Trilingual World Observatory: italiano, english, română. GLOBAL NEWS & more... di Redazione
Di seguito tutti gli interventi pubblicati sul sito, in ordine cronologico.
By Admin (from 30/09/2012 @ 03:03:18, in en - Video Alert, read 1683 times)

What would you do if your 3-year old son was stricken with brain cancer? Most parents wouldn’t think twice about bringing their child to a mainstream doctor, only to undergo modern-day cancer ‘treatments’ such as chemotherapy. This is what one father, Mike Hyde, from Montana did when his 3 year old was diagnosed with brain cancer, but the father doesn’t attribute his sons victory against cancer with the use of chemotherapy or any other mainstream treatment; the dad actually says marijuana oil is what made the young boy beat cancer. While the story isn’t recent, it is one that everyone should hear about.

marijuanaleaves2 Marijuana Oil Helps 3 Year Old Son Beat Cancer, Dad Says

Marijuana Oil Helps 3-Year-Old Son Beat Cancer

In May of 2010, radiologists at Community Medical Center in Missoula, Mont., discovered a stage 4 brain tumor in a 20-month-old boy named Cash. Shortly after the tumor was discovered, the toddler was brought to Primary Children’s Hospital in Salt Lake City, Utah, where he was placed in intensive care. It was recommended that Cash receive three cycles of chemotherapy, only to be followed by another 3 cycles of high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue. The boy would also receive ‘max amounts’ of anti-nausea pharmaceutical medications.

“After his first round of high-dose chemo in August 2010, he no longer ate anything, and this went on through September. He was getting worse and worse…By the end of September he was so sick. He no longer was able to take feedings into his G-tube. His stomach lining was burnt from the chemotherapy, it was no longer processing anything – it was fried. I asked doctors if there was anything else we can give him and they said ‘We’re giving him max amounts of all anti-nausea medications we can give him.’ They basically told me that this was as good as it was going to get. I told them that it was unacceptable,” Hyde said.

Cash Hyde Hospital

Cash was diagnosed with a PNET brain tumor at 20-months-old. He spent nine months in the hospital. (

The results of the chemotherapy were less than effective, as with most chemotherapy treatments, and the anti-nausea drug cocktail was causing numerous side-effects. These results caused Hyde to pull his son off of the medication, and begin secretly administering .3 milligrams of marijuana oil through his sons’s G-tube. Hyde says that once he began with the marijuana oil, his son started eating again and his quality of life completely changed for the better. The father was told that it was a miracle that his son began sitting up and laughing again.

“Doctors told us he was not going to make it. He was on life support for 40 days and was in a medically-induced coma. They said he would have brain damage and his lungs would fail. But I knew the medicine (marijuana oil) was in his body, and that helped him heal. It helped to rebuild his stomach lining, his liver and his lungs. He walked out of the ICU in mid-December. The nurses and doctors called him a ‘Christmas miracle’,” says Hyde.


Was this one of the few cases where chemo ended up working? Perhaps, but the this mainstream treatment nearly killed the young boy in the process.

“It brought him to the edge of life, and if I wouldn’t have stepped in when I did, he wouldn’t be here right now,” Hyde explained. “The marijuana oil was the best pain drug available for Cashy, as well as a neuro-protectant, antioxidant and antibacterial. I know it saves Cash’s life.”

Seeing how marijuana oil helped the young boy to survive isn’t surprising – the benefits of medical marijuana are vast, with the plant even able to fight cancer. The point of this story is to recognize that alternative solutions do exist which can be utilized. The marijuana and cancer relationship is very real; this is just one more of many cases that proves it.

Author: Mike Barrett - Sources: & Fox News (By Karlie Pouliot - Published on May 05, 2011)

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Launching a lawsuit against the very company that is responsible for a farmer suicide every 30 minutes, 5 million farmers are now suing Monsanto for as much as 6.2 billion euros (around 7.7 billion US dollars). The reason? As with many other cases, such as the ones that led certain farming regions to be known as the ‘suicide belt’, Monsanto has been reportedly taxing the farmers to financial shambles with ridiculous royalty charges. The farmers state that Monsanto has been unfairly gathering exorbitant profits each year on a global scale from “renewal” seed harvests, which are crops planted using seed from the previous year’s harvest.

