The thing I can’t stand is when people say “You are throwing your vote away.” If more people deleted that negative mindset, third party candidates would win. Vote on principle not fear.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58172758

John1940 wrote:

I know that everyone here is dying to visit or revisit irrational numbers. The square root of 2 is is irrational and it’s easy to prove that. Another is pi (3.14159…) — but there is another very interesting one that can be defined to any number of digits by a formula. It’s Euler’s irrational number called e which is 2.718… and so on.

It’s used in many sorts of mathematics. It appears in all engineering calculators to 10 digits (or more) such as in the one I bought years ago for $4 at the local supermarket. The reason I’m bring it up is that it’s used in public-key encryption. I’m working on a paper (to myself) to explain how it works and to show real examples. There is a shortage of real examples that start at the beginning and also show how long each takes on a laptop such as the one I am using. (I’ll tell you if I succeed. I have no idea how long this activity will take.)

I am an algorithm nut. Just to give you an example, there is the flying salesman’s problem that is very processing intensive if one wants to find an exact solution. Here is an example. Pick 99 cities in the contiguous States of the USA and figure out the shortest path, starting from any city, to visit each one only once and return to the start. That is called a tour and is a loop.

It is an important way to start a wide area network topology. On this PC it would take several billion years to get the best answer (the shortest tour). But it’s not hard to find a creditable answer in about 30 seconds or so. (Going to the closest next node does not provide a creditable answer. I can teach almost any kid to prove this point.)

Here is an explanation of e, Euler;s number.

http://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/e-eulers-number.html

John1940
Hey John, a few years back I found an excellent article describing many different types of numbers including rational, irrational, imaginary, transcendental and complex. I can’t seem to find it now- perhaps you can locate it?

I remember that the article discussed the concept that the number line was really a number ring, and that moving towards infinity actually led back to negative infinity (as an example- the tangent curve)- and that the number system actually mimicked the universe, that while infinite, the universe was closed and if you went far enough in one direction, you’d end up back where you started. It also discussed the concept of imaginary time and the speed of light being an asymptote rather than a limit. Fascinating- because we’ve found absolute zero temperatures to be an asymptote too (it can be jumped over to below absolute zero temperatures but not crossed directly.) The number system and the universe in general may work the same way (and “jumping” over the asymptote could cross us over the boundary into another universe with a reversed arrow of time compared to ours- but forward relative to itself and ours would be vice versa- as defined by black hole cosmology- but that’s another story.)

Hey John, a few years back I found an excellent article describing many different types of numbers including rational, irrational, imaginary, transcendental and complex. I can’t seem to find it now- perhaps you can locate it?

I remember that the article discussed the concept that the number line was really a number ring, and that moving towards infinity actually led back to negative infinity (as an example- the tangent curve)- and that the number system actually mimicked the universe, that while infinite, the universe was closed and if you went far enough in one direction, you’d end up back where you started. It also discussed the concept of imaginary time and a contracting universe before the big bang (oscillating model) with the cosmological constant winding down with each new cycle and the speed of light being an asymptote rather than a limit. Fascinating- because we’ve found absolute zero temperatures to be an asymptote too (it can be jumped over to below absolute zero temperatures but not crossed directly.) The number system and the universe in general may work the same way (and “jumping” over the asymptote could cross us over the boundary into another universe with a reversed arrow of time compared to ours- but forward relative to itself and ours would be vice versa- as defined by black hole cosmology- but that’s another story.)

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/10/closed-mind-richard-dawkins

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58162616

In fact, the Spanish and Portugese were the worst offenders in the African slave trade. The vast majority of Africans taken into slavery in the 1700’s-1800’s, around four million, went to south America to work the gold and silver mines. Most were dead within a year.

And, so far, they seem to have been given a free ride on that act of genocide.

The horrors visited by the Japanese upon those they conquered was swept under the carpet, as the US needed Japan to join in the cold war. Not to mention their WMD’s they tested on the Chinese – we needed their prowess in biological warfare, too, so that was hushed up.

However, one of the few positive outcomes of WW2 was setting a precedent that oppressing people simply because of who they are can lead to defeat and judgment at the end of a rope.

 

We have become a victim of our own unwillingness to think for ourselves.

 

And he isn’t a righty- he HATED Bush (as any peace activist should)- you should have seen the droves of cables released about what the Bush administration was doing in Iraq, its ties to Monsanto (trying to strongarm European countries into adopting Monsanto), and the release of surveillance data as well as the treatment of Bradley Manning.

Sure Obama has lowered the crime rate. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised. He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power, he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too), failed to prosecute those who tortured, expanded fracking, did not get the patriot act repealed, was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173290

Degania Alef wrote:

I don’t like to use the term ‘racism’ simply because there is only ONE human race on this planet…not several different ones.

What most people incorrectly call racism….is merely ethno-cultural based bigotry and prejudice.

Well, the British Empire certainly didn’t invent this concept…BUT, they sure did perfect it during their 328 year global based wankership

As a BRIT myself, let’s tell it like it truly is.

Britain has always held this pompous, we are better than everybody else, condescending, put down attitude…when it comes to all “foreigners”…which BTW, yes being at Calais.

Whilst I have absolutely nothing against ethnic based humour (as you know)…the true underlying bigotry and prejudice has always been right there brewing, (just under the surface) like a silent but deadly Cockney Chavvie FART…just waiting to leap out and smother any unsuspecting migrant (or home born minority) who doesn’t conform to the Ango Saxon ways.

Geeze, growing up in the UK during the 50’s to mid 70’s there were so many derogatory names for just about every different ethnic group – I can’t list them all here.

And IF I did…I’d simply be banned – again, for doing so.

Anti-semitic slurs were 10 shekels a pound when I was growing up in England.

Yeah, I know…this blatent anti-everything foreign one upmanship has been gradually pushed a little further under that surface a bit more in recent years…and yes, it’s now mostly contained to the lower working class types…and elite bigots (many in the British forces)….who still think the Empire is alive n well.

But, nevertheless…it’s still there lurking, and it doesn’t take very much to bring it out…as we have seen in recent months with regard the EU migrant crisis and BREXIT vote, etc.

They don’t call it the Septic Isles for nuffink.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173311
by the way, didn’t your outgoing prime minister Cameron use thinly veiled bigotry against London’s new mayor?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173322
…and, never mind the Bollox
What the Brits did in India was heinous- they were raping local women. Also the Opium Incidents with China were not a high point. You can clearly see where America gets its thirst for Empire from. It went directly from the Romans to the Brits to the Americans. I never had any regard for the Romans either- they stole so much knowledge from the Greeks, even their gods.

The Romans, the Brits, the Mongols, the Nazis, the Russians, the Americans, the Spaniards, the French, etc.- I put them all into the same category. And thus completely understand why people resort to violence to oppose being controlled by them.

Re: religion vs spirituality and atheism vs agnosticism
In reply to ck3 • 1 min ago
ck3 wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

ck3 wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

SirLataxe wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

ck3 wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

SirLataxe wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Can you explain to me how Islam is “race”? and how you can have a “phobia” about something which preaches the subjugation, and murder, of people who refuse to submit to it?

SirLataxe
Pap, old swivel-eye,

This explanation you demand is probably best obtained by a close examination of yourself by yourself. I realise that introspection is not much developed in your psyche but, believe me, it is a mental skill you desperately need to acquire.

I suppose I could mention the many explanations provided to you by others concerning the extreme and uncontrolled emissions from your wee brainbox. But in it’s present configuration that wee brainbox cannot seem to grok anything other than the football hooligan mode of judging others (i.e. by their scarf-colour).

Yes – introspection, you need. Or perhaps a good psychoanalyst?

SirLataxe
some faux shakesperean cobblers
You tried, I’ll give you that…
He never answers the questions, just goes ad-hominem, it’s easier than reality.
Pap the realist! A most peculiar notion given his Pap-parps concerning “cultural Marxism” and the invisible horde of murderous foreigners about to overwhelm his Papness any minute now albeit he has been expecting this horde for some years yet they still haven’t swept him away in a tide of stones and beheadings.
You mean the voices in your head, the ones that never answer the actual questions.

As to the ad-hominem – well, one likes to converse in an idiom or argot in which one’s interlocutor will feel the ease of familiarity. I apologise for being rather amateur at this mode but, unlike yourself, I haven’t had decades of practice bellowing crude threats and insults at the blokes on the other terrace with different coloured stripes in their scarves.
Well it appears all you can do is throw out insults, because you don’t actually have any answers to anything, so I’ll try again, here are the questions:

Can you explain to me how Islam is a “race”? and how you can have a “phobia” about something which preaches the subjugation, and murder, of people who refuse to submit to it?
You don’t know what “morphed” means, do you?
I most definitely do, you appear to have “morphed” into Sir Laxative.
Not at all, SirLataxe (again, your spelling issues) remains distinct and unique.

And it seems neither do you know what the meaning of “phobia” in “Islamophobia” is.
I do, it just doesn’t make logical sense in this context, but carry on.

Let me help you:

“Such terms are not phobias. They are negative towards certain categories of people or other things, used in an analogy with the medical usage of the term. Usually these kinds of “phobias” are described as fear, dislike, disapproval, prejudice, hatred, discrimination, or hostility towards the object of the “phobia”. Often this attitude is based on prejudices and is a particular case of most xenophobia.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia#Non_medical_use

You don’t deny that you “fear, dislike and disapprove” of Islam, do you?
Why would I do that?
See, and that would describe a phobia – so why so defensive?

it’s an entirely logical thing to feel with a religion that openly says it wants to make me submit to it or kill me.
See, and that would describe the “prejudice, hatred, discrimination” part.

And while you think your attitude towards Islam is perfectly rational, because you diligently read Breitbart and those “Islam-for-dummies” books of that retired engineer, others might suspect your attitude is based predominantly on prejudice and hatred and a surprising need to simplify complex social phenomena in order to fit them in a rigid and rather crude worldview. Oh, and probably also on old-fashioned racism.
Well that’s lovely and all, but as you appear to have “morphed” into Sir Laxative by proxy,

I have some questions for you, just so we can establish how ludicrous a word “Islamphobia” is and establish your credentials as a useful idiot (to be fair, it’s not required, but lets do it anyway).
Oh fun, a Pap-quiz!

Question 1 – Is the Koran the word of god, to be followed as it is written (if you’re a muslim of course)?
Yes! Just like the words of Jesus btw!

Question 2 – Is Mohammed meant to be the perfect man, to be emulated at all times?
He is not meant to be but considered to be someone to very much aspire to – and according to legend he seems to have been quite a decent bloke, much beloved by the people who met him.

Question 3 – Does the Koran specify sanctions and punishments, including death to “unbelievers” (That’s non-muslims in case you weren’t aware)?
Probably not but I guess you will find some quote by some “expert” who claims otherwise – and you believe him because if it confirms your prejudices. And “unbelievers” probably would exclude Christians and Jews unless they are converts from Islam.

Question 4 – Was Mohammed a terrorist?
No.

Question 5 – Does the Koran call Muslims to war against unbelievers?
No. It is a proselytizing religion though – like Christianity.

So, once you’ve answered those questions, can you tell me why I logically should be a big fan of Islam, as opposed to being what I am, someone who abhors everything it stands for, by it’s own words and deeds?
Why would I tell you, you should be a big fan of Islam? I am not. But then again, I’m not a big fan of any religion.

What you abhor though is not Islam, which is quite a complex set of ideas (embedded in social praxis which differs from place to place) that inspire different people to different things, some bad, some good – as most ideas do.

What you “abhor” is the cheap caricature of Islam you’ve made up and take for “the real thing” (as if there was “one real Islam”) – though you don’t really abhor it, because after all it gives you a reason to hate people – something you eminently like, because you’re a racist.
Agreed, I don’t approve of any religions, only respectful peaceful spirituality that holds nature in high esteem- like Buddhism and Taoism. I’m an agnostic. Not fond of atheists either- Dawkins is arrogant and his atheism is almost like a religion.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173345

Someone who can’t spell “particle” properly shouldn’t be taken seriously period. I suppose it’s asking too much to have been reading about Grand Unified Theories back in seventh grade, like I was- but I know people who did it when they were even younger. That an adult can’t spell a simple word correctly is something that still shocks me. But then again I’ve never had much contact with people of average and below intelligence and never had the desire to do so. The human species is pretty backwards, in spite of its technology, it has not advanced much intellectually from the days of cave people. You see that with the overreaction to fear, greed, power, etc. If a cataclysm happens to take away our technology, we go right back to sticks and stones. Einstein said that, actually.

MrCentrist wrote:

Morris Sullivan wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

Not a day goes by without a brain dead right winger ranting about how crime rates have gone up since Obama came into office. And to make themselves look more ignorant, they blame Hillary.

But the reality is crime rates are at historic lows. Every year under Obama crime rates were lower than any year un GW Bush. Amazing the same idiots bragged about how low the crime rates were under GW.
The reason that there’s such gulf between right and left-wing viewpoints is that they’re arguing from different perspectives. Progressive people tend to argue based on facts and figures, whereas conservatives tend to argue based on emotion. I believe that many people on the right feel like they’re less safe, and for them that’s all that matters. They feel that way because of the rise of terrorism and the sensational coverage it gets in the media, who are engaged in a race to the bottom in order to satisfy that kind of appetite.

