Where I live Tempeh hard to find, actually I have yet to find it.
So since my book Veganomicon has many recipes asking for Tempeh I will have to make it myself. I found this web site that seems to explain it pretty well.
That will be interesting
http://www.toomanychefs.net/archives/001785.php
http://www.tempehonline.com/
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Say No to Monsanto Genetically Engeneered Alfalfa
Call your Senators and Representative today and say
“USDA must not approve GE alfalfa!”
Monsanto wants to sell its genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa and wants the USDA to approve its permit application, but consumers, farmers, dairies, and food companies don’t want GE alfalfa plants and seeds released into the environment.
USDA’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) admits that if GE alfalfa is approved:
* GE Contamination of non-GE and organic alfalfa crops will occur
* GE contamination will economically impact small and family farmers
* Foreign export markets will be at risk due to rejection of GE contaminated products
* Farmers will be forced to use more toxic herbicides to remove old stands of alfalfa
Yet, unbelievably, USDA has decided that these impacts are insignificant! And, USDA intends to approve Monsanto’s Roundup Ready™ GE alfalfa anyway.
Call your Congressional Representatives today and ask them to hold USDA accountable by contacting Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack and urging him to deny approval of Monsanto's GE alfalfa! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202)224-3121 and ask for your Senator/Representative’s office. If you do not know who they are click here to look them up. Speak with the agriculture staff person or leave a message. Tell them that you DO NOT support the deregulation of GE alfalfa, for the following reasons:
* GE contamination of non-GE and organic crops would be inevitable
* You won’t buy products that are GE-contaminated
* Alfalfa is a major food source for livestock and GE alfalfa would destroy the integrity of organic dairy products
* You support the rights of farmers to grow the crops of their choice, and GE contamination makes that impossible
* GE crops increase pesticide use, harming human health and the environment
* Ask your Representative and Senators to contact Secretary Vilsack and urge him to deny USDA approval of Monsanto's GE alfalfa
Then email us at info@truefoodnow.org and tell us who you called and let us know what kind of response you got!
Background
In 2006, the Center for Food Safety (CFS) sued the Department of Agriculture (USDA) for its illegal approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa. USDA failed to conduct an environmental impact statement (EIS) before deregulating the crop, as required by law. An EIS is a rigorous analysis of the potential significant environmental, health, and economic impacts of a federal decision, mandated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The federal courts sided with CFS and banned GE alfalfa until the USDA fully analyzed the impacts of the GE plant on the environment, farmers, and the public in an EIS.
USDA released its draft EIS on December 14, 2009. A 75-day comment period is now open until 3 March, 2010. CFS has begun analyzing the EIS and it is clear that the USDA has not taken the concerns of non-GE alfalfa farmers, dairies, exporters, retailers or consumers into consideration in its recommendation to approve the commercial sale (deregulation) of GE alfalfa. In fact, the EIS states that consumers don't care if their organic food is GE contaminated and neither do organic farmers, as long as farmers employ the organic practices required under the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Obviously, this is not true and we need to push our Congressional representatives to call upon USDA to deny the approval of GE alfalfa.
For more talking points and links to review the EIS and other documents, click here, or copy and paste this URL into your browser's address bar: http://ga3.org/cfs/
| Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this. |
| If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Center for Food Safety. |
Monday, February 22, 2010
They Named Him FREEDOM
They Named Him FREEDOM
Today, IDA is fighting for all the wild horses who are threatened by man’s inhumanity. And we need your help! Tens of thousands of America’s wild horses have been rounded up and trapped in internment camp-like corrals. They are threatened like never before by the BLM’s accelerating efforts to steal their land and drive them into extinction.
In addition to the ground-breaking lawsuit IDA filed in December to stop the roundups, we have:
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| In Defense of Animals, located in San Rafael, Calif., is an international animal protection organization with more than 85,000 members and supporters dedicated to ending the abuse and exploitation of animals by protecting their rights and welfare. IDA's efforts include educational events, cruelty investigations, boycotts, grassroots activism, and hands-on rescue through our sanctuaries in Mississippi, Mumbai, India, and Cameroon, Africa. In Defense of Animals is a registered 501(c)3 non-profit organization. We welcome your feedback and appreciate your donations. Please join today! All donations to IDA are tax-deductible. In Defense of Animals | ||||||||
Michelle Obama Lets' Move Campaign. Good start !!!
