Start A Petition

Librarian Blogs 'Long, Unexaggerated, Devastating' Cuts to Canadian Science

Science & Tech  (tags: science, scientists, research, muzzling, Canada, Harper, environment, politics, Oliver, Kent, energy )

- 1838 days ago -
Three weeks ago, York University librarian John Dupuis posted a story in his personal blog, which aimed to show what he called the Conservative government's "campaign to undermine evidence-based scientific, environmental and technical decision-making."

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Michael O (176)
Tuesday June 11, 2013, 7:38 pm
The post exploded with 40,000 page views, more than 9,000 recommendations on Facebook, and more than a thousand tweets.

The blog post, titled "The Canadian War on Science: A Long, Unexaggerated, Devastating Chronological Indictment," is, according to the author, "a chronology of all the various cuts, insults, muzzlings and cancellations that I've been able to dig up." It links to more than 100 news stories about scientific programs the Conservatives have discontinued or stopped funding since 2006.

Dupuis says the post has been a collaborative effort. He originally included around 70 links, but after it went live he began receiving comments and emails with links to other stories. He updated the post to include around 30 new links. Now, he's working on a new update with further links, to be posted in a week or so.

Last May's post is not the librarian's first about the federal Conservatives shutting down science-related programs, but it's certainly his most popular ever.

"I was expecting the post to be somewhat more popular than the average post," he said. "It ended up being about 10 times more popular than my previous biggest post, and it's probably 100 times more popular than an average post."

Dupuis has two theories regarding why his post ended up being so successful.

"There's a lot of people out there that either didn't know the extent to which the Conservative government has its eye on science, or there's a lot of people that already did and said: 'Now we have it all in a list,'" he said.

Jason S (50)
Tuesday June 11, 2013, 7:38 pm
Good posting, thanks

Roger G (154)
Wednesday June 12, 2013, 1:22 am
no surprise there, noted, thanks!

Birgit W (160)
Wednesday June 12, 2013, 1:42 pm
This is Canada, where the Conservatives not only undermine scientists, they undermine all efforts for a clean environment, and more. The only thing they support are the tar sands.
Even David Suzuki had to stop speaking up for our environment, because of the Conservatives.

Vicky P (476)
Wednesday June 12, 2013, 5:03 pm
sad, the conservatives seem to be cutting everything important, they wouldn't think of raising taxes on corporations or on their rich friends though.

DaleLovesOttawa O (198)
Wednesday June 12, 2013, 8:37 pm
Thank you Michael O, we have to keep the light focused on what Harper is doing to science. He is intent on taking us back to the dark ages. He detests science as he thinks it conflicts with his religious values but he is so wrong about that. He is ruthless and unyielding and will stop at nothing to drag Canada into a scientific backwater. His government's decision to shut down the mandatory long term census so that we cannot get the statistics necessary for many social and other programs is another black mark against him. Canada is now the only western nation without this additional informative census, it is now voluntary only making it more difficult to collect stats. He has no interest in progress science as he thinks that Canada should ride on the scientific coat tails of other nations while ignoring the fact that Canadian science is necessary. Nothing surprises me about his government, its secrecy and attempts to impose his ultra conservative values on a social democratic nation. The end of his government will go down in infamy as with Brian Mulruiney's conservative bent government.

DaleLovesOttawa O (198)
Wednesday June 12, 2013, 8:41 pm
Sorry, I meant progressive science but the cat that owns me wanted my immediate attention.

greenplanet e (155)
Thursday June 13, 2013, 1:22 am
We need curiosity, good info and books.

Dorothy N (63)
Thursday November 28, 2013, 5:51 am
Thanks so much for posting this, and leading us to this site.

Harper is fulfilling his agenda of doing ALEC/fundamentalist bidding, for which he, (like many other temporary leaders regarding their own countries), is willing to sacrifice Canada and the entire world of life, despite having no right to do so.

In future, assuming any of us have elections in future, if we do not allow these ilegal 'trade agreements' such as the TPP to go through, we absolutely need to have the UN in as electoral observers in each province to help prevent any more electoral cheating, since Harper's selected head of Elections Canada is too corrupt to do his job.

The following quotes from a comprehensive and informative article from our CBC, which Harper's in the process of destroying as Canada's independent voice, shows how deadly these 'trade agreements'/corporate coups are, as Eli Lilly and Lone Pine Resources test the water (that Lone Pine wants to frack up) in Canada, prior to the much more extreme TPP.

This is the beginning of what all countries suffering these 'trade agreements' can expect, until they've been sued into abject poverty and are at the non-existent mercy of hundreds of ruthless would-be corporate overlords.

Eli Lilly files $500M NAFTA suit against Canada over drug patents
Compensation sought for Federal Court's invalidation of Straterra, Zyprexa patents
By Kazi Stastna, CBC News Posted: Sep 13, 2013

Eli Lilly is accusing Canada of violating its obligations to foreign investors under the North American Free Trade Agreement by allowing its courts to invalidate patents for two of its drugs. ...

... In the Straterra case, the Federal Court judge found that the drug did not meet the threshold of "utility" for the long-term treatment of ADHD and did not fulfil the implied "inventive promise" of the patent — that is, it did not do what the inventor said, or implied, it would do when it applied for the patent.

The court found that the clinical trial used to demonstrate the drug's utility — a seven-week, double-blind placebo-controlled study of 22 patients — was "too small and too short in duration to provide anything more than interesting but inconclusive data."

The judge hearing the Zyprexa patent challenge found that the drug did not meet the implied promise Eli Lilly made that the drug is markedly superior to other drugs for the long-term treatment of schizophrenia. ...

... Ely Lilly is contending that the court decisions constitute an expropriation of the "exclusive rights" conferred to Eli Lilly under the two drug patents, the company said in the notice of intent to submit a NAFTA claim filed June 13.

By stripping the company of its patents before they were expired, the courts deprived Eli Lilly of its "exclusive rights to prevent third parties from making, using or selling its patented product during the patent term" and cost the company money, the drug maker said.

The global sales of Straterra were $620.1 million in 2011 and sales of Zyprexa totalled $5.026 billion in 2010, the company said in its June document, which has the Canadian sales figures blacked out.

The company argues that by not rectifying the "judge-made law" on utility that expropriated Eli Lilly's exclusive rights as the patent holder, the government was guilty of expropriating Eli Lilly's investments, the company said, which is prohibited under Chapter 11 and entitles the company to compensation "equivalent to the fair market value of the expropriated investment."

