Skip navigation

Tag Archives: tyranny

video at http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/3/spin_the_bottle_expose_raises_alarming
Fiji Water is America’s leading imported water and the bottled water of choice among the rich and famous. President Obama was photographed drinking Fiji on election night, and Mary J. Blige demands ten bottles before concerts. But a new expose in Mother Jones magazine raises alarming questions about Fiji Water’s ties to Fiji’s military dictatorship, the company’s environmental record and its impact on the residents of Fiji. We speak with reporter Anna Lenzer about “Spin the Bottle.” [includes rush transcript]

Anna Lenzer, author of the article “Fiji Water: Spin the Bottle.” It appears in the current issue of Mother Jones. Her reporting was supported by the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute.
Rush Transcript

JUAN GONZALEZ: The Pacific island nation of Fiji is in the news this week. On Tuesday, Fiji was suspended from the Commonwealth of Nations because its military dictatorship refused to schedule elections for next year. The nation has been ruled by a military junta since a coup in 2006.

In May, the country’s second highest court declared that government to be unconstitutional. The military government responded by abolishing the judiciary and banning unauthorized public gatherings.

While the Commonwealth of Nations, the European Union and the Pacific Islands Forum have condemned the political crisis in Fiji, one institution has been notably quiet: the US owners of Fiji Water, one of Fiji’s largest companies.

Since its founding in 1995, Fiji Water has emerged as the bottled water of choice among the rich and the famous. It has been described as the Mercedes Benz of bottled water. President Obama was photographed drinking Fiji on election night. The singer Mary J. Blige demands ten bottles of Fiji Water before her shows. Rap mogul P. Diddy has praised Fiji Water, saying, quote, “It tastes so pure.”

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Fiji Water has also marketed itself as the environmentally friendly bottled water company. Its slogan is “Every Drop Is Green.” On its website fijigreen.com, the company writes, quote, “The production and sale of each bottle of Fiji Water will actually result in a reduction of carbon in the atmosphere.”

But a new exposé in Mother Jones magazine raises alarming questions about Fiji Water’s ties to the nation’s military junta, the company’s environmental record, and its impact on the residents of Fiji.

Earlier this year, reporter Anna Lenzer traveled to Fiji to investigate the company. While she was working at an internet cafe, Fiji police detained her and interrogated her. They threatened to send her to prison filled with men.

Anna Lenzer is the author of the new cover story in Mother Jones called “Spin the Bottle.” She joins us here in our firehouse studio.

Why don’t you begin there, Anna? When were you there? And tell us what happened in the internet cafe.

ANNA LENZER: Sure. I was there in April. It was actually a coincidence, the timing of my trip. I arrived April 11th, which was a Saturday, and the military junta had declared martial law the day before. And what had happened was that this regime has been in power since a coup in 2006. And the previous week before I went, the court of appeals had declared the regime unconstitutional, illegal and so forth. And the regime’s response was to abolish the judiciary, withdraw the constitution, and declare martial law. So my plane ticket happened to be for the very next day, so I arrived—it was Easter weekend, actually, in April.

So, I had done some reporting and been there for a few days, and I was in an internet cafe in the morning. And I basically had my laptop. I wasn’t actually on one of their computers. But, you know, I sent some emails back to the States. I had gone to the Fiji Water factory the day before. I returned the night before. So I was sending out some emails about that, and I also had gone to check on the political situation in Fiji. And just that week, what had been happening was the regime had been deporting journalists, specifically mainly from Australia and New Zealand. Those are the journalists who, you know, report on the political situation there.

So I sent this story, and pretty much instantly my internet connection died. So I waited, and I asked the staff, you know, what happened, if there was a problem, if it was going to come back up. And they went back to check and, you know, asked me to wait and said that everything would be fine and the connection would come back up. So I waited a few minutes.

And it was very fast. A pair of police officers walked into the cafe, which, you know, I was sort of observing. The police presence in the country was—seemed to be escalating over those days. And they went and spoke to a woman behind a terminal. I didn’t really observe what they were saying, but, you know, she essentially pointed them to me. And then the next thing I knew, I saw them coming towards me. And, you know, he basically—there was two of them—basically just stood over me and said, “We’re going to take you in for questioning about the emails that you’ve been writing.” So, of course—

AMY GOODMAN: On your own computer.

ANNA LENZER: On my own computer, so, you know, of course there’s a moment when I was thinking, you know, “Did I send you an email? What emails are you talking about?” You know? And it was extremely shocking. I mean, I had never heard of this happening before.

And, you know, we’re talking about the political situation. And there’s sort of this idea Fiji has a coup culture. They’ve had four coups since 1987. You know, that for American tourists, we still go to Fiji, and it’s OK, and it’s—you know, we can go to the five-star luxury resorts, and we’re not really—these things don’t affect us. But, you know, so I had heard of these political tensions, but never so much that police were actually monitoring people in cafes.

So, you know, I had been taking certain precautions, given the martial law and this and that, but never—never would I have thought that the police were actually monitoring me. So that was how they picked me up. And essentially, then they—you know, they just escorted me. We took all my stuff in a police station, the central police station in Suva. I was right around the corner, so that’s where we went for a couple hours.

JUAN GONZALEZ: You said that they specifically asked you whether you were representing some other water company and you were trying to, somehow or other—

ANNA LENZER: Yeah.

