It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
]
Food inspections have dropped from a robust 50,000 in 1972 to about 5,000 today, meaning that U.S. food processors are inspected on average about every 10 years. The chance of a food product from overseas being inspected is infinitesimal. Most raw materials for our drugs come from foreign producers that are rarely inspected. The rate of quality-control failures found in manufacturing facilities by FDA inspectors has soared. www.washingtonpost.com...
The USDA has decrease the inspection of imported food from 8.0% to 0.6% WHILE IMPORTS HAVE DOUBLED SINCE THE MID NINETIES.
www.worldnetdaily.com...
when USDA “officials initially described HACCP to the industry in the mid-90’s, the agency made the following enticing promises:
* “Under HACCP, the agency will implement a ‘Hands Off’ role in meat inspection.
* “Under HACCP, the agency will no longer police the industry, but the industry will police itself.
* “Under HACCP, the agency will disband its previous command and control authority.
* “Under HACCP, each plant will write its own HACCP Plan, and the agency cannot tell plants what must be in their HACCP Plans.”
As a result, the plant operator was required to identify potential hazards and the critical points in the process where those hazards could come into play. The plan would then identify procedures that would be used to minimize the hazard risk at those control points. The plant would be responsible for the implementation of the plan.
As a result, the inspector was no longer responsible for what was happening on the plant floor: that was left to company personnel. The new role of the inspector was to make sure that plant personnel were carrying out their duties in a manner consistent with the HACCP plan. In many cases this amounted to making sure that all of the paper work was in the proper order.
It (the recall of Hallmark/Westland Meat) highlights one of the problems that we have attempted to raise with the agency ever since 1996 when the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) inspection system was put in place. There seems to be too much reliance on an honor system for the industry to police itself. While the USDA investigation is still on going at Hallmark/Westland, a couple of facts have emerged that point to a system that can be gamed by those who want to break the law. It (HACCP) shifted the responsibility for food safety over to the companies .
The sudden discovery of a global pandemic of international cartels in the mid 1990s, after a hiatus of a half century, is puzzling. That the greatest number and most injurious conspiracies should be clustered in the food and feed ingredients industries adds another element of mystery to the puzzle.
I. Food Facilities – these provisions apply to any place that engages in “manufacturing,
processing, packing, or holding food for consumption in the United States.”
...B. Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventative Controls (“HARPC”) (sec. 103)
1. HARPC requirements are very similar to the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control
Point plans (HACCP) plans required under the House version of the bill. Every
facility would be required to develop a HACCP-type plan that identifies and evaluates
potential hazards, develops preventative controls, monitors the effectiveness of the
controls, takes corrective actions, and provides verification. The facility owner must
also keep records documenting all of this and periodically reanalyze the plan. The
plan is subject to FDA approval and inspection. (pp.11-16)
...II. On-Farm Regulation: “Standards for Produce Safety” (Sec. 105) (pp. 29-41)
A. FDA is authorized to establish standards for how fruits and vegetables are grown and
harvested, including standards for “soil amendments, hygiene, packing, temperature
controls, animals in the growing area, and water.”
C. The requirements specifically include farms that sell directly to consumers (p.31)
The most offensive parts (S.510):
page 121 – “Sec. 404 Compliance with international agreements.”
page 136 – “Review” …. “internationally-recognized standards….”
page 137 – “Nothing… limits the authority of the Secretary…to revise, issue, and enforce product and category-specific regulations….” And “(f) DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS – Nothing in the amendment made by this section shall apply to any dietary supplement that is in compliance with the requirements of sections 402(g)(2) and 761 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 USC 342(g)(2), 379aa-1).”
page 195 – “No limit on Secretarial Authority” What??!!!! No limit?
page 212 – “(c) Civil Penality – inserts “or any person who does not comply with a recall order under 423….” (see also page 137)
page 213 – exchanges reasonable language to seemingly arbitrary language – “’1) striking ‘credible evidence or information indicating’ and inserting ‘reason to believe’ and (2) striking ‘presents a threat of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans and animals’ and inserting ‘is adulterated or misbranded.’” Misbranded = produced in an unregistered facility. Adulterated = intentional or unintentional contamination or poisoning.
"Warburg's associates said, "Paul, what are you doing? We don't want those in there this is our bill." And his response was this, he said, "Relax fellas, don't you get it? Our object is to get the bill passed. We can fix it up later." Those were his exact words. "We can fix it up later." A Talk by G. Edward Griffin
"That is the Banking business, just in the same way that a steel plant makes steel. (p. 287) The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all. (pp. 76 and 238) Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money. (pp. 113 and 238) Broadly speaking, all new money comes out of a Bank in the form of loans."