Eli Lilly objects to the way Canadian courts interpret whether a drug has fulfilled its promise of being useful in the treatment of a certain condition. It argues that unlike other jurisdictions, Canada has an "elevated standard" when it comes to demonstrating the utility of a new drug and doesn't use the widely accepted threshold that demands only that patent holders show their invention has a "scintilla" of utility. ...

... Eli Lilly's NAFTA complaint is unprecedented and should worry the citizens of Canada and other NAFTA countries because the drug maker is not only challenging the invalidation of its particular patents but is challenging "Canada's entire legal doctrine for determining an invention's 'utility' and, thus, a patent’s validity," Public Citizen wrote in a brief on the case.

"While pushing for an entirely different patent standard, Eli Lilly, the fifth-largest U.S. pharmaceutical corporation, is demanding [$500 million] from Canadian taxpayers as compensation for Canada’s enforcement of its existing patent standards." ...

... While the tribunal can only award damages and can't force Canada to change its laws, some argue that the latter is, ultimately, what Eli Lilly is after.

The company's so-called investor-state challenge "marks the first attempt by a patent-holding pharmaceutical corporation to use the extraordinary investor privileges provided by U.S. 'trade' agreements as a tool to push for greater monopoly patent protections, which increase the cost of medicines for consumers and governments," Public Citizen said.

If Eli Lilly is successful in getting the NAFTA tribunal to approve its claim for compensation, it "could expose Canada to a slew of investor-state attacks from other drug companies that have had patents invalidated because their patent applications failed to show or predict that the medicines would provide the promised benefits," the group said.

In an interview with the American online news magazine Politico, Toronto attorney Lawrence Herman, a former trade official with Canada's foreign service, agreed that Eli Lilly is less interested in compensation than in changing Canada's patent law so that judges no longer have the leeway to make the kind of rulings they did in its case.

This is a revised version of FDA Press Release P0-65, originally issued September 29, 2005.
This release was updated on Sept. 30, 2005, to indicate the correct number of trials.

September 29, 2005

Media Inquiries:
Susan Cruzan, 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries:
FDA Issues Public Health Advisory on Strattera (Atomoxetine) for Attention Deficit Disorder

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today is issuing a Public Health Advisory to alert physicians of reports of suicidal thinking in children and adolescents associated with Strattera, a drug approved to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). FDA has also directed Eli Lilly and Company, manufacturer of Strattera, to develop a Medication Guide for patients and caregivers.

FDA is advising health care providers and caregivers that children and adolescents being treated with Strattera should be closely monitored for clinical worsening, as well as agitation, irritability, suicidal thinking or behaviors, and unusual changes in behavior, especially during the initial few months of therapy or when the dose is changed (either increased or decreased). Patients and caregivers who have concerns or questions about these symptoms should contact their healthcare provider. ...

... Call your child or teenager’s doctor right away if they develop new psychological symptoms such as abnormal thoughts/behaviors and/or extreme elevated or irritable moods while taking Strattera.

Strattera can cause liver injury in some patients. Call your doctor right away if you or your child has itching, right upper belly pain, dark urine, yellow skin or eyes, or unexplained flu-like symptoms.

Heart-related problems have been reported with Strattera. Sudden death has been reported in patients who have heart problems or heart defects. There have also been reports of stroke and heart attack in adults, and increased blood pressure and heart rate. Tell your doctor if you or your child has any heart problems, heart defects, high blood pressure, or a family history of these problems. Your doctor should check you or your child carefully for heart problems before starting Strattera. Call your doctor right away if you or your child has any signs of heart problems such as chest pain, shortness of breath, or fainting while taking Strattera. ...

... What other important information should I know about Strattera?

Serious allergic reactions have occurred in patients taking Strattera. Call your doctor if you or your child has trouble breathing, swelling, hives, or experience other allergic reactions.

Talk to your healthcare provider if your child experiences slowing of growth (height and weight). Children should have height and weight checked often while taking Strattera, and your healthcare provider may stop Strattera treatment if a problem is found during these checkups.

Patients taking Strattera have experienced problems passing urine, including trouble starting or keeping a urine stream, and not being able to fully empty the bladder.

Erections that won't go away (priapism) have occurred rarely during treatment with Strattera. If you or your child/teenager has an erection that lasts more than 4 hours, seek medical help right away.

Strattera may affect your ability or your child’s ability to drive or operate heavy machinery. Be careful until you know how Strattera affects you or your child/teenager. ...

... What are the common possible side effects of Strattera?

Common side effects in children and teenagers include upset stomach, decreased appetite, nausea or vomiting, dizziness, tiredness, and mood swings.

Common side effects in adults include constipation, dry mouth, nausea, decreased appetite, dizziness, sexual side effects, and problems passing urine. ...

The Largest Pharma Fraud Whistleblower Case in U.S. History Totaling $1.4 Billion

Thu Jan 15, 2009

... Stephen A. Sheller, a well-known mass tort and class action lawyer from Philadelphia, filed the first Complaint in the case in February 2003, bringing the off-label drug allegations to the government under seal as required by law. Today, after six years, the Department of Justice settled with Lilly the allegations that six former Lilly drug marketing representative whistleblowers brought to Sheller. Lilly will pay more than $1.4 billion for its illegal off-label marketing of the antipsychotic drug, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania announced. Zyprexa is Lilly's top-selling drug with worldwide sales of nearly $40 billion since its approval in 1996. ...

... For years, Lilly has been accused of influencing doctors to prescribe Zyprexa to treat disruptive children and tranquilize nursing home patients. The FDA has not approved the drug for children or the elderly and the side effects of the drug are significant: inducing heart failure and pneumonia in the elderly and increasing the risk of significant weight gain and diabetes in children. According to the Sheller Complaint, some of the tactics used by Eli Lilly to push Zyprexa sales beyond the drug's approved use were: -- During off-label lectures and audio conferences for physicians Lilly sales people posed as persons in the audience who were interested in Zyprexa's expanded use and asked "planted questions;" -- While knowing the significant risk for weight gain posed by Zyprexa, Lilly minimized the connection between Zyprexa and weight gain in a widely disseminated videotape called "The Myth of Diabetes" which used "allegedly scientific studies of questionable integrity as well as the haphazard reporting of adverse events;" -- Providing evidence that, in the summer of 2003, Lilly management ordered the destruction of sales literature with misleading information, "core sales aids, flip charts and acetates;" and -- Promoting the sublingual version of Zyprexa, called "Zydis," by claiming that it did not have the same weight-gain effects as Zyprexa. ...

