STATE OF THE NATION: “President Trump: BY FAR — The Worst Environmental POTUS In History”

“First, this president, from day one, has highly encouraged and issued specific policy that has provided extraordinary incentives to fracking companies across the USA so that the Trump administration can sell liquid natural gas (LNG) to Russia’s customers in Europe and elsewhere. Secondly, this president has pushed the military deployment of 5G with a vengeance. He has even sung the praises of a “future” and extremely deadly 6G. Thirdly, there is Trump’s egregious failure to shut down the chemical geoengineering operations being conducted in the skies across the country — 24/7. Then there is the intentional weakening of the cornerstone pieces of legislation that undergird the nation’s environmental protection. Fifth, it’s now evident that there’s a total disregard for the health and wellness of the populace by the Trump administration. The BOTTOM LINE: Mother Earth is not happy, Mr. President!”

~State of the Nation

 

President Trump has been — BY FAR — the worst environmental POTUS in history. It’s clear from his many reckless actions, misguided policies and heedless proclamations where it concerns the environment, that he’s a real Neanderthal.

First, this president, from day one, has highly encouraged and issued specific policy that has provided extraordinary incentives to fracking companies across the USA so that the Trump administration can sell liquid natural gas (LNG) to Russia’s customers in Europe and elsewhere. This highly destructive strategy alone is enough to give him the award for the “Worst Enviro POTUS” — EVER! Hydro-fracking has been devastating communities across America since the BP Gulf oil spill.

Secondly, this president has pushed the military deployment of 5G with a vengeance. He has even sung the praises of a “future” and extremely deadly 6G. Truly, his zealous promotion of the 5G roll-out nationwide is enough to make him guilty of GENOCIDE. And, he became the world’s unequalled pitchman for 5G only at the insistence of it being developed in Israel. Hence, he owes an explanation to the American people about why such an inherently dangerous technology is okay for the United States, but not for Israel.

See: Here’s why 5G is NOT allowed in Israel where it was developed

Thirdly, there is Trump’s egregious failure to shut down the chemical geoengineering operations being conducted in the skies across the country — 24/7. Also known as chemtrails, these now ubiquitous toxic aerosols are disseminated from specially equipped U.S. military jets, nonstop, in all 50 states for reasons unknown. The U.S. citizenry is literally being sprayed like bugs and the government has never explained why and has only denied their obvious existence. (CHEMTRAIL SYNDROME: A Global Pandemic Of Epic Proportions). Any POTUS, as Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces, who allows the reckless and incessant pollution of the ambient atmosphere will have to answer to We the People.

Then there is the intentional weakening of the cornerstone pieces of legislation that undergird the nation’s environmental protection. This is where Trump himself has turned back the clock on the most important environmental laws ever enacted. Not only did Trump’s EPA move to gut the Clean Air Act, his administration has also been undermining critical protections mandated by the Clean Water Act. It’s entirely true that environmental activists nationwide consider Trump to be a one-man wrecking crew whose cave-man mentality will destroy the delicate ecological balance wherever he relaxes or terminates necessary rules and regulation.

Fifth, it’s now evident that there’s a total disregard for the health and wellness of the populace by the Trump administration. In fact, “a 2018 analysis reported that the Trump administration’s rollbacks and proposed reversals of environmental rules would likely ‘cost the lives of over 80,000 US residents per decade and lead to respiratory problems for many more than 1 million people’.” This willful negligence by Trump to safeguard the citizenry reflects an unprecedented repudiation of the most fundamental agreement (and basic responsibility) every POTUS swears to uphold. One wonders if Trump even knows how to spell E N V I R O N M E N T.

Lastly, President Trump has done everything in his power to push the stock market as high as he can. It’s as though the DJIA is the primary metric by which he measures his success. Quite unfortunately, this inordinate determination to manipulate daily the NYSE and artificially prop up the various markets has only emboldened Corporate America to run roughshod over the environment. Their high-paid lobbyists and lawyers are as busy as ever re-writing environmental laws in Washington, D.C. and every state house in the nation. In the end, it’s the people who will suffer greatly from this profound betrayal.

There’s much more to this screed, but the foregoing examples sketch out the general picture.

The BOTTOM LINE: Mother Earth is not happy, Mr. President!

 

~via State of the Nation

LISA RENEE: “Genetically Modified Organism”

“Once we gain comprehension of the NAA beyond the corporate greed and political corruption, the willingness to poison the human population’s food supply starts to make a lot more sense.”