CED determined that the problem with American agriculture was that there were too many farmers.
But the CED had a "solution": millions of farmers would just have to be eliminated. In a number of reports written over a few decades, CED recommended that farming "resources" " that is, farmers " be reduced.
In its 1945 report "Agriculture in an Expanding Economy," CED complained that "the excess of human resources engaged in agriculture is probably the most important single factor in the "farm problem'" and describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs.[2]
A report published in 1962 entitled "An Adaptive Program for Agriculture"[3] is even more blunt in its objectives, leading Time Magazine to remark that CED had a plan for fixing the identified problem: "The essential fact to be faced, argues CED, is that with present high levels farm productivity, more labor is involved in agriculture production that the market demands " in short, there are too may farmers.
To solve that problem, CED offers a program with three main prongs."[4] Some of the report's authors would go on to work in government to implement CED's policy recommendations. Over the next five years, the political and economic establishment ensured the reduction of "excess human resources engaged in agriculture" by two million, or by 1/3 of their previous number.
1945-70 - Change from horses to tractors and the adoption of a group of technological practices characterized the second American agricultural revolution
Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn't help but congratulate itself in another agricultural report called "A New US Farm Policy for Changing World Food Needs" for the efficiency of the tactics they employed to drive farmers from their land.[5]
The human cost of CED's plans were exacting and enormous.
CED's plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers' lives ended in suicide [6], not unlike farmers in India today who have been tricked into debt and desperation and can see no other way out.[7]
As has been true since the nation's founding, continuing improvements in farm machinery, better seeds, better fertilizers, more irrigation, and effective pest control have made farmers more and more successful in what they do (except for making money).
Who's making the bread?
Freedom to Farm's lower commodity prices have not translated into consumer benefits. Since 1984, the real price of a USDA market basket of food has increased 2.8 percent while the farm value of that food has fallen by 35.7 percent, according to C. Robert Taylor, professor of agriculture and public policy at Auburn University. Taylor says there is a "widening gap" between retail price and farm value for numerous components of the market basket, including meat products, poultry, eggs, dairy products, cereal and bakery products, fresh fruit and vegetables, and processed fruit and vegetables.
At a major farm rally in Washington, D.C. in March, farmers served legislators a "farmers" lunch. The lunch included what would typically be an $8 lunch -- barbecued beef on a bun, baked beans, potato salad, coleslaw, milk and a cookie. The farmers charged only 39 cents for the meal, reflecting what farmers and ranchers receive to grow the food for such a meal.
"The World Bank says that 100 million more people are facing severe hunger. Yet some of the world's richest food companies are making record profits. Monsanto last month reported that its net income for the three months up to the end of February this year had more than doubled over the same period in 2007, from $543m (£275m) to $1.12bn. Its profits increased from $1.44bn to $2.22bn....
A look at the figures for 2007, when the world food crisis began, shows that corporations such as Monsanto and Cargill, which control the cereals market, saw their profits increase by 45 and 60 per cent, respectively; the leading chemical fertilizer companies such as Mosaic Corporation, a subsidiary of Cargill, doubled their profits in a single year" Monsanto and the World Food Crisis
Great thread but abandon the idea that either the right or left has any interest or focus, that's an illusion.
...Not One World Government or New World Order as too many people mistakenly believe. Rather, the ideology is of a ONE WORLD COMPANY LIMITED....
* One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government as we identified in our survey.
* Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken.
* With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.
If a small business owner goes into a store and buys $600 worth of goods with a credit card, “that will already generate a report, and therefore no additional reporting is required,” Mundaca said.
Both provisions are examples of third-party reporting of income, which is designed to make sure businesses don’t hide income from the IRS. Credit card payments exempt from new 1099 reporting rule
is it possible that all of this is also tied into one world government? the way you tied all the pieces together, and the fact that they seem to be attempting to make all the rules/laws enforceable on a international basis. this has taken place in almost every industry over the last 20 years....
Shouldnt the title be "POLITICIANS sell us out"?
This is government and politicians. Just one authoritarian tyrant party with it's boot on your face.
....No accident at all that there are many distractions (TSA, Wikileaks, Portland bombing attempt, etc) on the MSM (including Fox) and NO mention of this bill. Passed right after Thanksgiving! Let's hope the Senate's technical error (of raising taxes to cover part of the expense of this bill) will delay the final passage of this bill. We need to bombard our reps with protests to kill this bill.