The practice of using renewal seeds dates back to ancient times, but Monsanto seeks to collect massive royalties and put an end to the practice. Why? Because Monsanto owns the very patent to the genetically modified seed, and is charging the farmers not only for the original crops, but the later harvests as well. Eventually, the royalties compound and many farmers begin to struggle with even keeping their farm afloat. It is for this reason that India slammed Monsanto with groundbreaking ‘biopiracy’ charges in an effort to stop Monsanto from ‘patenting life’.

Jane Berwanger, a lawyer for the farmers who went on record regarding the case, told the Associated Press:

“Monsanto gets paid when it sell the seeds. The law gives producers the right to multiply the seeds they buy and nowhere in the world is there a requirement to pay (again). Producers are in effect paying a private tax on production.”

The findings echo what thousands of farmers have experienced in particularly poor nations, where many of the farmers are unable to stand up to Monsanto. Back in 2008, the Daily Mail covered what is known as the ‘GM Genocide’, which is responsible for taking the lives of over 17,683 Indian farmers in 2009 alone. After finding that their harvests were failing and they started to enter economic turmoil, the farmers began ending their own lives — oftentimes drinking the very same insecticide that Monsanto provided them with.

As the information continues to surface on Monsanto’s crimes, further lawsuits will begin to take effect. After it was ousted in January that Monsanto was running illegal ‘slave-like’ working rings, more individuals became aware of just how seriously Monsanto seems to disregard their workers — so why would they care for the health of their consumers? In April, another group of farmers sued Monsanto for ‘knowingly poisoning’ workers and causing ‘devastating birth defects’.

Will endless lawsuits from millions of seriously affected individuals be the end of Monsanto?

Source: - Author: Anthony Gucciardi (June 5, 2012)

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa
By Admin (from 01/10/2012 @ 01:02:57, in it - Osservatorio Globale, read 3088 times)

Quando il delirio speculativo di Wall Street ha fatto credere agli improvvidi che il valore di Facebook ammontava a 15 milioni di dollari, nel 2008 Zuckerberg è diventato il miliardario “che si è fatto tutto da solo”, il più giovane della storia della “graduatoria” della rivista Forbes, con 1500 milioni di dollari.

A quel momento, il capitale di rischio investito dalla CIA sembrava avere ottenuto degli ottimi rendimenti, ma nel 2009 il “valore” di Facebook è andato ad aggiustarsi al suo valore reale e Zuckerberg è scomparso dalla graduatoria Forbes.

La bolla Facebook si è gonfiata quando William Gates, il titolare di Microsoft, vi acquisiva nell’ottobre 2007 una partecipazione dell’1.6%, per un ammontare di 240 milioni di dollari.

Questa operazione induceva a fare il ragionamento per cui, se l’1% di Facebook corrispondeva a 150 milioni di dollari, allora il valore del 100% doveva ammontare a 15 miliardi di dollari, ma il sotterfugio finiva per apparire nella sua piena luce.

La questione di fondo è che Facebook esiste grazie ad un investimento di capitali di rischio della CIA. Nel 2009, i grandi mezzi di comunicazione non si sono risparmiati nel produrre “propaganda informativa” per rendere omaggio a Zuckerberg come paradigma del giovane imprenditore di successo, ma la diffusione reiterata di questa “informazione” non è stata in grado di indurre la rivista Forbes a mantenerlo nella sua graduatoria, versione 2009. (1) Il bambino prodigio spariva dalla lista, malgrado l’intensa campagna propagandistica della CNN e della grande stampa mondiale, che riflettevano gli interessi di Wall Street. La lista Forbes corrisponde ad un Premio Oscar dei grandi affari e fa gonfiare o sgonfiare il valore delle azioni.

La CIA ha investito in Facebook molto prima che questa rete divenisse una delle reti sociali più popolari di Internet, questo secondo una inchiesta del giornalista britannico Tom Hodgkinson pubblicata nel

2008 nel giornale inglese The Guardian (3) e ripresa e commentata da qualche mezzo di comunicazione indipendente di lingua inglese, ma senza alcuna ripercussione nella grande stampa.

La propaganda corporativa ha trasformato il portale sociale Facebook in sinonimo di successo, di popolarità, e nel contempo di buoni affari. Facebook si presenta come un inoffensivo sito web di relazioni sociali, che facilità i rapporti interpersonali. La sua popolarità ha fatto prevedere che i suoi approssimativamente 70 milioni di utilizzatori potrebbero aumentare in un paio di anni a 200 milioni nel mondo intero, dato che nelle migliori settimane Facebook è arrivato a ricevere fino a due milioni di nuovi utilizzatori. Nel frattempo, Facebook non convince proprio tutti!