So it’s pretty much useless to argue with facts. If you’re to have a hope of convincing “them”, you’ll need to communicate in a way that connects with their emotions.
You have right and left confused.

The reason that there’s such gulf between right and left-wing viewpoints is that they’re arguing from different perspectives. Conservative people tend to argue based on facts and figures,
But here we have facts and figures and only the Left can see them.

whereas Progressives tend to argue based on emotion.
But here despite the facts the Right seems to argue with paranoia ignoring the facts.

I believe that many people on the left feel like they’re less safe
Again, we have HRC and the left arguing we are better off today that 10 years ago, and Trump and the right arguing that the country is less safe and that people should be scared.

It is not just cime stats too. Look at illegal immigration. We hit a low for the past 15 years. It was much worse 10 years ago. But only the right is arguing that is too high and a threat to their lives.
The Clintons aren’t part of the “left” lol. And look at Obama’s record and why he’s been called Deporter-in-Chief. Most progressives don’t like neolibs and neocons. I’ve had the perspective of living in other countries for a time and understanding why these countries don’t like America and how it tries to control them. I’ve also seen how the Nordic Model is better and results in a higher standard of living and life expectancy than the oligarchy that passes for “democratic republic” in the US. Studies from major universities like Princeton back that up.

, and for them that’s all that matters. They feel that way because of the increasing sensational coverage of shootings in the media, who are engaged in a race to the bottom in order to satisfy that kind of appetite.
But in the case you mention there are stats to back it up. But the emotional Right refuses to look at them and instead talks of fear of minorities.

So it’s pretty much useless to argue with facts. If you’re to have a hope of convincing “them”, you’ll need to communicate in a way that connects with their emotions.
This is true. Look at this one thread avout crime. The Right wing refuses to look at the facts.

Look at illegal immigration. The Right wing refuses to look at the facts.

Look at police violating the civil rights of minorities. The Right wing refuses to look at the facts.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/us/baltimore-justice-department-report/index.html
How can you argue that the country is better off when you see the police committing such heinous acts? This country is a cesspool of bigotry, racism, elitism, and capitalistic corruption.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173428

No, you’re not. Clinton is not from the left. That’s a major issue. Also, you cannot say the country is better off when you have so much bigotry, racism, elitism and corrupt capitalism going on and the police violating civil rights and establishing a psuedo-police state. Trump is going way in the wrong direction, but that doesn’t mean Clinton is correct either- and she certainly isn’t a progressive. She only looks good compared to Trump- and even so, just barely.
No, you’re not. Clinton is not from the left. That’s a major issue. Also, you cannot say the country is better off when you have so much bigotry, racism, elitism and corrupt capitalism going on and the police violating civil rights and establishing a psuedo-police state. Trump is going way in the wrong direction, but that doesn’t mean Clinton is correct either- and she certainly isn’t a progressive. She only looks good compared to Trump- and even so, just barely.

Yes Obama deported much more then BushII and I didn´t looked it up, but I would bet he also bombed/dronestriked more countries then BushII. He was also the first puppet that killed two US citizens with dronestrikes, one was an child.
And the other problem is assuming anyone who speaks out is a Putin schill smacks of McCarthyism. There’s enough room for two corrupt “superpowers”- as well as two corrupt major party candidates.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173447

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/edward-snowden-dead-conspiracy-theory-claims-whistleblower-killed-after-cryptic-tweet-1574892

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-vs-edward-snowden-twitter-feud-kicks-off-over-recent-data-leaks-1573236

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/cyberwar-begins-us-believed-hack-back-russia-following-democratic-party-email-leaks-1573640

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/whistleblower-edward-snowden-sparks-curiosity-cryptic-tweet-its-time-1574308

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/edward-snowden-dead-conspiracy-theory-claims-whistleblower-killed-after-cryptic-tweet-1574892

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-could-release-more-material-us-election-says-assange-1572945

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-dumps-20000-emails-revealing-personal-details-democrat-donors-1572131

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/whistleblower-edward-snowden-says-nsa-would-know-if-russia-involved-dnc-hack-1572768

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/dnc-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz-resigns-amid-email-leaks-revealing-plot-against-bernie-sanders-1572267

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-vs-edward-snowden-twitter-feud-kicks-off-over-recent-data-leaks-1573236

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173488

Don´t find the link I had read from my usual sources or maybe I have seen it in the news on one of our publicbroadcaster, however this comes close to what I have heard.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/edward-snowden-dead-conspiracy-theory-claims-whistleblower-killed-after-cryptic-tweet-1574892

And as said, I only was speculating in the hope you would have maybe more information.
I like trying to put 2 and 2 together and I saw some flags in the article you posted.

It mentioned the 64 bit code that was posted and then it stated that although Greenwald says Snowden is safe, that Snowden’s Twitter account has been suspiciously inactive.

Then I read this:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-vs-edward-snowden-twitter-feud-kicks-off-over-recent-data-leaks-1573236

So my speculation would include that it’s possible that wikileaks is trying to hack Snowden because of what he said? It would not surprise me, since wikileaks is more of a loose association of people with varying goals. Perhaps he detected the hack and sent the code out so the information wouldn’t be lost in case he did get hacked? And maybe his silence on the matter indicates they succeeded but hopefully Greenwald was able to secure the information with the code that Snowden sent out? Just speculation on my part.

Don´t find the link I had read from my usual sources or maybe I have seen it in the news on one of our publicbroadcaster, however this comes close to what I have heard.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/edward-snowden-dead-conspiracy-theory-claims-whistleblower-killed-after-cryptic-tweet-1574892

And as said, I only was speculating in the hope you would have maybe more information.
I like trying to put 2 and 2 together and I saw some flags in the article you posted.

It mentioned the 64 bit code that was posted and then it stated that although Greenwald says Snowden is safe, that Snowden’s Twitter account has been suspiciously inactive.

Then I read this:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-vs-edward-snowden-twitter-feud-kicks-off-over-recent-data-leaks-1573236

So my speculation would include that it’s possible that wikileaks is trying to hack Snowden because of what he said? It would not surprise me, since wikileaks is more of a loose association of people with varying goals. Perhaps he detected the hack and sent the code out so the information wouldn’t be lost in case he did get hacked? And maybe his silence on the matter indicates they succeeded but hopefully Greenwald was able to secure the information with the code that Snowden sent out? Just speculation on my part.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/guccifer-2-0-exposed-dnc-hacker-propaganda-tool-russian-intelligence-1572702

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/did-russia-really-hack-dnc-kremlin-officials-continue-deny-involvement-email-leak-1572591

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/wikileaks-leaks-25-dnc-voicemails-likely-from-email-transcription-service

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/26/politics/julian-assange-dnc-email-leak-hack/

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/guccifer-2-0-exposed-dnc-hacker-propaganda-tool-russian-intelligence-1572702

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/trump-enters-unchartered-territory-after-urging-russia-conduct-espionage-against-clinton-1572915

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173524

In either case, the war in Iraq was completely unnecessary. Similar to Vietnam.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173538

Would be only half the fun if the elites would chose Presipuppet The Donald with VP ClintonII without the election show.

Go greens Go
I’m sure one day we’ll find out how much of a sham this whole political process was/is- actually I think we are already learning that lol. And the mass media have been found out for what they are- colluders.

Go Greens Go!

Would be only half the fun if the elites would chose Presipuppet The Donald with VP ClintonII without the election show.

Go greens Go
I’m sure one day we’ll find out how much of a sham this whole political process was/is- actually I think we are already learning that lol. And the mass media have been found out for what they are- colluders.

Go Greens Go!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173552

You two seem to use similar tactics lol. By the way, assault weapons do need to be banned. They might be involved in a “tiny fraction” but that fraction seems to be growing.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173646

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/05/marc-mezvinsky-clinton-hedge-fund-greece

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173774

I like Buffet; Gates, not so much. He has a long history of using dirty takeover tactics. He gave Microsoft a bad name. And his donations always have an ulterior motive- including being tied to companies like Monsanto.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/10/emails-raise-new-questions-on-ties-between-clinton-foundation-state-department.html

Emails raise new questions on ties between Clinton Foundation, State Department

“In one email exchange released by Judicial Watch, Doug Band, an executive at the Clinton Foundation, tried to put billionaire donor Gilbert Chagoury — a convicted money launderer — in touch with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.

In the email, Band notes that Chagoury is a “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us,” and insists Clinton aide Huma Abedin call Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman to connect him with Chagoury.

Chagoury is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton and has appeared on the Clinton Foundation donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor. He’s also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for money laundering. He cut a deal and agreed to repay $66 million to the Nigerian government.”

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173709
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173800

Only on non-violent offenders that make up the majority of the prison population. Studies show putting them in jail does more harm than good.

Maybe the US will finally legalize pot like so many states have too.

on that successful model and repudiated much of her husband’s and Congress’ successful efforts,
Only the part that put non-violent offenders in jail, like people who smoked pot for medical purposes. I am sure you agree with her on that point.
Most of us progressives did not like what Clinton did. Simply jailing someone is shortsighted. It’s better to provide education and jobs and raise the minimum wage.

By the way, pot is much less dangerous than prescription painkillers and alcohol and nicotine. But the prescription drug cartel gets its way thanks to $- just like the fossil fuel industry.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173856

mas cervezas wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

Crime is up in several large cities, ( Chicago, Washington, BC, Baltimore).
Wow, you found a few parts of cities where crime is up even though in almost every city crime is down.

Your post is like crying about how some guy was hit by lightning twice, so clearly there must be an epidemic accross the US.
Did you read my post? If so, did you not see the word “satire?” If you did, do you know it’s meaning?

</eyeroll>

Right wingers are paranoid and delusional. They will wet their pants over any rumor or cherry picked thing despite the facts.
Damn! I fell for obvious satire. Sorry. I am starting to become like them!!!
No, you’re not becoming like them. They don’t ever admit, let alone apologize when they have made an error.

That’s Siobhan so there is no “becoming” lol- she was born that way. She sounds very right wing in some of her statements and doesn’t seem to understand that the whole American political system needs to be upended with someone from a third party who doesn’t worship money.
I have no idea who is this Siobhan to which you refer, but let it be said, this is the first year that I have supported a major party candidate for President since 1992. Now, as it appears, I am back to third patties if I am looking for any representation.
From what people have said that person publicly humilated OutsideTheMatrix (or one of his many former IDs) in this forum, and so he holds so bizarre grudge that no one else cares about. But seriously, who hasn’t embarrassed OutsideTheMatrix?

Anyway, I am sorry about before.
I run about a dozen sites on the web…
And how many IDs have you used in this forum? About a dozen?

I am sorry if people keep humilating you here. Maybe you need to go back to your sites and only post there where facts and reality won’t get in the way.
You wouldn’t know a “fact”
Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.
Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.
Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South.

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,
As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.
Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

— hide signature —

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),
Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,
For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html
Ugh you and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

expanded fracking,
Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,
Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.
This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.
Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.
I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.
He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/17/college-rape-prosecutors-press-charges_n_5500432.html

http://www.cruz.senate.gov/files/documents/The%20Legal%20Limit/The%20Legal%20Limit%20Report%204.pdf

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Calgene

http://www.cleanupwashington.org/lobbying/page.cfm?pageid=36

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ann_M._Veneman
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ann_M._Veneman

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174011

No, what we’re talking about is that humanity hasn’t evolved much intellectually from those caveman days- much as we like to think how “civilized” we are. Einstein was referring to humanity being precariously close to weapons of mass destruction destroying our technology and our culture. It applies to any kind of cataclysm- also strong solar flare to gamma ray burst to a megatsunami to a supervolcano eruption to a moderately sized meteorite strike.

No, what we’re talking about is that humanity hasn’t evolved much intellectually from those caveman days- much as we like to think how “civilized” we are. Einstein was referring to humanity being precariously close to weapons of mass destruction destroying our technology and our culture. It applies to any kind of cataclysm- also strong solar flare to gamma ray burst to a megatsunami to a supervolcano eruption to a moderately sized meteorite strike.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173800
It’s a pity that Hillary has now proposed a reverse course
Only on non-violent offenders that make up the majority of the prison population. Studies show putting them in jail does more harm than good.

Maybe the US will finally legalize pot like so many states have too.

on that successful model and repudiated much of her husband’s and Congress’ successful efforts,
Only the part that put non-violent offenders in jail, like people who smoked pot for medical purposes. I am sure you agree with her on that point.
Most of us progressives did not like what Clinton did. Simply jailing someone is shortsighted. It’s better to provide education and jobs and raise the minimum wage.

By the way, pot is much less dangerous than prescription painkillers and alcohol and nicotine. But the prescription drug cartel gets its way thanks to $- just like the fossil fuel industry.

It’s a pity that Hillary has now proposed a reverse course
Only on non-violent offenders that make up the majority of the prison population. Studies show putting them in jail does more harm than good.

