Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
A company named Senomyx is using genetic
technology to develop chemicals that directly interfere
with the tongue’s taste receptors, then adding them to
food without listing them as ingredients.
Biotechnology company Senomyx is exploiting
regulatory loopholes to add untested new
additives to your food, in collaboration with Kraft,
Campbell Soup, Pepsi and other food giants. The
company claims to have reverse engineered the
human genome and is now adding “artificial
flavors” to our food supply that directly block
or activate taste receptors on your tongue. This
allows companies to trumpet their products as
“low salt” or “low sugar” without changing the
flavor.
Why is Senomyx allowed to use genetic technology without warning consumers? The biotech
compounds operate in such small quantities that they can easily gain FDA approval under
antiquated food safety laws designed before the biotech age. Indeed,[B] these biotech additives
don’t even need to be listed as anything but “artificial flavor”![/B]Unsurprisingly, both Senomyx and its food industry partners are being secretive about which
foods contain these ingredients.
How can you defend yourself against being a guinea pig in a giant genetic experiment? Buy
only foods with no additives whatsoever.
Sources: 'Secretive' Chemicals Being Hidden in Food Under 'Artificial Flavors' Label Senomyx - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Senomyx: Technology: Our Technology
A company named Senomyx is using genetic
technology to develop chemicals that directly interfere
with the tongue’s taste receptors, then adding them to
food without listing them as ingredients.
Biotechnology company Senomyx is exploiting
regulatory loopholes to add untested new
additives to your food, in collaboration with Kraft,
Campbell Soup, Pepsi and other food giants. The
company claims to have reverse engineered the
human genome and is now adding “artificial
flavors” to our food supply that directly block
or activate taste receptors on your tongue. This
allows companies to trumpet their products as
“low salt” or “low sugar” without changing the
flavor.
Why is Senomyx allowed to use genetic technology without warning consumers? The biotech
compounds operate in such small quantities that they can easily gain FDA approval under
antiquated food safety laws designed before the biotech age. Indeed, these biotech additives
don’t even need to be listed as anything but “artificial flavor”! Unsurprisingly, both Senomyx and its food industry partners are being secretive about which
foods contain these ingredients.
How can you defend yourself against being a guinea pig in a giant genetic experiment? Buy
only foods with no additives whatsoever.
Sources: 'Secretive' Chemicals Being Hidden in Food Under 'Artificial Flavors' Label Senomyx - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Senomyx: Technology: Our Technology
Texturized soy protein may contain toxic
cottonseeds.
There are plenty of reasons to avoid
texturized soy protein, also known as
textured vegetable protein or TVP. It is
made from genetically modified soy that
has been processed with toxic chemicals
until it is simply a fibrous mass of protein
that bears no resemblance to real food.
Now you can add another reason to your
list: much TVP is made with cotton seeds,
which are unfit for human consumption.
Although sometimes referred to
specifically as “soy protein,” TVP is actually
made of proteins extracted from a variety
of seeds, with soy predominating. Cotton
seeds, which are cheap and abundant in the United States, are a popular TVP component.
Yet although the FDA allows cotton seeds to be used in food, cotton is not regulated as a
food crop. This means that pesticides banned for use on food crops are regularly used on
cotton, and other pesticides may be used in higher concentrations than normally allowed.
Most cotton is also genetically modified—and to top it off, cottonseeds naturally contain
such high levels of the toxin gossypol that the unprocessed seed oil can actually be used as
a pesticide in its own right.
Sources: The Awful Truth About Cottonseed Oil (Wizbang Blue) Textured vegetable protein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There are many processed foods that contain: textured protein.
Most Americans do not understand what “derivatives” are, so they kind of tune out when people start talking about them. But they are very important to understand. Essentially, derivatives are “side bets”. When you buy a derivative, you are not investing in anything. You are just gambling that something will or will not happen.
The latest executive order (EO) emanating from the White House October 9 now claims the power to freeze all bank accounts and stop any related financial transactions that a “sanctioned person” may own or try to perform — all in the name of “Iran Sanctions.”