JUAN GONZALEZ: —blemish the reputation of Fiji?

ANNA LENZER: Yeah, that was a very strange encounter. I mean, you know, what he did in the interrogation was he took out my laptop, and he just read through everything, all my personal emails, every doc, you know, anything on my computer. And then he also went through my bags, and I had notebooks.

And as I said, I had been traveling the day before to the Fiji Water factory, and part of that was visiting, you know, the towns in the area and just to get a sense of what water do they drink. And I write in the story about a town called Rakiraki, which is a half-an-hour drive from the factory. They’ve had huge water problems. So I was in this town, and I had a notebook full of prices of Fiji Water bottles in the grocery stores in this town half an hour from the Fiji Water factory. And I was surprised to find out that the bottles were nearly as expensive as they are in the United States, which—

AMY GOODMAN: The Fiji Water from next door.

ANNA LENZER: The Fiji Water bottles, yeah. I mean, you know, I took pictures of the stands and, you know, the prices, and we did the conversions. I mean, it was just kind of a shocking thing.

AMY GOODMAN: Why can’t they drink their own water?

ANNA LENZER: There’s a whole host of problems with Fiji’s water supply problems. I mean, obviously, you know, there’s a choice of what people are going to drink. But, you know, in this one town, Rakiraki, in particular, I mean, I had a Lonely Planet, a travel guide, and it literally said, you know, Rakiraki water is deemed unfit for human consumption. So that was—you know, this is an incredible paradox of this town, where the water is—you know, don’t drink the water, and the next town down is like the best water in the world.

AMY GOODMAN: What happened to you?

ANNA LENZER: What’s that?

AMY GOODMAN: What happened to you when you were in detention?

ANNA LENZER: Yes. So he saw the prices where I had written down the costs. And yeah, at that point he basically accused me of some kind of corporate espionage. I mean, he really did not like that. He basically—I quote it in the story. What he said was, “It would be really good to come here and, you know, hurt Fiji Water’s business, wouldn’t it? Who do you work for?” He just—you know, the interrogation was just through this cycle of, like, who are you? And I had my passport and my press credentials.

AMY GOODMAN: Did he threaten you?

ANNA LENZER: Well, a sort of this—a bleak threat, as I quote it in the story. What he basically said was—and he sort of said it with a smile—like, “I would hate to see you go to jail. And I would hate to see you go to jail”—and the language he used was—“a jail full of men,” which, you know, at that point, I just—there was sort of this—I really was not expecting that. I mean, to be frank, I was expecting there was a chance I would be deported, when I knew there was martial law, when I knew, you know, they were deporting journalists reporting on political or anything sensitive. I mean, the term I use in the story is “journalism of hope.” You know, that’s what they’re enforcing now, and they have—I mean, there are military censors now in the news in Fiji, so…

AMY GOODMAN: Anna Lenzer is our guest. We’ll come back to her after break. She wrote the cover story of Mother Jones called “Fiji Water: Spin the Bottle.” Stay with us.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: Our guest is Anna Lenzer, wrote the cover story of Mother Jones magazine this month. It’s called “Fiji Water: Spin the Bottle.” Juan?

JUAN GONZALEZ: Anna, I’d like to ask you—tell us a little bit about the history of how Fiji Water developed on this remote group of islands in the Pacific, and how important is it to the economy, and what you found about its relationship to the government.

ANNA LENZER: Right. Well, its evolution is pretty fascinating. It started in 1995, and it really started as a luxury product. It was started by a gold mining and real estate mogul named David Gilmour, and he really created this product as a luxury, you know, niche product for the elite. I mean, it was—it did not do traditional advertising. It was placed in five-star hotels, movies. You know, it was really—it really shunned this traditional route of, you know, Dasani or these other brands. So it really started off as this luxury.

And we quote some of the various ways they had of doing that. You know, David Gilmour frequently would call it “living water.” A big part of the marketing was this idea that Fiji comes from “before the Industrial Revolution,” and so it’s this water from, you know, hundreds of years ago, and we have exclusive access; you know, this is the best water in the world.

AMY GOODMAN: Because there’s this aquifer that was discovered in Fiji, and then he moved in and, what, bought it or leased it?

ANNA LENZER: Yeah, he obtained a ninety-nine-year lease on this aquifer. And what I talk about in the story, too, is the aquifer was actually discovered by the Fijian government working in tandem with international aid groups, who were serving the island for water, you know, for the people. But then it turned out that basically people working with David Gilmour in his company, you know, they heard of this report, and they secured the lease on the land for ninety-nine years.

So, to go back to your question, it really is a fascinating thing to see how this product evolved, because it really was this extremely luxury product, but now it’s—since it’s become the most imported water in America, it’s really gone mainstream. And the shift, though, under the new owners who bought it in 2004, we talk about in the story, Stewart and Lynda Resnick, has really been to transform it into like an ecological and a progressive product almost. So it’s really shifted from this, you know, again, a luxury product to a product where it’s—where you’re ecologically and you’re socially responsible if you drink it. It’s really how the product has evolved over time.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And its relationship to the government?

ANNA LENZER: I mean, Fiji has trademarked the name “Fiji.” And its marketing campaign, what the government calls it is “brand Fiji.” And, you know, throughout—if you look at the bottle and the slogans it has used, it has been to brand the country, the image of the country, as basically an unspoiled paradise. I mean, that’s sort of been the idea of where this water comes from: from an unspoiled paradise.