Maybe the US will finally legalize pot like so many states have too.

on that successful model and repudiated much of her husband’s and Congress’ successful efforts,
Only the part that put non-violent offenders in jail, like people who smoked pot for medical purposes. I am sure you agree with her on that point.
Most of us progressives did not like what Clinton did. Simply jailing someone is shortsighted. It’s better to provide education and jobs and raise the minimum wage.

By the way, pot is much less dangerous than prescription painkillers and alcohol and nicotine. But the prescription drug cartel gets its way thanks to $- just like the fossil fuel industry.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174051
You left out Vikings, Persians, Indians, etc…

— show signature —
Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.

You left out Vikings, Persians, Indians, etc…

— show signature —
Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.

You left out Vikings, Persians, Indians, etc…

— show signature —
Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58162036

Shifter wrote:
You become less racist when you have contact with other races.
Surely that depends on the context of the contact? The article quoted about the institutionalised persecution of the aboriginal population of Australia (which has it’s corresponding persecution in the USA and elsewhere) occurs when the two “races” involved live very close together. Is there a closer relationship than prisoner & guard; or master & slave? Even where there is some form of segregation of housing, city-dwellers of different races live very closely with each other yet some still manage to be virulently racist.

There’s certainly less racism in a social context where people of different skin colours et al have genuinely equal opportunities and contact as peers rather than as superior-inferior. But even then, it’s surprising how many can be perfectly tolerant of others when things go well but instantly revert to racial stereotyping when a serious dispute arises. This tends to occur mutually, too. An angry purple man can be as racist as an angry green one when tempers flare.

****

As Kev mentions, though, it may be that racism is just a rather Victorian manifestation of a more general us&theming that tends to see cohesive groups under threat (real or imagined) revert to a de-humanisation of their perceived enemies. Tribalism. Hatreds arise between religious groups (e.g. the Protestant-Catholic divide of European history, still found in Northern Ireland & Scotland) or even wholly artificial groups (Hutus & Tutsis of Rwanda) where there is no discernible difference in terms of “racial” appearances.

There is also a long history of class divides and “warfare” between them. These still exist today, with a “new aristocracy” of very rich and powerful people seemingly quite happy to regard the hoi-polloi as essentially inferior to themselves and often barely human, thus worthy of both exploitation and degradation.

Consider also the current toxic politics of the USA, with Clinton & Trump supporters (not to mention Democrats & Republicans) convinced that the other lot are demonic and deserving of an utter rout, suppression or even elimination.

From this point of view, Kev’s hope that a melting pot of skin colours and nose shapes will give rise to a new peace-loving single planetary population seems a folorn hope, as humans will invent new differentiations between themselves over which to persecute or go to war.

SirLataxe

Shifter wrote:
You become less racist when you have contact with other races.
Surely that depends on the context of the contact? The article quoted about the institutionalised persecution of the aboriginal population of Australia (which has it’s corresponding persecution in the USA and elsewhere) occurs when the two “races” involved live very close together. Is there a closer relationship than prisoner & guard; or master & slave? Even where there is some form of segregation of housing, city-dwellers of different races live very closely with each other yet some still manage to be virulently racist.

There’s certainly less racism in a social context where people of different skin colours et al have genuinely equal opportunities and contact as peers rather than as superior-inferior. But even then, it’s surprising how many can be perfectly tolerant of others when things go well but instantly revert to racial stereotyping when a serious dispute arises. This tends to occur mutually, too. An angry purple man can be as racist as an angry green one when tempers flare.

****

As Kev mentions, though, it may be that racism is just a rather Victorian manifestation of a more general us&theming that tends to see cohesive groups under threat (real or imagined) revert to a de-humanisation of their perceived enemies. Tribalism. Hatreds arise between religious groups (e.g. the Protestant-Catholic divide of European history, still found in Northern Ireland & Scotland) or even wholly artificial groups (Hutus & Tutsis of Rwanda) where there is no discernible difference in terms of “racial” appearances.

There is also a long history of class divides and “warfare” between them. These still exist today, with a “new aristocracy” of very rich and powerful people seemingly quite happy to regard the hoi-polloi as essentially inferior to themselves and often barely human, thus worthy of both exploitation and degradation.

Consider also the current toxic politics of the USA, with Clinton & Trump supporters (not to mention Democrats & Republicans) convinced that the other lot are demonic and deserving of an utter rout, suppression or even elimination.

From this point of view, Kev’s hope that a melting pot of skin colours and nose shapes will give rise to a new peace-loving single planetary population seems a folorn hope, as humans will invent new differentiations between themselves over which to persecute or go to war.

SirLataxe

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173806
TrapperJohn • Forum Pro • Posts: 14,141
The only thing charitable about the clinton foundation
In reply to MrCentrist • 59 min ago
1
Is calling it a charity.

The CF has notoriously high overhead – about 80% of donations go towards ‘administrative overhead’, that happens to involve hiring people associated with the Clintons: Huma Abedin and Sidney Blumenthal both had high paying jobs with the CF while HC was sec state. (And Huma was supposed to be working for the state dept at the same time, what a busy gal…)

And the money that does make it to charity? The majority funds media sites that are complimentary to the Clintons, such as mediamatters and thinkprogress.

Giving to charity is a good thing.

Giving to the CF isn’t giving to charity, it’s buying the Clinton’s attention.

Chelsea Clinton’s Father-In-Law is Edward Mezvinsky-Truth!

Like father like son apparently. Looks like his son lost 90% of the value of his hedge fund in the Greece debacle but managed to skim $millions before shutting the fund down

Chelsea Clinton’s Father-In-Law is Edward Mezvinsky-Truth!

Like father like son apparently. Looks like his son lost 90% of the value of his hedge fund in the Greece debacle but managed to skim $millions before shutting the fund down

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173646

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/05/marc-mezvinsky-clinton-hedge-fund-greece

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173774

I like Buffet; Gates, not so much. He has a long history of using dirty takeover tactics. He gave Microsoft a bad name. And his donations always have an ulterior motive- including being tied to companies like Monsanto.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/10/emails-raise-new-questions-on-ties-between-clinton-foundation-state-department.html

Emails raise new questions on ties between Clinton Foundation, State Department

“In one email exchange released by Judicial Watch, Doug Band, an executive at the Clinton Foundation, tried to put billionaire donor Gilbert Chagoury — a convicted money launderer — in touch with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.

In the email, Band notes that Chagoury is a “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us,” and insists Clinton aide Huma Abedin call Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman to connect him with Chagoury.

Chagoury is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton and has appeared on the Clinton Foundation donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor. He’s also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for money laundering. He cut a deal and agreed to repay $66 million to the Nigerian government.”

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173709
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173800

Only on non-violent offenders that make up the majority of the prison population. Studies show putting them in jail does more harm than good.

Maybe the US will finally legalize pot like so many states have too.

on that successful model and repudiated much of her husband’s and Congress’ successful efforts,
Only the part that put non-violent offenders in jail, like people who smoked pot for medical purposes. I am sure you agree with her on that point.
Most of us progressives did not like what Clinton did. Simply jailing someone is shortsighted. It’s better to provide education and jobs and raise the minimum wage.

By the way, pot is much less dangerous than prescription painkillers and alcohol and nicotine. But the prescription drug cartel gets its way thanks to $- just like the fossil fuel industry.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173856

mas cervezas wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

Crime is up in several large cities, ( Chicago, Washington, BC, Baltimore).
Wow, you found a few parts of cities where crime is up even though in almost every city crime is down.

Your post is like crying about how some guy was hit by lightning twice, so clearly there must be an epidemic accross the US.
Did you read my post? If so, did you not see the word “satire?” If you did, do you know it’s meaning?

</eyeroll>

Right wingers are paranoid and delusional. They will wet their pants over any rumor or cherry picked thing despite the facts.
Damn! I fell for obvious satire. Sorry. I am starting to become like them!!!
No, you’re not becoming like them. They don’t ever admit, let alone apologize when they have made an error.

That’s Siobhan so there is no “becoming” lol- she was born that way. She sounds very right wing in some of her statements and doesn’t seem to understand that the whole American political system needs to be upended with someone from a third party who doesn’t worship money.
I have no idea who is this Siobhan to which you refer, but let it be said, this is the first year that I have supported a major party candidate for President since 1992. Now, as it appears, I am back to third patties if I am looking for any representation.
From what people have said that person publicly humilated OutsideTheMatrix (or one of his many former IDs) in this forum, and so he holds so bizarre grudge that no one else cares about. But seriously, who hasn’t embarrassed OutsideTheMatrix?

Anyway, I am sorry about before.
I run about a dozen sites on the web…
And how many IDs have you used in this forum? About a dozen?

I am sorry if people keep humilating you here. Maybe you need to go back to your sites and only post there where facts and reality won’t get in the way.
You wouldn’t know a “fact”
Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.
Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.
Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South.

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,
As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.
Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

— hide signature —

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),
Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,
For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html
Ugh you and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

expanded fracking,
Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,
Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.
This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.
Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.
I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.
He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/17/college-rape-prosecutors-press-charges_n_5500432.html

http://www.cruz.senate.gov/files/documents/The%20Legal%20Limit/The%20Legal%20Limit%20Report%204.pdf

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Calgene

http://www.cleanupwashington.org/lobbying/page.cfm?pageid=36

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ann_M._Veneman
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ann_M._Veneman

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174011

No, what we’re talking about is that humanity hasn’t evolved much intellectually from those caveman days- much as we like to think how “civilized” we are. Einstein was referring to humanity being precariously close to weapons of mass destruction destroying our technology and our culture. It applies to any kind of cataclysm- also strong solar flare to gamma ray burst to a megatsunami to a supervolcano eruption to a moderately sized meteorite strike.

No, what we’re talking about is that humanity hasn’t evolved much intellectually from those caveman days- much as we like to think how “civilized” we are. Einstein was referring to humanity being precariously close to weapons of mass destruction destroying our technology and our culture. It applies to any kind of cataclysm- also strong solar flare to gamma ray burst to a megatsunami to a supervolcano eruption to a moderately sized meteorite strike.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173800
It’s a pity that Hillary has now proposed a reverse course
Only on non-violent offenders that make up the majority of the prison population. Studies show putting them in jail does more harm than good.

Maybe the US will finally legalize pot like so many states have too.

on that successful model and repudiated much of her husband’s and Congress’ successful efforts,
Only the part that put non-violent offenders in jail, like people who smoked pot for medical purposes. I am sure you agree with her on that point.
Most of us progressives did not like what Clinton did. Simply jailing someone is shortsighted. It’s better to provide education and jobs and raise the minimum wage.

By the way, pot is much less dangerous than prescription painkillers and alcohol and nicotine. But the prescription drug cartel gets its way thanks to $- just like the fossil fuel industry.

It’s a pity that Hillary has now proposed a reverse course
Only on non-violent offenders that make up the majority of the prison population. Studies show putting them in jail does more harm than good.

Maybe the US will finally legalize pot like so many states have too.

on that successful model and repudiated much of her husband’s and Congress’ successful efforts,
Only the part that put non-violent offenders in jail, like people who smoked pot for medical purposes. I am sure you agree with her on that point.
Most of us progressives did not like what Clinton did. Simply jailing someone is shortsighted. It’s better to provide education and jobs and raise the minimum wage.

By the way, pot is much less dangerous than prescription painkillers and alcohol and nicotine. But the prescription drug cartel gets its way thanks to $- just like the fossil fuel industry.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174051
You left out Vikings, Persians, Indians, etc…

— show signature —
Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.

You left out Vikings, Persians, Indians, etc…

— show signature —
Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.

You left out Vikings, Persians, Indians, etc…

— show signature —
Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58162036

Shifter wrote:
You become less racist when you have contact with other races.
Surely that depends on the context of the contact? The article quoted about the institutionalised persecution of the aboriginal population of Australia (which has it’s corresponding persecution in the USA and elsewhere) occurs when the two “races” involved live very close together. Is there a closer relationship than prisoner & guard; or master & slave? Even where there is some form of segregation of housing, city-dwellers of different races live very closely with each other yet some still manage to be virulently racist.

There’s certainly less racism in a social context where people of different skin colours et al have genuinely equal opportunities and contact as peers rather than as superior-inferior. But even then, it’s surprising how many can be perfectly tolerant of others when things go well but instantly revert to racial stereotyping when a serious dispute arises. This tends to occur mutually, too. An angry purple man can be as racist as an angry green one when tempers flare.

****

As Kev mentions, though, it may be that racism is just a rather Victorian manifestation of a more general us&theming that tends to see cohesive groups under threat (real or imagined) revert to a de-humanisation of their perceived enemies. Tribalism. Hatreds arise between religious groups (e.g. the Protestant-Catholic divide of European history, still found in Northern Ireland & Scotland) or even wholly artificial groups (Hutus & Tutsis of Rwanda) where there is no discernible difference in terms of “racial” appearances.

There is also a long history of class divides and “warfare” between them. These still exist today, with a “new aristocracy” of very rich and powerful people seemingly quite happy to regard the hoi-polloi as essentially inferior to themselves and often barely human, thus worthy of both exploitation and degradation.

Consider also the current toxic politics of the USA, with Clinton & Trump supporters (not to mention Democrats & Republicans) convinced that the other lot are demonic and deserving of an utter rout, suppression or even elimination.

