Gov. Kate Brown signed a law to allow Oregon students to ...

 

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2021/08/gov-kate-brown-signed-a-law-to-allow-oregon-students-to-graduate-without-proving-they-can-write-or-do-math-she-doesnt-want-to-talk-about-it.html  

 

For the next five years, an Oregon high school diploma will be no guarantee that the student who earned it can read, write or do math at a high school level.

Gov. Kate Brown had demurred earlier this summer regarding whether she supported the plan passed by the Legislature to drop the requirement that students demonstrate they have achieved those essential skills. But on July 14, the governor signed Senate Bill 744 into law.

Through a spokesperson, the governor declined again Friday to comment on the law and why she supported suspending the proficiency requirements.

Brown’s decision was not public until recently, because her office did not hold a signing ceremony or issue a press release and the fact that the governor signed the bill was not entered into the legislative database until July 29, a departure from the normal practice of updating the public database the same day a bill is signed.

The Oregonian/OregonLive asked the governor’s office when Brown’s staff notified the Legislature that she had signed the bill. Charles Boyle, the governor’s deputy communications director, said the governor’s staff notified legislative staff the same day the governor signed the bill.

Boyle said in an emailed statement that suspending the reading, writing and math proficiency requirements while the state develops new graduation standards will benefit “Oregon’s Black, Latino, Latina, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Tribal, and students of color.”

 

----------------

 

The three Rs ('riting, reading and 'rythmetics) are history. Welcome to woke equity lowest denominator possible in the majority of the populace eating fast fake fodder and drinking artificial sugary fizzies...

 

Excellent: watch https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW √√√√√√√√√√√√√√√√√√√!

 

Whenever we hear the word “sustainable” we would be well-advised to take a critical look behind the nice sounding words. In the case of the globalist Agenda 2030 with its 17 sustainable goals by 2030, the one for creating a “sustainable agriculture”, when looked at closely, will destroy a huge part of EU agriculture production and drive already rising global prices for food far higher. The EU Commission calls their Green Deal for food the cute title, “Farm to Fork.” It is being backed by Klaus Schwab’s omnipresent World Economic Forum and their Great Reset.

Keep in mind that sustainable as defined by the UN and Davos World Economic Forum means achieving Zero Carbon emissions by 2050. Yet there is no scientific study independently proving that CO2 is endangering our planet by creating global warming***. Only myriads of dubious, well-funded computer models. The harmless gas is essential to all human, animal and all plant life. Now the European Union Commission is pushing a top-down radical agenda on the agriculture heart of the world’s second most important food producer as part of its ill-conceived EU Green Deal. If implemented as is likely, it will cause drastic reduction in crop outputs, a severe reduction in meat protein and, perhaps most dangerous, an overturning of current EU law regulating new gene-edited crops, or GMO.2. That will have global consequences.

Farm to Fork… 

In May 2020 the EU Commission released its Farm to Fork Strategy. The official Brussels rhetoric makes it sound like a food nirvana is coming. They state, “The Farm to Fork Strategy is at the heart of the European Green Deal, aiming to make food systems fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly.” Wow, that sounds super.

They then get to the real agenda: “We need to redesign our food systems which today account for nearly one-third of global GHG (Green House Gas) emissions, consume large amounts of natural resources, result in biodiversity loss and negative health impacts…” This is a clever way of demonizing farmers and our food production as CO2 violators. The solution? “New technologies and scientific discoveries, combined with increasing public awareness and demand for sustainable food, will benefit all stakeholders.” What new technologies will be explained.

How do the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels plan to “redesign our food systems” to eliminate one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050? By forcing farmers to go bankrupt by demanding new costly inputs to production and radical new genetic manipulated patented plants with unproven safety. Above all they plan to lift the current de facto ban on gene-edited plant cultivation. For those who do not know, it is the same unproven risky technology used in the COVID-19 vaccines of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA gene-edited vaccines using CRISPR.

EU Commissioner for Agriculture, Janusz Wojciechowski, says of the Farm to Fork Green Agenda, “Farmers will need to radically transform their production methods and make the best use of technological, digital, and space-based solutions to usher in the new agricultural transition.” So they plan a radical transformation. Already this sounds ominous.