However considering the amazing solution of steering away from animal based foods, I have not heard her say anything about that. Maybe this is the first step. She seems very sincere and passionate about her campaign, that's a good thing!
Michelle Obama Lets' Move Campaign. Good start !!!
Michelle Obama Lets' Move Campaign. Good start !!!
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Avandia kills thousands but FDA refuses to act!
 | FDA refuses to pull dangerous diabetes drug Avandia, even knowing it will kill thousands |
The Food and Drug Administration voted overwhelmingly to keep the diabetes drug Avandia on the market, despite its known deadly effects. Two FDA committees met yesterday in Gaithersburg, Maryland, to consider whether the drug -- which has led to the deaths of 80,000 people -- should be pulled from the marketplace.
http://www.naturalnews.com/021959_Avandia_diabetes.html
The FDA does not deny that the drug is dangerous. Members of the FDA's Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee voted 20-3 to acknowledge the finding that the drug raises the risk of heart attacks, and called for stronger warning labels.
------------------
Avandia's Black Box Warning
A black box warning is the strongest safety warning issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Named for their black borders, the warnings are supposed to call attention to life-threatening or very serious potential side effects of a drug.
They are the most serious action the FDA can take without recalling a drug or subjecting it to strict regulations. It was this type of warning that the FDA issued for Type II diabetes drug Avandia, after a study was published showing that Avandia raises its users’ risk of heart attacks by 43 percent and their risk of death from heart problems by 64 percent.
http://www.anapolschwartz.com/practices/avandia/avandias-blackbox-warning.aspThursday, February 18, 2010
The Future of Food
If you think seeds are the stuff food grows from, think again.
Seeds have become a battle field.
When once you could scatter seeds to grow your food, collect your own seeds and reseed now you have multi-billion companies like MONSANTO patenting seeds, and then sue farmers all over the country if they find what they claim are "their" seeds pop up in the farmers field. The go on to farmers property without consent, they collect samples of the plants and test them genetically then claim it's our seed and sue the farmers. Isn't that crazy!
Think if someone grows a crop and nature disburses a MONSANTO seeds you end up getting sued. MONSANTO own the seed so MONSANTO owns the plant and every seed coming from that plant species in the future. They made a small farmer and his wife destroy years of seeds because they claimed it was their seeds.
Seed and are disbursed in the way nature does... if the end up on your field and mix with your crop as you can see in the above movie, you can get sued by this huge company that has all the money, they can and they are ruining small farmers. This is bloody greed and the end result is that you can't grow food without the permission of these patent owners. These patents should never be given out. It's unnatural to panted a live giving force like seeds to one corporation. This belongs to people.
Yes my friends you don't even own seeds anymore. Whoever controls the seeds in the future will control food supply. This is a serious issue and every American should learn about this and get involved!