From this point of view, Kev’s hope that a melting pot of skin colours and nose shapes will give rise to a new peace-loving single planetary population seems a folorn hope, as humans will invent new differentiations between themselves over which to persecute or go to war.

SirLataxe

Shifter wrote:
You become less racist when you have contact with other races.
Surely that depends on the context of the contact? The article quoted about the institutionalised persecution of the aboriginal population of Australia (which has it’s corresponding persecution in the USA and elsewhere) occurs when the two “races” involved live very close together. Is there a closer relationship than prisoner & guard; or master & slave? Even where there is some form of segregation of housing, city-dwellers of different races live very closely with each other yet some still manage to be virulently racist.

There’s certainly less racism in a social context where people of different skin colours et al have genuinely equal opportunities and contact as peers rather than as superior-inferior. But even then, it’s surprising how many can be perfectly tolerant of others when things go well but instantly revert to racial stereotyping when a serious dispute arises. This tends to occur mutually, too. An angry purple man can be as racist as an angry green one when tempers flare.

****

As Kev mentions, though, it may be that racism is just a rather Victorian manifestation of a more general us&theming that tends to see cohesive groups under threat (real or imagined) revert to a de-humanisation of their perceived enemies. Tribalism. Hatreds arise between religious groups (e.g. the Protestant-Catholic divide of European history, still found in Northern Ireland & Scotland) or even wholly artificial groups (Hutus & Tutsis of Rwanda) where there is no discernible difference in terms of “racial” appearances.

There is also a long history of class divides and “warfare” between them. These still exist today, with a “new aristocracy” of very rich and powerful people seemingly quite happy to regard the hoi-polloi as essentially inferior to themselves and often barely human, thus worthy of both exploitation and degradation.

Consider also the current toxic politics of the USA, with Clinton & Trump supporters (not to mention Democrats & Republicans) convinced that the other lot are demonic and deserving of an utter rout, suppression or even elimination.

From this point of view, Kev’s hope that a melting pot of skin colours and nose shapes will give rise to a new peace-loving single planetary population seems a folorn hope, as humans will invent new differentiations between themselves over which to persecute or go to war.

SirLataxe

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173806
TrapperJohn • Forum Pro • Posts: 14,141
The only thing charitable about the clinton foundation
In reply to MrCentrist • 59 min ago
1
Is calling it a charity.

The CF has notoriously high overhead – about 80% of donations go towards ‘administrative overhead’, that happens to involve hiring people associated with the Clintons: Huma Abedin and Sidney Blumenthal both had high paying jobs with the CF while HC was sec state. (And Huma was supposed to be working for the state dept at the same time, what a busy gal…)

And the money that does make it to charity? The majority funds media sites that are complimentary to the Clintons, such as mediamatters and thinkprogress.

Giving to charity is a good thing.

Giving to the CF isn’t giving to charity, it’s buying the Clinton’s attention.

Chelsea Clinton’s Father-In-Law is Edward Mezvinsky-Truth!

Like father like son apparently. Looks like his son lost 90% of the value of his hedge fund in the Greece debacle but managed to skim $millions before shutting the fund down

Chelsea Clinton’s Father-In-Law is Edward Mezvinsky-Truth!

Like father like son apparently. Looks like his son lost 90% of the value of his hedge fund in the Greece debacle but managed to skim $millions before shutting the fund down

George Sd Dec 9, 2014
“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

George Sd Dec 9, 2014
“poses a real risk to democratic governance”
I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.
FlagShareReply
Nick
Nick Dec 9, 2014
@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.
FlagShareReply
october271986
october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014
@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014
“poses a real risk to democratic governance”
I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.
FlagShareReply
Nick
Nick Dec 9, 2014
@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.
FlagShareReply
october271986
october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014
@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014
“poses a real risk to democratic governance”
I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.
FlagShareReply
Nick
Nick Dec 9, 2014
@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.
FlagShareReply
october271986
october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014
@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/aug/10/filmmakers-citizen-journalists-justice-department-investigation

A group of more than 40 documentarians, including eight Oscar winners, has called on the justice department to investigate the “harassment” and “targeting” of citizen journalists who record episodes of police violence.

People who film police violence are citizen journalists. We stand with them
Trevor Timm
Trevor Timm Read more
Noting that the citizens who filmed the deaths of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Freddie Gray and Eric Garner were all subsequently arrested, film-maker David Sutcliffe wrote in an open letter to the documentary community that it is “vital we defend the rights of these individuals to use video as a means of criticizing unjust police activity”.

The undersigned film-makers include Going Clear director Alex Gibney, Citizenfour director Laura Poitras, Cartel Land director Matt Heineman and The House I Live In director Eugene Jarecki.

“Mainstream media has paid ample attention to the images captured by these citizen journalists. Largely, it has ignored the methods in which they were recorded and distributed, and the penalties for those involved,” the letter states.

As with other high-profile police killings from the last two years, the cases of Sterling and Castile, which inspired nationwide protests throughout much of July, both gained attention largely through the release of bystander video.

After Sterling was shot by Baton Rouge police officers during a struggle, the two men who posted viral video of the incident, Chris LeDay and Abdullah Muflahi, were both detained by police. LeDay did not record the video but was one of the first people to post it to Facebook and was arrested and shackled the day after posting the video for “fitting a description”, according to the 34-year-old air force veteran. He was later released after paying more than $1,200 in fines for an earlier traffic violation.

‘I dream about it every night’: what happens to Americans who film police violence?
When Feidin Santana filmed Walter Scott’s death, it marked a turning point in the US civil rights movement – and in Santana’s life. He and others who have taken the law into their own hands tell their stories
Read more
Muflahi, the proprietor of the convenience store where Sterling was killed on 5 July, was detained for four hours in the back of a police car while officers searched his store. Muflahi uploaded the second video that depicted Sterling’s death.

Diamond “Lavish” Reynolds, the fiancee of Castile, who was killed by an officer during a traffic stop just days after Sterling was shot, was also detained by police after the fatal shooting. Reynolds broadcasted the immediate aftermath of the incident on Facebook Live from the front seat of the couple’s car as she spoke with the Minnesota police officer who fired at Castile, who was legally carrying a concealed weapon in the vehicle.

Reynolds was held overnight by police for questioning, sparking outrage on social media, with activists using the hashtag #whereisLavishReynolds to call attention to her detention. “They treated me like a prisoner,” Reynolds said the following morning, after being released.

The letter, which is attached to a statement directed at the DoJ, calls actions such as this “evidence of a pattern of systemic and vindictive targeting by law enforcement”, adding that the efforts “reveal an intention to suppress footage, intimidate witnesses, control narratives, obscure brutality and punish”.

Citizen journalists such as Reynolds and Muflahi “have made it impossible for white Americans to continue ignoring a truth our leaders have spent centuries obfuscating: black lives matter,” the letter says.

In 2015, Kevin Moore, who filmed the Baltimore police tackling Freddie Gray and pulling him into a police van, was also arrested, and released without charges. Moore alleges that police continue to harass him. “They ride past me taunting me with their phones up,” Moore told Vice News in an interview.

Ramsey Orta, who filmed the fatal chokehold arrest of Eric Garner in Staten Island in 2014, also faced repeated interaction with police after the incident, culminating in an arrest on weapons charges. Orta is currently serving a four-year sentence on a plea deal. He claims police targeted him, and, like Moore, approached him with their phones out on one occasion as a taunt.

The letter calls for more people in the documentary community to join the case, declaring that while “the nature of documentary truth may be slippery”, “the one captured by LeDay, Muflahi, Reynolds, Moore, Orta and so many many more is immutable”.

The justice department did not return a request for comment on whether it would answer the film-makers’ call for investigation.
A group of more than 40 documentarians, including eight Oscar winners, has called on the justice department to investigate the “harassment” and “targeting” of citizen journalists who record episodes of police violence.

People who film police violence are citizen journalists. We stand with them
Trevor Timm
Trevor Timm Read more
Noting that the citizens who filmed the deaths of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Freddie Gray and Eric Garner were all subsequently arrested, film-maker David Sutcliffe wrote in an open letter to the documentary community that it is “vital we defend the rights of these individuals to use video as a means of criticizing unjust police activity”.

The undersigned film-makers include Going Clear director Alex Gibney, Citizenfour director Laura Poitras, Cartel Land director Matt Heineman and The House I Live In director Eugene Jarecki.

“Mainstream media has paid ample attention to the images captured by these citizen journalists. Largely, it has ignored the methods in which they were recorded and distributed, and the penalties for those involved,” the letter states.

As with other high-profile police killings from the last two years, the cases of Sterling and Castile, which inspired nationwide protests throughout much of July, both gained attention largely through the release of bystander video.

After Sterling was shot by Baton Rouge police officers during a struggle, the two men who posted viral video of the incident, Chris LeDay and Abdullah Muflahi, were both detained by police. LeDay did not record the video but was one of the first people to post it to Facebook and was arrested and shackled the day after posting the video for “fitting a description”, according to the 34-year-old air force veteran. He was later released after paying more than $1,200 in fines for an earlier traffic violation.

‘I dream about it every night’: what happens to Americans who film police violence?
When Feidin Santana filmed Walter Scott’s death, it marked a turning point in the US civil rights movement – and in Santana’s life. He and others who have taken the law into their own hands tell their stories
Read more
Muflahi, the proprietor of the convenience store where Sterling was killed on 5 July, was detained for four hours in the back of a police car while officers searched his store. Muflahi uploaded the second video that depicted Sterling’s death.

Diamond “Lavish” Reynolds, the fiancee of Castile, who was killed by an officer during a traffic stop just days after Sterling was shot, was also detained by police after the fatal shooting. Reynolds broadcasted the immediate aftermath of the incident on Facebook Live from the front seat of the couple’s car as she spoke with the Minnesota police officer who fired at Castile, who was legally carrying a concealed weapon in the vehicle.

Reynolds was held overnight by police for questioning, sparking outrage on social media, with activists using the hashtag #whereisLavishReynolds to call attention to her detention. “They treated me like a prisoner,” Reynolds said the following morning, after being released.

The letter, which is attached to a statement directed at the DoJ, calls actions such as this “evidence of a pattern of systemic and vindictive targeting by law enforcement”, adding that the efforts “reveal an intention to suppress footage, intimidate witnesses, control narratives, obscure brutality and punish”.

Citizen journalists such as Reynolds and Muflahi “have made it impossible for white Americans to continue ignoring a truth our leaders have spent centuries obfuscating: black lives matter,” the letter says.

In 2015, Kevin Moore, who filmed the Baltimore police tackling Freddie Gray and pulling him into a police van, was also arrested, and released without charges. Moore alleges that police continue to harass him. “They ride past me taunting me with their phones up,” Moore told Vice News in an interview.

Ramsey Orta, who filmed the fatal chokehold arrest of Eric Garner in Staten Island in 2014, also faced repeated interaction with police after the incident, culminating in an arrest on weapons charges. Orta is currently serving a four-year sentence on a plea deal. He claims police targeted him, and, like Moore, approached him with their phones out on one occasion as a taunt.

The letter calls for more people in the documentary community to join the case, declaring that while “the nature of documentary truth may be slippery”, “the one captured by LeDay, Muflahi, Reynolds, Moore, Orta and so many many more is immutable”.

The justice department did not return a request for comment on whether it would answer the film-makers’ call for investigation.

There are a lot of reasons why one can argue that the US has become a police state, many from the media would agree even if they are today in most cases to shy to speak out in the open and please look how militaristic the police has become. If you don´t have the feeling to live in a police state where very step is monitored, vote for ClintonII she will push the project “digital prison” further on. Every step you make…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOZVu9nN0o

There are a lot of reasons why one can argue that the US has become a police state, many from the media would agree even if they are today in most cases to shy to speak out in the open and please look how militaristic the police has become. If you don´t have the feeling to live in a police state where very step is monitored, vote for ClintonII she will push the project “digital prison” further on. Every step you make…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOZVu9nN0o

I´m also no US citizen, nor resident but I find it scary to see the US election. I am not asking them to change anything for me, I only expect that they respect the US constitution, the human rights convention, the geneva conventions and other international law. ClintonII showed in the past that she doesn´t care about the law, more about her sponsors. And there are alternativs, but the corporate media is surpressing them or painting them with lies and misinformation. As one example take Jill Stein and the greens (remember the climate change is coming and ClintonII is surrounded and takes money from the oilindustry and so she lobbied not only in the US for fracking). The world doesn´t need another warmongering Presipuppet in office, ClintonII and her ilk have coursed enough death and destruction in the middle east, south america (Honduras),…, look at the refugees.

http://www.jill2016.com/

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/breedlove-network-sought-weapons-deliveries-for-ukraine-a-1104837.html

What Price Victory?

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/09/ex-cia-chief-who-endorsed-clinton-calls-for-killing-iranians-and-russians-in-syria/

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58170950
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173856

mas cervezas wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

Crime is up in several large cities, ( Chicago, Washington, BC, Baltimore).
Wow, you found a few parts of cities where crime is up even though in almost every city crime is down.

Your post is like crying about how some guy was hit by lightning twice, so clearly there must be an epidemic accross the US.
Did you read my post? If so, did you not see the word “satire?” If you did, do you know it’s meaning?