To raise the share of pesticide-free organic farming to 25% of the EU total at the same time reducing chemical pesticide use by 30% by 2030 sounds great to the uninformed. Like the claims of Monsanto and the GMO industry that their GMO crops reduce need for pesticides, it is a lie. The EU is using this as bait to introduce a radical change in strict current EU rules for allowing approval of gene-edited plants and animals into agriculture. In their May 2020 document on Farm to Fork Green Deal, the EU states that the Commission is “carrying out a study which will look at the potential of new genomic techniques to improve sustainability along the food supply chain.” This means gene-editing, CRISPR/Cas9 genetic modification. 

‘New Genomic Techniques’

In April this year, the EU Commission released that study on New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). NGTs are producing gene-edited plants and even animals. The report claims that NGTs, “techniques to alter the genome of an organism, have the potential to contribute to a more sustainable food system as part of the objectives of the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy.” The report calls for a “public debate” to change the strict EU laws on approval of GMO crops that require extensive testing and labelling of GMO crops.

That law from 2001 has successfully restricted use of GMO across the EU in contrast with the USA where unregulated GMOs are dominant for key crops. In 2018 the European Court of Justice, the EU court, ruled that Gene-edited crops should be subject to the same stringent regulations as first-generation genetically modified (GMO) organisms. The key to the Davos and EU Farm to Fork Agenda is a radical reduction in pesticides to be replaced by gene-edited crops allegedly able to replace pesticides. 

The EU Commission, in cahoots with Bayer-Monsanto and others of the GMO agribusiness lobby, are working hard to remove that court restriction. Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, Stella Kyriakides, said of their April EU study, “The study we publish today concludes that New Genomic Techniques can promote the sustainability of agricultural production, in line with the objectives of our Farm to Fork Strategy.” New Genomic Techniques is the euphemism for gene-edited crops.

EU Vice President responsible for the Green Deal, Franz Timmermans, has openly admitted the lure of promising huge cuts in pesticides, implying it will come from abolishing restrictions on gene-editing. He told a recent EU Green Week conference that the EU aims to give farmers the tools to adopt precision agriculture and to leverage scientific discoveries to optimize seeds: “That’s how we limit our dependency on pesticides.” Precision agriculture and scientific discoveries to optimize seeds is Brussels doublespeak for massive introduction of unregulated gene-editing. He continued, “Going to ecological farming doesn’t mean we all have to munch on grass and live in caves, we need to use the latest technology to get us there.” That means gene-editing CRISPR.

Translated into plain English, the heart of Farm to Fork is the planned overturning of the 2018 ECJ court ruling that treats CRISPR gene-edited plants or animals under the same strict “precautionary principle” rules for GMO. With no restrictions, gene-editing companies like Bayer-Monsanto will be free to introduce experimental and unproven genetically altered plants and animals into our diet with no labelling. 

Such a gene-edit-free regime already exists in the USA where the USDA and regulators allow CRISPR gene-edited soy oil, mushrooms that don’t brown, wheat with more fiber, better-producing tomatoes, herbicide-tolerant canola and rice that doesn’t absorb soil pollution as it grows. Gene-edited US projects on fish and animals include such dubious ones as cows that only have male calves, using CRISPR; Pigs that don’t need castration; hornless dairy cows and growth-enhanced catfish using CRISPR to develop catfish with more muscle cells. It makes the mouth water…

CRISPR Risks Huge, Rewards Not

The major lobbying push to remove EU regulations on gene-edited crops or animals is coming from Bayer-Monsanto and the other GMO agribusiness giants including Syngenta, BASF, and DowDupont’s Corteva. In November 2020 Liam Condon, the President of Bayer-Monsanto crop science division told a Bayer Future of Farming conference, that Bayer is lobbying “very strongly” to change the EU’s GMO regulations to exempt gene editing. Condon said, “[We are] promoting very strongly that regulations should catch up with technology and allow this technology to be used, [not only] for the benefit of Europeans, but also for the benefit of others all over the world who look to Europe for regulations.” Condon called gene editing and CRISPR technology an “amazing breakthrough” that would allow agriculture to be more sustainable. What he omitted was that deregulating gene-edited crops will allow Bayer-Monsanto and other major GMO companies to charge farmers for their patented “sustainable” seeds. 

Gene-editing of plants or animals is not at all risk-free as claimed. The technology is not at all precise or controlled and often has unpredicted outcomes such as unintended genetic alteration, even the inadvertent addition of foreign DNA from other species, or even entire foreign genes, into the genome of gene-edited organisms.