Eli Lilly accused of spending millions of dollars to bribe doctors in China

Tuesday, September 03, 2013

NaturalNews) Nearly every major pharmaceutical company is now facing criminal charges for breaking the law somewhere in the world, with Eli Lilly and Co.'s alleged bribery escapades in China currently capturing top headlines globally. According to Reuters, the U.S.-based drug firm is being accused of engaging in a massive kickback scheme spanning multiple years, which involved the company funneling millions of dollars to doctors as a form of bribery to get them to prescribe more Eli Lilly drugs to their patients.

A former company insider recently spilled the beans about Eli Lilly's alleged crimes to Chinese reporters, divulging under whistleblower protection that the company had spent more than 30 million yuan, or about $5 million, bribing doctors to increase drug sales between 2011 and 2012. Eli Lilly had also allegedly pushed its diabetic treatments on Chinese doctors, encouraging them to give talks to other doctors about the supposed benefits of these and other drugs. ...

... As we reported recently, several GSK executives working in China were recently indicted for not only bribing doctors to raise drug prices in violation of Chinese law, but also pushing them to prescribe drugs to patients who did not need treatment. ...

... 2. Evidence Eli Lilly Uses Medicaid "Behavioral Pharmacy Management" to Promote Off-Label Prescribing of Eli Lilly Products. ...

... We've uncovered numerous examples of how Eli Lilly has utilized this program as a "Trojan Horse" to gain access to and influence over state Medicaid officials, and numerous ways the program is designed to promote Lilly products, expanding Lilly's share of the Medicaid market. ...

... Lilly and CNS consistently misrepresent the true nature of BPM by distributing false and misleading promotional material to Medicaid officials and the public. A May 21, 2007 Lilly press release, Pharmacy Management Initiative in 19 States Strives for Best Possible Care for Medicaid Patients, boasted that in the first six months of Michigan's program, "A 22% reduction in claims and 21% reduction in cost were realized for the time period May 2005 through January 2006." However, data contained in CNS "Behavioral Pharmacy Reports" obtained through FOIA requests to the Mich. Dept. of Community Health (Exhibit 6) reveal that in the succeeding 12 months of Michigan's PQIP, from Jan. to Dec. 2006, some dramatic increases occurred:
# children age 13-17 on 4 or more psychotropics rose from 59 to 163 (177% increase);
# children age 6-12 on 3 or more psychotropics rose from 114 to 402 (250% increase);
# children age 6-12 on 4 or more psychotropics rose from 14 to 67 (97% increase);
# children under age 6 on 3 or more psychotropics rose from 1 to 11 (1,000% increase).

At a meeting of Oregon's Partnership for Psychiatric Medication Access Advisory Group on April 19, 2006, CNS employees reported that Oregon's BPM had achieved a dramatic 83% reduction in the number of children on 3 or more psychotropics, falling from 639 children in May 2004 to 111 children in Dec. 2005. However, data contained in CNS Behavioral Pharmacy Reports obtained through FOIA requests to the Oregon Dept. of Human Services show that between April 2004 and Dec. 2005, the number of children on 3 or more psychotropics actually rose from 206 to 219 (Exhibit 7).

In Pennsylvania (Exhibit 8), an October 27, 2005 CNS presentation to the Medical Assistance Advisory Committee included a graph reporting to show a dramatic 69% decrease in the number of children on three or more psychotropics, falling from 2,773 in Nov. 2004 to 847 in July 2005. However, actual numbers in CNS "Behavioral Pharmacy Reports" obtained through FOIA requests to the Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare tell a different story. From Nov. 2004 to July 2005, the number of children on three or more psychotropics fell from 2,009 to 1,800, a decline of 10%, not 69%. Furthermore, subsequent reports reveal dramatic increases between Dec. 2005 and Aug. 2007:
# children age 13-17 on 4 or more psychotropics rose from 56 to 82 (45% increase);
# children age 6-12 on 3 or more psychotropics rose from 136 to 249 (90% increase);
# children age 6-12 on 4 or more psychotropics rose from 20 to 39 (97% increase);
# children under age 6 on 3 or more psychotropics rose from 1 to 6 (500% increase). ...

... As another example, physicians prescribing 6mg Risperdal (2mg below the FDA-approved maximum dose of 8mg) are targeted for "educational intervention" while physicians prescribing up to 30mg of Lilly's Zyprexa (50% higher than the FDA-approved maximum dose of 20mg) are not targeted for intervention. CNS BPM "high dose thresholds" are listed in the Minnesota DHS DUR March 8, 2006 Meeting Minutes, Exhibit 10. The FDA-approved maximum dose is significant because many adverse drug reactions are dose-related, i.e., the frequency and severity of adverse reactions correspond to the dosage and may do so in a disproportional (nonlinear pharmacokinetic) manner. Dose-related Zyprexa side effects include: EEG abnormalities; embryo and fetal toxicity; alanine aminotransferase and gamma glutamyltransferase with incident diabetes; somnolence; dizziness; leukopenia; peripheral oedema; postural hypotension; extrapyramidal symptoms including akathisia, dyskinesia and dystonia (see bibliography of references, Exhibit 11). The resultant harm to Medicaid patients and additional expense to the Medicaid budget are incalculable.

By funding a program that systematically condones the off-label prescribing of Zyprexa, Eli Lilly has violated Sections 201 and 301 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [21 U.S.C. §321 & §331]. ...

... A serious investigation is clearly warranted.

Signed and dated May 1, 2009.
Bernard L. Hansen
Traverse City, Michigan

Fracking is not a right: Tell Lone Pine to drop its NAFTA lawsuit against Quebec’s moratorium on fracking!

When the people of Quebec spoke out against fracking, the provincial government listened. Quebec put a moratorium1 on the controversial and dangerous method for extracting hard-to-reach natural gas until the environmental impacts could be studied.

Fracking uses enormous amounts of water and sand, mixed with toxic chemicals, which are forced into the ground at high pressure to fracture shale rock or coal beds to release natural gas or oil. The process is linked to earthquakes and water pollution, which is why communities around the world are trying to stop it.

You would think the Quebec government has an obligation to protect its people and their environment. But a U.S. fracking company called Lone Pine Resources thinks otherwise.

Lone Pine, which wanted to frack for gas under the St. Lawrence River, has threatened to sue Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The company is demanding $250 million in compensation for Quebec’s moratorium, which it says violates Lone Pine’s “right” to frack!

We shouldn’t have to pay to protect ourselves and our environment. Communities, not private firms, should have the final say on fracking and other projects that threaten water sources, the environment and public health – and there should be no penalty for saying “no.”