What is BT? You will hear in the above movie about BT a bacteria that is genetically engineered in to the genetically engineered corn. The Bacteria kills bugs. If a bug eats on the corn it will die. What is BT.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Report Details Monsanto's Patent Suits Against Farmers
Monsanto has filed 90 lawsuits against American farmers in 25 states that involve 147 farmers and 39 small businesses or farm companies. Compiled by staff
Please HELP to fight Animal Cruelty
| | |||
| Dear Animal Lover and Defender, I write you with some good news today –- and with an urgent request for your help. We are closing in on our goal of raising $200,000 as a “counterpunch” to one of our more persistent critics –- an unprincipled group that gleefully stands in the way of all efforts to help animals so long as someone pays them to do it. They’re the worst kind of hired guns, representing nothing but greed -- even at the expense of animals who are suffering today and in need of rescue. Ask yourself, what kind of people would take delight in trying to prevent The HSUS from rescuing animals? I’ll tell you who. Richard Berman and his lackey, David Martosko. They’re the shadowy flim-flam artists who do dirty work for agribusiness, tobacco interests and the like. They are the people who tell you that mercury-laced fish won't harm pregnant women and trans fats aren’t bad for you. And now they’re trying to tell you animals don’t matter. Last week, I wrote a blog about them and set this $200,000 “counterpunch” challenge. The stakes are high, so please join me in making a donation today. Martosko claims to be a “watchdog.” But Martosko saying he is a watchdog of animal protection is like a band of professional thieves acting as a home security company. He is a pro-cockfighting, pro-sealing, pro-puppy mill, pro-factory farming, pro-captive shooting hack whose organization does nothing but tear animal protection down and clear a pathway for animal abusers. Let me call your attention to two events this week that underscore the urgency of the fundraising request I've made. First, the Berman-Martosko operation openly encouraged factory farming interests to protest against a corporate partner of The HSUS. This partner company donated $100,000 to help cover the costs of our animal rescue efforts. That’s right, animal rescue. In natural disasters and in cases of cruelty -- when law enforcement agencies and our colleagues at local humane societies call for our help -- we roll with the best trained and best equipped animal rescue team in the nation. This work is entirely supported by donations from our generous members and corporate sponsors. That’s why we proudly wear the banner of a being a “charity.” The second event occurred in rural Southern California. Here, a team of our animal rescue experts was on the ground working shoulder-to-shoulder with a local sheriff to raid a suspected, and massive, cockfighting operation. Together, we brought an end to the suffering of these animals. Watch this video and see for yourself what “rescue” means. That’s right, they and their shadowy funders would let animals be thrown in the ring to die for the sake of slowing down the work of The HSUS. It won’t work, of course. Help us prove it to Berman, Martosko and their cronies and make a special gift today to protect animals from harm. As always, thank you for all you do for animals.
|
-------------------------
Want to know more about who these folks are that are buying your elected officials for
Big food business. Read on it's VERY interesting!
Lobbyists Hide Behind Non-Profit Fronts
May 3 - KGO (KGO) -- Lobbying in Washington is taking a new turn. A growing number of lobbying firms are setting up non-profit front groups to push their corporate messages. We found one example when we began investigating the source of information on a website called Fishscam.
For years we've heard about health risks associated with eating certain kinds of fish because of high mercury levels. The Chicago Tribune recently did a big report on canned tuna with high levels of mercury, forcing the FDA to reevaluate their standards. So I was particularly interested when I came across Fishscam.com which says those mercury warnings are full of baloney.
Like to eat ahi but you're worried about mercury? Click on Fishscam.com, a website run by the Center for Consumer Freedom.
David Martosko, Center for Consumer Freedom: "The best science indicates that the trace amounts of mercury in the fish we feed our children and our families is so small that it's not a danger to anybody."
David Martosko is director of research at the Center for Consumer Freedom -- a non-profit tax exempt educational organization.
David Martosko: "We like to call shenanigans on people when they're really off base. So we're sort of a watchdog group in that respect."
The center has found there's a lot to watch. You know those warnings about drinking and driving&
David Martosko: "Government statistics and independent science confirms very clearly that the drunk driving problem in this country has been reduced to a small hard core of repeat offenders."
In fact, government statistics don't show that. The majority of arrests are first-timers, but the center runs ad campaigns against lowering the legal blood alcohol limit.
You know those warnings that Americans are getting fat? The center says we should be promoting exercise.
David Martosko: "That would do far more to combat childhood obesity than say suing McDonald's."
The centers ads are eye catching. And the message is food police are out to take the ice cream away from children, the hot dog out of your hand.
The Center for Consumer Freedom ads say activists are trying to scare us. One of those activists is San Francisco physician Jane Hightower.
Dr. Jane Hightower, research scientist: "I'm honored." (laughs)
Dr. Hightower published a report linking the coronary artery disease in her patients with the large amounts of tuna and swordfish they were eating.