So, you know, over the years, they have worked with the government. Last year, I spoke with one of the Fiji Water spokesmen, and what he said to me was, “We basically market Fiji with the product.” He also said that it’s one of the few products that the government is able to get off the island, so it’s been a really good thing for the government. And I think, as a lot of people in the States know, I mean, one of the only and the first things we hear and think about when we hear Fiji is Fiji Water. I mean, the company has really sort of capitalized on the fact that this is a very small nation. We don’t talk a lot about it. We don’t know a lot about it. And this is something that comes up a lot, that, you know, the government basically has thanked the company and said, you know, “We have brand Fiji now. It’s this idea as an unspoiled paradise. You’ve created it.”

And to go back to the size of it in the country, it’s now—the company now says that it’s 20 percent of Fiji’s exports, and that’s three percent of its GDP, which is $3,900. So it’s pretty big.

AMY GOODMAN: Anna Lenzer, we invited Fiji Water to join us on the program; they declined. But in a statement posted on their website, the company writes, in part, quote, “We strongly disagree with the author’s premise that because we are in business in Fiji somehow that legitimizes a military dictatorship. We bought FIJI Water in November 2004, when Fiji was governed by a democratically elected government. We cannot and will not speak for the government, but we will not back down from our commitment to the people, development, and communities of Fiji.

“We consider Fiji our home and as such, we have dramatically increased our investment and resources over the past five years to play a valuable role in the advancement of Fiji.”

That, again, the statement on Fiji Water’s website. Anna Lenzer, your response?

ANNA LENZER: Well, whether or not the company intends to legitimize the government, the fact is it does. I mean, right now, even just in the last week in the news in Fiji, there’s news that Fiji Water is working with the Fiji embassy in Japan to market its product. It works with the embassy in the States to market its product. You know, this is part of how it has marketed itself, is working with the embassy and the government.

You know, in the story, we talk about Tourism Fiji. President Obama, you know, has been photographed drinking Fiji Water and Tourism Fiji circulates that photograph. Government agencies circulate these photographs of Fiji Water. You know, elsewhere, you can see the military junta in their boardroom in their meetings with—recently with a delegation, a Chinese delegation, working on a hydro project, and there are Fiji Water bottles all around the table.

I mean, this is an impressive product. You know, it’s one of the country’s—it’s the country’s signature export. It’s got the country’s name on the bottle. So, whether or not the company says, you know, “We are, you know, giving them guns”—no one has accused them of that—the fact is, the product offers legitimacy to the government.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And when you we mention the military junta, your article goes into the development of the military in Fiji. Because obviously it’s not a country that’s exactly menaced by its neighbors, how that military developed and the role of the United Nations in that?

ANNA LENZER: Well, I mean, basically there was, you know, two coups in the 1980s, another coup in 2000, and then this most recent coup in 2006. So it has been—you know, since 2006, there has been a lot of pressure on Fiji from the Commonwealth, which just suspended Fiji on Tuesday, but mainly from Australia and New Zealand. And nobody has really known quite what to do.

You know, the government has kept pushing back this election deadline. First it was March 2009. You know, then this most recent event, and they’re saying it’s going to be—elections are not going to be until 2014. So, you know, I don’t think anybody really knows exactly what’s going on there. I mean, the commander, Bainimarama, he’s basically saying, you know, “We’re doing this to bring democracy. And how dare you question us for taking time to do it properly?”

JUAN GONZALEZ: But isn’t it—wasn’t the point that you were making that because Fiji has played an outsized role in supplying peacekeepers to the United Nations peacekeeping forces, that it therefore has developed a much bigger military culture, I guess, than would be expected?

ANNA LENZER: I mean, I don’t talk about Fiji’s role in the United Nations in the story, but I think that is something that has come up a lot with people, you know, watching the war in Iraq, watching Fiji saying Fiji’s military has these peacekeepers in the United Nations. And that has been sort of a point of pressure, I think, you know, among the people in the United Nations, because they’re saying, “Look, you know, in Fiji we’ve got a military junta, we’ve got martial law. And, you know, is this a contradiction here to have peacekeepers in Iraq enforcing democracy?”

AMY GOODMAN: On the environmental record of Fiji Water, I want to go to a brief excerpt of a talk recently given by Lynda Resnick, who owns Fiji Water with her husband Stewart Resnick. She outlined Fiji Water’s efforts to become carbon-neutral.

LYNDA RESNICK: First of all, we measured our carbon footprint, from the place in China where the preforms are made all the way to the moment you pick this up in the store. OK? And you can watch our progress reducing our carbon footprint on fijiwater.com. We bought back our carbon offsets, and the way we did it, 120 percent. So every time you pick up a bottle of Fiji, you’re giving 20 percent back to the grid.

But what we did, we’re replanting the rainforest in Fiji. And the reason we’re doing that is, so much of the Fijian rainforest has been slashed and burned to grow sugar cane and to raise cattle. And so, we’re trying to keep it pristine. We also saved the Sovi Basin in Fiji, which is 50,000 square miles of beautiful virgin rainforest. And we reduced the plastic in the bottle. And we’re shipping through the Panama Canal instead of going and dropping off in California and trucking across the country. We’re doing all sorts of things, putting in wind and solar, in an ever-ending attempt to do it better.