</eyeroll>

Right wingers are paranoid and delusional. They will wet their pants over any rumor or cherry picked thing despite the facts.
Damn! I fell for obvious satire. Sorry. I am starting to become like them!!!
No, you’re not becoming like them. They don’t ever admit, let alone apologize when they have made an error.

That’s Siobhan so there is no “becoming” lol- she was born that way. She sounds very right wing in some of her statements and doesn’t seem to understand that the whole American political system needs to be upended with someone from a third party who doesn’t worship money.
I have no idea who is this Siobhan to which you refer, but let it be said, this is the first year that I have supported a major party candidate for President since 1992. Now, as it appears, I am back to third patties if I am looking for any representation.
From what people have said that person publicly humilated OutsideTheMatrix (or one of his many former IDs) in this forum, and so he holds so bizarre grudge that no one else cares about. But seriously, who hasn’t embarrassed OutsideTheMatrix?

Anyway, I am sorry about before.
I run about a dozen sites on the web…
And how many IDs have you used in this forum? About a dozen?

I am sorry if people keep humilating you here. Maybe you need to go back to your sites and only post there where facts and reality won’t get in the way.
You wouldn’t know a “fact”
Let’s see who is right.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174423

Ole Richard can be something of a closed mind about these matters and many others.

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/10/closed-mind-richard-dawkins

SirLataxe
Are you saying he’s wrong ? Or the others who have written about how our behaviour towards family etc. is linked to how our genes are continued ?
No, not wrong but rather inclined to put these matters in an over-simplified fashion that often ignores other aspects of how we humans are driven.

Firstly, genes are not simple programs that make us do very specific things in very specific circumstances. They’re part of a highly complex whole that behaves in often unpredictable ways, even if there are certain basic behaviours that can be induced in many humans by many kinds of environmental pressures.

Secondly, there’s the whole issue of culture – the traditions of behaviour that are inculcated in us from childhood that are particular to each culture (and time/age) and which can work “against” some of our basic genetic drives.

Of course, genes and memes are in some sense complementary but there is no standard-program human being that always behaves in a very specific way when stimulated with a very specific set of “goads”. Different cultures (and the sub-cultures within them) can cause people to behave in very diverse ways in identical circumstances. Pap reads the Daily Hate Mail and has a xenophobic paroxysm whereas Jules reads it and feels rather sick about it’s rabid rabble rousing.

SirLataxe
Genes turning on or not is in close concert with environmental factors. Even such conditions as autism, food allergies, ADHD, cancer, etc., all have strong environmental components. Which explains why they are rising exponentially.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.
Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.
Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,
As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.
Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.

Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.

You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.

Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.

You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

Ole Richard can be something of a closed mind about these matters and many others.

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/10/closed-mind-richard-dawkins

SirLataxe
Are you saying he’s wrong ? Or the others who have written about how our behaviour towards family etc. is linked to how our genes are continued ?
No, not wrong but rather inclined to put these matters in an over-simplified fashion that often ignores other aspects of how we humans are driven.

Firstly, genes are not simple programs that make us do very specific things in very specific circumstances. They’re part of a highly complex whole that behaves in often unpredictable ways, even if there are certain basic behaviours that can be induced in many humans by many kinds of environmental pressures.

Secondly, there’s the whole issue of culture – the traditions of behaviour that are inculcated in us from childhood that are particular to each culture (and time/age) and which can work “against” some of our basic genetic drives.

Of course, genes and memes are in some sense complementary but there is no standard-program human being that always behaves in a very specific way when stimulated with a very specific set of “goads”. Different cultures (and the sub-cultures within them) can cause people to behave in very diverse ways in identical circumstances. Pap reads the Daily Hate Mail and has a xenophobic paroxysm whereas Jules reads it and feels rather sick about it’s rabid rabble rousing.

SirLataxe
Genes turning on or not is in close concert with environmental factors. Even such conditions as autism, food allergies, ADHD, cancer, etc., all have strong environmental components. Which explains why they are rising exponentially.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174423

No, not wrong but rather inclined to put these matters in an over-simplified fashion that often ignores other aspects of how we humans are driven.

Firstly, genes are not simple programs that make us do very specific things in very specific circumstances. They’re part of a highly complex whole that behaves in often unpredictable ways, even if there are certain basic behaviours that can be induced in many humans by many kinds of environmental pressures.

Secondly, there’s the whole issue of culture – the traditions of behaviour that are inculcated in us from childhood that are particular to each culture (and time/age) and which can work “against” some of our basic genetic drives.

Of course, genes and memes are in some sense complementary but there is no standard-program human being that always behaves in a very specific way when stimulated with a very specific set of “goads”. Different cultures (and the sub-cultures within them) can cause people to behave in very diverse ways in identical circumstances. Pap reads the Daily Hate Mail and has a xenophobic paroxysm whereas Jules reads it and feels rather sick about it’s rabid rabble rousing.

SirLataxe
Genes turning on or not is in close concert with environmental factors. Even such conditions as autism, food allergies, ADHD, cancer, etc., all have strong environmental components. Which explains why they are rising exponentially.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174407

Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.
Origins of fear and violence? I think most animals share those.

For humans any group that poses a threat in any way shape or form will generally get bad treatment. This hold true in basically all cultures.

— show signature —
But let’s use other animals as an example. When one breed of cat or dog encounters another breed of cat or dog they don’t behave this way towards each other, they don’t hold such prejudices as humans do. My thought is that the more complex human brain also has more of a tendency to be defective.

Overpopulation and limited resources might also play a role here. Perhaps if other animals felt similar kinds of pressure that humans do they would behave in similar ways.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174011

No, what we’re talking about is that humanity hasn’t evolved much intellectually from those caveman days- much as we like to think how “civilized” we are. Einstein was referring to humanity being precariously close to weapons of mass destruction destroying our technology and our culture. It applies to any kind of cataclysm- also strong solar flare to gamma ray burst to a megatsunami to a supervolcano eruption to a moderately sized meteorite strike.
I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.
FlagShareReply
Nick
Nick Dec 9, 2014
@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.
FlagShareReply
october271986
october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014
@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014
“poses a real risk to democratic governance”
I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.
FlagShareReply
Nick
Nick Dec 9, 2014
@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.
FlagShareReply
october271986
october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014
@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014
“poses a real risk to democratic governance”
I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.
FlagShareReply
Nick
Nick Dec 9, 2014
@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.
FlagShareReply
october271986
october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014
@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/aug/10/filmmakers-citizen-journalists-justice-department-investigation

A group of more than 40 documentarians, including eight Oscar winners, has called on the justice department to investigate the “harassment” and “targeting” of citizen journalists who record episodes of police violence.

People who film police violence are citizen journalists. We stand with them
Trevor Timm
Trevor Timm Read more
Noting that the citizens who filmed the deaths of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Freddie Gray and Eric Garner were all subsequently arrested, film-maker David Sutcliffe wrote in an open letter to the documentary community that it is “vital we defend the rights of these individuals to use video as a means of criticizing unjust police activity”.

The undersigned film-makers include Going Clear director Alex Gibney, Citizenfour director Laura Poitras, Cartel Land director Matt Heineman and The House I Live In director Eugene Jarecki.

“Mainstream media has paid ample attention to the images captured by these citizen journalists. Largely, it has ignored the methods in which they were recorded and distributed, and the penalties for those involved,” the letter states.

As with other high-profile police killings from the last two years, the cases of Sterling and Castile, which inspired nationwide protests throughout much of July, both gained attention largely through the release of bystander video.

After Sterling was shot by Baton Rouge police officers during a struggle, the two men who posted viral video of the incident, Chris LeDay and Abdullah Muflahi, were both detained by police. LeDay did not record the video but was one of the first people to post it to Facebook and was arrested and shackled the day after posting the video for “fitting a description”, according to the 34-year-old air force veteran. He was later released after paying more than $1,200 in fines for an earlier traffic violation.

‘I dream about it every night’: what happens to Americans who film police violence?
When Feidin Santana filmed Walter Scott’s death, it marked a turning point in the US civil rights movement – and in Santana’s life. He and others who have taken the law into their own hands tell their stories
Read more
Muflahi, the proprietor of the convenience store where Sterling was killed on 5 July, was detained for four hours in the back of a police car while officers searched his store. Muflahi uploaded the second video that depicted Sterling’s death.

Diamond “Lavish” Reynolds, the fiancee of Castile, who was killed by an officer during a traffic stop just days after Sterling was shot, was also detained by police after the fatal shooting. Reynolds broadcasted the immediate aftermath of the incident on Facebook Live from the front seat of the couple’s car as she spoke with the Minnesota police officer who fired at Castile, who was legally carrying a concealed weapon in the vehicle.

Reynolds was held overnight by police for questioning, sparking outrage on social media, with activists using the hashtag #whereisLavishReynolds to call attention to her detention. “They treated me like a prisoner,” Reynolds said the following morning, after being released.

The letter, which is attached to a statement directed at the DoJ, calls actions such as this “evidence of a pattern of systemic and vindictive targeting by law enforcement”, adding that the efforts “reveal an intention to suppress footage, intimidate witnesses, control narratives, obscure brutality and punish”.

Citizen journalists such as Reynolds and Muflahi “have made it impossible for white Americans to continue ignoring a truth our leaders have spent centuries obfuscating: black lives matter,” the letter says.

In 2015, Kevin Moore, who filmed the Baltimore police tackling Freddie Gray and pulling him into a police van, was also arrested, and released without charges. Moore alleges that police continue to harass him. “They ride past me taunting me with their phones up,” Moore told Vice News in an interview.

Ramsey Orta, who filmed the fatal chokehold arrest of Eric Garner in Staten Island in 2014, also faced repeated interaction with police after the incident, culminating in an arrest on weapons charges. Orta is currently serving a four-year sentence on a plea deal. He claims police targeted him, and, like Moore, approached him with their phones out on one occasion as a taunt.

The letter calls for more people in the documentary community to join the case, declaring that while “the nature of documentary truth may be slippery”, “the one captured by LeDay, Muflahi, Reynolds, Moore, Orta and so many many more is immutable”.

The justice department did not return a request for comment on whether it would answer the film-makers’ call for investigation.
A group of more than 40 documentarians, including eight Oscar winners, has called on the justice department to investigate the “harassment” and “targeting” of citizen journalists who record episodes of police violence.

People who film police violence are citizen journalists. We stand with them
Trevor Timm
Trevor Timm Read more
Noting that the citizens who filmed the deaths of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Freddie Gray and Eric Garner were all subsequently arrested, film-maker David Sutcliffe wrote in an open letter to the documentary community that it is “vital we defend the rights of these individuals to use video as a means of criticizing unjust police activity”.

The undersigned film-makers include Going Clear director Alex Gibney, Citizenfour director Laura Poitras, Cartel Land director Matt Heineman and The House I Live In director Eugene Jarecki.

“Mainstream media has paid ample attention to the images captured by these citizen journalists. Largely, it has ignored the methods in which they were recorded and distributed, and the penalties for those involved,” the letter states.

As with other high-profile police killings from the last two years, the cases of Sterling and Castile, which inspired nationwide protests throughout much of July, both gained attention largely through the release of bystander video.

After Sterling was shot by Baton Rouge police officers during a struggle, the two men who posted viral video of the incident, Chris LeDay and Abdullah Muflahi, were both detained by police. LeDay did not record the video but was one of the first people to post it to Facebook and was arrested and shackled the day after posting the video for “fitting a description”, according to the 34-year-old air force veteran. He was later released after paying more than $1,200 in fines for an earlier traffic violation.

‘I dream about it every night’: what happens to Americans who film police violence?
When Feidin Santana filmed Walter Scott’s death, it marked a turning point in the US civil rights movement – and in Santana’s life. He and others who have taken the law into their own hands tell their stories
Read more
Muflahi, the proprietor of the convenience store where Sterling was killed on 5 July, was detained for four hours in the back of a police car while officers searched his store. Muflahi uploaded the second video that depicted Sterling’s death.

Diamond “Lavish” Reynolds, the fiancee of Castile, who was killed by an officer during a traffic stop just days after Sterling was shot, was also detained by police after the fatal shooting. Reynolds broadcasted the immediate aftermath of the incident on Facebook Live from the front seat of the couple’s car as she spoke with the Minnesota police officer who fired at Castile, who was legally carrying a concealed weapon in the vehicle.

Reynolds was held overnight by police for questioning, sparking outrage on social media, with activists using the hashtag #whereisLavishReynolds to call attention to her detention. “They treated me like a prisoner,” Reynolds said the following morning, after being released.

The letter, which is attached to a statement directed at the DoJ, calls actions such as this “evidence of a pattern of systemic and vindictive targeting by law enforcement”, adding that the efforts “reveal an intention to suppress footage, intimidate witnesses, control narratives, obscure brutality and punish”.

Citizen journalists such as Reynolds and Muflahi “have made it impossible for white Americans to continue ignoring a truth our leaders have spent centuries obfuscating: black lives matter,” the letter says.