Critiche e detrattori

“Colui che non compare su Facebook non conta nulla o si colloca fuori del sistema”, affermano taluni. Al contrario, altri dichiarano che si tratta di uno strumento atto a costruirsi una nuova immagine senza contenuti, per darsi dell’importanza nel mega-supermercato che è diventato Internet, sostituto dei posti pubblici di anziana memoria. I più pragmatici sostengono che Facebook consiste solo in uno strumento per ritrovarsi fra vecchi compagni di infanzia o di gioventù, che si sono persi di vista fra i movimenti della vita.

I suoi difensori di sinistra ribadiscono invece che Facebook serve a promuovere le lotte contro la globalizzazione e a coordinare campagne contro attività come le riunioni del G8.

Il giornalista spagnolo Pascual Serrano ha descritto come Facebook sia stato utilizzato dal governo della Colombia per coordinare la giornata mondiale contro le FARC, che nel 2008 ha marcato lo scatenarsi dell’offensiva propagandista contro la guerriglia, che continua tutt’oggi.

Ed è molto evidente come Facebook sia stato utilizzato dalla CIA.

Per Walter Goobar, di, “si è trattato in realtà di un esperimento di manipolazione globale: [...] Facebook è uno strumento sofisticato finanziato dall’Ufficio Centrale d’Informazione, la CIA, che non solamente lo utilizza per il reclutamento di agenti e per la compilazione di informazioni in lungo e in largo attraverso tutto il pianeta, ma anche per allestire operazioni sotto copertura.”

A grandi linee, Facebook è uno strumento di comunicazione che consente di contattare e di archiviare indirizzi ed altri dati relativi a famigliari ed amici. Per istituzioni come il ministero di Sicurezza per la Patria, degli Stati Uniti, e, in generale, per l’insieme degli apparati di sicurezza dello Stato, consacratisi con pari entusiasmo al “nemico” interno come a quello esterno, dopo l’era Bush, Facebook è una miniera di informazioni sulle amicizie dei suoi utilizzatori.

Milioni di utenti offrono informazioni sulla loro identità, fotografie, e liste di oggetti di consumo da loro preferiti.

Un messaggio proveniente da un amico invita all’iscrizione e a partecipare a Facebook.

I dati personali, spesso catturati da ogni sorta di truffatori e clonatori di carte bancarie, vanno inoltre ad approdare nei dischi rigidi dei computers dei sistemi di sicurezza degli USA.

Il sistema Beacon di Facebook realizza degli elenchi di utenti e associati, includendovi anche coloro che non si sono mai iscritti o quelli che hanno disattivato la loro registrazione. Facebook si dimostra essere più pratico e rapido degli InfraGard (2), che corrispondono a 23.000 micro-comunità o “cellule” di piccoli commercianti-informatori organizzati dall’FBI al fine di conoscere i profili psico-politici della loro clientela.

Dopo il dicembre 2006, la CIA ha utilizzato Facebook per reclutare nuovi agenti.

Altre organizzazioni governative devono sottoporre il reclutamento e gli ingaggi a regole federali, ma la CIA ha acquisito una maggior libertà di azione che non ha avuto mai nemmeno sotto l’amministrazione Bush, perfino per torturare senza salvare nemmeno le apparenze.

La CIA ha dichiarato: “ Non è necessario ottenere un qualsivoglia permesso per poterci inserire in questa rete sociale.”

Capitale di rischio della CIA

Il giornalista britannico Tom Hodgkinson ha lanciato un ben motivato segnale di allarme rispetto alla proprietà della CIA su Facebook in un articolo ben documentato, “With friends like these…”, pubblicato nel giornale londinese The Guardian, il 14 gennaio 2008 (3).

Il giornalista ha sottolineato come dopo l’11 settembre 2001 l’entusiasmo per l’alta tecnologia si è assolutamente intensificato.

Entusiasmo che aveva già catturato gli apparati di sicurezza degli Stati Uniti, dopo che costoro avevano creato due anni innanzi il fondo di capitali “In-Q-Tel”, per far fronte ad opportunità di investimenti a rischio nelle alte tecnologie.