AMY GOODMAN: Lynda Resnick, the owner of Fiji Water. Anna Lenzer, your response?

ANNA LENZER: Basically, all of those things are things that happen in the future. I mean, the company has been fantastic at creating a list of green goals, using the lingo. But fact is, right now Fiji Water is double the amount of plastic as a lot of other bottles, and that’s part of what made it a luxury product: it feels great in your hand.

AMY GOODMAN: Gets the plastic from China.

ANNA LENZER: Yeah, it gets the plastic from China. Right now, the company has on its website, you can even see a one-liter bottle, they have estimated, creates 1.3 pounds of greenhouse gases of carbon—I mean, 1.3 pounds of gas. Yeah, this idea of offsets on top it, I mean, they were questionable to begin. Do they take place over decades? And as I report in the story, a climate trade journal called ClimateBiz reported that Fiji’s offset program is called—under “forward crediting,” meaning it takes decades to even take effect. And they haven’t even measured last year’s offsets yet. So, you know, Lynda uses the present tense for a lot of things, but the fact is, these things are going to happen in the future. So when the company says, “Every drop is green,” what you’re buying right now is not green.

AMY GOODMAN: I just wanted to end with a little box, a side box that’s in Mother Jones that’s very interesting, about the overall bottled water industry, called “H2Uh-Oh: Fiji’s Not the Only Bottled Water with a PR Challenge.”

It talks about Sam’s Choice, which is sold at Wal-Mart. “Water comes from the Las Vegas municipal supply. A test by the Environmental Working Group found it had 200% of the allowable”—let’s see if I can even pronounce it—“trihalomethane, a carcinogen, and included several chemicals known to cause DNA damage.”

Dasani, which is owned by Coca-Cola: “Coca-Cola’s bottling plant near the village”—near a village [Plachimada] “in Kerala, India, began pumping groundwater in 2000. When wells dried up and villagers couldn’t irrigate their fields, Coke offered a goodwill gesture: heavy-metal-laced sludge from the plant to use as fertilizer. After company ignored years of protests—and two government orders to install wastewater treatment and provide drinking water to villagers—the state ordered Coke plant to close in 2004. (Coke won the right to reopen the next year.)”

Then there’s Arrowhead, owned by Nestlé: “Nestlé is seeking a permit to pipe 65 million gallons a year from a spring in rural Colorado. When critics raised concerns about the effect of climate change on local water supplies, Nestlé said it was ‘illogical’ to base decisions on changes ‘many years in the future.’”

Then there’s Volvic, which is, “Last fall, Japan recalled 570,000 bottles of the French water after finding the toxic paint chemicals xylene and naphthalene in the bottles.”

Deer Park, owned by Nestlé: “In the middle of a drought, convinced officials to let it pump water from Florida’s Madison Blue Spring State Park for 14 years for no fee except a $230 permit (more than offset by nearly $1.7 million in tax subsidies).”

Ice Mountain, owned by Nestlé: “Pays nothing (other than small lease and $85 yearly well fee) to pump from a Mecosta County, Michigan, spring. Citizens sued, saying the plant would damage nearby waterways, and prevailed. But Nestlé appealed and this past July won the right to continue pumping up to 200 gal./minute.”

And finally, International Bottled Water Association: “Created @Bottled H20Babe on Twitter: ‘A lover of bottled water, a convenient, refreshing beverage that shouldn’t be restricted by governments or false claims.’”

That’s it. That’s the little side box on the competitors to Fiji Water.

ANNA LENZER: Well, I think the fascinating difference about Fiji—you know, all these bottles, they’re from fake places. I mean, the sort of question about bottled water is, where does it come from? And you have, you know, image of trees; it might be a parking lot in Jersey or something. But that’s sort of what makes Fiji unique. It’s actually branded as water to this very specific location. And I think now it’s going to start to see some blowback about what is actually going on in Fiji. And how long can its brand actually eclipse what’s going on there?

AMY GOODMAN: Anna Lenzer, we want to thank you very much for being with us, author of the article “Fiji Water: Spin the Bottle.” It appears in the current issue of Mother Jones magazine.

—————————————

Here is some more stuff about Fiji’s military dictatorship from earlier this summer (July 23, 2009) where the dictatorship was arresting Methodists for organizing a religious conference.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/south-pacific/2667136/Wave-of-Fiji-arrests-alarms-Key

Wave of Fiji arrests alarms Key

A wave of arrests of church leaders in military-ruled Fiji is alarming, Prime Minister John Key says.

“It’s a very concerning move,” he told Stuff.co.nz.

“It follows on from the breakdown of the government structure.”

At least 12 leaders of the Fiji Methodist Church and a paramount chief have been seized in the last couple of days, after trying to get around martial law by organising an annual church conference.

Dictator Voreqe Bainimarama, who overthrew democracy in a 2006 coup, this morning told Indian Auckland Radio Tarana that his regime would not tolerate any challenge from Methodist politicians.

Mr Key said Bainimarama was leading Fiji down the wrong path.

“Unfortunately it is having a real and immediate impact on the lives of Fijians,” Mr Key said.

“I sense you are starting to see a push back from everyday Fijians.”

In developments this morning state controlled and censored Fiji Broadcasting reported that the Methodist Church of Fiji’s general secretary Reverend Tuikilakila Waqairatu and paramount chief Ro Temumu Kepa will appear in court later today for breaching martial law.