Letter text:

To Tim Granger, President & Chief Executive Officer of Lone Pine Resources Inc.

We’re writing to urge you to drop Lone Pine Resources’ NAFTA challenge against Quebec’s fracking moratorium. Communities are demanding bans on fracking because case studies have shown fracking to contaminate drinking water, and because fracking can result in permanent removal and loss of large quantities of water from a watershed that feeds creeks, streams, lakes and wetlands. The injection of fracking wastewater into the ground has been linked to earthquakes. Despite industry and some governments promoting natural gas as a clean, green (remove small quotes) fuel, studies show that fracked natural gas may produce as much greenhouse gas emissions as coal.

Quebec’s moratorium on fracking is not arbitrary or without public purpose, as Lone Pine states in its Notice of Intent to sue Canada for $250 million. In fact it is necessary to protect water, a public resource, based on both short and long term impacts and effects to other uses of water, the ecosystem, conservation and the health, safety and general welfare of communities. Thus, the Quebec government responded to legitimate and wholly proper public concerns about fracking in the St. Lawrence Valley. This is a precautionary measure to protect the environment and health of Quebec, its people and water, and to take legitimate action while impacts of fracking are studied further and it is demonstrated, if possible, that no such harm will or is likely to occur. Nor is Quebec alone in its concern – countries and communities around the world are speaking out against fracking, and a moratorium is a proper and responsible measure for the province to take.

All communities, including Quebec, have a right to decide whether or not they want fracking. Companies like yours must not be allowed to abuse investor rights in treaties like NAFTA. We urge you to respect Quebec’s right and obligation under international trade law, including NAFTA, to protect its people and its sovereign right to set its own environmental and resource laws by dropping your NAFTA challenge to the fracking moratorium.

Thank you for your attention into this matter.


With support from:

Eau Secours
Sierra Club

More information on the Lone Pine case, fracking and investor-state dispute settlement:

Five reasons Canada should NOT ratify a Canada-EU free trade agreement, By Stuart Trew, Troy Media, April 26, 2013
Free Trade is Fracking with our Future, Council of Canadians factsheet, February 2013
Don’t Frack with our Water, Council of Canadians anti-fracking campaign and Fracker Tracker
The right to say no: EU–Canada trade agreement threatens fracking bans, May 2013 report from Corporate Europe Observatory, Council of Canadians and Transnational Institute
Testing the Right to Frack: NAFTA investor lawsuit against shale gas moratorium adds reason to fear FIPA with China, Op-ed by Stuart Trew in The Tyee, March 28, 2013
Profiting from Injustice: How law firms, arbitrators and financiers are fuelling an investment arbitration boom, November 2012 report from Corporate Europe Observatory and Transnational Institute
Open letter to Stephen Harper: Fourteen reasons the Canada-China FIPA needs a full public review, By Gus Van Harten, Osgoode Hall Law School, October 18, 2012
Mining for Profits in International Tribunals: Corporate lawsuits against governments over resource rights continue to increase, Report by the Institute for Policy Studies, May 2013 ...

(Please go to source to sign petition?)

As far as these corporations and Harper are concerned, this temporary public servant - who cheated to get 'elected' - thinks he's literally sold us and our country...

Wait until there are 600 or more corporations under the TPP - if it goes through, as it could, at any time now - suing all involved countries into a global corporate-controlled state with no protections at all...

Harper's working toward dragging Canada into, (among other no doubt disastrous corporate sell-outs worse than NAFTA and the experimental lawsuits we're now beginning to see from that, regarding such things as our right to protective health and environmental standards and law,) the TPP, referred to by many as the 'corporate coup' over multiple countries, although nobody, in or out of public office, has any right to essentially hand over control of domestic legislation from any country's Justice system - which are the only Courts legally administering the law of the land - to corporations someone temporarily in public office wishes to 'entitle' to sue the people of the country - whom their public office exists to protect the interests of - into submission in eliminating any law, any legal protection safeguarding the people and country's rights, health, life, environment and democracy at any time any involved corporation feels that any such law might potentially be reducing their ideal profits.

And they can sue us for hundreds of millions in 'lost profits' in a secretive trade court without even showing what their actual profits WERE, as shown in the first CBC article, where it stated that: '... The global sales of Straterra were $620.1 million in 2011 and sales of Zyprexa totalled $5.026 billion in 2010, the company said in its June document, which has the Canadian sales figures blacked out. ...'

I don't believe that any country or people should or can be held liable for the privately made, secretive and illegal acts of any traitorous public official literally selling the country and people he's sworn to serve up the river without a paddle, although in Harper's case, a party that has cheated its way in is obviously not forming a legitimate government to begin with.

We need Fair Trade agreements with the rest of the world, not a corporate coup ultimately over us all.

And in Canada, we need the NDP and Green Parties in, so that we can not only survive, but retain our democracy, rather than miserably labouring, (likely without a 'burdensome' minimum wage or anything much over that of the lowest globally,) to suffer and die (one suspects without our health care system, doubtless to be privatized for corporate profit, probably with insurance middlemen to hike costs for their profit as well, as in the horrendous US system the industrialized world has typically long regarded with outright horror) along with our to-be-massively polluted environment, all to serve Harper's corporate masters in doing nothing that might potentially interfere with theoretical corporate profits they might imagine they might otherwise have made at our expense, with Harper trying to make us liable to be sued potentially for billions by any or all of 600 corporations in the TPP alone, they being apparently not answerable to our legal system and above all domestic law? and suing us in a special 'trade court' outside of ours, until our tax-paid money has all been bled away, along with any chance we had of maintaining law, democracy or life in our own country.

I'd like to see what our Supreme Court would make, if asked, of the legality of our courts being bypassed and our laws determined by destructive corporate interests via a 'trade court' outside of the country, because someone temporarily holding public office decided to make a very private deal at our expense.

Unfortunately, I'm not so sure about the Republican appointments in the US Supreme Court, unless they personally want to retain their jobs as actual Supreme Court Judges capable of determining domestic law, of course...

Welcome to the Third World world - what goes around comes around, and what can be done to one, can now be done to all.

So, can our own courts, in our various countries, still function enough to prevent this and other corporate coups by pointing out that under the country's own law, to which ALL within that country are subject, each such country makes its own domestic laws and that nobody can legally toss such law and democracy away in some privately made agreement spuriously using our names and countries to make us, the people of our respective countries, liable for the privately made promises of this traitor in this appalling betrayal, made with hundreds of ruthless corporations intended to become our virtual rulers, because it suited his/her purposes?