Ok....A memo to President Obama: sir, this is so purposely loosely written that one could fly a kite through it, and I guess that is the entire point of the exercise.
But it brings me to another question, Mr. President, and that is, has logic become illegal in this country?!?
Because, as with the language in the NDAA, enabling any President to have anyone arrested and indefinitely detained for "providing aid and comfort to the enemy", this EO could be interpreted as being used to financially persecute, and destroy, any American who has a difference of opinion from that of the current Administration on its Iran policy, and have a deathly chilling effect on rational discussion on this issue.
And sir, respectfully, peacefully, and logically, I absolutely do not agree with the current administration in its Iran policy. And sir, here are the facts of the case:
1. Fact: Iran has not started a war in over 200 years.
2. Fact: To date, as an NPPT signatory, which means that Iran's nuclear weapons program must be consistently inspected by the IAEA, no nuclear materials have been found to have been diverted from its energy program to a nuclear weapons program.
3. Fact: Israel, which has nuclear weapons, refuses to become a signatory to the NNPT, and refuses to have its nuclear sites inspected. This means that every dollar of US military and financial aid to Israel has been illegal, under the Symington Amendment. And yet, the US government continues, illegally, to provide military and financial aid to Israel.
4. Fact: As of last July, China has been developing oil fields in Southern Iran for its own domestic consumption; therefore, any attack against Iran will be construed as an attack against China's national interest.
5. Fact: Iran's nuclear program is not a threat to anyone, including Israel. Israel just doesn't want the financial competition of a nuclear capable Iran, selling its nuclear products around the world.
6. Fact: it is not Iran's nuclear program that is the real agenda here: it is that Iran refuses to sell its oil using US petrodollars.
7. Fact: the US dollar is losing any real value, after "Helicopter Ben" Bernake's latest round of quantitative easing.
8. Fact: as it has done innumerable times before, the US government is looking at a war with which to shore up the petrodollar.
9. Fact: the US military is getting ready to invade Syria, although Syria is not the prize here. Because Syria and Iran have a mutual defense pact, if Syria is attacked, Iran must come to its aid militarily, giving the US government the causus belli for war.
There are many things about the Iranian government I do not like. Theocracies (just as with the one in Israel) always scare me. I do not like the way the Iranian government tends to marginalize the women of this country.
But that having been said, as having a Christian background, and would to think a logical person, I do not think, for one second, Iran is deserving of a devastating war simply to prop up the US dollar, which is now at its death-throes.
Nor do I think such an invasion, which could quickly escalate into war with Russia and China, is prudent.
Steven Strong with Lisa Harrison:
This is a follow up interview with Steven on the supporting evidence that has come out in regards to the Gosford Glyphs:
UK to Introduce National ID Scheme Using Mobile Phones and Social Media Profiles
"Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
Early in 2012, I wrote an article regarding India’s implementation of the Unique Identification (UID) Program for all of its 1.2 billion residents entitled, “Cashless Society: India Implements First Biometric ID Program Despite Growing Concern,” where I detailed the history, mechanisms and ultimate goals of the program. I followed this report by an article entitled, “Japan Proposes Next Phase of Centralized Surveillance,” dealing with the new Japanese UID with a similar analysis. But, while news of India and Japan’s massive National ID program was met with much surprise by many even in the alternative media, it may once again come as a surprise that yet another push for a National ID push is on the way - this time, in the UK.
Like the Indian and Japanese ice-breaker, the UK program is being developed in concert and collusion between the UK government and international corporations.
To be clear, the English version of the National ID is not the same as the Indian program. Biometrics have yet to enter into the equation.
In fact, at this point, the UK is only attempting to implement a “virtual ID” under the Identity Assurance Programme. Yet, the scheme is still raising some ire amidst privacy advocates and those still conscious enough to be aware that they are passengers on a train headed for a system of total surveillance and control if the engine is not soon shut off.
Others, of course, simply recognize the “public/private partnership” required to develop this type of system as a threat to their personal data and a potential source of unprecedented identity theft.
Nevertheless, the new back-door National ID scheme is being ushered in to the UK using similar justifications as that used by the Indian government when the UID program began – i.e. that the new program will improve and streamline the process of requesting, granting, receiving, and distributing government benefits and/or aid.