Fiji courts are military controlled and operate without a constitution.

Bainimarama told Radio Tarana that the Methodist Church secretariat had a permit to hold a meeting last week but they breached this by discussing plans to hold the banned national conference next month.

“It’s a political move,” Bainimarama said.

“If you look at everyone making decisions in the Methodist Church they are politicians.”

The church was listening to local chiefs like Kepa when the chiefs themselves were members of the deposed SDL Government.

“It’s a political move and we are not going to tolerate this.”

Asked if the security forces were ready to halt the annual conference if it went ahead, Bainimarama replied: “Its not going to come to that.”

Most indigenous Fijians are Methodists.

In the past the church has taken a hard political line and has been involved in earlier coups, notably the 2000 George Speight coup which bought down an Indian led government.

Bainimarama was firm on its stand of “no conference for the Methodist Church”.

The event usually attracts around 100,000 people.

Comment: Private schools are becoming just as much mini-prisons as public schools.

School Wants Access to Students Facebook, MySpace Accounts

Fraendy Clervaud/WJBF
Published: September 1, 2009

Does a school have a right to demand access to your child’s Facebook or Myspace account?  That’s the question some local parents are asking.  School leaders say it’s all about making sure the students adhere to the school policies and they claim it’s not an invasion of privacy.

Doctor Edward Martin Junior is the principal at Victory Christian School in North Augusta.  He says all students are required to follow their biblical curriculum.

Dr. Edward Martin Junior: “We don’t expect perfection, we expect compliance.”

It’s compliance to a new school policy that’s turning some heads.  If an administrator suspects a student of unruly behavior that student could be required to give school leaders their password and username to their Facebook or Myspace account.

Dr.Martin: “Several years ago we had a student and he was bragging about alcohol that he drank on the weekends he was telling everybody that he went to our school.”

Dr. Martin says this policy is in place to protect the sanctity of the school and it’s not an invasion of privacy.

Dr. Martin:”We are looking for families that agree with this philosophy and if they don’t that’s fine. There’s plenty of schools they can choose to go to.”

Attorney Robert Mullins disagrees.

Robert Mullins: “”It’s basically an invasion of privacy rights and if they were doing the conduct at school on a school computer that would be one thing. But if they are doing it on a home computer, that’s a totally different thing.”

Deborah Ryufuku, Parent: “If the student insists on using Facebook or Myspace at school which I think should not ever occur, then I think the school does have the right to monitor it.”

Tiffany Dukes, Parent: “On the other hand I agree with the school because if it’s a Christian-based school they don’t want anything in their school that is not appropriate.”

And Dr. Martin claims to have backing.  He says the school is following the advice of the South Carolina Association of Christian Schools.
We’ve gotten lots of response on our Facebook page.

Dere-Ewig-AmericanLR2

(Click here to view full-size image.)

To the conservatives (taken from here):

Freepers, Birthers, Morons of all stripe, You didn’t get mad…

You didn’t get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President.

You didn’t get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy.

You didn’t get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed.

You didn’t get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.

You didn’t get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.

You didn’t get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said illegal war.

You didn’t get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq.

You didn’t get mad when you saw the Abu Grahib photos.

You didn’t get mad when you found out we were torturing people.

You didn’t get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans.

You didn’t get mad when we didn’t catch Bin Laden.

You didn’t get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed.

You didn’t get mad when we let a major US city drown.

You didn’t get mad when the deficit hit the trillion dollar mark.

You finally got mad when.. when… wait for it… when the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick. Yes, illegal wars, lies, corruption, torture, stealing your tax dollars to make the rich richer, are all ok with you but helping other Americans… well f**k that. That about right? You know it is.

You people have all lost your f**king minds. You are selfish, greedy, obnoxious, narcissistic, and frankly… stupid. Your pathetic little misspelled protest signs are embarrassing. Maybe you ought to find the smart person in your midst and let them make up all the signs, cause man, you look like a bunch of idiots. Also you’re ugly and your mother dresses you funny.

That’s the new liberal spin of whitewashing everything bad that the Obama puppet administration is doing. “Bush ruined the country and you said nothing, now it’s Obama’s turn to ruin the country. Now sit down and shut up.”

To the liberals:

Did you get mad when Rockefeller sabotaged a true investigation into MK Ultra?

Did you get mad when Harriman/Bush/Rockefeller blew JFK’s brains out in the bankers coup d’etat of 1963?

Did you get mad when they did the same to MLK, RFK, and Malcolm X?

Did you get mad when Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground worked with the FBI as agent provacateurs to execute Fred Hampton while he lied in his bed (as well as destroy the entire Black Panther Party and the Peaceful work of the SDS)?

Did you get mad when Larry Potts of the FBI and the Southern Poverty Law Center conspired with Army Intelligence Asset Timothey McVeigh and Terry Nichols to blow up children in OK City?

Did you get mad when Clinton/Larry Potts/CIA gunned down babies at close range at Waco?

Did you get mad when Patrick Fitzgerald covered up the FBI’s involvement in the ’93 WTC bombing?

Did you get mad when Clinton committed genocide in Boznia, Africa, and Iraq killing over 2,000,000 people?

Did you get mad when Obama is continuing the same genocides in Iraq and Africa?

Didyou get mad when Obama is still hiding torture?