Secondo il giornalista Hodgkinson, i collegamenti di Facebook con la CIA passano attraverso Jim Breyer, uno dei tre associati chiave che nell’aprile 2005 ha investito in questa rete sociale 12,7 milioni di dollari, associato anche al fondo di capitali Accel Partners, membro dei consigli direttivi di giganti del calibro di Wal-Mart e Marvel Entertainment e per di più ex-presidente di National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), caratterizzata nell’investire su giovani talenti.

Hodgkinson ha scritto: “La più recente tornata di finanziamenti di Facebook è stata condotta da una compagnia finanziaria denominata Greylock Venture Capital, che vi ha impegnato 27,5 milioni di dollari.

Uno dei più importanti associati di Greylock si chiama Howard Cox, che è un altro ex-presidente di NVCA, che inoltre fa parte del consiglio direttivo di In-Q-Tel”.

“E In-Q-Tel, in cosa si configura?” si domanda Hodgkinson. “Bene, che lo crediate o no, (comunque lo potete verificare sul suo sito web) si tratta di un fondo di capitali a rischio della CIA. Creato nel 1999, la sua missione è quella di “individuare e di associarsi a società che sono intenzionate a sviluppare nuove tecnologie, per sostenere l’apporto di nuove soluzioni necessarie all’Ufficio Centrale d’Informazione CIA”.

La pagina web di In-Q-Tel (4) raccomandata da Hodgkinson è del tutto esplicita: “Nel 1998, il Direttore della Centrale di Intelligence (DCI) identificava la tecnologia come una prerogativa strategica superiore, direttamente connessa ai progressi della CIA nelle future tecnologie per migliorare le sue missioni di base, di compilazione e di analisi. I responsabili della Direzione di Scienza e Tecnologia hanno elaborato un piano radicale per creare una nuova struttura d’impresa con il compito di consentire un accresciuto accesso dell’Agenzia all’innovazione del settore privato.”

Anche aggiungendo ancora acqua non potremo avere più limpidità, conclude Hodgkinson. (Originale da: Noticias Censuradas XXIII: Facebook żes de la CIA? / Articolo originale pubblicato il 26.5.2009)


(1) Rapporto Forbes 2009, a :




Traduzione di: Curzio Bettio, membro di Tlaxcala, la rete di traduttori per la diversità linguística.

Revisione testo/ editing: Jules Previ, giornalista freelance, traduttore news online presso agenzie stampa internazionale, collaboratore al progetto dal 2007.

Questo articolo è liberamente riproducibile, a condizione di rispettarne l'integrità e di menzionarne autori, traduttori, revisori e la fonte.

URL di questo articolo su Tlaxcala:

ERNESTO CARMONA: Giornalista e scrittore cileno. Amministratore del Consiglio dei Giornalisti del Cile. Segretario esecutivo della Commissione d'Inchiesta sugli attenati contro giornalisti delle Federazione latinoamericana dei giornalisti (CIAP-FELAP). Autore di Los Dueńos de Chile, Los Dueńos de Venezuela, Chile Desclasificado, żQué es el Anarquismo?, e di molti altri libri.

Più info:
Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

When testing the firm’s top brand weed killer the rats showed similar symptoms.

The French government has asked its health and safety agency to assess the study and had also sent it to the European Union's food safety agency, Reuters reports.

"Based on the conclusion…, the government will ask the European authorities to take all necessary measures to protect human and animal health, measures that could go as far as an emergency suspension of imports of NK603 maize in the European Union," the French health, environment and farm ministries said in a joint statement.

Researchers from the University of Caen found that rats fed on a diet containing NK603 – a seed variety made tolerant to amounts of Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller – or given water mixed with the product, at levels permitted in the United States – died earlier than those on a standard diet.

The research conducted by Gilles-Eric Seralini and his colleagues, said the rats suffered mammary tumors, as well as severe liver and kidney damage. The study was published in the journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology and presented at a news conference in London.

Fifty percent of male and 70 percent of female rats died prematurely, compared with only 30 percent and 20 percent in the control group, said the researchers.

Combination image of two pictures featuring rats with tumors after they were fed a diet of genetically modified (GM) maize produced by US chemical giant Monsanto (AFP Photo / Criigen)

Monsanto spokesman, Thomas Helscher, said the company would review the study thoroughly but stated that other scientific studies had proved the biotech crops’ safety.

Some scientists however criticized the French researchers’ statistical methods and the use of a particular type of rat, saying the albino Sprague-Dawley strain of animal had a tendency to develop cancers.