And if we somehow survive by evading this and having rescinded all such 'trade laws' detrimental to virtually all but the corporations involved, (who will in any event ultimately self-destruct in fairly short order, without restraints to their polluting, disgusting, mindless greed,) are we going to get it together globally and demand agreements for fair wages and treatment for all, while boycotting offending corporations - while any local business still survives?

Because it's a lot easier to see how this sucked for people in the other 3rd World countries now that we're looking at living it ourselves.

Please, sign as many petitions as you can, even if you have to use the 5 zeroes that work on US petitions.

There seem to be two Avaaz petitions - the more we sign and the more petitions get in, the better our chance of at least making our betrayers nervous.

There is also an opportunity to comment on this one - please do!

To all the governments negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement:

As concerned global citizens, we call on you to make the TPP process transparent and accountable to all, and to reject any plans that limit our governments' power to regulate in the public interest. The TPP is a threat to democracy, undermining national sovereignty, workers' rights, environmental protections and Internet freedom. We urge you to reject this corporate takeover.

(multi-country petition at bottom)

Stop the corporate Death Star
Join the call to make the TPP process transparent and accountable to all, and call on all participating parties to reject any plans that limit our governments' power to regulate in the public interest

(This was supplied by someone on an Avaaz petition)

Please visit the site below to register your opposition
to the TPP with the White House:

Short URL:

Big Media lobbyists are trying to lock down the Internet in Canada through secretive laws and agreements1

Secretive bills and processes are before Parliament that include provisions to criminalize and restrict your daily use of the Internet and give Big Media giants increased power to shut down websites without court oversight.2

We’re now looking at having Canada’s copyright rules overwritten with extreme Internet restrictions,4 including website blocking and even terminating your access to the Internet.5

This approach is backwards: it suffocates online innovation and is patently unfair. It's time for policymakers to stop listening to outdated conglomerates and work to put Canada on the map as a leader in Internet openness and affordability.

Please sign the petition—tell the Prime Minister and the Industry Minister to say no to this Internet lockdown before it's too late →

The Trans-Pacific Partnership would impose SOPA-style Internet censorship worldwide -- but we can stop it.

It's official: the Trans-Pacific Partnership is SOPA on steroids. Thanks to a leaked chapter of the secret international treaty, we now know that the TPP would grant unprecedented snooping and censorship powers to ISPs, copyright holders, and governments.
Sign to the right to tell your lawmakers: Oppose the TPP and SOPA-style internet censorship.

The TPP would encourage ISPs to censor web content, prosecute supposed copyright infringers without due process, spy on your web activity, share your private data with copyright holders, and even block your internet connection altogether.

The intellectual property provisions in the TPP -- leaked by WikiLeaks last week -- amount to a wish-list for Hollywood and Big Pharma: criminalizing small-scale downloading, destroying Fair Use standards, and undermining access to medicine for million of people worldwide.
We still have time to stop this corporate coup d'etat -- sign to tell your lawmakers stand against censorship and corporate protectionism.

The TPP sacrifices our democratic power to serve the interests of giant companies. Lax food safety rules, unregulated fracking, overseas job shifts, rocketing drug prices, internet monopolies, slashes to public services to profit Wall Street robbers -- are just some of the projected effects of the TPP.

And if the President has his way, this thing will be "fast-tracked" through Congress -- which means lawmakers' won't get a chance to debate or modify the trade law.
Sign to the right to tell Congress to reject "fast track" trade authority -- and stop the TPP!

(Except that the TPP is evidently nothing more a corporate coup from start to finish, and must be rejected entirely.)

You could have to pay a fine for simply clicking on the wrong link.

Right now, a group of 600 industry lobbyist "advisors" and un-elected government trade representatives are scheming behind closed doors1,2 to craft an international agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

Why the secrecy? We know from leaked documents3 that the TPP includes what amounts to an Internet trap that would:

Criminalize4 some of your everyday use of the Internet,
Force service providers to collect and hand over your private data without privacy safeguards5, and
Give media conglomerates more power to fine you for Internet use,6 remove online content—including entire websites—and even terminate7 your access to the Internet.
Create a parallel legal system of international tribunals that will undermine national sovereignty and allow conglomerates to sue countries for laws that infringe on their profits.

The TPP's Internet trap is secretive, extreme, and it could criminalize your daily use of the Internet. We deserve to know what will be blocked, what we and our families will be fined for.

If enough of us speak out now, we can force participating governments to come clean. Your signature will send a message to leaders of participating countries. 8

Please sign our petition to make your objection heard.
135,820 people have signed (and counting).

Say NO to Internet Censorship before it's too late.
Sign the petition to world leaders: "Don't sign the TPP"

"The Trans Pacific Partnership includes provisions that would lead to extreme Internet censorship and undermine democracy and national sovereignty. I demand that my government oppose this agreement and refuse to sign."

WikiLeaks has released documents exposing an extreme internet censorship plan called the Trans-Pacific Partnership.1 The TPP is a secretive trade agreement negotiated behind closed doors with no democratic process.

We know from the leaked drafts that the TPP will make the Internet more expensive, censored, and policed.2 It undermines democracy and national sovereignty, and would force SOPA-like Internet censorship on the world.3

World leaders are meeting next week. This could be our last chance to stop the TPP before it's too late.

Tell U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman to Stop Attacking Access to Lifesaving Medicines

Many countries and treatment providers, including Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), rely on affordable quality generic medicines to treat life-threatening diseases. We need to keep prices low so our patients — and millions of others still waiting for treatment in the developing world — can get the medicines they need.

But right now the U.S. government is advocating for trade terms with eleven other Pacific Rim nations that could restrict access to generic medicines, making life-saving treatments unaffordable to millions.

Read MSF's Open Letter to President Obama

Find details on the seven most concerning provisions listed in the Annex of the letter.

To read more about the TPP and access to medicines, please visit:

Damaging intellectual property rules in the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) would give pharmaceutical companies longer monopolies over brand name drugs. Companies would be able to charge high prices for longer periods of time. And it would be much harder for generic companies to produce cheaper drugs that are vital to people’s health.

US Trade Representative Michael Froman needs to know that if harmful provisions in the U.S. proposals for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement are not removed before it is finalized, this trade deal will have a real cost in human lives.

We need your help. Tell USTR Michael Froman to protect access to medicines for poor people.

Say No to Internet Censorship

WikiLeaks has released documents detailing the Trans Pacific Partnership’s Internet censorship plan.1And it’s worse than we feared.