Did you get mad when Obama is increasing surveillance of innocent American citizens?

Did you get mad when Obama is continuing the contracts with Blackwater?

Did you get mad when the international banking cartel used Obama just like Bush to steel over $23.7 Trillion from your unbourn children.

“You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite,  favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting amongst themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, that’s the beginning of getting out of slavery.”—Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dere-Ewig-AmericanLR2

(Click here to view full-size image.)

“You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery
in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that?
He kept the slaves fighting amongst themselves.
But whenever the slaves get together, that’s the beginning of
getting out of slavery.”

—Martin Luther King, Jr.

Comment: Of course he did nothing wrong, he was doing what he was trained to do, that being to show the younger generation to submit or it will happen to you.

—————————————–

N.Y. Officer: I Was Right to Tase Mom in Front of Kids

Sunday, August 30, 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,544480,00.html

SYRACUSE, N.Y. —  A sheriff’s deputy said in an e-mail that he made the right decision when he zapped a woman with a stun gun during a traffic stop in a Syracuse suburb this year, a newspaper reported Sunday.

Sean Andrews, in a message obtained by the Post-Standard and published Sunday on its Web site, said the video taken from the dashboard of the Onondaga County officer’s car “alone does not look good to the public because the general public have difficulty putting themselves in a cop’s position.” But he says he was justified in using the Taser on her.

Andrews, 37, was suspended for 30 days after an administrative hearing Aug. 20 and could face further disciplinary actions over the Jan. 31 traffic stop in Salina.

The sheriff’s deputy used a Taser to subdue the woman, Audra Harmon, after pulling her minivan over. The 38-year-old mother was driving with two children in the car.

The video shows the officer stunning Harmon with two Taser shots. Harmon was charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and driving 50 mph in a 45 mph zone. The charges were dismissed, and Harmon sued the sheriff’s department in early August.

In his e-mail, Andrews writes that he stopped Harmon because it appeared that she was talking on her cell phone and appeared to be speeding. He said he decided to use the Taser based on his training because Harmon defied his orders and because he couldn’t see her hands at certain points during the stop.

He also wrote that he was concerned that she would drive off if he didn’t use the Taser on her, and that he would “have a vehicle pursuit with two kids in the car.”

His direct supervisor supported the decision, Andrews wrote, and even sent a memo to administrators saying Andrews had not violated the department’s policies on use of force or Tasers.

He goes on to accuse Sheriff Kevin Walsh of playing politics by asking him to resign after the arrest became fodder for the media in August, months after the actual incident.

“It is no mystery that this was a completely political move on the Sheriff’s part because he realizes that the video alone with no explanation does not look good and he feels his job will be in jeopardy,” Andrews said.

A message requesting comment from the sheriff’s department was not immediately returned Sunday afternoon.

Harmon said that she largely agrees with Andrews’ account but says she posed no physical threat to the sheriff’s deputy. Her lawyer says that the sheriff’s department and district attorney’s office apparently don’t support Andrews’ justification of his actions because he has been suspended and the charges dismissed.

Andrews wrote the e-mail for friends and family shortly after the video was released earlier this month, said his mother, Joan Andrews.

She said the publicity surrounding the case has hurt her son and his family.

Sean Andrews did not immediately respond to a message left early Sunday at a number listed for him.

Article also found here.
————————–

The Tyranny of Weight Control

by Karen De Coster

Once again, the U.S. government is busy producing a series of frenzied health “findings,” making the case that the assorted health problems plaguing Americans keep getting worse, they can’t be solved on an individual basis, and therefore it’s a collective problem that demands an aggressive intervention on the part of bureaucrats through a series of central-planning policies. This article from the Wall Street Journal gives publicity to the government’s obsession with stamping out one health issue in particular, obesity. A couple of snippets from the article claim,

“Obesity and with it diabetes are the only major health problems that are getting worse in this country, and they’re getting worse rapidly,” he said.

Change is needed on many fronts, he added. “Reversing obesity is not going to be done successfully with individual effort.”

These words were verbalized by Thomas Friedan, the new director of the CDC (Center for Disease Control). Obesity and diabetes are two of the government’s favorite “wars,” and this is because the epidemic of obesity, which tends to be a chief cause of diabetes in adults, can pave way for a series of centrally-planned food and prescription drug policies that can be passed off, with minimal effort, as a collective cure to the masses. In fact, solving America’s fat problem, on an aggregate scale, would provide government with wide-ranging powers over individuals and their day-to-day lifestyles. This has government officials – federal, state, and local – salivating over the prospect of such an enormous level of control through policy-wonking and special interest baiting.

Unfortunately for the wanna-bee CommuNannies in Washington, diabetes can only be approached on an individual basis. One person’s diabetes is not the other person’s diabetes. Lifestyles among individuals are drastically different and therefore each case requires unique approaches that get at the root of each diabetic’s problems. Mostly, Americans are becoming diabetic due to their diet – fast foods, sugar-laden foods, processed foods, and overindulgence in carbohydrates that continue to be dominant in the American diet.

Since we know that the modern explosion of diabetes is related to poor diet and inactivity, and each person’s diet and activity level is unique to him, how does diabetes become a problem to be collectively solved? By making such claims through their carefully-plotted propaganda, this is the only way that government autocrats can turn weak-minded Americans into jelly and have them begging for intervention, laws, Big Pharma’s pills – anything that promises to cure what ails them. Somewhere within this strategy I also smell the promise of scores of clients and big dollars for Big Pharma through the use of mandatory drugging for people who do not meet the government’s BMI standards, or some other politically influenced and capricious weight criteria.