In 2015, Kevin Moore, who filmed the Baltimore police tackling Freddie Gray and pulling him into a police van, was also arrested, and released without charges. Moore alleges that police continue to harass him. “They ride past me taunting me with their phones up,” Moore told Vice News in an interview.

Ramsey Orta, who filmed the fatal chokehold arrest of Eric Garner in Staten Island in 2014, also faced repeated interaction with police after the incident, culminating in an arrest on weapons charges. Orta is currently serving a four-year sentence on a plea deal. He claims police targeted him, and, like Moore, approached him with their phones out on one occasion as a taunt.

The letter calls for more people in the documentary community to join the case, declaring that while “the nature of documentary truth may be slippery”, “the one captured by LeDay, Muflahi, Reynolds, Moore, Orta and so many many more is immutable”.

The justice department did not return a request for comment on whether it would answer the film-makers’ call for investigation.

There are a lot of reasons why one can argue that the US has become a police state, many from the media would agree even if they are today in most cases to shy to speak out in the open and please look how militaristic the police has become. If you don´t have the feeling to live in a police state where very step is monitored, vote for ClintonII she will push the project “digital prison” further on. Every step you make…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOZVu9nN0o

There are a lot of reasons why one can argue that the US has become a police state, many from the media would agree even if they are today in most cases to shy to speak out in the open and please look how militaristic the police has become. If you don´t have the feeling to live in a police state where very step is monitored, vote for ClintonII she will push the project “digital prison” further on. Every step you make…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOZVu9nN0o

I´m also no US citizen, nor resident but I find it scary to see the US election. I am not asking them to change anything for me, I only expect that they respect the US constitution, the human rights convention, the geneva conventions and other international law. ClintonII showed in the past that she doesn´t care about the law, more about her sponsors. And there are alternativs, but the corporate media is surpressing them or painting them with lies and misinformation. As one example take Jill Stein and the greens (remember the climate change is coming and ClintonII is surrounded and takes money from the oilindustry and so she lobbied not only in the US for fracking). The world doesn´t need another warmongering Presipuppet in office, ClintonII and her ilk have coursed enough death and destruction in the middle east, south america (Honduras),…, look at the refugees.

http://www.jill2016.com/

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/breedlove-network-sought-weapons-deliveries-for-ukraine-a-1104837.html

What Price Victory?

https://theintercept.com/2016/08/09/ex-cia-chief-who-endorsed-clinton-calls-for-killing-iranians-and-russians-in-syria/

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58170950
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173856

mas cervezas wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

Crime is up in several large cities, ( Chicago, Washington, BC, Baltimore).
Wow, you found a few parts of cities where crime is up even though in almost every city crime is down.

Your post is like crying about how some guy was hit by lightning twice, so clearly there must be an epidemic accross the US.
Did you read my post? If so, did you not see the word “satire?” If you did, do you know it’s meaning?

</eyeroll>

Right wingers are paranoid and delusional. They will wet their pants over any rumor or cherry picked thing despite the facts.
Damn! I fell for obvious satire. Sorry. I am starting to become like them!!!
No, you’re not becoming like them. They don’t ever admit, let alone apologize when they have made an error.

That’s Siobhan so there is no “becoming” lol- she was born that way. She sounds very right wing in some of her statements and doesn’t seem to understand that the whole American political system needs to be upended with someone from a third party who doesn’t worship money.
I have no idea who is this Siobhan to which you refer, but let it be said, this is the first year that I have supported a major party candidate for President since 1992. Now, as it appears, I am back to third patties if I am looking for any representation.
From what people have said that person publicly humilated OutsideTheMatrix (or one of his many former IDs) in this forum, and so he holds so bizarre grudge that no one else cares about. But seriously, who hasn’t embarrassed OutsideTheMatrix?

Anyway, I am sorry about before.
I run about a dozen sites on the web…
And how many IDs have you used in this forum? About a dozen?

I am sorry if people keep humilating you here. Maybe you need to go back to your sites and only post there where facts and reality won’t get in the way.
You wouldn’t know a “fact”
Let’s see who is right.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174423

Ole Richard can be something of a closed mind about these matters and many others.

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/10/closed-mind-richard-dawkins

SirLataxe
Are you saying he’s wrong ? Or the others who have written about how our behaviour towards family etc. is linked to how our genes are continued ?
No, not wrong but rather inclined to put these matters in an over-simplified fashion that often ignores other aspects of how we humans are driven.

Firstly, genes are not simple programs that make us do very specific things in very specific circumstances. They’re part of a highly complex whole that behaves in often unpredictable ways, even if there are certain basic behaviours that can be induced in many humans by many kinds of environmental pressures.

Secondly, there’s the whole issue of culture – the traditions of behaviour that are inculcated in us from childhood that are particular to each culture (and time/age) and which can work “against” some of our basic genetic drives.

Of course, genes and memes are in some sense complementary but there is no standard-program human being that always behaves in a very specific way when stimulated with a very specific set of “goads”. Different cultures (and the sub-cultures within them) can cause people to behave in very diverse ways in identical circumstances. Pap reads the Daily Hate Mail and has a xenophobic paroxysm whereas Jules reads it and feels rather sick about it’s rabid rabble rousing.

SirLataxe
Genes turning on or not is in close concert with environmental factors. Even such conditions as autism, food allergies, ADHD, cancer, etc., all have strong environmental components. Which explains why they are rising exponentially.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.
Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.
Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,
As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.
Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.

Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.

You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.

Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.

You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.

Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,

As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.

Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),

Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,

For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html

You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,

Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,

Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.

This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.

Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.

I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.

He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

Ole Richard can be something of a closed mind about these matters and many others.

http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/10/closed-mind-richard-dawkins

SirLataxe
Are you saying he’s wrong ? Or the others who have written about how our behaviour towards family etc. is linked to how our genes are continued ?
No, not wrong but rather inclined to put these matters in an over-simplified fashion that often ignores other aspects of how we humans are driven.

Firstly, genes are not simple programs that make us do very specific things in very specific circumstances. They’re part of a highly complex whole that behaves in often unpredictable ways, even if there are certain basic behaviours that can be induced in many humans by many kinds of environmental pressures.

Secondly, there’s the whole issue of culture – the traditions of behaviour that are inculcated in us from childhood that are particular to each culture (and time/age) and which can work “against” some of our basic genetic drives.

Of course, genes and memes are in some sense complementary but there is no standard-program human being that always behaves in a very specific way when stimulated with a very specific set of “goads”. Different cultures (and the sub-cultures within them) can cause people to behave in very diverse ways in identical circumstances. Pap reads the Daily Hate Mail and has a xenophobic paroxysm whereas Jules reads it and feels rather sick about it’s rabid rabble rousing.

SirLataxe
Genes turning on or not is in close concert with environmental factors. Even such conditions as autism, food allergies, ADHD, cancer, etc., all have strong environmental components. Which explains why they are rising exponentially.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174423

No, not wrong but rather inclined to put these matters in an over-simplified fashion that often ignores other aspects of how we humans are driven.

Firstly, genes are not simple programs that make us do very specific things in very specific circumstances. They’re part of a highly complex whole that behaves in often unpredictable ways, even if there are certain basic behaviours that can be induced in many humans by many kinds of environmental pressures.

Secondly, there’s the whole issue of culture – the traditions of behaviour that are inculcated in us from childhood that are particular to each culture (and time/age) and which can work “against” some of our basic genetic drives.

Of course, genes and memes are in some sense complementary but there is no standard-program human being that always behaves in a very specific way when stimulated with a very specific set of “goads”. Different cultures (and the sub-cultures within them) can cause people to behave in very diverse ways in identical circumstances. Pap reads the Daily Hate Mail and has a xenophobic paroxysm whereas Jules reads it and feels rather sick about it’s rabid rabble rousing.

SirLataxe
Genes turning on or not is in close concert with environmental factors. Even such conditions as autism, food allergies, ADHD, cancer, etc., all have strong environmental components. Which explains why they are rising exponentially.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174407

Yes indeed- too many groups to mention. Rewording Lataxe’s original question- we should be probing the origins of fear and violence. It runs deeper than bigotry.
Origins of fear and violence? I think most animals share those.

For humans any group that poses a threat in any way shape or form will generally get bad treatment. This hold true in basically all cultures.

— show signature —
But let’s use other animals as an example. When one breed of cat or dog encounters another breed of cat or dog they don’t behave this way towards each other, they don’t hold such prejudices as humans do. My thought is that the more complex human brain also has more of a tendency to be defective.

Overpopulation and limited resources might also play a role here. Perhaps if other animals felt similar kinds of pressure that humans do they would behave in similar ways.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58174011

No, what we’re talking about is that humanity hasn’t evolved much intellectually from those caveman days- much as we like to think how “civilized” we are. Einstein was referring to humanity being precariously close to weapons of mass destruction destroying our technology and our culture. It applies to any kind of cataclysm- also strong solar flare to gamma ray burst to a megatsunami to a supervolcano eruption to a moderately sized meteorite strike.

FlagShare1Javier GonzalezLikeReply
JNewman
JNewman Feb 3, 2015
“…a voter initiative that, if successful in November, would require most foods containing genetically modified ingredients to be labeled as such in the state.”

Great scott! Think of the unadulterated chaos that would ensue if there was additional information on a food label! These anarchists must at all cost be stopped!
Yeah, asking for more labeling of foods is definitely on par with climate denial, which scientists predict will cause widespread human suffering if left unchecked, or anti-vaccination, which can cause other people to get sick or die in large numbers. Yeah, asking for more information on a food label is pretty much the same thing, probably if people knew which foods contained GMO ingredients (as they do in Europe) the country would almost definitely collapse in a few years. Ten tops. Spot-on comparison.
FlagShareLikeReply
jyo
jyo Feb 3, 2015
@JNewman what the goal of labeling the food? Just by putting GMO on the food tells the common consumer nothing.
FlagShareLikeReply
Javier Gonzalez
Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015
@jyo @JNewman Yes idiot, it tells them it is GMO.
FlagShareLikeReply
jyo
jyo Feb 3, 2015
@JNewman you actually sound alot like the antivaxxers. There is no scientific evidence that GMOs cause health problems yet you like them are convinced that it is.
FlagShareLikeReply
MemeInjector3000
MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015
@jyo @JNewman There is plenty of peer-reviewed data on all the other problems with GMOs besides safety: they have resulted in increased overall pesticide/herbicide usage (which does have deleterious health effects), they show no significant yield improvement for many crops, they kill non-target species, and they pollute neighboring non-GM fields.

Ag biotech apologists are so predictable.
FlagShare1Javier GonzalezLikeReply
Javier Gonzalez
Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015
@jyo @JNewman Non-sequitur.
GMOs cause autism, cancer, Alzheimers, and Parkinson
FlagShareLikeReply
Origin of Truth
Origin of Truth Jun 20, 2014
iF GMO’s are so safe,and the levels of “Roundup” in ou food not a problem, then why not label them proudly, and nullify the “:Exemption from Prosecution”, Monsanto rammed through the Supreme Court. Also what about the cross-pollination , that threatens other varieties with contamination, or extinction!!! The GREED of corporations has no concern for “future generations”.
FlagShare2Javier GonzalezMemeInjector3000LikeReply
MemeInjector3000
MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015
@Origin of Truth Ethics are irrelevant. GM crops were designed for one reason and one reason only: to create a bigger market for the pesticides that the biotech firms also conveniently sell and thus increase quarterly revenues. Capitalism 101.

(¯¥¯`·._§tå®®¥™_.·´¯¥¯) (¯¥¯`·._Юèå|\/|§™_.·´¯¥¯) just now
I am a scientist who supports GMO but do not support companies like Monsanto or Bayer that have a long history of polluting the environment. Monsanto is currently being sued by several cities, including Seattle and San Diego, for PCB pollution (like what they did to the groundwater in Anniston, AL) and of course there is the whole Agent Orange fiasco. Many scientists who work in biotech do not like Monsanto and are developing GMO that will not need glyphosate- for the reasons that the scientist a few posts above me mentioned (in addition to that, glyphosate is now meeting with much greater weed resistance so even more dangerous pesticides like Enlist-Duo are being used, which is connected to breast cancer, while the World Health Oranization has linked glyphosate to lymphoma in a meta-analysis of 34 studies.) There is also the matter of tighter regulations, like they have in Europe, something which the American Medical Association has been calling for.
I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)
And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA
Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07
NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.
The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”
http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA
Monica Eng
Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story
The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.
Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.
Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.
“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.
On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”
The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.
“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”
Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”
The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.
In that Slate article, they mention Ken Folta at the University of Florida. He has already come under fire and exposed in a New York Times article (and others) for taking large payments from Monsanto- which was revealed via numerous Freedom of Information Act requests.

Javier Gonzalez
Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015
Kloor isa liar.
Dr. Seralini is a hero to everybody with relatives with cancer.
FlagShareLikeReply
MemeInjector3000
MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015
Kloor is a liar… or at least very, very stupid. The actual data clearly show that GMO skepticism is NOT a liberal issue. See:
Stop pretending that liberals are just as anti-science as conservatives

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173856

mas cervezas wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

Crime is up in several large cities, ( Chicago, Washington, BC, Baltimore).

Wow, you found a few parts of cities where crime is up even though in almost every city crime is down.