The documents confirm that the TPP will make the Internet more expensive, censored, and policed. Experts say, “kids could be sent to jail for downloading” and whole families could be kicked off the Internet.2

In just a few days those behind the TPP will meet in Salt Lake City USA to ram this binding plan into place. Send decision-makers these three demands by filling out the form on this page before it's too late.

This looks like our last chance to speak out against the huge damage the TPP will do to free expression online. Please send this crucial message by filling out this form now.

Five things you must know about the TPP

By William C. Anderson and Natalie Yoon

... Here are 5 crucial things you should know about the TPP:

1. The TPP is the corporate coup of our democracy and will undermine our ability to shape public policy.

Forget corporate personhood, try corporate nationhood. The TPP will elevate multinational corporations and banks to the status of nation-states, giving them the power to sue sovereign governments for policies that they think threaten their potential profits. If the TPP is passed, these privileges will be given to over 30,000 companies. This international agreement would trump any national, state, or local legislation. As our sovereignty is signed away, this means that movements for regulating Wall Street, labor rights, or environmental protection may soon hit monstrous, international roadblocks.

2. The TPP will destroy American jobs and cause a pay cut for 90% of Americans.

By gutting what’s left of manufacturing in the U.S., the TPP will replace good jobs here in the U.S. with abysmal sweatshops overseas. As the race to the bottom accelerates, union membership will likely fall along with workplace standards and wages.

3. The TPP will devastate communities abroad, increase forced migration, and encourage border militarization.

While much of the immigrant rights movement has focused on harmful policies for undocumented immigrants, we must also confront the root causes of forced migration, and the continued struggle families face on the other side of the border.

4. The TPP will drastically raise the cost of healthcare by preventing the sale of low-cost generic drugs. Millions could die.

Big Pharma is using the TPP to implement extreme intellectual property rights to destroy the competitive generic drug market. To put this in perspective, the first generation of HIV drugs have come down in price by 99% over the last decade thanks to of generic production. While these new laws will most severely threaten poor people in underdeveloped countries, U.S. Government programs like medicaid, medicare, and tricare, will be undermined as well.

5. It’s not too late. Congress still has a chance to stop this before Obama and his corporate advisors complete it.

Basically, it all boils down to “Fast Track”, a trade negotiating process that circumvents congressional oversight and public participation. Without Fast Track, there’s little chance the TPP will actually happen. Congress must grant Fast Track authority through a majority vote, and it remains very controversial among both Republicans and Democrats. The race is on. Corporations have been lobbying for Fast Track and the TPP for years, its now time our movements get moving too.

If those of us who know do not acknowledge this threat before it gets worse we are partially to blame. Something has to be done and we cannot expect a party, a nonprofit, or a politician to save us. In the era of corporate personhood, people are about to face off with a serious opponent. One of a stature we have yet to encounter. The problem is, we cannot expect much of a fight when people do not even know they are in the ring with the TPP. It always hurts worse to be hit when you didn’t even see it coming.

Follow William on Twitter @WilliamCAnder.

Natalie Yoon is a contributing author. Natalie is the National Organizer for United Students for Fair Trade (USFT). USFT just launched a Topple the TPP campaign to bring students into the fight against the TPP. For more information check and like us on Facebook.

November 26, 2013
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on google More Sharing Services 129
Putting Profits Before Populations
Monsanto, the TPP and Global Food Dominance

“Control oil and you control nations,” said US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in the 1970s. “Control food and you control the people.”

Global food control has nearly been achieved, by reducing seed diversity with GMO (genetically modified) seeds that are distributed by only a few transnational corporations. But this agenda has been implemented at grave cost to our health; and if the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) passes, control over not just our food but our health, our environment and our financial system will be in the hands of transnational corporations.

Profits Before Populations

Genetic engineering has made proprietary control possible over the seeds on which the world’s food supply depends. According to an Acres USA interview of plant pathologist Don Huber, Professor Emeritus at Purdue University, two modified traits account for practically all of the genetically modified crops grown in the world today. One involves insect resistance. The other, more disturbing modification involves insensitivity to glyphosate-based herbicides (plant-killing chemicals). Often known as Roundup after the best-selling Monsanto product of that name, glyphosate poisons everything in its path except plants genetically modified to resist it.

Glyphosate-based herbicides are now the most commonly used herbicides in the world. Glyphosate is an essential partner to the GMOs that are the principal business of the burgeoning biotech industry. Glyphosate is a “broad-spectrum” herbicide that destroys indiscriminately, not by killing unwanted plants directly but by tying up access to critical nutrients.

Because of the insidious way in which it works, it has been sold as a relatively benign replacement for the devastating earlier dioxin-based herbicides. But a barrage of experimental data has now shown glyphosate and the GMO foods incorporating it to pose serious dangers to health. Compounding the risk is the toxicity of “inert” ingredients used to make glyphosate more potent. Researchers have found, for example, that the surfactant POEA can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells. But these risks have been conveniently ignored.

The widespread use of GMO foods and glyphosate herbicides helps explain the anomaly that the US spends over twice as much per capita on healthcare as the average developed country, yet it is rated far down the scale of the world’s healthiest populations. The World Health Organization has ranked the US LAST out of 17 developed nations for overall health.

Sixty to seventy percent of the foods in US supermarkets are now genetically modified. By contrast, in at least 26 other countries—including Switzerland, Australia, Austria, China, India, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Greece, Bulgaria, Poland, Italy, Mexico and Russia—GMOs are totally or partially banned; and significant restrictions on GMOs exist in about sixty other countries.

A ban on GMO and glyphosate use might go far toward improving the health of Americans. But the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a global trade agreement for which the Obama Administration has sought Fast Track status, would block that sort of cause-focused approach to the healthcare crisis.

Roundup’s Insidious Effects

Roundup-resistant crops escape being killed by glyphosate, but they do not avoid absorbing it into their tissues. Herbicide-tolerant crops have substantially higher levels of herbicide residues than other crops. In fact, many countries have had to increase their legally allowable levels—by up to 50 times—in order to accommodate the introduction of GM crops. In the European Union, residues in food are set to rise 100-150 times if a new proposal by Monsanto is approved. Meanwhile, herbicide-tolerant “super-weeds” have adapted to the chemical, requiring even more toxic doses and new toxic chemicals to kill the plant.

Human enzymes are affected by glyphosate just as plant enzymes are: the chemical blocks the uptake of manganese and other essential minerals. Without those minerals, we cannot properly metabolize our food. That helps explain the rampant epidemic of obesity in the United States. People eat and eat in an attempt to acquire the nutrients that are simply not available in their food.