FOX news recently covered a story that is monstrous on all counts. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) just concluded a three-day conference in Washington, D.C. called “Weight of the Nation,” which is described as an “inaugural conference on obesity and weight control.” According to the CDC’s website, the purpose of the conference was to “provide a forum to highlight progress in the prevention and control of obesity through policy and environmental strategies and is framed around four intervention settings: community, medical care, school, and workplace.” (Emphasis mine.) One of the conference objectives was to “discuss the use of law-based efforts to prevent and control obesity (e.g., legislation, regulation and policies).” From the FOX story:

But they also venture into suggestions for new restrictions. The recommendations call for communities to restrict the availability of unhealthy foods and beverages, institute smaller portion sizes, limit advertisements of unhealthy products and discourage consumption of sugary drinks.

The recommendations generally apply to public venues, with the possible goal of prompting more widespread restrictions elsewhere.

This article brings up one very important point that should make people pay attention: reducing obesity is at the heart of President Obama’s health care plan. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius stated this fact at the conference on Tuesday, July 28th. In effect, government officials are executing an agenda for enriching special interests and restricting free choice for individuals, in regards to food and beverages, as a part of the totalitarian nationalized health care plan. Other brilliant ideas offered up to collectively control the weight of millions of people are the usual: fat taxes, as well as food stamps to subsidize the purchase of “healthy” foods. Even known health expert Bill Clinton, a former presidential power broker who remains in elite company, spoke at the conference as a consultant to this national urgency (emphasis mine):

It is a public health issue that cannot be dealt with entirely within the confines of a medical office,” Clinton told the CDC conference Monday, talking about childhood obesity. “If we want to change this, we have to change what goes on at home and in the community and in the neighborhood and in the schools.

Such changes can only be accomplished when government takes bureaucratic control over individuals and uses force to alter their habits. Public schools are public tools for the government to move in and indoctrinate and control young children, thus this environment gives way to numerous possibilities for control policies within those boundaries. In fact, exercising weight control tyranny through the school systems will be a cinch. However, homes and neighborhoods and communities are private. A family makes a home, households make up a neighborhood, and neighborhoods are the foundations for communities. Yet we have ex-government officials, who are still kept in the power loop, declaring that individuals and families should be subject to coercive decrees that violate their ability to function as free individuals making free choices.

Furthermore, the government campaign attacking fatness has ramped up significantly as public health officials and assorted Czars start to smell blood in the battle to control consumer habits and behavioral outcomes. The propaganda campaign targeting obesity as a killer disease has built the foundation for the government’s declaration of war on weight. In fact, many people see nothing wrong with public awareness campaigns because they present information and advice as opposed to mandating particular behavior through forced policy. Only when these information campaigns turn into calls for government policies do some of them start voicing their concern for individual liberty. However, the government’s propaganda is paid for with stolen loot, and the funds are directed toward politically-favored schemes and allies that enrich and empower the very politicians who have the clout to put the propaganda in place. The public awareness campaign on obesity not only provides the opportunity for people-control via crisis, it is also an illegitimate use of power because government uses the very resources it controls (media, airwaves, schools, universities, etc.) to indoctrinate the masses toward its preferred views that it will later enforce through its laws.

To make matters worse, the government’s policies have promoted obesity in recent decades, as opposed to actually reducing the problem. This is because of the corporate state interests that have gained control of the politicians whose allegiance they purchase through campaign donations. This arrangement, that buys access for powerful special interests, keeps unhealthy, processed – but profitable – foods a part of the government’s food policy while demonizing foods, for years, that not only don’t pose the health risks claimed by food-Nazi bureaucrats and their paid researchers, but actually offer tremendous health benefits and maintain lean, healthy bodies. In terms of subsidized and harmful foods, think corn, and ask yourself why there is such a powerful corn lobby and why corn is found in so many highly-processed foods. In the other hand, healthy fats have been inaccurately portrayed as the villain in the American diet. In the end, the powerful corporate-state alliance will price you out of, or outright ban, healthy-but-unpopular foods while it forces unhealthy foodstuff produced within influential industries, such as refined, corn-based foods, into its centrally planned food policy.

If you want to see where this overall strategy is headed, read the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Here are some high-level snippets from the government’s plan:

  • Establishment of the Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention Project (the Measures Project), with a goal to “identify and recommend a set of obesity prevention strategies and corresponding suggested measurements that local governments and communities can use to plan, implement, and monitor initiatives to prevent obesity.”
  • The Measures Project will include a select Expert Panel of nationally recognized content-area experts in the areas of urban planning, built environment, obesity prevention, nutrition, and physical activity that will assist in the selection of the recommended strategies and measurements.
  • Twenty local government representatives, including city managers, urban planners, and budget analysts, who participate in ICMA’s Center for Performance Measurement (CPM), have volunteered to pilot test the selected measurements. (My input: this means local government agents “volunteering” to force businesses and citizens within their community to adhere to laws deemed desirable by the feds.)
  • Implementing a policy to affect the cost of healthier foods and beverages relative to the cost of less healthy foods and beverages sold within local government facilities in a local jurisdiction or on public school campuses during the school day within the largest school district in a local jurisdiction.
  • Partnering with communities to restrict the availability of less healthy foods and beverages, institute smaller portion size options, and limit advertisement of less healthy foods and beverages in public service venues.
  • Requiring licensed child care facilities within the local jurisdiction to limit screen-viewing time to no more than 2 hours per day for children aged ≥2 years.
At the Tennessee farm, July 2009.