~Lisa Renee

 

Genetically Modified Organism or GMO is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques (i.e., a genetically engineered organism). GMOs are used to produce many medications and genetically modified foods and are widely used in scientific research and the production of other goods. The term GMO is very close to the technical legal term, ‘living modified organism’, defined in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which regulates international trade in living GMOs specifically, “any living organism that possesses a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology”.

A more specifically defined type of GMO is a “transgenic organism.” This is an organism whose genetic makeup has been altered by the addition of genetic material from an unrelated organism. This should not be confused with the more general way in which “GMO” is used to classify genetically altered organisms, as typically GMOs are organisms whose genetic makeup has been altered without the addition of genetic material from an unrelated organism. [1]

GMOs are the Brainchild of the NAA

Genetically modified (GM) foods also known as genetically engineered foods, are foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA using the bio-technology laboratory methods of Genetic Engineering, some of which are subjected to intellectual property rights owned by corporations. The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming despite what the Controller corporations try to spread as positive marketing. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property over seeds and plant breeding, in order to drive agriculture in directions that benefit the NAA Controller structure for global slavery. This agenda is occurring at the expense of the farmers, all of humanity and the natural world.

The public are told that the commercial sale of genetically modified foods began in 1994, although it was probably introduced into the food supply some time earlier. Hence the long term results and testing of genetically engineered foods on the human body is relatively recent and remains a controversial and repressed subject, in order to avoid negative press in the mainstream media. GMOs were pushed onto the farmers because they still had to generate profits on mass produced foods to sell the corporate monopolies, while the earth and soil are being further poisoned, genetically polluted and depleted. When humanity lives out of balance with the forces of nature, the natural kingdom reveals signs of rapid decay, disease and pest infestation. There are little efforts to clean up the abusive methods of massive toxic waste and chemical soil pollution in commercial food production, but instead to squeeze out corporate profits by genetically engineering foods and livestock over and over again, to splice in new genes thereby creating entirely different organisms with new traits. Control over the world food supply has made the choice to eat healthy more difficult for most people. Even animals will not choose to eat GM foods if given a choice. However, knowing the clear reasons for GMOs it is suggested to avoid consuming them and to stop giving them to children as much as possible.

GM plants such as soybean, corn, cottonseed and canola, have had foreign genes forced into their DNA. The inserted genes come from species such as bacteria and viruses, which have never been in the human food supply. The Transgenes are also transferred to the earth’s soil bacteria and into the human body. Many of these bacteria and virus interfere with the natural protein transcription factors in the human body that are programmed to turn the genetic switches on and off. Natural genes can be deleted or permanently turned on or off, and the genes change their behavior and traits. Even the inserted gene can be damaged or rearranged and may create aberrant proteins that can trigger allergies or disease. Proteins produced by engineered plants are different than what they should be. Inserting a gene into a plant and animal genome using bio-technology results in damaged proteins that are passed on to those who consume these foods.

Thus, genetically modified foods can leave residue and metabolic waste material inside our bodies, as the human body has a hard time digesting and eliminating synthetic chemicals and bio-tech genetically modified foods. This produces GMO related contaminates which are similar to pollution. Most GM crops are engineered to be herbicide tolerant, withstanding large amounts of chemical weed killer, which over many years of use has produced super-weeds that are resistant to the herbicide, which increases the ongoing chemical sprays on food crops. These herbicides are Neurotoxins that are linked to a variety of diseases and birth defects. Genes that have been inserted into genetically engineered foods can transfer into the DNA of the bacteria in our intestines where it continues to function. The toxic insecticide that is produced by genetically engineered corn can get directly into the bloodstream and travel into organs throughout the body.

Most of the health and environmental risks of GMOs are totally ignored by governments’ superficial regulations and safety assessment, by citing rigged research by those with conflicting interests that try to convince the public that GM foods are safe. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for example, does not require safety studies and does not mandate labeling of GMOs. Currently there is no monitoring of GMO-related illnesses and no long-term animal studies. Once we gain comprehension of the NAA beyond the corporate greed and political corruption, the willingness to poison the human population’s food supply starts to make a lot more sense. This is why independent scientific research and reporting the problems with GM foods are fully attacked and suppressed, while any criticism of the published science behind the bio-technology methods of genetic engineering foods, remains off limits for public review and discussion. [2]

 

References:

  1. GMO
  2. Genetic Engineering

See Also:

Mind Controlled Gene Expression

Proteins

 

~via AscensionGlossary.com

ECOWATCH: “Trump’s EPA Won’t Ban Brain-Damaging Pesticide”

“Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA. Today’s decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children’s safety.”

Ken Cook – President, Environmental Working Group

 

President Donald Trump‘s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not ban the agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, a toxic pesticide that the EPA’s own scientists have linked to brain damage in children.