But despite skepticism, the study draws attention to controversy surrounding genetically modified crops and the US biotech giant Monsanto.

Michael Antoniou, a molecular biologist at King’s College London – who acted as an adviser to Seralini's team – told reporters that the study stresses the “need to test all GMO crops in two-year lifelong studies”.

“I feel this data is strong enough to withdraw the marketing approval for this variety of GMO maize temporarily, until this study is followed up and repeated with larger number of animals to get the full statistical power that we want,” he said as quoted by Reuters.

Last Friday France said it will uphold a ban on genetically modified crops produced by the Monsanto. The move came as President Francois Hollande pushed his plan to put the environment back at the top of the international agenda.

In the wake of the publication, Jose Bove, vice-chairman of the European Parliament’s commission for agriculture, called for an immediate suspension of all EU cultivation and import authorizations of genetically modified crops.

“This study finally shows we are right and that it is urgent to quickly review all GMO evaluation processes,” he said following the announcement of the research.

While being widely used in the United States, GMO crops have been less popular among European consumers, due to concerns about its impact on people’s health and the environment.

In California, opponents of genetically engineered food are fighting to have it removed from the food supply. They are also pushing to pass Proposition 37, a law that would legally require genetically modified foods to be labeled as such. Monsanto stands opposed to such a proposal and has donated over $4.2 million to lobby against it.

Agriculturalists across America have previously tried to take the biotech giant to court over charges stemming from their lab-made corn GMOs. Over 2,000 farmers have petitioned the US government to more thoroughly investigate the impact that genetically modified corn crop from Monsanto will have on the country.

As RT reported before, Monsanto wants to plant a corn variant across America’s Midwest that will be resistant to a powerful pesticide produced with 2,4-D, the same compound crucial to the make-up of the notorious Vietnam War-era killer Agent Orange. If approved, the new corn will be able to thrive as farmers douse their fields in the chemical, killing off unwanted weeds in the process, while at the same time subjecting Americans to a pesticide linked to cancer risks.

Source: - Published: 20 September, 2012

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Indipendentemente dall'obiettivo strategico che la nomenclatura vuole perseguire abbattendo questo paese ostile all'assetto globale auspicato dai Bilderberg e simili, è ormai imbarazzante rilevare l'assoluta inverosimiglianza delle notizie riferite.

Ieri si è saputo che l'Iran intende porre severe restrizioni all'uso della Rete partendo in particolare da Google e dai servizi connessi arrivando, si dice, a una sorta di intranet nazionale isolato dal resto della Rete mondiale. Sino ad oggi per la verità la Repubblica Islamica ha sempre stretto il pugno intorno al web, vuoi per l'oscurantismo attribuito agli Ayatollah, vuoi per la necessità di controllare uno strumento col quale l'Occidente ha già infiltrato e messo in crisi altri paesi.

Tuttavia non si capisce perché il salto di qualità nella censura dell'Iran sulla Rete debba scandalizzare l'opinione pubblica italiana, europea e nordamericana nel momento in cui la medesima censura vige anche da noi. Certo, la censura non riguarda lo strumento in sé, nel momento in cui il web è sostanzialmente accessibile a tutti, ma il flusso delle informazioni. Queste sono liberamente consultabili ma chi ce le fornisce sono sempre e comunque testate coartate dal Sistema e i nomi di direttori ed editori ne forniscono una prova esaustiva.

In proposito è bene anche ricordare quanto avvenuto in occasione dell'arrivo del presidente iraniano Mahmoud Ahmadinejad all'assemblea generale dell'Onu. Sarebbe giusto e interessantissimo soffermarsi sul merito del suo discorso circa il disinteresse esplicito dei paesi occidentali verso l'arsenale atomico di Israele e la preoccupazione esasperata per un arsenale atomico iraniano che non esiste, che forse mai esisterà e che se dovesse esistere non può certo subire le condanne di chi le armi nucleari le ha usate.

Quello che preme sottolineare è che giornalisti del New York Post, ripeto, giornalisti e quindi addetti all'informazione, non si tratta ufficialmente di militanti sionisti, hanno inviato al presidente iraniano un cesto con tipici prodotto ebraici, un opuscolo sul museo dell'olocausto e un biglietto per uno spettacolo teatrale di tema ebraico.