Dr. Jane Hightower: "I didn't get paid to do this study. I did it because people were not feeling well and they all had elevated mercury levels."
Her research is supported by the Environmental Protection Agency which warns pregnant women -- don't eat any swordfish.
David Martosko: "Dr. Hightower I think is three parts activist and one part scientist."
Martosko attacks Hightower for being an activist. But Martosko himself is no part scientist. He was a music major in college and then an AM radio talk show producer before becoming chief researcher for the Center for Consumer Freedom which is headquartered inside the lobbying offices of Richard Berman, a lobbyist for the restaurant and beverage industry.
Berman set up the Center for Consumer Freedom and a number of other tax exempt educational organizations. And those educational non-profits all seem to support messages that dove tail nicely with the food beverage and tobacco industries that have hired Richard Berman.
David Martosko: "Welcome to Washignton. This is the way things tend to be done here."
When we tried to ask Rick Berman himself about that, he ducked out of our interview.
Rick Berman: "We'll give you a photograph. Say whatever you want to say."
ABC7's Mark Matthews: "Oh don't do that to me."
Berman wouldn't talk with us about how his non-profits are connected financially to his lobbying business, and his research director didn't tell us.
David Martosko: "I don't know the firms that send the Center for Consumer Freedom money. I don't want to know. It's not my business to know."
We did find that 10 years ago Berman lived in a house in a D.C. suburb. After he opened his first non-profit, he moved to a much more expensive home.
The most recent available tax records for the Center for Consumer Freedom show in 2004 Berman and Co. took in a million-and-a-half dollars from the Center for Consumer Freedom.
John Stauber, environmental activist: "It's like getting a tax advantage for paying your lobbyist."
John Stauber is an environmental activist and founder of the Center for Media and Democracy which tracks Berman's financing. He says Berman's tax exempt organizations don't have to reveal who gives them money.
During one of our repeated requests for an interview, Rick Berman told me it wouldn't serve his food and beverage clients to be specifically identified with the often edgy campaigns of his non-profit educational organizations.
John Stauber, Center for Media & Democracy: "Not public interest campaigns, but smear campaigns that he brags about to muddy the image and reputation of legitimate public interest organizations and scientists."
Stauber says some groups have filed complaints against Berman with the IRS. The IRS doesn't confirm or deny investigations. The former IRS director in charge of the tax exempt division says the IRS takes a broad view of what is educational.
Marc Owens, former IRS division director: "If someone sets up a website claiming the moon is made of green cheese and they go through some elaborate proof of that, the IRS isn't going to say that's too absurd. It's a form of free speech."
Marc Owens says Berman could get in trouble if he's found to be running a tax exempt organization for private benefit. But the IRS admits it doesn't have a lot of people check up on that. Berman told the Washington Post he's been contacted by the IRS and nothing came of it because he's doing nothing wrong.
But on Capitol Hill, an activist on issues of health care and childhood obesity, Representative Pete Stark of Fremont, calls Berman's operation an abuse.
Pete Stark, D-Fremont: "I don't know what we do except expose the guy for what he is and expose the programs for doing what he's trying to do to people."
David Martosko told me that he likes to call shenanigans on people who are off base. We have that in common. There are a growing number of people keeping track of Berman and Co. For more information on that, visit the links below.
In Memory of "Joe Stack" 1956 - 2010
Click on the image to see it larger.I feel his pain about government corruption. It's the same government that is hiding the truth from our children, allowing food to be distributed in schools that have been proven to cause health problems and disease, they force parents to give their children drugs like Ritalin, they allow meat and other food products in to circulation that is contaminated and makes people sick, they allow and finance the torture of animal in the name of pseudo food, pseudo science and greed. They are in Bed with Drug conglomerates so they can make more poison to supposedly treat diseases when the evidence shows these diseases can be prevented. No matter who gets elected they all are of the same breed and that breed is greed & Power. Government has no moral compass. They play with our money as if it grows on trees and the same immoral acts keep getting committed and we pay for it. The public is in a trance.