The decision, announced Thursday, was a response to a petition from public health and environmental groups who had pushed for a ban. The agency ruled that “critical questions remained regarding the significance of the data” on the pesticide’s health effects.

The ruling is the latest in a series of Trump EPA decisions that weaken chemical safety rules. In April, it opted against a full ban on asbestos in favor of restrictions that critics say could usher in new uses. Also this year, it issued restrictions on a paint-stripping chemical that were weaker than a ban proposed during the Obama years. Finally, just last week, it widely expanded the use of the pesticide sulfoxaflor, which its own scientists have shown can harm bees.

“Siding with pesticide corporations over the health and well-being of kids is the new normal at the EPA,” Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook said in a statement. “Today’s decision underscores the sad truth that as long as the Trump administration is in charge, this EPA will favor the interests of the chemical lobby over children’s safety.”

The EPA’s decision came after a federal court ordered the agency to make a final call on the ban by mid-July. Chlorpyrifos has been banned for home use since 2000, but farmers have continued to spray it on crops like apples, strawberries, broccoli and corn. The Obama administration had initiated a ban on agricultural uses of the pesticide, but Trump’s EPA reversed it, setting off a legal battle with environmental advocates. In the absence of federal action, states have moved against the pesticide on their own. Hawaii became the first state to ban chlorpyrifos in 2018, and California announced it would ban the chemical in May. New York is also moving towards a ban.

Research has linked chlorpyrifos exposure to lower IQ, memory loss, breathing problems and increased risk of autism in babies born to mothers who lived near farms where it was sprayed.

“What we have with chlorpyrifos is multiple academic research projects that have shown that actual children who actually live in California are being harmed by this chemical,” said Center for Environmental Health senior scientist Caroline Cox. “It’s pretty rare that you have that kind of evidence for any toxic chemical.”

So how was the EPA able to decide that the science wasn’t conclusive? The ruling was a direct consequence of former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt‘s decision to limit the kinds of studies that regulators could use to make decisions.

Under Mr. Pruitt, the agency proposed a rule saying it could not consider scientific researchunless the raw data behind it was made public, saying the issue was a matter of transparency. Scientists argued that studies measuring human exposure to pesticides and other chemicals often rely on confidential health information and argued the E.P.A.’s real motivation was to restrict the ability to develop regulations.

In opting not to ban chlorpyrifos, the E.P.A. rejected a major study conducted by Columbia University on its effects on children in New York City. The E.P.A. said because it was unable to obtain the raw data and replicate that study, which linked the insecticide to developmental delays, it could not independently verify the conclusions.

The 12 groups who brought the petition against the EPA vowed to keep fighting.

“We will continue to fight until chlorpyrifos is banned and children and farmworkers are safe from this dangerous chemical,” they said in a joint statement reported by Earthjustice, the legal organization that represented the groups.

Former senior EPA attorney Kevin Minoli thought that federal courts would ultimately rule in favor of a ban.

“To me, this starts the clock on the use of chlorpyrifos on food crops in the US.”

 

~via EcoWatch.com

DERRICK BROZE: “Trump Just Made It A Lot Easier For GMOs To Enter The Food Supply”

“President Trump issued an executive order aimed at ‘streamlining’ GMO regulations in the U.S. To critics, the bill is known as the ‘DARK’ Act (Deny Americans the Right to Know) because the law is also aimed at nullifying GMO labeling measures, such as a state labeling bill passed in Vermont. Mike Pompeo, author of the bill, criticized mandatory labeling laws as unnecessarily costly and insisted a federal standard was the answer.”

~Derrick Broze

 

President Trump issued an executive order aimed at ‘streamlining’ GMO regulations in the U.S.

On June 11, President Donald Trump quietly issued an executive order to “streamline” GMO regulations in the United States. The order, titled Modernizing the Regulatory Framework for Agricultural Biotechnology Products, is the latest move by the Trump administration aimed at promoting the use of genetically engineered or modified crops.

In his executive order, Trump called on federal agencies to fix what he called a “regulatory maze” related to the farming and selling of GMO products.

The executive order states:

“Biotechnology can help the Nation meet its food production needs, raise the productivity of the American farmer, improve crop and animal characteristics, increase the nutritional value of crop and animal products, and enhance food safety. In order to realize these potential benefits, however, the United States must employ a science-based regulatory system that evaluates products based on human health and safety and potential benefits and risks to the environment. Such a system must both foster public confidence in biotechnology and avoid undue regulatory burdens.“

The order goes on to instruct the Secretary of Agriculture and other officials to “develop an action plan to facilitate engagement with consumers in order to build public confidence in, and acceptance of, the use of safe biotechnology in agriculture and the food system”.