Questo episodio ben evidenzia la malafede e la posizione aprioristica di quella stampa americana ed occidentale che dovrebbe fornire sull'Iran e le questioni che lo riguardano un'informazione oggettiva. Senza contare, mi preme dirlo, il voluto dirottamento dell'attenzione da parte dei pennivendoli del Post dalla questione del sionismo a quella ebraica, due cose fondamentalmente differenti.

Se è vero che Ahmadinejad ha sempre puntato il dito contro Israele e stigmatizzato la speculazione ideologica e mediatica che gli israeliani fanno dell'olocausto, è altrettanto vero che egli non ha mai negato l'olocausto stesso e nemmeno ha mai espresso sentimenti antisemiti, considerando pure la numerosa comunità ebraica in Iran.

Il fatto che i giornalisti abbiano invece impostato l'ironia del loro cesto di benvenuto sulla questione ebraica piuttosto che su quella sionista lascia ben intendere quanto ci si possa fidare quando leggiamo i giornali o ascoltiamo i tg.

Ma quello che sorprende di più ancora una volta, considerando la maldestra costruzione della montatura anti-Iran e la ripetizione dei soliti schemi mediatici nel tempo, è l'assoluta incapacità di un'opinione pubblica ipnotizzata di comprendere queste dinamiche.
Fonte: - Autore: Simone

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

To Support Rick Steves's excellent work please buy his DVD via the following address :

Sincere appreciation and gratitude goes to Rick Steves and PBS for depicting an honest vision of our beloved country ; IRAN
With many thanks

Dr. Ali Asadi

Join Rick as he explores the most surprising and fascinating land he's ever visited: Iran. In this one-hour, ground-breaking travel special, you'll discover the splendid monuments of Iran's rich and glorious past, learn more about the 20th-century story of this perplexing nation, and experience Iranian life today in its historic capital and in a countryside village. Most important, you'll meet the people of a nation whose government has so exasperated our own.


Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

In Monsanto vs. Geertson Seed Farms, No. 09-475, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case which could have an enormous effect on the future of the American food industry. This is Monsanto's third appeal of the case, and if they win a favorable ruling from the high court, a deregulated Monsanto may find itself in position to corner the markets of numerous U.S. crops, and to litigate conventional farmers into oblivion.

Here's where it gets a bit dicier. Two Supreme Court justices have what appear to be direct conflicts of interest.

Stephen Breyer
Charles Breyer, the judge who ruled in the original decision of 2007 which is being appealed, is Stephen Breyer's brother, who apparently views this as a conflict of interest and has recused himself.

Clarence Thomas
From the years 1976 - 1979, Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto. Thomas apparently does not see this as a conflict of interest and has not recused himself.

Fox, meet henhouse.

The lawsuit was filed by plantiffs which include the Center for Food Safety, the National Family Farm Coalition, Sierra Club, Dakota Resources Council and other farm, environmental and consumer groups and individual farmers. The original decision, here  :

The federal district court in California issued its opinion on the deregulation of “Roundup Ready” alfalfa pursuant to the Plant Protection Act on February 13, 2007.   Upon receiving Monsanto’s petition for deregulation of the alfalfa seed, APHIS conducted an Environmental Assessment and received over 500 comments in opposition to the deregulation.  The opposition’s primary concern was the potential of contamination.  APHIS, however, made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and approved the deregulation petition, thereby allowing the seed to be sold without USDA oversight.  Geertson Seed Farms, joined by a number of growers and associations, filed claims under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)  as well as the Endangered Species Act and Plant Protection Act.  In regards to NEPA, they argued that the agency should have prepared an EIS for the deregulation.

Addressing only the NEPA claims, the court agreed that APHIS should have conducted an EIS because of the significant environmental impact posed by deregulation of the alfalfa seed.  A realistic potential for contamination existed, said the court, but the agency had not fully inquired into the extent of this potential.  The court also determined that APHIS did not adequately examine the potential effects of Roundup Ready alfalfa on organic farming and the development of glyphosate-resistant weeds and that there were “substantial questions” raised by the deregulation petition that the agency should have addressed in an EIS.  Concluding that the question of whether the introduction of the genetically engineered alfalfa and its potential to affect non-genetic alfalfa posed a significant environmental impact necessitated further study, the court found that APHIS’s decision was “arbitrary and capricious” and ordered the agency to prepare an EIS.  The court later enjoined the planting of Roundup Ready alfalfa from March 30, 2007, until completion of the EIS and reconsideration of the deregulation petition, except for those farmers who had already purchased the seed.  In May of 2007, the court enjoined any future planting of the alfalfa.  An order by the court in June, 2007 required disclosure of all Roundup Ready planting sites.