The government is in bed with Drug companies and Meat and Dairy Industry. AND WE ALL PAY FOR IT in more than one way!!!
I am sorry Joe you felt so desperate to do what you did.
I wish you had not done this, and instead had used all your might to keep fighting the corruptness.
Violence is not the answer. They will now portrait you as a nut.
I pray for you and your family Joe!
READ what Joe had to say before his death.
If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?” The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time. The writing process, started many months ago, was intended to be therapy in the face of the looming realization that there isn’t enough therapy in the world that can fix what is really broken. Needless to say, this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I would let it. I find the process of writing it frustrating, tedious, and probably pointless… especially given my gross inability to gracefully articulate my thoughts in light of the storm raging in my head. Exactly what is therapeutic about that I’m not sure, but desperate times call for desperate measures.
We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was “no taxation without representation”. I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a “crackpot”, traitor and worse.
While very few working people would say they haven’t had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainty that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say.
Why is it that a handful of thugs and plunderers can commit unthinkable atrocities (and in the case of the GM executives, for scores of years) and when it’s time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours? Yet at the same time, the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple, and this country’s leaders don’t see this as important as bailing out a few of their vile, rich cronies. Yet, the political “representatives” (thieves, liars, and self-serving scumbags is far more accurate) have endless time to sit around for year after year and debate the state of the “terrible health care problem”. It’s clear they see no crisis as long as the dead people don’t get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in.
And justice? You’ve got to be kidding!
How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet, it mercilessly “holds accountable” its victims, claiming that they’re responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that’s not “duress” than what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.
How did I get here?
My introduction to the real American nightmare starts back in the early ‘80s. Unfortunately after more than 16 years of school, somewhere along the line I picked up the absurd, pompous notion that I could read and understand plain English. Some friends introduced me to a group of people who were having ‘tax code’ readings and discussions. In particular, zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful “exemptions” that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy. We carefully studied the law (with the help of some of the “best”, high-paid, experienced tax lawyers in the business), and then began to do exactly what the “big boys” were doing (except that we weren’t steeling from our congregation or lying to the government about our massive profits in the name of God). We took a great deal of care to make it all visible, following all of the rules, exactly the way the law said it was to be done.
The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us… Oh, and the monsters are the very ones making and enforcing the laws; the inquisition is still alive and well today in this country.
That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie. It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”… and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them.
Before even having to make a shaky recovery from the sting of the first lesson on what justice really means in this country (around 1984 after making my way through engineering school and still another five years of “paying my dues”), I felt I finally had to take a chance of launching my dream of becoming an independent engineer.
On the subjects of engineers and dreams of independence, I should digress somewhat to say that I’m sure that I inherited the fascination for creative problem solving from my father. I realized this at a very young age.
The significance of independence, however, came much later during my early years of college; at the age of 18 or 19 when I was living on my own as student in an apartment in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. My neighbor was an elderly retired woman (80+ seemed ancient to me at that age) who was the widowed wife of a retired steel worker. Her husband had worked all his life in the steel mills of central Pennsylvania with promises from big business and the union that, for his 30 years of service, he would have a pension and medical care to look forward to in his retirement. Instead he was one of the thousands who got nothing because the incompetent mill management and corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement. All she had was social security to live on.
In retrospect, the situation was laughable because here I was living on peanut butter and bread (or Ritz crackers when I could afford to splurge) for months at a time. When I got to know this poor figure and heard her story I felt worse for her plight than for my own (I, after all, I thought I had everything to in front of me). I was genuinely appalled at one point, as we exchanged stories and commiserated with each other over our situations, when she in her grandmotherly fashion tried to convince me that I would be “healthier” eating cat food (like her) rather than trying to get all my substance from peanut butter and bread. I couldn’t quite go there, but the impression was made. I decided that I didn’t trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.
Return to the early ‘80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ contract software engineer… and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706.
For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml).
SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.
(a) IN GENERAL - Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:
(d) EXCEPTION. - This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. - The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986.
Note:
· “another person” is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship.
· “taxpayer” is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop.
