Roberto Abraham Scaruffi

Saturday 6 December 2014

The European Union Times


Posted: 05 Dec 2014 09:37 AM PST


The European Union has approved a law that will enable the bloc’s 28 member states to restrict the cultivation of genetically modified crops, even if the EU has declared them as safe. The law comes despite furious lobbying from multinationals.
Previously, countries that opposed the cultivation of crops approved by Brussels potentially faced legal challenges. Now, any country may unilaterally ban a particular genetically modified variety of seed or even “groups of GMOs defined by crop or trait” and additionally demand that their neighbors do not contaminate their fields.
The EU legislation will come into force in spring next year, pending a formal agreement from the individual states. Among the states likely to find use for the statute are France, Germany, Austria and Poland, which have consistently opposed gene-splicing technologies.
“The agreement, if confirmed, would meet member states’ consistent calls since 2009 to have the final say on whether or not GMOs can be cultivated on their territory, in order to better take into account their national context and, above all, the views of their citizens,” said a statement from EU Food Safety Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis.
“The text agreed is in line with EU President Juncker’s commitment, as reflected in his political guidelines, to give the democratically elected governments at least the same weight as scientific advice when it comes to important decisions concerning food and environment.”
Some scientists and industry groups say the decision undermines the continent-wide system of certification, a key tenet of the EU’s common market, as well allowing irrational prejudices to overrule reasoned study. All previous EU-commissioned studies have failed to detect harm from GMOs.
Biotech giants had hoped that a clause would be included in the legislation that would force governments to consult with them before terminating any crop.
“Rejecting modern technologies on non-scientific grounds sets a dangerous precedent for the internal market and sends a negative signal for innovative industries worldwide considering whether or not to invest and operate in Europe,” said a written statement from EuropaBio, the European Association for Bioindustries.
Yet some believe that the new law will allow the deadlock over GM crops to be broken after nearly two decades of controversy. Due to opposition from the EU heavyweights, only one GM crop has been approved since 1998. About 0.1 percent of land on the continent is used to grow genetically-modified crops, specifically Monsanto’s MON810 maize.
Officials have speculated that the new nation-oriented rules will allow more leeway for proponents of GM crops, such as Britain and the Iberian states, to go ahead.
The new law is “finally opening the door to genetically-modified organisms across Europe, in spite of citizens’ clear opposition,” said Green MEP Bart Staes, who called the new proposal a “Trojan Horse.”
Meanwhile, market leader Monsanto, which last year said it would not try to get any more GM crops approved in Europe, remained unperturbed, insisting its business does not rely on favors from the EU.
“What we sell in Europe today is 99.5 percent conventional seeds. So if you think about it, we are not a GMO company,” Leticia Goncalves, the company’s Europe and Middle East regional president, told the media.
“To be honest, we have a very healthy business today in terms of growth expectations,” said the executive of the US-based company, which had revenues of nearly $15 billion last year.
Source
        
Posted: 05 Dec 2014 09:28 AM PST
A handcuffed Christmas Island detainee being led to a plane bound for Sydney and the Silverwater detention center.
Australia has tightened its controversial immigration laws by introducing temporary visas for refugees, which do not grant settlement in the country.
Australia’s lower house of parliament narrowly approved amendments to the Migration Act on Friday following a debate on the issue in the Senate, the upper house of the legislative body.
Dubbed the “temporary protection visas” (TPVs), refugees are granted protection for up to three years, but they will not be allowed to settle in Australia permanently.
However, at the end of the three-year period, refugees could be sent back to their home country.
The re-introduction of the TPVs, used by previous Australian governments, is aimed at dealing with the backlog of 30,000 asylum-seekers who arrived by boat from neighboring countries.
“We always said that three things were necessary to stop the boats, offshore processing, turning boats around and temporary protection visas and last night the final piece of policy was put in place,” Prime Minister Tony Abbott said.
International globalist pressure has mounted over Australia’s offshore detention of third-world primitive invaders on Christmas Island in the Indian Ocean as well as turning back the boats filled with these illegals.
Source
        