Monsanto filed appeals in 2008 and 2009. In both instances, they were unsuccessful in having the original decision reversed, so they appealed to the Supreme Court, who agreed to hear the case.

Alfalfa is the fourth most widely grown crop in the United States, behind corn, soybeans, and wheat.

South Dakota alfalfa farmer Pat Trask, one of the plaintiffs, said Monsanto's biotech alfalfa would ruin his conventional alfalfa seed business because it was certain his 9,000 acres would be contaminated by the biotech genes.

Alfalfa is very easily cross-pollinated by bees and by wind. The plant is also perennial, meaning GMO plants could live on for years.

"The way this spreads so far and wide, it will eliminate the conventional alfalfa industry," said Trask. "Monsanto will own the entire alfalfa industry."

Monsanto has a policy of filing lawsuits or taking other legal actions against farmers who harvest crops that show the presence of the company's patented gene technology. It has sued farmers even when they have tried to keep their own fields free from contamination by biotech plants on neighbouring farms.

The case has implications beyond alfalfa crops. About eight hundred reviewed genetically engineered food applications were submitted to the USDA, yet no environmental impact statements were prepared. Even as this diary is being written, a federal judge in San Francisco is reviewing a similar case involving genetically modified sugar beets. The decision is expected this week and could halt planting and use of the gm sugar beets, which account for half of America's sugar supply.

Back to the Supreme Court case, oral argument is slated to begin on April 27, 2010. With Breyer recused and Thomas opting not to recuse, the bench appears to be heavily tilted to Monsanto.

Once more with feeling. Fox, meet henhouse.


Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

The assertions were made by Libyan opposition figures arrested by the Americans and handed over to Col. Muammar Gaddafi in the middle of the last decade when Washington was seeking rapprochement with the late Libyan dictator.

They are contained in a report by Human Rights Watch, which interviewed 14 former prisoners after the fall of Col Gaddafi. Most belonged to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group that had worked to overthrow him for 20 years.

Two out of the men interviewed said they were submitted to interrogation tactics that match previous instances of waterboarding.

After his arrest in Peshawar, Pakistan in 2003, Mohammed al-Shoroeiya said he was flown for half an hour to a location he later came to believe was in Afghanistan.

He said he was placed on a board that could rotate through 360 degrees. After a hood was put over his face, he said, “They start to pour water to the point where you feel like you are suffocating.”

When asked how many times this was done to him, he said: “A lot …a lot … it happened many times …. They pour buckets of water all over you.”

Khalid al-Sharif, who was arrested along with al-Shoroeiya, said: They gave me a different type of torture every day. Sometimes they used water, sometimes not.… Sometimes they stripped me naked and sometimes they left me clothed.”

Now head of the Libyan National Guard, Mr Sharif claimed he was held for two years in two different US-run detention centres believed to be operated by the CIA in Afghanistan.

Both men have always disavowed al-Qaeda and were never accused of sympathising with the global terror group by the Americans.

 CIA faces new waterboarding claims from Libya

Eric Holder, the US attorney general, announced that no one would be prosecuted for the deaths of a prisoner in Afghanistan in 2002 and another in Iraq in 2003.  Photo: AP

Laura Pitter, counterterrorism advisor at Human Rights Watch and author of the report, said: “Not only did the US deliver Gaddafi his enemies on a silver platter but it seems the CIA tortured many of them first,” said:
“The scope of Bush administration abuse appears far broader than previously acknowledged and underscores the importance of opening up a full-scale inquiry into what happened.”

Human Rights Watch said the report demonstrated that Britain and numerous other countries were complicit in helping hand over Col Gaddafi’s opponents.

Intelligence documents discovered in Tripoli supported similar claims by Abdul Hakim Belhadj, leader of the LIFG who was a key figure in the overthrow of Col Gaddafi, and a deputy Sami Mostafa al-Saadi.
The US government has stated that only three senior al-Qaeda figures were submitted to waterboarding.

When he came into office in January 2009 President Barack Obama banned the practice and ordered an investigation into all so called harsh interrogation techniques. It recently concluded that CIA officials should be charged.