· “individual”, “employee”, or “worker” is you.
Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it’s not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can’t believe my eyes.
During 1987, I spent close to $5000 of my ‘pocket change’, and at least 1000 hours of my time writing, printing, and mailing to any senator, congressman, governor, or slug that might listen; none did, and they universally treated me as if I was wasting their time. I spent countless hours on the L.A. freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity. This, only to discover that our efforts were being easily derailed by a few moles from the brokers who were just beginning to enjoy the windfall from the new declaration of their “freedom”. Oh, and don’t forget, for all of the time I was spending on this, I was loosing income that I couldn’t bill clients.
After months of struggling it had clearly gotten to be a futile exercise. The best we could get for all of our trouble is a pronouncement from an IRS mouthpiece that they weren’t going to enforce that provision (read harass engineers and scientists). This immediately proved to be a lie, and the mere existence of the regulation began to have its impact on my bottom line; this, of course, was the intended effect.
Again, rewind my retirement plans back to 0 and shift them into idle. If I had any sense, I clearly should have left abandoned engineering and never looked back.
Instead I got busy working 100-hour workweeks. Then came the L.A. depression of the early 1990s. Our leaders decided that they didn’t need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that. The result was economic devastation in the region that rivaled the widely publicized Texas S&L fiasco. However, because the government caused it, no one gave a shit about all of the young families who lost their homes or street after street of boarded up houses abandoned to the wealthy loan companies who received government funds to “shore up” their windfall. Again, I lost my retirement.
Years later, after weathering a divorce and the constant struggle trying to build some momentum with my business, I find myself once again beginning to finally pick up some speed. Then came the .COM bust and the 911 nightmare. Our leaders decided that all aircraft were grounded for what seemed like an eternity; and long after that, ‘special’ facilities like San Francisco were on security alert for months. This made access to my customers prohibitively expensive. Ironically, after what they had done the Government came to the aid of the airlines with billions of our tax dollars … as usual they left me to rot and die while they bailed out their rich, incompetent cronies WITH MY MONEY! After these events, there went my business but not quite yet all of my retirement and savings.
By this time, I’m thinking that it might be good for a change. Bye to California, I’ll try Austin for a while. So I moved, only to find out that this is a place with a highly inflated sense of self-importance and where damn little real engineering work is done. I’ve never experienced such a hard time finding work. The rates are 1/3 of what I was earning before the crash, because pay rates here are fixed by the three or four large companies in the area who are in collusion to drive down prices and wages… and this happens because the justice department is all on the take and doesn’t give a fuck about serving anyone or anything but themselves and their rich buddies.
To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed. But they didn’t notify me in time for me to launch a legal objection so when I attempted to get a protest filed with the court I was told I was no longer entitled to due process because the time to file ran out. Bend over for another $10,000 helping of justice.
So now we come to the present. After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake.
When we received the forms back I was very optimistic that they were in order. I had taken all of the years information to Bill Ross, and he came back with results very similar to what I was expecting. Except that he had neglected to include the contents of Sheryl’s unreported income; $12,700 worth of it. To make matters worse, Ross knew all along this was missing and I didn’t have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me.
This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented). Things I never knew anything about and things my wife had no clue would ever matter to anyone. The end result is… well, just look around.
I remember reading about the stock market crash before the “great” depression and how there were wealthy bankers and businessmen jumping out of windows when they realized they screwed up and lost everything. Isn’t it ironic how far we’ve come in 60 years in this country that they now know how to fix that little economic problem; they just steal from the middle class (who doesn’t have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it’s “business-as-usual”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn’t that a clever, tidy solution.
As government agencies go, the FAA is often justifiably referred to as a tombstone agency, though they are hardly alone. The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government. Nothing changes unless there is a body count (unless it is in the interest of the wealthy sows at the government trough). In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self-serving laws.
I know I’m hardly the first one to decide I have had all I can stand. It has always been a myth that people have stopped dying for their freedom in this country, and it isn’t limited to the blacks, and poor immigrants. I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after. But I also know that by not adding my body to the count, I insure nothing will change. I choose to not keep looking over my shoulder at “big brother” while he strips my carcass, I choose not to ignore what is going on all around me, I choose not to pretend that business as usual won’t continue; I have just had enough.