While India argued that the UID would cut down on fraud, the UK suggests that the program will free up an already-clogged system (due to a ravaged economy) and allow for a smoother and more streamlined process of distribution. "
Indians signing life away for biometric ID cards (22Dec11)
"... Again, the question must be asked: Are we really to believe that information sharing between such powerful corporations and governments will not occur due to the high ethical standards of either one? If the answer to this question is affirmative, surely, they jest.
Nevertheless, one must wonder how long it will be before the UK database becomes openly centralized like the Japanese Juki-net and Basic Resident Register program. One must also wonder how long the system will exist before reports of illegal information sharing begin to circulate within the media, subsequently culminating in the confirmation of such information sharing out in the open with no legal repercussions. How long will it be before the information sharing process is codified into law?
If you think it sounds like the above questions are more a list of predictions than possibilities, you would be right. That’s because, using recent history as a guide, whether it be the Japanese Basic Resident Register, India, Germany, Argentina, Belgium, Colombia, Spain, Peru, or Italy, the same roadmap is almost always followed with the same results almost always being achieved – the establishment of a massive, all-encompassing (biometric) database containing information gleaned from every aspect of life by corporations, government, and other sources.
Of course, government databases and control are not the only concerns arising out of the new UK program.
As 21st Century Fix reports, there is also the issue of the commercial sale of the personal information submitted by the individual accessing his government services by the corporations facilitating that transaction. The report states:
I would, however, add a third reason not to proceed: I simply, frankly, don’t want to access government services using a privately contracted device I use in the rest of my life. That is to say, for me the real issue is the privatization of a virtual ID card system. That companies such as, for example, Facebook – with all its manifest privacy issues – should seriously be considered a partner in such a scheme is indicative of why so many social media sites now want us to use real identities. For there’s real money in them thar hills for owners of real-identity databases.
The really long-term business plan becomes evermore clear, doesn’t it?
Information creep was bad enough when governments suggested real-time Internet snooping. Knowing the efficiency of the private sector in extracting personal data from us to generate private profit, the Lord only knows what might happen when corporations get officially involved – and what’s more, with the full force of the law behind them in their every act and deed.
But while the concerns centered around the privatization of a virtual database are very real, as are those regarding identity theft, hacking, and centralization, the reality of the situation is much more grave than many of the opponents of the UK virtual ID are letting on. The true nature of the virtual ID scheme is rooted in the ultimate goal of creating an all-encompassing, top-down, cashless society combined with a Total Information Awareness network which includes every aspect of individual life.
While a “decentralized” voluntary virtual ID with allegedly built-in protections may seem like a far cry from a forced omnipotent surveillance state or a national ID, the fact is that the new scheme is merely one more step in that direction.
Obviously, the program will not be voluntary for long. As I have discussed in previous articles, the introduction of a program such as a national ID card, biometric data, or cashless payment technologies is always followed by the program becoming mandatory. The ultimate goal of an all-encompassing cashless surveillance program with no opt-out provisions is always introduced by stealth and the Gradualist Technique.
At first, the program is introduced as a way to speed up transactions, increase efficiency, and provide convenience. Soon, however, governments and businesses begin to transition out of the older methods of payment and identification and focus more on the new technology. Identification using the traditional methods remain as an option, but become viewed as cumbersome. Eventually, the alternative methods are phased out completely and mandates replace what was once a personal choice.
In the end, the statements and reassurances issued by the UK government (or any other government for that matter) should hold very little water with the English people. In terms of the development of virtual and/or biometric databases, government agencies have a track record of 0% when it comes to both honesty and integrity or having the best interests of their people at heart.
What governments cannot accomplish out in the open, they will accomplish by the backdoor as any American who has had experience with programs such as IDENT, NGI, and S-COMM can attest to.
History and experience both have shown that government cannot be trusted to tell the truth regarding potentially dangerous technologies and surveillance policies – much less be trusted to operate these programs with responsibility. It is for this reason that the English people must view the new virtual ID scheme with more than just a healthy dose of skepticism...."