This is still a new experimental technology. Its advocates such as Bayer-Monsanto claim that gene editing of plants is precise. Yet investigation finds that far from proven. Dr. Allison K Wilson of The Bioscience Resource Project, states, “plant gene editing methods are also prone to introducing UTs (Unintended Traits or genetic damage)…new evidence from both animals and plants indicates that gene editing itself can result in unintended mutations at or near the target site. These include the insertion of vector, bacterial, and other superfluous DNA, and the unintended introduction of large DNA deletions and rearrangements.”

These are not minor flaws that can be ignored. Wilson concludes, “plant gene editing outcomes are imprecise and unpredictable, and that, depending on the combination of techniques used, gene editing can be highly mutagenic. While in theory it might someday be possible to create a GM crop that meets the broad requirements of sustainable agriculture, in practice this seems highly unlikely to ever happen.”

According to an analysis of the EU Farm to Fork strategy by Global Ag Media, “the effect of these strategies will be an unprecedented reduction of EU production capacity and of its farmers’ income. All sectors show declines in production of 5% to 15%, with the livestock sectors being the most heavily impacted… Meanwhile, whatever the scenario, production prices show a net increase of around 10% with a negative impact for most farmers’ incomes. ” The EU farmers’ union, Copa-Cogeca warns the policy will result in an unprecedented reduction in agriculture capacity. But that’s the real intent of “sustainable agriculture.”

Davos and EU Farm to Fork

The radical EU Farm to Form Green agenda finds its echo in the Davos World Economic Forum which already in 2014 promoted what it called, “Enabling Trade: From Farm to Fork.” A January 2018 WEF report states, “Gene-editing technologies such as CRISPR-Cas could provide a way to achieve multi-trait improvements, producing a step change in productivity while improving the drought resistance and nutritional content of food. “ This was done together with McKinsey & Co as part of the WEF Food Security and Agriculture Initiatives and their Great Reset. WEF Forum Partners include Bayer, Syngenta, BASF. According to the WEF website, “The World Economic Forum at its Annual Meeting in Davos in January 2020 brought together leaders from industry and business with Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans to explore how to catalyze the European Green Deal.” Bayer’s Liam Condon was also there as was the head of Syngenta and BASF.

If the EU agriculture sector is brought into the gene-edited GMO regime and its production radically reduced as a consequence, it will drive ever greater food shortages around the world. This is the Davos plan along with their COVID-19 eugenics Great Reset agenda. Calling it Farm to Fork makes it sound harmless. It clearly is not.

 

 

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

 

 

Read more: https://journal-neo.org/2021/09/29/farm-to-fork-how-the-eu-and-the-davos-cabal-plan-to-control-agriculture/

 

 "Yet there is no scientific study independently proving that CO2 is endangering our planet by creating global warming***" F. William Engdahl is incorrect. Whether the studies are linked or not by the IPCC, the reality is dire on this subject. CO2, METHANE and NOXs gases — PRODUCED BY HUMAN ACTIVITIES — are driving global warming. In this regard, the possibility of danger is evaluated with computer models and ordinary slide rules, including the rule of thumb, that things could deteriorate quickly. F. William Engdahl should talk to actuaries working the risk factors for insurance companies. See also: https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/41398

 

Now, this does not mean that the solutions proposed by the Davos Cabal are correct. 

 

Read from top.

 

assangez

 

by Henry Kamens

 

I’ve recently come across a report stating that 3,000 cows died suddenly last weekend in SW Kansas. No one knows why. I said to myself, WTF? A quick turn of the shovel revealed that already many are questioning the conventional media and its headlines, such as Shocking Footage Shows Thousands of Dead Cattle in Kansas During a Heatwave.

According to US weather experts, heat waves there have steadily increased in frequency, duration and intensity in the four decades since the 1960s. OK, close case; leave it to the weather.

The trouble is, farming is not like international politics. If you want to know what’s really going on in politics the last people to listen to are the politicians, because they live or die by people’s votes, and say what they want you to hear. Farmers live or die by practicalities, they have no choice to to acknowledge realities – even if they try and spin a yarn to get support, it won’t get them anywhere because they have to back it up to actually obtain anything they need.

The farmer I talked in Kansas said it wasn’t the heat. If it were, there are signs you would see, and they aren’t there. Something else has killed all those cows, all at once, faster than any contagion could have spread to them.

