/justnews/ - Just News

No to GMO! Scotland to Outlaw Growing of GM Crops!

Scotland says it will ban genetically modified crops on its soil. According to officials, the move will protect the environment. They are also taking advantage of new EU laws, allowing member states to decide whether they want to grow the crops or not.

Although the EU imports large quantities of GM crops from abroad, it is less sure about growing them on their own soil. Some environmental groups are worried about the impact they could have on the countryside, while there are also concerns over health issues for humans, despite producers of the crops insisting they are safe.

Only Monsanto’s maize MON810, which is cultivated in Spain and Portugal, is currently on sale for human consumption within the EU.

"Scotland is known around the world for our beautiful natural environment - and banning growing genetically modified crops will protect and further enhance our clean, green status," Richard Lochhead, the Scottish government's minister for the environment, food and rural affairs, said in a statement.

The politician also added there was no public demand for introducing GM crops.

"There is no evidence of significant demand for GM products by Scottish consumers and I am concerned that allowing GM crops to be grown in Scotland would damage our clean and green brand, thereby gambling with the future of our £14 billion ($22 billion) food and drink sector," Lochhead added.

‘GM not the answer to food security’

The decision was taken by Scotland’s devolved parliament, with the UK’s legislative body in London having no say in the matter.

The move was welcomed by the Scottish Green MSP Alison Johnstone. In a statement on the party’s website, she said, “Opting out of growing genetically modified crops is the right move for Scotland. Cultivation of GM crops would harm our environment and our reputation for high quality food and drink."

Mumps Outbreak Strikes College Students Who Already Received TWO MMR Vaccines

Dozens of students attending the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) have come down with the mumps virus in what authorities believe could snowball into an all-out epidemic. But once again, the vast majority of afflicted students were already twice vaccinated for mumps (MMR) prior to catching the disease, upending government claims about this dangerous and useless vaccine.

Reports indicate that some 69 cases of mumps have thus far been reported on the UIUC campus, and most of these, according to Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) Director Nirav Shah, occurred among students who had previously received two rounds of the combination vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella.

As you may recall, the efficacy of the mumps component of the MMR vaccine was called into question by two former Merck scientists who filed a False Claims Act complaint in 2010. They allege that the vaccine giant fabricated study data to promote this controversial vaccine as effective, when in reality it doesn't actually work as claimed.

The escalating mumps outbreak at UIUC further substantiates what these two fleshed out in their court filing – that despite getting vaccinated for mumps with MMR, individuals are still getting sick. And yet IDPH's Shah believes the solution is to push more MMR vaccines on students to supposedly curb the disease's spread.

He told the media that, even though the first two rounds of MMR apparently didn't work amongst the affected students at UIUC, they should still opt for a third round of the vaccine because it "could help control the outbreak," reports Fox News.

https://archive.is/tuFeh

Vet Resisted VA Gun Grab Tyranny With Help Of Local Sheriff

Idaho residents gathered outside Veteran John Arnold’s home in Priest River on Thursday to protest the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs decision to threaten seizure of Arnold’s firearms after labeling him “financially incompetent.”

Arnold claims that an error on paper work he filed with the VA shortly after having a stroke one year ago is the reason he received the label.

“If somebody else makes an error and they cause you grief they should fix it,” Arnold told KREM 2. “That’s all I want is that stuff to get fixed.”

Roughly 100 people gathered outside Arnold’s house on Thursday to show support for the veteran’s right to bear arms.

A VA inspector was set to visit Arnold Thursday but likely flaked due to the protest.

Among the protesters was State Representative Heather Scott and Bonner County Sheriff Daryl Wheeler.

“I took an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and uphold the laws of Idaho,” Sheriff Wheeler said. “This seemed appropriate to show my support. I was going to make sure Mr. Arnold’s rights weren’t going to be breached.”

Oathkeepers has reported that the VA was forced to stand down!

The VA goofed and had to back down. The Bonner County, Idaho, Sheriff sent the Feds packing. How did the VA goof? The VA wanted another Veteran’s guns. The People said “NO!” and the Sheriff backed them. Awesome.

I’m lovin’ it! All over the place people are beginning to stand up for their rights, and for all of our rights. I would like to invite all Oath Keepers to enjoy this brief video in which two State legislators and a solid good All American Sheriff stood up for a Viet Nam Veteran when the VA notified him that they were coming to inspect his house to remove any firearms he might have there. Here are three heroes:

IdaPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Minnesota Expands Food Freedom in New Cottage Food Bill

Minnesota experienced a win for liberty recently when the state reformed regulations on in-home food businesses. According to the Institute for Justice, almost every state has regulations, called cottage food laws, that limit the sale of food out of the home. However, until last month Minnesota was one of the strictest states, allowing many bakers to sell their products only at farmers’ markets and events, and capping the amount they could earn annually to $5,000.