Your post is like crying about how some guy was hit by lightning twice, so clearly there must be an epidemic accross the US.

Did you read my post? If so, did you not see the word “satire?” If you did, do you know it’s meaning?

</eyeroll>

Right wingers are paranoid and delusional. They will wet their pants over any rumor or cherry picked thing despite the facts.

Damn! I fell for obvious satire. Sorry. I am starting to become like them!!!

No, you’re not becoming like them. They don’t ever admit, let alone apologize when they have made an error.

That’s Siobhan so there is no “becoming” lol- she was born that way. She sounds very right wing in some of her statements and doesn’t seem to understand that the whole American political system needs to be upended with someone from a third party who doesn’t worship money.

I have no idea who is this Siobhan to which you refer, but let it be said, this is the first year that I have supported a major party candidate for President since 1992. Now, as it appears, I am back to third patties if I am looking for any representation.

From what people have said that person publicly humilated OutsideTheMatrix (or one of his many former IDs) in this forum, and so he holds so bizarre grudge that no one else cares about. But seriously, who hasn’t embarrassed OutsideTheMatrix?

Anyway, I am sorry about before.

I run about a dozen sites on the web…

And how many IDs have you used in this forum? About a dozen?

I am sorry if people keep humilating you here. Maybe you need to go back to your sites and only post there where facts and reality won’t get in the way.

You wouldn’t know a “fact”

Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.
Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.
Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,
As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.
Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

Javier Gonzalez

Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015

Kloor isa liar.

Dr. Seralini is a hero to everybody with relatives with cancer.

FlagShareLikeReply

MemeInjector3000

MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015

Kloor is a liar… or at least very, very stupid. The actual data clearly show that GMO skepticism is NOT a liberal issue. See:

Stop pretending that liberals are just as anti-science as conservatives

FlagShare1Javier GonzalezLikeReply

JNewman

JNewman Feb 3, 2015

“…a voter initiative that, if successful in November, would require most foods containing genetically modified ingredients to be labeled as such in the state.”

Great scott! Think of the unadulterated chaos that would ensue if there was additional information on a food label! These anarchists must at all cost be stopped!

Yeah, asking for more labeling of foods is definitely on par with climate denial, which scientists predict will cause widespread human suffering if left unchecked, or anti-vaccination, which can cause other people to get sick or die in large numbers. Yeah, asking for more information on a food label is pretty much the same thing, probably if people knew which foods contained GMO ingredients (as they do in Europe) the country would almost definitely collapse in a few years. Ten tops. Spot-on comparison.

FlagShareLikeReply

jyo

jyo Feb 3, 2015

@JNewman what the goal of labeling the food? Just by putting GMO on the food tells the common consumer nothing.

FlagShareLikeReply

Javier Gonzalez

Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015

@jyo @JNewman Yes idiot, it tells them it is GMO.

FlagShareLikeReply

jyo

jyo Feb 3, 2015

@JNewman you actually sound alot like the antivaxxers. There is no scientific evidence that GMOs cause health problems yet you like them are convinced that it is.

FlagShareLikeReply

MemeInjector3000

MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015

@jyo @JNewman There is plenty of peer-reviewed data on all the other problems with GMOs besides safety: they have resulted in increased overall pesticide/herbicide usage (which does have deleterious health effects), they show no significant yield improvement for many crops, they kill non-target species, and they pollute neighboring non-GM fields.

Ag biotech apologists are so predictable.

FlagShare1Javier GonzalezLikeReply

Javier Gonzalez

Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015

@jyo @JNewman Non-sequitur.

GMOs cause autism, cancer, Alzheimers, and Parkinson

FlagShareLikeReply

Origin of Truth

Origin of Truth Jun 20, 2014

iF GMO’s are so safe,and the levels of “Roundup” in ou food not a problem, then why not label them proudly, and nullify the “:Exemption from Prosecution”, Monsanto rammed through the Supreme Court. Also what about the cross-pollination , that threatens other varieties with contamination, or extinction!!! The GREED of corporations has no concern for “future generations”.

FlagShare2Javier GonzalezMemeInjector3000LikeReply

MemeInjector3000

MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015

@Origin of Truth Ethics are irrelevant. GM crops were designed for one reason and one reason only: to create a bigger market for the pesticides that the biotech firms also conveniently sell and thus increase quarterly revenues. Capitalism 101.

(¯¥¯`·._§tå®®¥™_.·´¯¥¯) (¯¥¯`·._Юèå|\/|§™_.·´¯¥¯) just now

I am a scientist who supports GMO but do not support companies like Monsanto or Bayer that have a long history of polluting the environment. Monsanto is currently being sued by several cities, including Seattle and San Diego, for PCB pollution (like what they did to the groundwater in Anniston, AL) and of course there is the whole Agent Orange fiasco. Many scientists who work in biotech do not like Monsanto and are developing GMO that will not need glyphosate- for the reasons that the scientist a few posts above me mentioned (in addition to that, glyphosate is now meeting with much greater weed resistance so even more dangerous pesticides like Enlist-Duo are being used, which is connected to breast cancer, while the World Health Oranization has linked glyphosate to lymphoma in a meta-analysis of 34 studies.) There is also the matter of tighter regulations, like they have in Europe, something which the American Medical Association has been calling for.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

In that Slate article, they mention Ken Folta at the University of Florida. He has already come under fire and exposed in a New York Times article (and others) for taking large payments from Monsanto- which was revealed via numerous Freedom of Information Act requests.

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),
Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,
For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html
You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,
Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,
Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.
This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.
Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.
I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.
He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

GM Myths and Truths: A critical review of the science

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/obama-signs-bill-requiring-labeling-of-gmo-foods/2016/07/29/1f071d66-55d2-11e6-b652-315ae5d4d4dd_story.html

 

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58173856

mas cervezas wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

MrCentrist wrote:

glasswave wrote:

Crime is up in several large cities, ( Chicago, Washington, BC, Baltimore).

Wow, you found a few parts of cities where crime is up even though in almost every city crime is down.

Your post is like crying about how some guy was hit by lightning twice, so clearly there must be an epidemic accross the US.

Did you read my post? If so, did you not see the word “satire?” If you did, do you know it’s meaning?

</eyeroll>

Right wingers are paranoid and delusional. They will wet their pants over any rumor or cherry picked thing despite the facts.

Damn! I fell for obvious satire. Sorry. I am starting to become like them!!!

No, you’re not becoming like them. They don’t ever admit, let alone apologize when they have made an error.

That’s Siobhan so there is no “becoming” lol- she was born that way. She sounds very right wing in some of her statements and doesn’t seem to understand that the whole American political system needs to be upended with someone from a third party who doesn’t worship money.

I have no idea who is this Siobhan to which you refer, but let it be said, this is the first year that I have supported a major party candidate for President since 1992. Now, as it appears, I am back to third patties if I am looking for any representation.

From what people have said that person publicly humilated OutsideTheMatrix (or one of his many former IDs) in this forum, and so he holds so bizarre grudge that no one else cares about. But seriously, who hasn’t embarrassed OutsideTheMatrix?

Anyway, I am sorry about before.

I run about a dozen sites on the web…

And how many IDs have you used in this forum? About a dozen?

I am sorry if people keep humilating you here. Maybe you need to go back to your sites and only post there where facts and reality won’t get in the way.

You wouldn’t know a “fact”

Let’s see who is right.

Do you agree that duing the Obama adminstration the crime rate has been lower than anytime during the GW Bush, GH Bush, and Reagan adminstrations? Yes or No.
Sure. But he was also known as the deporter-in-chief and true progressives like Dr. Cornelius West were disappointed in his lack of accomplishing what he promised.
You mean the democratic socialist Dr. Cornel West?

By the way, President Obama never ran as a progressive, he was a pretty middle-of-the-road centrist even on the campaign trail.
Thats the problem. You have people in the South who simply aren’t progressive enough to elect what America truly needs- which is a government based on the Nordic Model which allows for a much higher standard of living in those countries (and longer life expectancy too.) Democratic Socialism is the ideal. I’ve long wanted the North and South to separate so we don’t have to be shackled down by the South’s conservative ideals. I can’t even stand the so-called Southern “demoncrats.” I will never step foot in the South. Princeton University did a long study that proved that America is an oligarchy (something we’ve discussed before.) Surely a socialist democracy is far better than that (as proven by the high standard of living of countries like Norway, Iceland and Denmark.)

He put people from corrupt companies like Merck and Monsanto in positions of regulatory power,
As much as I distrust Monsanto, most of the foot traffic goes from government to Monsanto, not the other way around.
Guys like Michael Taylor and Clarence Thomas have no business being allowed into government positions. And it isn’t just them- companies like Merck have an undue influence in the FDA- and corporations should not be allowed to control the regulatory process. A few years ago they were found to be given paid vacation trips to FDA employees! The connection between agribusiness and the USDA is just as dire- as the industry is basically allowed to regulate itself. Also see my post about what’s going on at the EPA and our water. America has consistently erred in favor of corporations over public safety- which is why we have all these superfund sites now. And they span every industry- from agribusiness to fossil fuel to pharmaceutical. Also, wikileaks released cables a few years ago showing that the Bush Administration was trying to push for Monsanto products to be accepted into the EC.

Javier Gonzalez

Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015

Kloor isa liar.

Dr. Seralini is a hero to everybody with relatives with cancer.

FlagShareLikeReply

MemeInjector3000

MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015

Kloor is a liar… or at least very, very stupid. The actual data clearly show that GMO skepticism is NOT a liberal issue. See:

Stop pretending that liberals are just as anti-science as conservatives

FlagShare1Javier GonzalezLikeReply

JNewman

JNewman Feb 3, 2015

“…a voter initiative that, if successful in November, would require most foods containing genetically modified ingredients to be labeled as such in the state.”

Great scott! Think of the unadulterated chaos that would ensue if there was additional information on a food label! These anarchists must at all cost be stopped!

Yeah, asking for more labeling of foods is definitely on par with climate denial, which scientists predict will cause widespread human suffering if left unchecked, or anti-vaccination, which can cause other people to get sick or die in large numbers. Yeah, asking for more information on a food label is pretty much the same thing, probably if people knew which foods contained GMO ingredients (as they do in Europe) the country would almost definitely collapse in a few years. Ten tops. Spot-on comparison.

FlagShareLikeReply

jyo

jyo Feb 3, 2015

@JNewman what the goal of labeling the food? Just by putting GMO on the food tells the common consumer nothing.

FlagShareLikeReply

Javier Gonzalez

Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015

@jyo @JNewman Yes idiot, it tells them it is GMO.

FlagShareLikeReply

jyo

jyo Feb 3, 2015

@JNewman you actually sound alot like the antivaxxers. There is no scientific evidence that GMOs cause health problems yet you like them are convinced that it is.

FlagShareLikeReply

MemeInjector3000

MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015

@jyo @JNewman There is plenty of peer-reviewed data on all the other problems with GMOs besides safety: they have resulted in increased overall pesticide/herbicide usage (which does have deleterious health effects), they show no significant yield improvement for many crops, they kill non-target species, and they pollute neighboring non-GM fields.

Ag biotech apologists are so predictable.

FlagShare1Javier GonzalezLikeReply

Javier Gonzalez

Javier Gonzalez Feb 19, 2015

@jyo @JNewman Non-sequitur.

GMOs cause autism, cancer, Alzheimers, and Parkinson

FlagShareLikeReply

Origin of Truth

Origin of Truth Jun 20, 2014

iF GMO’s are so safe,and the levels of “Roundup” in ou food not a problem, then why not label them proudly, and nullify the “:Exemption from Prosecution”, Monsanto rammed through the Supreme Court. Also what about the cross-pollination , that threatens other varieties with contamination, or extinction!!! The GREED of corporations has no concern for “future generations”.

FlagShare2Javier GonzalezMemeInjector3000LikeReply

MemeInjector3000

MemeInjector3000 Feb 4, 2015

@Origin of Truth Ethics are irrelevant. GM crops were designed for one reason and one reason only: to create a bigger market for the pesticides that the biotech firms also conveniently sell and thus increase quarterly revenues. Capitalism 101.

(¯¥¯`·._§tå®®¥™_.·´¯¥¯) (¯¥¯`·._Юèå|\/|§™_.·´¯¥¯) just now

I am a scientist who supports GMO but do not support companies like Monsanto or Bayer that have a long history of polluting the environment. Monsanto is currently being sued by several cities, including Seattle and San Diego, for PCB pollution (like what they did to the groundwater in Anniston, AL) and of course there is the whole Agent Orange fiasco. Many scientists who work in biotech do not like Monsanto and are developing GMO that will not need glyphosate- for the reasons that the scientist a few posts above me mentioned (in addition to that, glyphosate is now meeting with much greater weed resistance so even more dangerous pesticides like Enlist-Duo are being used, which is connected to breast cancer, while the World Health Oranization has linked glyphosate to lymphoma in a meta-analysis of 34 studies.) There is also the matter of tighter regulations, like they have in Europe, something which the American Medical Association has been calling for.