According to researchers Samsell and Seneff in Biosemiotic Entropy: Disorder, Disease, and Mortality (April 2013):

Glyphosate’s inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes is an overlooked component of its toxicity to mammals. CYP enzymes play crucial roles in biology . . . . Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body. Consequences are most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet, which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.

More than 40 diseases have been linked to glyphosate use, and more keep appearing. In September 2013, the National University of Rio Cuarto, Argentina, published research finding that glyphosate enhances the growth of fungi that produce aflatoxin B1, one of the most carcinogenic of substances. A doctor from Chaco, Argentina, told Associated Press, “We’ve gone from a pretty healthy population to one with a high rate of cancer, birth defects and illnesses seldom seen before.” Fungi growths have increased significantly in US corn crops.

Glyphosate has also done serious damage to the environment. According to an October 2012 report by the Institute of Science in Society:

Agribusiness claims that glyphosate and glyphosate-tolerant crops will improve crop yields, increase farmers’ profits and benefit the environment by reducing pesticide use. Exactly the opposite is the case. . . . [T]he evidence indicates that glyphosate herbicides and glyphosate-tolerant crops have had wide-ranging detrimental effects, including glyphosate resistant super weeds, virulent plant (and new livestock) pathogens, reduced crop health and yield, harm to off-target species from insects to amphibians and livestock, as well as reduced soil fertility.

Politics Trumps Science

In light of these adverse findings, why have Washington and the European Commission continued to endorse glyphosate as safe? Critics point to lax regulations, heavy influence from corporate lobbyists, and a political agenda that has more to do with power and control than protecting the health of the people. ...

... The TPP and International Corporate Control

As the devastating conclusions of these and other researchers awaken people globally to the dangers of Roundup and GMO foods, transnational corporations are working feverishly with the Obama administration to fast-track the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement that would strip governments of the power to regulate transnational corporate activities. Negotiations have been kept secret from Congress but not from corporate advisors, 600 of whom have been consulted and know the details. According to Barbara Chicherio in Nation of Change:

The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has the potential to become the biggest regional Free Trade Agreement in history. . . .

The chief agricultural negotiator for the US is the former Monsanto lobbyist, Islam Siddique. If ratified the TPP would impose punishing regulations that give multinational corporations unprecedented right to demand taxpayer compensation for policies that corporations deem a barrier to their profits.

. . . They are carefully crafting the TPP to insure that citizens of the involved countries have no control over food safety, what they will be eating, where it is grown, the conditions under which food is grown and the use of herbicides and pesticides.

Food safety is only one of many rights and protections liable to fall to this super-weapon of international corporate control. In an April 2013 interview on The Real News Network, Kevin Zeese called the TPP “NAFTA on steroids” and “a global corporate coup.” He warned:

No matter what issue you care about—whether its wages, jobs, protecting the environment . . . this issue is going to adversely affect it . . . .

If a country takes a step to try to regulate the financial industry or set up a public bank to represent the public interest, it can be sued . . . .

Return to Nature: Not Too Late

There is a safer, saner, more earth-friendly way to feed nations. While Monsanto and US regulators are forcing GM crops on American families, Russian families are showing what can be done with permaculture methods on simple garden plots. In 2011, 40% of Russia’s food was grown on dachas (cottage gardens or allotments). Dacha gardens produced over 80% of the country’s fruit and berries, over 66% of the vegetables, almost 80% of the potatoes and nearly 50% of the nation’s milk, much of it consumed raw. According to Vladimir Megre, author of the best-selling Ringing Cedars Series:

Essentially, what Russian gardeners do is demonstrate that gardeners can feed the world – and you do not need any GMOs, industrial farms, or any other technological gimmicks to guarantee everybody’s got enough food to eat. Bear in mind that Russia only has 110 days of growing season per year – so in the US, for example, gardeners’ output could be substantially greater. Today, however, the area taken up by lawns in the US is two times greater than that of Russia’s gardens – and it produces nothing but a multi-billion-dollar lawn care industry.

In the US, only about 0.6 percent of the total agricultural area is devoted to organic farming. This area needs to be vastly expanded if we are to avoid “the sixth mass extinction.” But first, we need to urge our representatives to stop Fast Track, vote no on the TPP, and pursue a global phase-out of glyphosate-based herbicides and GMO foods. Our health, our finances and our environment are at stake.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, president of the Public Banking Institute, and author of twelve books, including the best-selling Web of Debt. In The Public Bank Solution, her latest book, she explores successful public banking models historically and globally. Her blog articles are at

The following makes it very clear that this is not a trade agreement, this is a betrayal of the people of the world to a ruthless and mindlessly destructive enemy consisting of all-devouring greed - none of our politicians have any right to do this.

While we still have law and democracy, those public officials who would so horribly betray and destroy their people and country must be tried and jailed.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics
By Global Research News
Global Research, October 22, 2013
The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 36, No. 3.
Region: Asia, Canada, Latin America & Caribbean, USA
Theme: Global Economy

PP批判 序論と要望書

by Sachie Mizohata and the Association of University Faculties

See the petition in English and Japanese.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement is a proposed trade pact that Japan is currently negotiating with Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam (as of September 2013). The TPP aims to increase the liberalization of economies in the Pacific region through abolition of tariffs on trade as well as reregulation.1 In 2008, the United States joined the talks “and has espoused a hard core complete free trade policy,” which has vastly expanded the scope of the negotiations.2 With both the US and Japan as participants, the pact would cover nearly 40% of the world’s economy.3 Japan officially joined one of final rounds of the negotiations in July 2013 in Malaysia, as the participating countries intend to finalize the TPP negotiations (at least partially) by the end of 2013.4

The TPP agreement affects not only trade issues, but also nontrade matters that immensely impact lives of citizens in all participating countries.5 The areas at stake include, for example:

domestic court decisions and international legal standards (e.g., overriding domestic laws on both trade and nontrade matters, foreign investors’ right to sue governments in international tribunals that would overrule the national sovereignty)
environmental regulations (e.g., nuclear energy, pollution, sustainability)
financial deregulation (e.g., more power and privileges to the bankers and financiers)
food safety (e.g., lowering food self-sufficiency, prohibition of mandatory labeling of genetically modified products, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease)
Government procurement (e.g., no more buy locally produced/grown)
Internet freedom (e.g., monitoring and policing user activity)
labor (e.g., welfare regulation, workplace safety, relocating domestic jobs abroad)
patent protection, copyrights (e.g., decrease access to affordable medicine)
public access to essential services may be restricted due to investment rules (e.g., water, electricity, and gas)

For a brief explanation, see the video made by workers across the Pacific Rim (on right).

