivered by that military..
now it may well be that no harm has been done and that no negative
outcome will come from it in the social ecologies on the ground there.
this is very possible. I do believe tho that this concern (aligning PC
ideas with non-PC institutions like the US military) is dangerous and
potentially counter-productive for PC at large. it requires and deserves
careful consideration. i hope people understand my point here.
Re: "there is a context, a context with an extremely complex social ecology"
The late and great General McCrystal was sent to Afganistan to solve a major
problem, the U.S. military was increasingly loosing the PR battle, in fact
they were despised. The reason, apart from being an occupying force, was
that we were killing a boat load of civilians and the glib response of
collateral damage didn't wash! McCrystal was the one who decided to create
the agricultural project to work with small villagers, in conjunction with
his policy to stop the civilian violence. I personally think this was way
outside the box for a West Point graduate and agreed that less violence and
more humanitarian aid was a step in the right direction.
I went through a little of my own soul searching and then agreed to accept
the Oklahoma National Guard into my PDC class for the first section on
"ethics", principals, and pattern the remaining 10 days were spent on hands
on projects that we felt would be helpful information to the agrarian
Afghani.
i want to offer another short example, and i know people will see this as a
personal attack, but be that as it may here goes.
If you truly wanted to avoid a personal attach then you could just eliminate
naming the people involved - the example would still get your point across.
I personally have much more difficulty in accepting the UAE super green
desert city of Masdar as an ethical pc project.
a few yrs ago Geoff Lawton was working on another effort in Jordan. In this
case a USAID funded effort that required, in order to get the funding, that
it be an effort that included israeli participation. (the project as i
understood it was something to do with "plant quarantine" and i suspect the
Israeli and US interest was in access to genetic material from arab
countries traditional drought resistant varieties for israeli GMO
programs) it turned out that Geoff at al were not able to persuade very many
Jordanian NGO's to partner in the effort, something that should have been
obvious to him as first glance at the proposal, yet it was something he
didn't seem to want to think about. he just seemed to want to remain blind
to the social ecology involved, much less the potential consequences to the
PC movement for being identified in the minds of jordanian and arab folks on
the ground as being aligned with a project like this.
so, for me, this question of "ethics" it is about effectiveness in the
movement. if an average arab, afghan, US, any person anywhere has their very
first exposure to PC being a press release from the Pentagon about their new
green PC intiative to 'help' the people of afghanistan, (or whatever the
latest military effort is) do you believe this is going to advance, or
setback the movement of PC ideas into these communities?
I would love to see a Pentagon release about this training - perhaps it
would lead to training all the National Guard troops in agricultural and
appropriate technology for the rural population. Combine this with Rosemary
Morrows' work building gardens in the captol and we might just come up with
a major change in attitude and the parameters of the "social ecology".
That's enough for now. I realize this is somewhat challenging stuff.
I don't find this "stuff" challenging in the least but, rather, lacking in a
deep understanding of the subject matter, including ethics, which I think
are far more complex than has been offered in this conversation.
-snip-
with respect,
kevin
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 07:37:59 -0400
From: kevin skvorak <k.skvorak@gmail.com>
To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [permaculture] on an ethics of Mr Pittman (and the US
military)
Message-ID:
<AANLkTin2VJ_2FHFogZN7hFGDRE=4TTHoPzvNb_H=PZe7@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
thank you Scott for this reply,
again i appreciate it, and the opportunity to dialogue about these issues
you raised a question as to why i named people in this, specifically you and
Geoff. This was intentional on my part (so i'm glad you asked!)
there are a few folks like you and geoff that have the
notoriety/instituitions (as they are) etc to get offered these opportunities
to work with the US military, middle eastern elites etc.
You have put yourselves out there. (these opportunties come with having to
put up with folks like myself as well i suppose)
the main reason i was concerened about this whole issue enough to write
something, was not to feel holier-than-thou, or try to make some
irelevent point about who was more gooder or less gooder and who is the
biggest hipocrite etc. i feel folks were misunderstanding me in this.
my concern is that you and geoff and others that are working with violent
non-PC instituions like the US military, might be "shitting" in the
downstream social-ecology of other permies. i would hate to see some (as
yet future and hypothetical) permie across borders folks with the courage
and integrity of medicines sans frontiers get their heads chopped off by the
resistance forces somewhere because that resistance has already made the
connection between permaculture and their oppressors/elites etc
there was a reason i used the example in jordan that i did. there are
plenty of lame permie projects out there that i could name-call on that are
only serving the privileged class but i chose to point that one out because
it relates to my concern at hand. another way to say it might be- yes, by
working with the US military you can push a lot of dirt aroundand and
establish facts-on-the-ground, but if these projects come with a cost of
screwing things up for permies that might be working in a more
community-based fashion (which i prefer) in the future, it is too high a
cost imho.
i appreciate the opportunity to express myself on this. thanks for
listening.
kevin
*Scott Pittman* scott at permaculture.org
<permaculture%40lists.ibiblio.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Bpermaculture%5D %20on%20an%20ethics%20of%20permaculture%20%28and%20the%20us%0A %09military%29&In-Reply-To= %3C5CB8516E69F24BA1A034B72580650796%40ScottPC%3E>
I would however like to comment on item 3. which I think is the heart of the
matter and displays a basic ignorance of what has been going on in
Afghanistan.
