Friday, August 10, 2012

Blackwater Changed Its Name, Not Habits

As Blackwater avoids war crimes prosecution, by paying a $7.5 million deferred prosecution bribe and promising they’ve changed, the only thing that’s changed is their name.

The firm formerly known as Blackwater – now Academi LLC- is paying a $7.5 million bribe to get out of war crimes prosecution.

That’s on top of its already 42 million dollar settlement reached regarding civil arms export violations.

They recently admitted to wrongdoing in connection to 17 federal criminal charges and the funds that they will use to pay off those fines will come from already existing contracts from the Pentagon.

So what seems to be an act of accountability boils down to a continued revolving door between defense contractors and the government – all amid the talks on how terrible it is to cut the Pentagon budget.

Douglas McGregor, a retired US Army colonel, talks with RT on the matter revealing how the only thing that has changed about Blackwater is their name.

Source: RT

Twitter Withholds Information from Police After Troll Threatens Murder? Not Quite

When New York Magazine reported that Twitter had declined an NYPD request for identifying information about a Twitter account that had allegedly been posting death threats since May, Harrison Weber at The Next Web titled his response: “Twitter Withholds Information from Police After Troll Threatens Murder.” While this language may make for an attention-grabbing headline, the facts are decidedly more complicated.

In his article, Weber cites the recent Guy Adams case to illustrate why Twitter has to “tread extremely carefully on this one, as it has recently received criticism for over-policing its platform.”

In fact, while we were extremely critical of Twitter’s actions in the Adams case, the two don’t warrant comparison. Whereas Twitter believed it was acting on the letter of its terms of service in respect to Adams’ tweets, in this situation the company has taken a clear stand in respect to the law: Twitter will not, in most cases, hand over user information without valid legal process.

Here’s what happened: According to the original New York Post article, NYPD detectives sent an “emergency request” to Twitter to unmask the user. Twitter declined the request with the following response:

“While we do invoke emergency-disclosure procedures when it appears that a threat is present, specific and immediate, this does not appear to fall under those strict parameters as per our policies.”

Twitter has certain legal obligations under the Stored Communications Act, which regulates when and how a service provider can disclose information to others. Twitter is not required to turn over information to law enforcement agents in an emergency, but—under 18 USC § 2702—may do so if it, “in good faith, believes that an emergency involving danger of death or serious physical injury to any person requires disclosure without delay of communications relating to the emergency.”

Despite the fact that Twitter did not deem the tweets to be immediate threats, the NYPD dispatched officers to a location proposed in one of the Twitter user’s alleged threats.

The prospect of Twitter handing over user data to law enforcement on the basis of a simple, informal request—rather than formal legal process like a subpoena, court order, or a warrant, which are subject to varying degrees of oversight from courts—has tremendous implications for Twitter as a platform supporting international freedom of expression. According to Twitter’s first Transparency Report, Twitter received 170 government requests for user information from countries other than the United States between January and July of 2012.

Because Twitter’s policy is to require valid legal process before it will hand over user data, very few of these requests were granted in part or in whole. But if Twitter were to loosen this requirement—as many of yesterday’s commentators have suggested it ought to—it would make it far easier for governments to violate user privacy and demand information be censored.

In other words, if Twitter were to give up the identity of a user to the NYPD based only on a request (as opposed to a court order), what’s to stop them from giving up the identity of a user who breaks Turkish law by “insulting Turkishness” to Turkish authorities, or a user who criticizes the King of Thailand

Source: EFF

Is there fluoride in your grapes?

Most of the talk concerning fluoride exposure these days centers around the chemical's forced presence in many public water supplies, and how this is causing an epidemic of chronic health problems. But little do many people realize that fluoride exposure is also problematic throughout the food supply, including in fresh food crops that have been sprayed with pesticides and herbicides made from fluoride compounds.

Grape growers in particular have long used a chemical known as cryolite, which also goes by the trade name Kryocide, to deter leaf-eating and other types of pests. This fluoride-based chemical is used on all sorts of food crops, in fact, including on many different fruits and vegetables consumed by millions of people. And because insects have yet to build up a resistance to cryolite, despite its having been in use for at least 50 years, the chemical has become a staple pesticide for many growers.