Although the TPP negotiations have been held in the name of the people, the draft texts have been shrouded in secrecy not only from the public, but also members of the Diet, and civil society, thereby precluding public scrutiny and public input. Reportedly, the countries have signed up not to reveal the contents of the agreement for four years after the signing of the agreement. 6 All public information comes from leaked texts. Bizarrely, the TPP makes a special exception to “a group of some 600 trade ‘advisers,’ dominated by representatives of big businesses.”7

The TPP is a Trojan horse, branded as a “free trade” agreement, but having nothing to do with fair and equitable treatment. In reality, it is precisely “a wish list of the 1% ―a worldwide corporate power.”8 “Only 5 of its 29 chapters cover traditional trade matters, like tariffs or quotas.”9 “The other chapters enshrine new rights and privileges for major corporations while weakening the power of nation states to oppose them.”10 As the Japanese people have increasingly become concerned about its potential implications on their lives, some groups have voiced their objections to the TPP. ...

... This secret history brings us to the thesis of Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine, which examines the use of “moments of collective trauma to engage in radical social and economic engineering” that would be almost impossible during normal less chaotic times.24 While Japan still reels from the Fukushima shock, the government is bent on trying “to impose a rapid-fire transformation of the economy―tax cuts, free trade, privatized services, cuts to social spending and deregulation.”25 Above all, this US-Japan history confirms the persistence of the “Servile Line” discussed by Magosaki Ukeru or “Client State” by Gavan McCormack.26

Amongst many woeful issues of the TPP mentioned above, the Japanese might need to pay special attention to two issues (for more details, see the AUF petition). First, is Investor-State Dispute (ISD) resolution. Public Citizen, a non-profit U.S.-based consumer rights advocacy group, explains: “Under this regime, foreign investors can skirt domestic courts and laws, and sue governments directly before tribunals of three private sector lawyers operating under World Bank and UN rules to demand taxpayer compensation for any domestic law that investors believe will diminish their ‘expected future profits.’” 27 The ISD issue is especially serious. Tsuruoka Kouji of the Foreign Ministry, TPP chief negotiator, has said that Japan will accept the inclusion of ISD in its trade deals for possible disputes with “undeveloped” countries.28 However, the ISD allows corporations to attack “developed” countries such as Japan or the US. “Over $3 billion has been paid to foreign investors under U.S. trade and investment pacts, while over $14 billion in claims are pending under such deals, primarily targeting environmental, energy, and public health policies.”29 Also, this can be applied to “anything from government proceurement contracts and environmental protection to financial regulation.”30 See companies that could use such investor rights in the map.

Second, Japan’s nationalized health-care system is at stake. The annual US-Japan Business Council (USJBC) held in Tokyo on November 8-9, 2012, issued a public announcement: “USJBC companies can connect with Japanese industry and government to help shape transparent trade rules, standards and regulations in this dynamic region – particularly if Japan decides to pursue membership in TPP.”31 The USJBC’s chairman was Charles Lake II. Note that he is chairman of the American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus (Aflac) Japan, whose company revenues were $16.6 billion in 2008, about 70% of them from Japan.32 If the government embraces lucrative privatization accepting the ISD system, it would be detrimental to Japan’s long cherished national health-care system.

In conclusion, we have reviewed this extraordinary agreement, which would ruinously reverse and rewrite the history of humanity with its repeated struggles for democracy, freedoms, human rights, and welfare. As noted, “the secrecy of the Trans-Pacific Partnership process represents a huge assault on the principles and practice of democratic governance.”33 In translating the AUF’s “youbousho” as “petition,” I thought of another word: list of grievances. One such formal set of letters was “Cahiers de Doléances” written in 1789, the year the French Revolution started. Similarly, I thought of letters written by our ancestors on the eve of peasant uprisings in feudal Japan. The AUF petition evokes such indignation of citizens as it brings the TPP under public scrutiny.

I repeat, this is not legal.

Agreements made by traitorous public servants and greedy commerce to destroy democracy and the rule of law cannot be binding upon democracies and people so betrayed, any more than the terms of an agreement made among any other conspiracy of thieves or those of any fraud planned among corrupt paid administrators of smaller properties could be held binding upon their intended victims.

How do the greedy lunatics behind this think they'll make that 'ever more money' they're so obsessed with when most of the world is impoverished, dying or dead?

Because they'll also kill off what remains of our natural life support system and in that case, any glitch in any artificial life support system they think will sustain them will kill them off too.

GMOs aren't stable, either, so that's not long-term... you never know what they'll start producing even in the first generation for proteins/toxins...

Of course, there's a lot of fuss in some circles about 'immortal life', lol; put your brain in a robotic body, no sex, food, drink, touching, no smoking or boozing or cuddling, no pleasures, none of the human things - and no possibility of proper nourishment for your brain, since you have no human body processing and supplying all the unimaginable trillions of actions and various essentials - nutrients, enzymes, hormones, cellular signalling, etc., - that your body effortlessly and continually supplies, even with our toxic, nutrient-deprived industrialized world.

With your brain wired up in such a mechanical body, it's theorized, you can work 16 hours a day, with no physical needs beyond sleep - but even if you live to work, how can you sleep, isolated in such a prison, even without dysfunction steadily settling in?

And what if the batteries or whatever powers the system supplying oxygen and whatever limited else to your brain run down, or a glitch occurs - would you care or notice?

Even if your brain did not inexorably deteriorate, why would you want to 'live' like that?

Granted, the brain in the 16-hour-workday body was probably intended for human servants to the 0.01%, but how are they planning to immortalize themselves?

And won't they be sorry in their post-apocalyptic world, if they do succeed?

You come across examples of those imagining living a virtual existence as a paradise - no real life, some electronic copy.

And what happens when the power goes off and there's nothing?

Sooner or later, technology fails, nothing's foolproof, and nothing's forever.

Will anyone know how to do repairs, with cognitive deterioration likely in this artificial world?

SuperJesus isn't going to swoop in to save them, if that's what they're thinking, and they're lucky about that.

How would you feel if you'd created a whole wonderful world of life and diversity only to find that some small group of psychopaths had polluted and destroyed it all, killed virtually all of your living creations, just for more money, more power and a very sick amusement?

You might just be cruel enough with outrage and disgust to grant them that immortality and leave them in the Hell they'd made themselves...
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Science & Tech

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.