Last week Eric Holder, the US attorney general, announced that no one would be prosecuted for the deaths of a prisoner in Afghanistan in 2002 and another in Iraq in 2003.

Author: Alex Spillius, Diplomatic Correspondent - Source: via

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

The Russia’s consumer-rights regulator Rospotrebnadzor asked scientists at the country’s Institute of Nutrition to review the study. The watchdog has also contacted to European Commission’s Directorate General for Health & Consumers to explain the EU’s position on GM corn.

The report prepared by France’s University of Caen and published last week, claimed that rats fed over a two-year period with Monsanto’s genetically modified NK603 corn, developed more tumors and other pathologies than a test group fed with regular corn. The NK603, sold under the Roundup label, is genetically engineered to withstand glyphosate weed killer.

The company criticized the study, saying it “doesn’t meet minimum acceptable standards for this type of scientific research” and the data was incomplete.

Monsanto also said Russia’s ban will have little effect on its business as the country import small volumes of corn from the US. Besides that, the Russian government doesn’t permit farmers to plant GM crops. “Russia is a net exporter of grain, so the actual impact of their temporary suspension, if any, is likely to be small,” the spokesman said in a statement.

Meanwhile, France announced it will uphold the ban on genetically modified crops in the country. It has asked the national food-security agency Anses to examine the study of Monsanto’s corn. If other countries follow the examples of Russia and France it could be a severe blow to the major US biotech.

In California, activists are fighting to have GM products removed from the food supply. They are also pushing to pass Proposition 37, a law that would legally require genetically modified foods to be labeled as such. Monsanto is opposing the law and it has donated over $4.2 million to lobby against it. Over 2,000 farmers have petitioned the US government to more thoroughly investigate the impacts of the genetically modified corn crop from Monsanto.

Source: (September 26, 2012) via

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Gli studenti del Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) hanno ideato e messo a punto la prima griglia che cuoce utilizzando il solo calore del sole e non più il carbone o la legna o il gas.

Grazie alla tecnologia sviluppata dal professor David Wilson e messa in pratica dagli studenti dell'iTeams, questo sorprendente barbecue poco più grande di un normale grill da giardino riesce a raccogliere l'energia termica del sole e ad immagazzinarla per consentire fino a 25 ore ininterrotte di grigliate a temperature superiori ai 230 gradi Celsius.

La tecnologia del professor Wilson utilizza, infatti, una comune lente di Fresnel grazie alla quale sfrutta l'energia solare termica per fondere, in un apposito contenitore, del nitrato di litio che funziona proprio come una batteria solare: il calore del sole viene immagazzinato e, quando richiesto, viene rilasciato per essere utilizzato per cucinare.

Per quanto stravagante possa sembrare questa invenzione può avere un'importanza considerevole per l'ambiente: basti pensare, ad esempio, al problema della deforestazione nei Paesi meno sviluppati dove le persone utilizzano gli alberi per fare il fuoco con cui cucinare.

E non si tratta assolutamente di una cosa di poco conto: secondo le Nazioni Unite, infatti, ben il 55% delle famiglie che vivono nell'Africa sub sahariana utilizzano solo la legna per cuocere i loro cibi.

Auguriamoci, dunque, che questa fantasiosa ma pratica idea possa essere messa presto in commercio...

Fonte: via &

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa
Ci sono 4980 persone collegate

< dicembre 2023 >

en - Global Observatory (605)
en - Science and Society (594)
en - Video Alert (346)
it - Osservatorio Globale (503)
it - Scienze e Societa (555)
it - Video Alerta (132)
ro - Observator Global (399)
ro - Stiinta si Societate (467)
ro - TV Network (143)
z - Games Giochi Jocuri (68)

Catalogati per mese - Filed by month - Arhivate pe luni:

Gli interventi piů cliccati

Ultimi commenti - Last comments - Ultimele comentarii:
Now Colorado is one love, I'm already packing suitcases;)
14/01/2018 @ 16:07:36
By Napasechnik
Nice read, I just passed this onto a friend who was doing some research on that. And he just bought me lunch since I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that Thank you for lunch! Whenever you ha...
21/11/2016 @ 09:41:39
By Anonimo
I am not sure where you are getting your info, but great topic. I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more. Thanks for fantastic information I was looking for this info for my...
21/11/2016 @ 09:40:41
By Anonimo


02/12/2023 @ 19:36:57
script eseguito in 1076 ms