Cryolite is very easily absorbed by the crops to which it is applied, which means that people who eat grapes, or who drink wine made from grapes that have been sprayed with cryolite, are inadvertently consuming untold amounts of toxic fluoride. It turns out that cryolite contains aluminofluoride ions that shed fluoride ions, which then pass through the blood-brain barrier and contaminate brain tissue.

Since fluoride chemicals are persistent and do not biodegrade, they often build up in soils where plants uptake them into their roots, stems, leaves, and even their fruit. This has clearly been observed in grapes, for instance, which often contain levels of fluoride far higher than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) maximum contaminant level (MCL) for fluoride of four parts per million (ppm).

Many domestic wines, in fact, have levels of fluoride so high that they cannot be exported to Europe and other places where MCL thresholds for fluoride are lower than they are in the U.S. Elf Atochem North America, Inc., the chemical company responsible for producing Kryocide, actually put out an advisory for domestic grape growers a while back warning them not to use as much cryolite on grape crops intended for export, as the crop would not meet proper safety standards. (http://www.fluoridealert.org/kryocide.htm)

And yet the company encouraged these same growers to continue using high amounts of cryolite on grapes intended for domestic consumption, as U.S. standards are far more lenient. As a result, many domestic wines contain inordinate amounts of fluoride, some as high as six ppm or more, which greatly exceeds the EPA's MCL for fluoride -- and this is on top of fluoride exposure from other food sources, as well as routine exposure through the water supply. (http://www.organicconsumers.org/Toxic/flouride.cfm)

National organic standards permit use of fluoride on organic crops

Sadly, conventional crops are not the only ones subjected to fluoride chemicals. Even though many of the more than 150 fluoridated pesticides on the market today are prohibited for use on crops grown according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) established organic standards, the agency still allows the use of fluoride chemicals on organic crops.

According to research compiled by Dr. Paul Connett, Ph.D., a professor of chemistry at St. Lawrence University in New York, the USDA, when crafting its final guidance on National Organic Standards (NOS), ignored public concern about allowing the use of fluoride on organic crops. Despite all the evidence showing fluoride's dangers, and the fact that it is a synthetic chemical that has no place in organic agriculture, the USDA sided with the EPA in declaring that sodium fluoride is inert, or inactive.

"To call sodium fluoride an 'inert' is Orwellian and defies one of the NOS's stated principles: producers shall not use 'natural poisons such as arsenic or lead salts that have long-term effects and persist in the environment,'" wrote Dr. Connett and his wife Ellen in a published paper on the use of fluoride chemicals in agriculture.

"Sadly, the use of fluoride in organic farming could undermine the public's confidence and safety in organic food -- both here and abroad. This will become more obvious as the movement against fluoridation of public water picks up momentum worldwide. As it does, more and more people will be asking questions about fluoride levels in their food. Unlike the List of Inerts, fluoride levels in organic food cannot be hidden."

Avoiding California wines, grapes may limit your fluoride exposure

Because cryolite is primarily used just in California, sourcing wine and grapes from other states, or from outside the country, may help to limit your exposure to toxic fluorides. The Seattle Times, in a 2007 "Q&A" piece about wine explains how grapes grown in both Washington and Oregon, for instance, are not sprayed with cryolite, which means they will naturally contain lower levels of fluoride. (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Similarly, wines made in other countries such as France, Germany, Italy, and Spain will also have lower levels of fluoride overall as the grapes used to make them are not treated with cryolite. And even though national organic standards technically allow the use of certain fluoride chemicals on organic crops, it does not appear that cryolite is one of them, as many fluoride-sensitive individuals have not had a problem drinking organic wines or eating organic grapes.

The worst grapes for fluoride, it turns out, appear to be conventional varieties grown in California. Non-organic wines from California tend to test the highest for fluoride content, and various anecdotal reports indicate that they are the most likely to elicit negative side effects among those with strong sensitivities to fluoride. (http://www.celluliteinvestigation.com/2011/11/fluoride-wine.html)

Your best bet is to stick with organic grapes and wines sourced from outside California, whenever possible, or to personally contact individual wineries and grape growers to inquire about whether or not they use cryolite, bone meal, and other high-fluoride treatments on their grapes. You can also inquire as to whether or not they regularly test for fluoride levels in their wines or grapes.

Source: Natural News