Bullocks

Unfortunately, if you aren’t a farmer on the ground, whatever you read about this event is controlled by fact checkers. Reuters Fact Check, one of the more consulted sites, states the following – “Fact Check-Death of Kansas cattle in June 2022 caused by extreme temperatures, officials and industry say”.

Of course they say it. But is it a fact? We can all believe the versions we wish to believe, but most of us don’t bankroll fact checking sites, so can’t get away with saying our convenient version is the unvarnished truth.

We can be sure that “Billionaire tech mogul, Bill Gates, who is a reasonable scapegoat for consideration in killing about 3,000 cows in southwest Kansas under very mysterious and unknown circumstances” is innocent, and these cattle have not been vaccinated by BIG Pharma for COVID. Why? Because he runs many of these sites through proxies, in the same way that John Poulson, the notoriously corrupt British architect, described his buying off of everyone who could be useful as “advanced public relations techniques”.

Perhaps an overdose of Ivermectin, an injectable parasiticide for cattle, was responsible – on this occasion, not the thousands of others it has been used. That is of course unless it is produced by whoever the Gates clan is protecting this week.

Having just read Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation, which describes how the fast food industry has reduced the overall food quality worldwide, created poor working conditions for millions of people and ruined public health, I’m inclined to disagree. Compare the reach of fast food to cattle injections, and the accepted narrative becomes not a little dubious.

Schlosser is much in the tradition of Upton Sinclair, of The Jungle fame. This was an indictment of the terrible conditions in the slaughterhouses of Chicago – including the quality of the meat, and how sick and dying animals, some already dead, were turned into quality meat products.

The Jungle is best known as the novel which led to the Meat Inspection Act and partially to the creation of the FDA after much public outcry against the unsanitary conditions of food processing and packaging. But as in all such cases, when the powers that be make a new rule which is supposed to resolve a problem, that must mean the problem is solved, and they will not engage in any argument that it still exists, and that they know it does.

Conspiracy Theorists

There are many possible explanations for the Kansas cow fatalities. They range from the plausible to the outrageous. But they are only considered plausible or outrageous based on the official interpretation of previous precedent, and if everything followed precedent, nothing would ever happen.

Everyone can have a field day with the dying off of cows. Maybe aliens did it, or animal protein.

After all, the Americans should know about this subject, having found a way to slaughter all the buffalo the Native Americans had hunted for centuries without being able to destroy the whole population. They should also know that the buffalo would still be there if they had been the staple food of the white man, not the natives whose land they stole.

If aliens really did this, it could add some credence to the concept that Bill Gates himself is not of this world. It also makes it sooner rather than later that we will be eating Soylent Green, either made of human protein or insects, as this is another Gates programme.

It may turn your stomach, but to reflect on an earlier Bill Gates quote:

“I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand”.

Perhaps it would be best to call in the Chinese. They understand what it is to experience massive die offs of pigs, and they too know the source of African Swine Flu, which is not Africa. Jokes aside, there is a region in Tbilisi Georgia called Africa, and it is near the airport, like the Lugar Lab.

The current effort, or lack thereof, to discuss it – all the possibilities, is especially concerning, as recently discussed on YouTube. There appears to be some smoking gun, but nobody is really willing to look at the sudden die off in a concentrated area.

Too many things are acting concurrently, and although jumping to conclusions raises too many flags at first glance, they may simply be the sort they throw in American football, which disappear when the facts are established. There are just too many “mysterious” fires simultaneously destroying huge food processing and distribution facilities, and now pperhaps as many as 10,000 cattle in reality all suddenly die at once.

It is an understatement that, “what’s happening in the US now is like something out of a nightmare.” and not only in terms of the food supply. All the things we were warned about, all the monsters roaming around unchecked and even protected by those who are supposed to be protecting us, are being thrown in our faces daily.

Who is Behind the Curtain?

It leads one to think that what is happening, such as in Kansas, is more akin to a bio or targeted weapon being tested, not for warfare against the nation’s food supply per se but to create a weapon of mass destruction.

We might remember that the 1917 influenza pandemic should have been called the Kansas Flu and not the Spanish flu. It got that name only because Spanish newspapers were not being censored at the time and could write about it openly.

Reuters Fact Check says that it was 100 degrees F during day and not much cooling at night, plus no wind and high humidity. All these combined to cause heat stress. We know this because these factors always do, it is an observable phenomenon. But they don’t kill 3,000 cows in the process.