Under the new law, bakers can sell directly from their homes and even online to buyers in state. The annual sales cap was also raised to $18,000, a huge relief for many bakers who are reliant on the money they make from their home businesses and have been unable to expand because of the burdensome regulations.

The new law is not perfect. Though it “modif[ies] license exclusions for the direct sale of certain prepared food,” the bill still mandates that individuals register with the commissioner and pay a $50 fee every year unless they make less than $5,000 annually. Individuals must also take a course in handling food (up to eight hours long) every three years.

This is indicative of a mentality that the government ultimately owns its citizens and their property. Well intentioned people who are trying to make a living must pay the government off for permission to do so. However, this was a big step in the right direction for Minnesota, and those who worked on this bill should be congratulated.

Reform of small business regulation and licensure is picking up traction around the country. States including Texas and California have loosened their cottage food laws and seen booms in upstart home businesses. Wyoming enacted the Food Freedom Act this year allowing citizens to sell homemade and homegrown products (with the exception of meat products besides poultry) without a license or a state inspection. Just last week, the White House came out for occupational licensure reform, in an unexpected report by the Department of the Treasury Office of Economic Policy, the Council of Economic Advisers, and the Department of Labor.Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

EPA Causes Toxic Spill into Colorado River

Some of the major rivers and lakes of the Southwest, including the Colorado River, the San Juan River and Lake Powell, may turn polluted and dangerous after the Environmental Protection Agency badly managed a cleanup crew on Wednesday that was trying to drain water containing metals such as arsenic, lead, cadmium, aluminum, and copper from the Gold King Mine.

The operation was designed to force the water to flow into holding ponds, but the water surged, flowing into Cement Creek, then flowing into the Animas River. According to CNN, roughly one million gallons of wastewater spilled out on Wednesday. CNN reported the heavy metals released included iron, zinc, and copper.

The pellucid Animas, which supplies drinking water to the town of Durango, turned yellow as a result of the sludge, and was closed by EPA officials, who told local residents to start conserving water. Shocking pictures of the river showed how yellow it had become.

By Saturday, the sludge was traveling at 5 mph as it hit Farmington and Aztec, N.M., and threatened the San Juan and Colorado rivers and Lake Powell.

A cloud of orange-brown, toxic mine water and sludge accidentally released by the US Environmental Protection Agency is flowing down the Animas River through the hearts of towns in Colorado and New Mexico, and ultimately toward a lake in a national park.

The water, described as an “unnatural” orange color and loaded with heavy metals, was flowing through a stretch of wilderness as of Friday afternoon from Durango, Colorado toward Farmington, New Mexico. It is flowing toward the western edge of the Navajo Nation and along the Glen Canyon national recreation area in Utah.

The same area of wilderness in Utah contains well-known red rock cliffs and terraces in Utah, such as Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.

“It’s awful, it’s awful,” said San Juan County undersheriff Stephen Lowrance. “It’s [a] horrible, horrible accident.”

Pennsylvania to Become First State to Use “Precrime” Statistics in Criminal Sentencing

Criminal sentencing has long been based on the present crime and, sometimes, the defendant’s past criminal record. In Pennsylvania, judges could soon consider a new dimension: the future.

Pennsylvania is on the verge of becoming one of the first states in the country to base criminal sentences not only on what crimes people have been convicted of, but also on whether they are deemed likely to commit additional crimes. As early as next year, judges there could receive statistically derived tools known as risk assessments to help them decide how much prison time — if any — to assign.

As technology generally continues to advance, one thing you can be sure of is the criminal justice system’s use of innovative new “tools” will grow exponentially. This can be a good thing, but it can also be a very dangerous thing. Pennsylvania’s new law that permits the use of data showing whether people are “deemed likely to commit additional crimes” in criminal sentencing, is a perfect example of how an over reliance on technology can be a threat to liberty and due process.

Rather than explaining my position on the matter right here, I think it best to make my points within excerpts from the article itself.

Read the rest here: https://archive.is/Sc5A2

Oregon State Police Collecting Data On Gun Sellers

Just a few days before the universal gun owner registration bill kicks in, it appears that the Oregon State Police are planning on collecting data on sellers of guns, not just buyers.

We’ve been telling you all along that SB 941 was never intended to be anything but a vast database of gun owners and now it’s being proven to be all too true.

Starting today, gun dealers are seeing a new interface on their computer screens when they log in to conduct a background check on a gun sale. Now there is a box they can check for “Private Party Through Dealer.” While not fully functional, it is clear that the Oregon State Police plan to demand, and database, personal information on the seller, or transferor, of the firearm.