Comments in Blue
Scott Pittman
Director
Permaculture Institute
www.permaculture.org
-----Original Message-----
From: kevin skvorak [mailto:k.skvorak at gmail.com
<http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>]
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 8:23 AM
To: permaculture at lists.ibiblio.org
<http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>
Subject: [permaculture] on an ethics of permaculture (and the us military)
-snip-
3) on the question of social ecology, the trainining of the soldiers did
not go on in a vacumm. there is a context, a context with an extremely
complex social ecology - a war and occupation. an occupation in which the
people on the ground in afghanistan see the US military with absolute and
reasonable suspicion. not a very promising context in which to reach the
hearts and minds of afghan people with PC ideas delivered by that military..
now it may well be that no harm has been done and that no negative
outcome will come from it in the social ecologies on the ground there.
this is very possible. I do believe tho that this concern (aligning PC
ideas with non-PC institutions like the US military) is dangerous and
potentially counter-productive for PC at large. it requires and deserves
careful consideration. i hope people understand my point here.
Re: "there is a context, a context with an extremely complex social ecology"
The late and great General McCrystal was sent to Afganistan to solve a major
problem, the U.S. military was increasingly loosing the PR battle, in fact
they were despised. The reason, apart from being an occupying force, was
that we were killing a boat load of civilians and the glib response of
collateral damage didn't wash! McCrystal was the one who decided to create
the agricultural project to work with small villagers, in conjunction with
his policy to stop the civilian violence. I personally think this was way
outside the box for a West Point graduate and agreed that less violence and
more humanitarian aid was a step in the right direction.
I went through a little of my own soul searching and then agreed to accept
the Oklahoma National Guard into my PDC class for the first section on
"ethics", principals, and pattern the remaining 10 days were spent on hands
on projects that we felt would be helpful information to the agrarian
Afghani.
i want to offer another short example, and i know people will see this as a
personal attack, but be that as it may here goes.
If you truly wanted to avoid a personal attach then you could just eliminate
naming the people involved - the example would still get your point across.
I personally have much more difficulty in accepting the UAE super green
desert city of Masdar as an ethical pc project.
a few yrs ago Geoff Lawton was working on another effort in Jordan. In this
case a USAID funded effort that required, in order to get the funding, that
it be an effort that included israeli participation. (the project as i
understood it was something to do with "plant quarantine" and i suspect the
Israeli and US interest was in access to genetic material from arab
countries traditional drought resistant varieties for israeli GMO
programs) it turned out that Geoff at al were not able to persuade very many
Jordanian NGO's to partner in the effort, something that should have been
obvious to him as first glance at the proposal, yet it was something he
didn't seem to want to think about. he just seemed to want to remain blind
to the social ecology involved, much less the potential consequences to the
PC movement for being identified in the minds of jordanian and arab folks on
the ground as being aligned with a project like this.
so, for me, this question of "ethics" it is about effectiveness in the
movement. if an average arab, afghan, US, any person anywhere has their very
first exposure to PC being a press release from the Pentagon about their new
green PC intiative to 'help' the people of afghanistan, (or whatever the
latest military effort is) do you believe this is going to advance, or
setback the movement of PC ideas into these communities?
I would love to see a Pentagon release about this training - perhaps it
would lead to training all the National Guard troops in agricultural and
appropriate technology for the rural population. Combine this with Rosemary
Morrows' work building gardens in the captol and we might just come up with
a major change in attitude and the parameters of the "social ecology".
That's enough for now. I realize this is somewhat challenging stuff.
I don't find this "stuff" challenging in the least but, rather, lacking in a
deep understanding of the subject matter, including ethics, which I think
are far more complex than has been offered in this conversation.
-snip-
with respect,
kevin
------------------------------
- Previous message: [permaculture] on an ethics of permaculture (and the
us military)
<https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/2010-August/037187.html >
- Next message: [permaculture] More on Senate Bill S510
<https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/2010-August/037188.html >
- *Messages sorted by:* [ date
]<https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/2010-August/date.html#37190 >
[
thread ]<https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/2010-August/thread.html#37190 >
[
subject ]<https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/2010-August/subject.html#37190 >
[
author ]<https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/2010-August/author.html#37190 >
------------------------------
More information about the permaculture mailing
list<http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
End of permaculture Digest, Vol 91, Issue 10
********************************************
Rene Myers
Organic Body Works &
Green Sun Consulting
817 Ruth St., Apt. D
Prescott, AZ 86301
720-939-2079
-
[permaculture] More on Senate Bill S510,
Lawrence F. London, Jr., 08/08/2010
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
[permaculture] More on Senate bill S510,
Rene Myers, 08/09/2010
- Re: [permaculture] More on Senate bill S510, Lawrence F. London, Jr., 08/09/2010
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.