Farmers themselves, having lost their cattle and therefore income, are copping it from some embarrassed quarters as that is the only way out for the guilty. One of then has said in response:

“Absolutely I know what you mean, and are insinuating. We sold some cattle the week before, and definitely the market was down. If they’re ready to go to market and they’re not going to bring the price they expect there may perhaps be some foul play – but then there should be a common denominator, either they were all insured or they were all owned by the same management – something more than just the weather”.

Apparently the management of the confined feeding area had not installed hot weather mitigation such as fans and misters. If so, this was not clever, but like the creation of the Dust Bowl prior to the Great Depression, it reflects the sort of thinking coming out of urban areas rather than the straightforward farmers of Kansas.

Even if insured, the insurance company should have expected this in these circumstances, or had never experienced other than isolated heat,related deaths, and would therefore be braced for big payouts unless negligence could be proven. Even if many deaths could occur in a confined space over time, the cattle don’t just die suddenly. They are sold off for canners and cutters ahead of time, and made into dog food or prime meat for the fast food industry.

Heifer Off

Having raised cattle, and having also read what the mainstream media is writing, I can say this much – the story of why so many cows died off so suddenly is not adding up. Let’s assume for instance that the farmers and feedlot operators are not to be blamed, there was no insurance fraud, for the sake of discussion.

There are things which could have been done to protect the cows in unrelenting heat. They should be given additional water sources, and sprinklers should be deployed to cool the pen down at night. Keeping their grazing area free of hay bales, weeds, and large mounds makes for freer air movement. Changing the timing of feeding, and giving cows more easily digestible foods, also lowers the amount of energy they use to eat — and therefore makes them more able to survive the elements.

Were all these steps taken? No one wants to say, or ask. The official line on this is as believable as the idea promoted by some academics that drinking milk may cause hard drug use, because all drug users have drunk milk, and no one wants to examine, or acknowledge the existence of, any other possible causal factor.

It is alarming that the same story is repeated in the same fashion, and little attention is being given to possible motivations, which in itself is incriminating. At the end of the day, if somebody has money to spend the best industries to invest in are food and pharmaceuticals. Even better, the nexus between the two.

It will be interesting to see if this is an isolated case or will be repeated in the unrelenting heat, or even without it. Some historic die offs have been noted, but these are unexplained, which raises even more questions about why there is such a simple explanation for this anomalous event.

Reading insurance policies, options, you can find optional hypothermia coverage as a possible element of Livestock Feeding and Growing Facility Coverage. This covers loss through hypothermia caused by exposure to freezing rain, sleet, blizzard, or snowstorm which results in the death of covered livestock. Even this is not available in all states/provinces, and can only apply to feedlot or dairy cattle, not pasture cattle.

When such detail is included in insurance policies, it is implausible that something as simple as heatstroke death is not covered equally. It isn’t, in itself. Hypothermia yes, heat no. So we can’t be talking about something which can happen when the sun comes out, as it does every day.

Getting out my tin foil hat, I start imagining an energy ray, a directed energy weapon or the impact of 5G. According to PBS, a mostly trusted source, the cattle deaths have sparked “unsubstantiated reports” on social media and elsewhere that something besides the weather is at play, but Kansas agriculture officials said there’s no indication of any other cause.

What indication or they looking for? The conspiracy theories are starting to sound more reliable – DARPA is testing out a new weapon, etc. There are likely more obvious explanations: cattle deaths could be linked to potential toxic feed. However, few are talking about other reasons for the sudden die off, because no one wants other credible explanations to exist, only one being allowed.

They can put anything in pelleted feed. Feedlots are part of the general problem with how factory farming is conducted in the United States, and it needs to be reconsidered as an agribusiness model, alongside the general principles of animal husbandry. But no one wants to talk about such benign things, when an explanation linked to them would shut down wild conspiracy theories. Nothing has only one dimension, but that is what we who consume such stories are also being expected to have.

 

Henry Kamens, columnist, expert on Central Asia and Caucasus, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

 

 

READ MORE:

https://journal-neo.org/2022/07/05/cattle-die-in-mass-but-not-mad-cow-holy-cow/

 

 

SEE ALSO:

 

https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/42312 

the price of food…

 

RREAD FROM TOP

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>