The executive order also lays out plans for the Trump administration to work with other nations in developing GMO policies. Section 8 of the order gives the Ag Secretary and Secretary of State 180 days to develop an international communications and outreach strategy to facilitate engagement abroad with policymakers, consumers, industry, and other stakeholders.

Additionally, the order calls on the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Administration to design a website that contains and provides links to relevant United States Government regulatory information.

Greg Jaffe, biotechnology director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, told the Associated Press that the impact of the order depends on how the federal government responds. “There needs to be an assurance of safety for those products,” Jaffe said.

The topic of genetically engineered food has been controversial for years. Scientists, health advocates, and concerned citizens have been raising questions about the technology over the last decade, including activists forming global marches against biotechnology giant Monsanto between 2013 and 2016.

More recently, criticism of GMOs has centered around labeling laws. To understand the current battle for labeling genetically engineered foods, one must look back to 2015. At that time, the controversial Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act passed the House in June before ultimately failing amid heavy opposition.

To critics, the bill is known as the “DARK” Act (Deny Americans the Right to Know) because the law is also aimed at nullifying GMO labeling measures, such as a state labeling bill passed in Vermont. Mike Pompeo, author of the bill, criticized mandatory labeling laws as unnecessarily costly and insisted a federal standard was the answer.

In late February 2016, U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts introduced another bill which attempted to create a federal voluntary standard for labeling GE food. Roberts’ Senate Bill 2609, or the Biotech Labeling Solutions Act, would have blocked mandatory labeling efforts by states.

In March 2016, the bill failed to reach the 60 votes needed during a procedural vote, with 49 votes in favor and 48 votes against. However, by July 2016 the labeling measure was added to the National Sea Grant College Program Act as the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard. It was that measure which was ultimately signed into law by Obama, placing the U.S. Department of Agriculture in charge of labeling America’s genetically engineered food supply.

Under the Trump administration, the battle for labeling has died down largely due to a lack of reporting in the mainstream press and misinformation which falsely tells Americans that labeling rights have been won.

However, in July 2018, an analysis of proposed rule changes revealed that thousands of genetically engineered foods may be exempt from upcoming labeling requirements. In early May 2018, the Department of Agriculture released a draft rule describing how the labeling law is supposed to be implemented.

Between May and July 3, the USDA received 14,008 public comments. The comments indicate that some of the public is concerned about the language used in the rule.

“The term bioengineered should not be used. It is both misleading and confusing to consumers. GMO, GE or Genetic Engineering should be used instead,” one commenter writes. “Please make all food items labeled correctly as GMO so consumers know exactly what they are purchasing,” another said.

The Environmental Working Group reports that if companies want to label foods which are made with genetically engineered ingredients, they must use the terms “bioengineered”

or

“bioengineered food ingredient,” instead of the widely known phrases “genetically modified” or “genetically engineered.”

Interestingly, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) recently conducted a survey to see how people respond to these different labels, including new symbols being tested by the USDA. The IFIC found that in every combination of label, the level of concern among consumers increased. In the survey consumers were shown bottles of canola oil without any label, with one of three symbols (plant, sun, or smile), with a symbol plus “bioengineered” on the label, and a symbol with “may be bioengineered” on the label.

As the USDA works to establish a uniform national standard for labeling foods that may be genetically engineered, critics continue to call out the dangers of putting the federal government in charge of the situation. Donald Trump’s recent executive order will only exacerbate the already confusing situation.

Americans who have concerns about the safety of GMOs will have to wrestle with the fact that these products may not be labeled and — with the latest executive order from Trump — will enter the food supply at an increasing pace in the coming years.

 

~via DavidIcke.com

ARJUN WALIA: “The Trump Administration Just Lifted The Ban On Bee-Killing Pesticides & GMOs”

“Is Donald Trump’s administration really Donald Trump‘s administration? Was the Obama administration really the Obama administration? Was the Bush administration really the Bush administration? The answer by now should be an obvious ‘no’, as so many examples abound where corporate dominance influences and controls the political will of their puppets.”

~Arjun Walia

 

In Brief

The Facts:

The Trump administration has rescinded an Obama-era ban on the use of pesticides linked to declining bee populations and the cultivation of genetically modified crops in dozens of national wildlife refuges where farming is permitted.

Reflect On:

After so many years of evidence and activism, why was this really overturned? What’s the corporate relationship with government, and how does that influence policy?