If you breeze through these thirty-two painful pages you will observe a grotesque plan for micro-management of diet, nutrition, weight management, and activities of the U.S. population by utilizing a collective strategy for restriction and implementation, including the taxation of unfavorable foods and the subsidization of favored foods and industries dominated by powerful corporate giants. You will also note that the federal government plans to make extensive use of eager local officials in order to push its agenda down to the community level, as well as into the public schools. Along the way, the government will use “available evidence and expert opinion” to recommend strategies. Never mind the fact that 1) “evidence” is influenced and/or produced by special interests that wish to profit financially from government policy, and 2) “experts” are those whose judgment is deemed to take the correct position according to the desires of powerful and influential politicians, corporations, and special interests who will reap power and profit from a centrally-planned food policy.

Lastly, in staying with the usual course of dumbing down its propaganda to delightful, colorful pictures and graphs in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator in society, see the government’s cutesy little chart meant to inspire the masses to crave its invasive recommendations (on page 8 of this PDF):

Healthy policies = Healthy Environments = Healthy Behaviors = Healthy People

I can imagine this ridiculous motto drawn up in pretty colors on white paper, strung out on classroom walls and corporate cubicles all over America. For only when the majority of adults are reduced to hapless adolescents can the government work its parental magic on their teenage anxieties.

August 6, 2009

Karen DeCoster [send her mail] is an accounting/finance professional and writer. She rides a Harley, shoots lots of guns, and recently became a 1911 addict. She likes to put in long miles on her hybrid bicycle, lift heavy weights, use the crock pot, overindulge on Gouda cheese, do primal workouts, play Frisbee, get lost in the woods, and hang out at Bass Pro Shops. She won’t trade in her clunker for cash and it is highly unlikely that she will become a Czar in the Obama administration. This is her LewRockwell.com archive and her Mises.org archive. Check out her website.

NOTE: I don’t call them Murder King because of animal welfare. I call them Murder King because they murder their customers with aspartame-laced diet sodas and MSG-laced sandwiches. Did you know that the BK Veggie has MSG? Must be why it tastes so good.

——————————————————

Burger King: No shoes rule taken too far with baby
By The Associated Press

SUNSET HILLS, Mo. — Like most restaurants, the Burger King in this St. Louis suburb has a no shoes, no shirt, no service policy.

And baby, do they enforce it.

Too much so, the company admitted, after apologizing for restaurant workers who asked a mother to leave because her 6-month-old wasn’t wearing shoes.

Jennifer Frederich, her mother and Frederich’s infant daughter, Kaylin, stopped at the Burger King in Sunset Hills on Sunday. The baby was shoeless — Frederich figured tiny baby feet were immune from the rule.

But workers told the family to leave because the shoeless baby was violating a health code. In fact, shoelessness is not a health code violation in St. Louis County.

Frederich told KTVI-TV that she and her mother ate hurriedly and left before they could be kicked out. Frederich did not have a listed phone number, and The Associated Press could not reach her for comment.

Burger King released a statement Thursday indicating workers had taken the no shoes, no service policy too far.

“Our franchisee, which independently owns and operates this restaurant, apologizes for this guest’s experience,” the statement read. “The franchisee is retraining his restaurant team on the proper use of the ‘no shoes’ policy.”

The franchise owner also contacted Frederich to apologize in person.

Frederich told the TV station the flap was a bit overblown, and she hoped no one would be fired. But she appreciated Burger King’s apology.

Burger King, based in Miami, is the nation’s second-largest hamburger chain, with 11,800 restaurants worldwide.

Thanks to Andrew from Campaign for Liberty for the head’s up:

This just in from the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA):

VOTE on HR 2749 POSSIBLE TUESDAY. CALL TODAY.

HR 2749, the All Industrial Agriculture bill, could be voted on in the House of Representatives Tuesday. Please call your Congressman immediately and request that he or she reject this bill. Normal voting rules have been suspended to try and ram this through, so please call immediately.

This bill will:

  • Mandate NAIS (National Animal Identification System)
  • Allow industrializations of all farms
  • Give the federal government arbitrary power to force any practices they choose on any farm.
  • Allow the federal government to outlaw raw milk

This bill will not create the food safety it claims (it’s actually called The Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009). It will make the our food supply less safe by eliminating small farms and centralizing production and processing more than it is already.

ACTION: Please call your Congressman immediately and ask him or her to vote AGAINST HR2749.
Contact info: http://www.House.gov

There is no amendment that will “fix” this bill. An amendment proposed by Representative Kaptur has not been accepted and will not fix the problems in this bill anyway. We want to stop this bill.

Yours for small farms and real food,

Deborah Stockton, Executive Director
National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA)
nicfa@earthlink.net
http://www.nicfa.org

More about why NAIS and these so-called “food safety” bills must be stopped:

Learn more here:

http://bytestyle.tv/node/34
http://bytestyle.tv/node/36
http://bytestyle.tv/node/40

Related videos

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.