As of today, if a dealer checks the “Private Party Through Dealer” box they cannot actually enter the personal info of the seller, but they do get an error message saying “Alert!!!Please adjust for the following errors and try again” It then lists all the info “not supplied.” This includes the seller’s name, address, city, state and zip and their phone number.

https://archive.is/oHQdg

Psychologist’s Work for GCHQ Deception Unit Inflames Debate Among Peers

A British psychologist is receiving sharp criticism from some professional peers for providing expert advice to help the U.K. surveillance agency GCHQ manipulate people online.

The debate brings into focus the question of how or whether psychologists should offer their expertise to spy agencies engaged in deception and propaganda.

Dr. Mandeep K. Dhami, in a 2011 paper, provided the controversial GCHQ spy unit JTRIG with advice, research pointers, training recommendations, and thoughts on psychological issues, with the goal of improving the unit’s performance and effectiveness. JTRIG’s operations have been referred to as “dirty tricks,” and Dhami’s paper notes that the unit’s own staff characterize their work using “terms such as ‘discredit,’ promote ‘distrust,’ ‘dissuade,’ ‘deceive,’ ‘disrupt,’ ‘delay,’ ‘deny,’ ‘denigrate/degrade,’ and ‘deter.’” The unit’s targets go beyond terrorists and foreign militaries and include groups considered “domestic extremist[s],” criminals, online “hacktivists,” and even “entire countries.”

After publishing Dhami’s paper for the first time in June, The Intercept reached out to several of her fellow psychologists, including some whose work was referenced in the paper, about the document’s ethical implications.

One of the psychologists cited in the report criticized the paper and GCHQ’s ethics. Another psychologist condemned Dhami’s recommendations as “grossly unethical” and another called them an “egregious violation” of psychological ethics. But two other psychologists cited in the report did not express concern when contacted for reaction, and another psychologist, along with Dhami’s current employer, defended her work and her ethical standards.

A British law firm hired to represent Dhami maintained that any allegations of unethical conduct are “grossly defamatory and totally untrue.”

https://archive.is/NTXKD

This may sound like a harmless bit of "doing something" in response to a few tragic incidents, but there's nothing really harmless about it.

First off, it subjects everyone to the same level of scrutiny – provided they're carrying a bag of some sort. If you have a purse or backpack or (god forbid) a fanny pack, you're a potential threat. Everyone else? Free to go. Weapons tucked into waistbands or shoved into pockets will go undetected.

And, like the TSA its emulating, the security measures will be easily thwarted and ultimately useless. For every weapon the TSA brags about seizing, many more end up on planes. A recent audit of the TSA's security efforts found it missed 95% of smuggled weapons and explosives. Anyone thinking Regal's security force is going to be better trained and more thorough than the TSA is kidding themselves.

Like the TSA's efforts, this will give moviegoers the illusion of safety, rather than actual safety. An illusion might be comforting enough for most moviegoers and it's all Regal can actually offer. This move is more about PR than reality.

According to a new survey conducted by consumer research film C4, following the Nashville incident, 48% of moviegoers are willing to pay $1 or more per ticket for the additional measures. Nineteen per cent of respondents said they would pay $3 or more.

And I'm sure Regal will be more than happy to take $1-3 more from every moviegoer in exchange for a hassling a few moviegoers. But Regal's move – while good-intentioned – is ill-advised. Offering your customers mostly-theoretical protection places responsibility for any future shootings almost solely on each individual theater. Now, if anyone shoots up a theater, Regal will very likely be successfully targeted in wrongful death suits. After all, it instituted additional measures to prevent further shootings… and then failed to prevent a shooting from happening. The additional measures seem unlikely to dissuade anyone but the most easily-deterred shooters from following through with their plans. In exchange for little more than a temporary bump in goodwill, Regal is assuming a great deal of liability.

The MPAA has asked the U.S. Government for help in its efforts to reach private anti-piracy agreements with search engines, domain name registrars and hosting services. The Hollywood group believes that these three industries have shown "lagging progress" and should do more to deter online copyright infringement.

Following the failed SOPA and PIPA bills, entertainment industry groups have switched their efforts away from legislation and towards voluntary cooperation with various stakeholders.

This has resulted in several agreements in which Internet providers, advertising agencies, payment processors and other companies are more actively involved in deterring piracy.

These deals have been encouraged and facilitated by the Obama administration, often outside public view. The Copyright Alert System, for example, was negotiated with help from Vice President Joe Biden.

Despite various lobbying efforts the movie studios haven’t been able to strike a satisfactory deal with the domain name industry, search engines and hosting companies.

“…at least three areas have shown lagging progress: the use of domain names for unlawful conduct; the prevalence of piracy websites on the first pages of search results; and the use of data storage services to host websites trafficking in stolen content.”

To motivate various stakeholders to take action, the MPAA wants the U.S. Government to intervene. The Obama administration is currently working on a new Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement and the MPAA says that voluntary agreements should play a key role.

Read the rest here:

https://archive.is/LnqRg