Posted: 05 Dec 2014 09:15 AM PST


Today the US House passed what I consider to be one of the worst pieces of legislation ever. H. Res. 758 was billed as a resolution “strongly condemning the actions of the Russian Federation, under President Vladimir Putin, which has carried out a policy of aggression against neighboring countries aimed at political and economic domination.”
In fact, the bill was 16 pages of war propaganda that should have made even neocons blush, if they were capable of such a thing.
These are the kinds of resolutions I have always watched closely in Congress, as what are billed as “harmless” statements of opinion often lead to sanctions and war. I remember in 1998 arguing strongly against the Iraq Liberation Act because, as I said at the time, I knew it would lead to war. I did not oppose the Act because I was an admirer of Saddam Hussein – just as now I am not an admirer of Putin or any foreign political leader – but rather because I knew then that another war against Iraq would not solve the problems and would probably make things worse. We all know what happened next.
That is why I can hardly believe they are getting away with it again, and this time with even higher stakes: provoking a war with Russia that could result in total destruction!
If anyone thinks I am exaggerating about how bad this resolution really is, let me just offer a few examples from the legislation itself:
The resolution (paragraph 3) accuses Russia of an invasion of Ukraine and condemns Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The statement is offered without any proof of such a thing. Surely with our sophisticated satellites that can read a license plate from space we should have video and pictures of this Russian invasion. None have been offered. As to Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, why isn’t it a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty for the US to participate in the overthrow of that country’s elected government as it did in February? We have all heard the tapes of State Department officials plotting with the US Ambassador in Ukraine to overthrow the government. We heard US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland bragging that the US spent $5 billion on regime change in Ukraine. Why is that OK?
The resolution (paragraph 11) accuses the people in east Ukraine of holding “fraudulent and illegal elections” in November. Why is it that every time elections do not produce the results desired by the US government they are called “illegal” and “fraudulent”? Aren’t the people of eastern Ukraine allowed self-determination? Isn’t that a basic human right?
The resolution (paragraph 13) demands a withdrawal of Russia forces from Ukraine even though the US government has provided no evidence the Russian army was ever in Ukraine. This paragraph also urges the government in Kiev to resume military operations against the eastern regions seeking independence.
The resolution (paragraph 14) states with certainty that the Malaysia Airlines flight 17 that crashed in Ukraine was brought down by a missile “fired by Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.” This is simply incorrect, as the final report on the investigation of this tragedy will not even be released until next year and the preliminary report did not state that a missile brought down the plane. Neither did the preliminary report – conducted with the participation of all countries involved – assign blame to any side.
Paragraph 16 of the resolution condemns Russia for selling arms to the Assad government in Syria. It does not mention, of course, that those weapons are going to fight ISIS – which we claim is the enemy — while the US weapons supplied to the rebels in Syria have actually found their way into the hands of ISIS!
Paragraph 17 of the resolution condemns Russia for what the US claims are economic sanctions (“coercive economic measures”) against Ukraine. This even though the US has repeatedly hit Russia with economic sanctions and is considering even more!
The resolution (paragraph 22) states that Russia invaded the Republic of Georgia in 2008. This is simply untrue. Even the European Union – no friend of Russia – concluded in its investigation of the events in 2008 that it was Georgia that “started an unjustified war” against Russia not the other way around! How does Congress get away with such blatant falsehoods? Do Members not even bother to read these resolutions before voting?
In paragraph 34 the resolution begins to even become comical, condemning the Russians for what it claims are attacks on computer networks of the United States and “illicitly acquiring information” about the US government. In the aftermath of the Snowden revelations about the level of US spying on the rest of the world, how can the US claim the moral authority to condemn such actions in others?
Chillingly, the resolution singles out Russian state-funded media outlets for attack, claiming that they “distort public opinion.” The US government, of course, spends billions of dollars worldwide to finance and sponsor media outlets including Voice of America and RFE/RL, as well as to subsidize “independent” media in countless counties overseas. How long before alternative information sources like RT are banned in the United States? This legislation brings us closer to that unhappy day when the government decides the kind of programming we can and cannot consume – and calls such a violation “freedom.”
The resolution gives the green light (paragraph 45) to Ukrainian President Poroshenko to re-start his military assault on the independence-seeking eastern provinces, urging the “disarming of separatist and paramilitary forces in eastern Ukraine.” Such a move will mean many more thousands of dead civilians.
To that end, the resolution directly involves the US government in the conflict by calling on the US president to “provide the government of Ukraine with lethal and non-lethal defense articles, services, and training required to effectively defend its territory and sovereignty.” This means US weapons in the hands of US-trained military forces engaged in a hot war on the border with Russia. Does that sound at all like a good idea?
There are too many more ridiculous and horrific statements in this legislation to completely discuss. Probably the single most troubling part of this resolution, however, is the statement that “military intervention” by the Russian Federation in Ukraine “poses a threat to international peace and security.” Such terminology is not an accident: this phrase is the poison pill planted in this legislation from which future, more aggressive resolutions will follow. After all, if we accept that Russia is posing a “threat” to international peace how can such a thing be ignored? These are the slippery slopes that lead to war.
This dangerous legislation passed today, December 4, with only ten (!) votes against! Only ten legislators are concerned over the use of blatant propaganda and falsehoods to push such reckless saber-rattling toward Russia.
Here are the Members who voted “NO” on this legislation. If you do not see your own Representative on this list call and ask why they are voting to bring us closer to war with Russia! If you do see your Representative on the below list, call and thank him or her for standing up to the warmongers.
Voting “NO” on H. Res. 758:
1) Justin Amash (R-MI)
2) John Duncan (R-TN)
3) Alan Grayson, (D-FL)
4) Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
5) Walter Jones (R-NC)
6) Thomas Massie (R-KY)
7) Jim McDermott (D-WA)
8 George Miller (D-CA)
9) Beto O’Rourke (D-TX)
10 Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)
Source
        