GMOs should be safety tested – AMA

Thursday, 21 June 2012 12:07

NOTE: U.S. regulators rely almost exclusively on information provided by GM crop developers like Monsanto on an entirely voluntary basis, and those data are not normally published in journals or subjected to peer review. This is why many critics regard U.S. regulation of GM foods as a rubber-stamp approval process that does nothing to ensure the safety of GM foods.

The American Medical Association’s stance echoes what the British medical journal The Lancet said in an editorial more than a decade ago, “Governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.”

In that Slate article, they mention Ken Folta at the University of Florida. He has already come under fire and exposed in a New York Times article (and others) for taking large payments from Monsanto- which was revealed via numerous Freedom of Information Act requests.

http://bangmfood.org/quotes/24-quotes/29-regulatory-breakdown

GMOs should be safety tested before they hit the market says AMA

Monica Eng

Chicago Tribune, 20 June 2012

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/food/stew/chi-gmos-should-be-safety-tested-before-they-hit-the-market-says-ama-20120619,0,4405082.story

The American Medical Association called for mandatory pre-market safety testing of genetically engineered foods as part of a revised policy voted on at the AMA’s meeting in Chicago Tuesday.

Currently biotech companies are simply encouraged to engage in a voluntary safety consultation with the Food and Drug Administration before releasing a product onto the market.

Some activists concerned about foods made with genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, had hoped the association would have gone so far as to support mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. But some still view the policy change as a major breakthrough.

“We applaud the AMA for taking the lead to help ensure a safe and adequate food supply,” said Anne Dietrich of the Truth In Labeling Campaign, which advocates labeling of genetically engineered foods. When Monsanto Co., the world’s largest biotech seed company, testified Sunday at the AMA committee hearing on the policy, its representative did not raise any objections to the mandatory safety assessment provision.

On Tuesday, however, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher would not say whether or not the company supports mandatory pre-market testing, only that the current voluntary consultation process “is working,” he wrote to the Tribune. “All of Monsanto’s biotech products, and to our knowledge all those of other companies, go through the FDA consultation process, which provides a stringent safety assessment of biotech crops before they are placed on the market.”

The AMA’s Dr. Patrice Harris said the testing provision was aimed at addressing public interests and ensuring public health.

“Recognizing the public’s interest in the safety of bioengineered foods, the new policy also supports mandatory FDA pre-market systemic safety assessments of these foods as a preventive measure to ensure the health of the public,” Harris said in a statement. “We also urge the FDA to remain alert to new data on the health consequences of bioengineered foods.”

Tuesday afternoon FDA officials would not say whether the department supported mandatory testing. “New foods have an obligation under the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act to ensure that the foods they offer consumers are safe and in compliance with applicable legal requirements,” the agency said. “In meeting their legal obligation, firms do conduct premarket safety testing.”

The agency was referring to testing manufacturers commission for their own use. Critics, however, argue that independent testing overseen by regulatory authorities often produces different results than testing paid for by the manufacturer.

From the metabunk link itself a concerned scientist posted this:

I’m a biological scientist with the primary concern over GMO crops being a continuation of the same concerns I already had with mass production of clonal hybrids and mechanized sterilized agriculture in general. Ecological stuff and also a risk to the food supply if some novel pathogen sets on a massive staple crop that lacks the genetic diversity to cope. Hell, a lot of the mass produced fruit was tasting like crap just because hybrids were selected for shelf life and truck-ability. But then again I can get a wide selection of fruits and veggies year round that would not be the case in a “traditional” agriculture system.

He is correct about lack of genetic diversity in our crops- it’s a major concern that the vast majority (over 90%) of our food comes from just six crops. Massive problems even if just one of those crops gets hit by disease. Then there are also the concerns with glyphosate, developing weed resistance and the usage of even more dangerous pesticides like 2-4, D. Nonprofit GMO developers like universities and nonprofits are a better choice since they are working on crops that do not need glyphosate (or any pesticide) and work by enhancing the “immune systems” of the plants- much like some drug companies are working on immune boosting drugs that solve the antibiotics resistance problem (which is a real issue, not just in people but on the overusage of antibiotics and hormones in farm animals, too.)

https://www.metabunk.org/partially-debunked-list-of-monsanto-employees-in-government.t3664/

he failed to shut down Guantanamo (yes, the Congress played a role in that too),
Played a role? You mean completely prevented it.

failed to prosecute those who tortured,
For some pretty good reasons.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/12/senate_torture_report_why_obama_won_t_prosecute_cia_and_bush_administration.html
You and I both know that they should have been prosecuted AND Bush and Cheney and the employees of Blackwater are war criminals and should have been handed over to the International Court. The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. American Imperialism is what angers the rest of the world and regardless of their positions, these people should have been prosecuted. As much as anything allowing these people to go unpunished gives terrorists more recruits to attack western countries. As much as those responsible for the Japan A-bomb drop should have been prosecuted- which the scientists who developed the bomb did not want dropped and as we later found out, Japan would have surrendered anyway and the bomb drops were just a show off.

BTW Princeton did an extensive study that proved that the US is an oligarchy and the influence of companies in government and government in the justice system were some of the reasons why. Also, Slate Staff themselves had scalding posts about the article.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

George Sd Dec 9, 2014

“poses a real risk to democratic governance”

I thought the real risk to democratic governance was when we passed laws via democratic processes which purport to outlaw certain classes of actions by our government employees, then government employees go ahead and do them anyway, and are never brought to account for those criminal acts.

FlagShareReply

Nick

Nick Dec 9, 2014

@George Sd

That’s old-fashioned of you. The new fashion is that if it is policy, you can break the law. And torture people to death.

FlagShareReply

october271986

october271986 MEMBERDec 10, 2014

@George Sd We can’t hold elites accountable. We are all equal but some of us are more equal than others.

expanded fracking,
Tried to limit fracking and was shut down.

did not get the patriot act repealed,
Under President Obama there has been some oversight added by the Executive Branch.

• Implemented a requirement that, when library or bookseller records are sought via a Section 215 order for business records, a statement of specific and articulable facts showing relevance to an authorized investigation must be produced;
• Adopted a policy requiring the FBI to retain a statement of facts showing that the information sought through a National Security Letter (NSL) is relevant to an authorized investigation, to facilitate better auditing and accountability;
• Adopted procedures to provide notification to recipients of NSLs of their opportunity to contest any nondisclosure requirement attached to the NSL;
• Agreed to ensure that NSL recipients who challenge nondisclosure orders are notified by the FBI when compliance with such nondisclosure orders are no longer required;
• Adopted procedures for the collection, use and storage of information derived from National Security Letters, which were approved by Attorney General Holder on October 1, 2010.

was not supportive of whistleblowers, etc.
This is true. This administration has been very diligent in tracking down leaks. However you must discriminate between leakers of government illicit or unethical behavior and actual cases of espionage which also seemed to increase during the last decade.
Some of these people actually went to the authorities first and warned them about abuses of authority that were happening, however they were ignored so they had no choice but to go public.

The last really good president this country had was many decades ago and that was JFK. None of these people you mentioned can be put in that category.
I think history is going to treat President Obama pretty well overall.
He’s okay, middle of the road in my opinion, of course. Better than what came before, but not as good as we hoped.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58176119

Yes, there’s probably some agreement that our evolutionary history has inclined us to certain behavioural traits that tend to emerge when there are certain kinds of environmental pressure. The term “hard-wired” seems too black & white to me, though. Humans might have a whole host of genetically-driven inclinations and unconscious responses but they aren’t as simple as a little computer program that parses a simple if-then structure to always come up with the same answer as to how to behave, in every human.

Human nature (to give the short hand term for a vast array of genetically and memetically-driven responses to stimuli) is hugely variegated. It has commonalities across all humans and, to a much lesser extent, across all their cultures. But an individual’s human nature can respond is vastly different ways to that of another individual when in identical circumstances. The enormous range of human genetic flavours, belief systems and social norms is what gives rise to the human need for politics; and to various co-operations & conflicts that have no cause other than an ideological cause.

So, in some contentious cultural and environmental circumstances one group of humans might behave in a very aggressive and “tribal” fashion whilst another might seek diplomacy and co-operation. The emergence of civilisation is in part the trend for the co-operative inclinations and responses to overcome the more primitive and aggressive responses.

But even in the most civilised societies and cultures, there will be individuals who have a genetic make up, or a personal nurture-history, of a kind that will readily latch on to one mode or the other. Those with a certain kind of brain chemistry and population-mix of the various gut bacteria will tend to the aggressive no matter what the circumstances. The same is true for those who have suffered such an abusive nurture that they are indeed programmed for “fight” in all circumstances.

If one has that aggression-inducing personal chemistry along with a history bereft of love, one might appear as a “hard-wired” nutter.

Yes, there’s probably some agreement that our evolutionary history has inclined us to certain behavioural traits that tend to emerge when there are certain kinds of environmental pressure. The term “hard-wired” seems too black & white to me, though. Humans might have a whole host of genetically-driven inclinations and unconscious responses but they aren’t as simple as a little computer program that parses a simple if-then structure to always come up with the same answer as to how to behave, in every human.

Human nature (to give the short hand term for a vast array of genetically and memetically-driven responses to stimuli) is hugely variegated. It has commonalities across all humans and, to a much lesser extent, across all their cultures. But an individual’s human nature can respond is vastly different ways to that of another individual when in identical circumstances. The enormous range of human genetic flavours, belief systems and social norms is what gives rise to the human need for politics; and to various co-operations & conflicts that have no cause other than an ideological cause.

So, in some contentious cultural and environmental circumstances one group of humans might behave in a very aggressive and “tribal” fashion whilst another might seek diplomacy and co-operation. The emergence of civilisation is in part the trend for the co-operative inclinations and responses to overcome the more primitive and aggressive responses.

But even in the most civilised societies and cultures, there will be individuals who have a genetic make up, or a personal nurture-history, of a kind that will readily latch on to one mode or the other. Those with a certain kind of brain chemistry and population-mix of the various gut bacteria will tend to the aggressive no matter what the circumstances. The same is true for those who have suffered such an abusive nurture that they are indeed programmed for “fight” in all circumstances.

If one has that aggression-inducing personal chemistry along with a history bereft of love, one might appear as a “hard-wired” nutter.

Yes, there’s probably some agreement that our evolutionary history has inclined us to certain behavioural traits that tend to emerge when there are certain kinds of environmental pressure. The term “hard-wired” seems too black & white to me, though. Humans might have a whole host of genetically-driven inclinations and unconscious responses but they aren’t as simple as a little computer program that parses a simple if-then structure to always come up with the same answer as to how to behave, in every human.

Human nature (to give the short hand term for a vast array of genetically and memetically-driven responses to stimuli) is hugely variegated. It has commonalities across all humans and, to a much lesser extent, across all their cultures. But an individual’s human nature can respond is vastly different ways to that of another individual when in identical circumstances. The enormous range of human genetic flavours, belief systems and social norms is what gives rise to the human need for politics; and to various co-operations & conflicts that have no cause other than an ideological cause.

So, in some contentious cultural and environmental circumstances one group of humans might behave in a very aggressive and “tribal” fashion whilst another might seek diplomacy and co-operation. The emergence of civilisation is in part the trend for the co-operative inclinations and responses to overcome the more primitive and aggressive responses.

But even in the most civilised societies and cultures, there will be individuals who have a genetic make up, or a personal nurture-history, of a kind that will readily latch on to one mode or the other. Those with a certain kind of brain chemistry and population-mix of the various gut bacteria will tend to the aggressive no matter what the circumstances. The same is true for those who have suffered such an abusive nurture that they are indeed programmed for “fight” in all circumstances.

If one has that aggression-inducing personal chemistry along with a history bereft of love, one might appear as a “hard-wired” nutter.

Yes, there’s probably some agreement that our evolutionary history has inclined us to certain behavioural traits that tend to emerge when there are certain kinds of environmental pressure. The term “hard-wired” seems too black & white to me, though. Humans might have a whole host of genetically-driven inclinations and unconscious responses but they aren’t as simple as a little computer program that parses a simple if-then structure to always come up with the same answer as to how to behave, in every human.

Human nature (to give the short hand term for a vast array of genetically and memetically-driven responses to stimuli) is hugely variegated. It has commonalities across all humans and, to a much lesser extent, across all their cultures. But an individual’s human nature can respond is vastly different ways to that of another individual when in identical circumstances. The enormous range of human genetic flavours, belief systems and social norms is what gives rise to the human need for politics; and to various co-operations & conflicts that have no cause other than an ideological cause.

So, in some contentious cultural and environmental circumstances one group of humans might behave in a very aggressive and “tribal” fashion whilst another might seek diplomacy and co-operation. The emergence of civilisation is in part the trend for the co-operative inclinations and responses to overcome the more primitive and aggressive responses.

But even in the most civilised societies and cultures, there will be individuals who have a genetic make up, or a personal nurture-history, of a kind that will readily latch on to one mode or the other. Those with a certain kind of brain chemistry and population-mix of the various gut bacteria will tend to the aggressive no matter what the circumstances. The same is true for those who have suffered such an abusive nurture that they are indeed programmed for “fight” in all circumstances.

If one has that aggression-inducing personal chemistry along with a history bereft of love, one might appear as a “hard-wired” nutter.

Advertisements