Is Donald Trump’s administration really Donald Trump‘s administration? Was the Obama administration really the Obama administration? Was the Bush administration really the Bush administration? The answer by now should be an obvious ‘no’, as so many examples abound where corporate dominance influences and controls the political will of their puppets. Yes, this includes Donald Trump, even though he’s not an insider the same way the Bushes, the Clintons and Obama were.

Powerful forces still impact the Trump administration, perhaps not to the extent that they would have for Hillary, who was nothing but a spokesperson for the corporatocracy. Goldman Sachs wrote many of her speeches, as outlined by Wikileaks, among many other things. Of course, the establishment tried to debunk Wikileaks, and blame Russia, but that’s another story. At the end of the day, they are all puppets in one way or another. Governments now sit functionally under the corporations, and the corporations sit under the financial sector, all the way up to the Bank of International Settlements.

If you follow the money, it’s not hard to see.

Puppet Administrations

We have yet to see a presidency that does not place corporate puppets or people of great power into office since, perhaps, John F. Kennedy. Administrations now brainwash and use propaganda and patriotism to create followers and to drive the masses to accept anything they propose. Roosevelt was clear in noting that political parties no longer exist to execute the will of the people:

 

“Political parties have become the tools of the corrupt interests which use them to serve their selfish purposes. Behind the ostensible government, sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day. Unhampered by tradition, uncorrupted by power, undismayed by the magnitude of the task, the new party offers itself as the instrument of the people, to sweep away old abuses, to build a new and nobler government.”

–Roosevelt

 

Dozens of presidents and politicians have outed the secret government over the years. Today they refer to it as the Deep State.

This is why we can never really know what’s going on, and exactly why presidential candidates make promises they can never keep. Almost every other world leader of a country that is not in an alliance with the United States, as well as leaders who are, have continuously spoken out about this secret government. The latest examples would be President Bashar Al Assad in Syria, or Vladimir Putin, who said after a US president is elected, “men in dark suits” come in and give him instructions.

So, either a president can bow and support and follow the will of their masters, or he can oppose them. Who knows what tools the Deep State uses to push our “leaders” into their decision making? Today, especially when we speak of developed countries, there are indeed governments within governments

EPA Ban Lifted

This is why it’s no surprise that the EPA ban on deadly pesticides has been lifted. These pesticides are not only harmful to human beings, but have also been strongly linked to a major decline in the global bee population. Some could argue that that industry is pushing bee deaths, like they push the war on terror, in order to drive the population into acceptance of a heightened national security state, or perhaps, in this case, the acceptance of GMOs within protected areas, a true natural hazard. As Jenny Keating, federal lands policy analyst for the group Defenders of Wildlife says,

“Industrial agriculture has no place on refuges dedicated to wildlife conservation and protection of some of the most vital and vulnerable species.”

It’s always necessary to think deeply and critically about these things, given the amount of corruption that plagues politics, government and it’s organizations like the EPA. These pesticides should not be sprayed, and the science is clear on that. The science concerning GMOs, as well, is very concerning. In fact, hundreds of scientists have now told the world that the GMO & Cancer link is real. This is important to note, because the bans of the cultivation of genetically modified crops in dozens of national wildlife refuges, where farming is permitted, is also a part of this.

It’s also concerning because multiple lawsuits have shown the corruption behind these products, be it glyphosate, or engineered foods. A 1998 lawsuit actually forced the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods. The files showed that scientists were lied to, brainwashed, as well as corrupted when it came to information and science. The lawyer published a book about it, called Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public. It has some great reviews by some of the leading scientists currently in the field.

It’s hard to believe that all the work that was done by activists to prohibit farmers on refuges from planting biotech crops, such as soybeans and corn, engineered to resist insect pests and weed-controlling herbicides, has been reversed. That being said, it’s clear that consciousness has shifted, the people don’t really want this stuff, so as we continue to move on into the future, you will see more health conscious people, less meat-eaters, fewer GMO eaters, more organic eaters, no matter how hard they make it for us.

As the Guardian Points out,

That policy also had barred the use on wildlife refuges of neonicotinoid pesticides, or neonics, in conjunction with GMO crops. Neonics are a class of insecticides tied by research to declining populations of wild bees and other pollinating insects around the world. Rather than continuing to impose a blanket ban on GMO crops and neonics on refuges, Fish and Wildlife Service deputy director Greg Sheehan said decisions about their use would be made on a case-by-case basis.

Despite the fact that we are making changes in our lives, the animals and the insects do not know, and we must speak for them, and be their voice, because they aren’t even given a choice.

 

~via Collective-Evolution.com