Posted: 05 Dec 2014 08:59 AM PST


Hungary has summoned the United States top diplomat in Budapest after Republican Senator John McCain described the country’s prime minster as a “neo-fascist dictator.”
Speaking in the US Senate on Tuesday, the Republican senator criticized Hungary’s premier Viktor Orban for pro-Russian stances. McCain described Hungary as “a nation that is on the verge of ceding its sovereignty to a neo-fascist dictator getting in bed with (Russian President) Vladimir Putin.”
McCain’s remarks caused Hungary’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto to summon US charge d’affaires Andre Goodfriend on Wednesday.
The foreign minister also said that the Hungarian embassy in Washington would contact McCain’s office to inquire about his words and their background.
The foreign ministry rejected the US senator’s remarks about both the premier and relations with Moscow as “totally unacceptable.”
“The Hungarian government… rejects the words of Senator John McCain regarding the Hungarian Prime Minister and the relationship of Hungary and Russia,” said Foreign Ministry State Secretary Levente Magyar.
McCain however said he was not concerned about how his remarks were being taken by the Hungarian government.
Orban has recently voiced objection to EU and US sanctions imposed on Russia because of the conflict in Ukraine. He said the European Union has harmed itself economically with the sanctions.
“The sanctions policy pursued by the West, that is ourselves– a necessary consequence of which has been what the Russians are doing– causes more harm to us than to Russia,” Orban said.
“In politics, this is called shooting oneself in the foot,” the prime minister added.
The US and its allies accuse Moscow of sending troops into eastern Ukraine in support of the pro-Russian forces. Russia, however, denies the accusation.
Source
        
Posted: 05 Dec 2014 08:12 AM PST


The Satanic Temple is claiming a religious freedom victory after winning the right to erect a fallen angel holiday display in Miami. Now it wants to put up a statue of pagan idol Baphomet in the Oklahoma state capitol next to one of the 10 Commandments.
The cardboard display in the Florida state capitol consists of a diorama of an angel falling from the sky into hell and an inscription, “Happy holidays from the Satanic Temple” atop of it. The stand is scheduled to be put up on Dec. 22, together with a “Happy Winter Solstice” banner from the Freedom From Religion Foundation and an entry from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. All the displays have been approved by the state government.
“We hope that, this holiday season, everybody can put their religious differences aside and respect that the celebratory spirit of responsible hedonism is available to all,” Lucien Greaves, spokesman for the Satanic Temple, said in an email to CBS Miami.
Last year the Florida Department of Management Services rejected the proposed holiday display from the New York-based Satanic Temple (not to be confused with Anton Szandor LaVey’s Church of Satan) because, according to the agency, the proposal was “grossly offensive during the holiday season.”
In 2013, the capitol’s rotunda did allow the display of a privately funded Pastafarian Flying Spaghetti Monster and a six-foot “Festivus pole” made out of beer cans, as well as displays from some atheist groups.
The temple continued demanding equal representation, with legal backing from Americans United for the Separation of Church and State threatening to sue the state of Florida for violating the temple’s free speech rights. This year a Satanic display appeared in the capitol largely because “this time around we arrived with lawyers,” Greaves wrote in an email.
“In a nation that respects religious liberty, viewpoint discrimination is simply intolerable,” Greaves said in a statement. “For that reason, we feel our holiday display sends a very important, affirmative message that goes above and beyond that of superficial season’s greetings.”


The Satanic Temple has a broadly libertarian philosophy: it’s pro-choice, in favor of same-sex marriage and champions individual liberty.
The Satanic Temple also claims to be active in politics, “facilitating the communication and mobilization of politically aware Satanists.” The group made headlines earlier this year when it proposed to place a 2-meter-tall statue of Baphomet in front of the Oklahoma state capitol next to a statue of the 10 Commandments, citing their freedom of religion rights under the US Constitution.
“We embrace practical common sense and justice. As an organized religion, we feel it is our function to actively provide outreach, to lead by example, and to participate in public affairs wheresoever the issues might benefit from rational, Satanic insights,” the Temple says on its website.
Source
        
Posted by Roberto Abraham Scaruffi at 09:38