I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee-jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are. Sadly, though I spent my entire life trying to believe it wasn’t so, but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer. The cruel joke is that the really big chunks of shit at the top have known this all along and have been laughing, at and using this awareness against, fools like me all along.
I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different. I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.
The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.
Joe Stack (1956-2010)
02/18/2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
I am elated!
I feel elated! I had ordered some vegan products and they arrived today.A baking mix from "The Cravings Place", Primal Beef Jerky Texas BBQ (Without the Beef), and a Vegan baking Recipes Book. I feel like a kid in a vegan candy store.
Since I was ready for a snack, I immediately opened one of the beef jerky's. I have to say they are awesome. Very very good. I had beef jerky before and these vegan ones are BETTER! I am saying this without prejudice. They really are. There is no funky stuff to spit out, only one gram of fat per jerky and 10 grams of vegetable protein, no MSG really you feel like you had a very healthy snack and you did. You don't have to lose your teeth neither to eat them and yet they have a very jerky beef like texture... How do they do that???
I shall hand them out to my friends. They will definitely become a staple in my house.
The All Purpose Pancake Batter & Waffle mix will be tried out soon. I ordered six 23 oz packs of the batter, enough to share with a friend. What's great about it is that while it is certified Vegan it is also great for folks with gluten, casein, lactose, egg allergies, and people with celiac disease. I will give a pack to a friend of mine who struggles with bouts of gout and other joint pains usually after eating meat, bacon, eggs and certain breads and pastries and after drinking any alcohol. I think he'll enjoy having some pancakes and hopefully won't get the joint pain attacks.
Since I went all out vegan I have been transforming some of my favorite recipes to vegan and I am always on the lookout for good foods including snacks that also provide vegetable protein.
The other day I baked Cinnamon Rolls. I have been pretty famous among friends for my super Cinnamon rolls. However I used to use butter, eggs and milk. So now my challenge was to get them good without butter, eggs, and milk.
Well let me relive the suspense. My hand on my heart... they turned out fantastic.
Actually if I had said anyhting nobody would have noticed a difference.
Here is a picture of these yummy rolls. I make a yeast dough as normally, substitute the eggs with 2 Tbs of flax seed egg replacer (Grind 1 tbsp flaxseed [use 2 1/2 tbsp pre-ground flaxseeds] combine with 3 tablespoons of water to replace one egg. Make sure that the mixture has gelled before using it. Some people recommend simmering the two items together to thicken this mix.) for more egg replacing suggestions click here
Instead of butter I use vegetable oil or vegan margarine, I still use regular refined sugar (oh my :-) I use Silk instead of milk. After letting the dough rise twice, I roll I out and spread more oil or vegan margarine, nuts ( don't have to) generous cinnamon, sugar, Roll it all up. Cut them in to 1.5 inch pieces, set them upside down in to a baking form, pour over that a half a cup of silk soy milk, shred some dark "no milk" chocolate, sprinkle over rolls (can omit). Let them rise again for about 30 to 40 minutes, bake them in 375 oven for about 25 minutes. You may decorate them with powder sugar water mixture frosting.
The book I bought is:
The 100 Best VEGAN Baking Recipes.
Can't wait to try some of them.
Go Vegan... it's so exciting, refreshing, non violent and healthy!
The depths of Human Depravity
The depths of Human Depravity
Celebrity chef Beppe Bigazzi upsets viewers with his cat casserole
Dectora Ryan wrote:
I must admit to hesitation about cat ( I am very fond of my cat). I have eaten dog (quite nice), donkey( much better), horse (really very good) and camel (say no more).
February 16, 2010 5:06 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (11)
Not all human food animals are herbivores. Pigs are omnivores like us and are often fed with food derived from other mamalian species. And of course most fish are carnivores or omnivores.
February 16, 2010 5:00 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (8)
P V wrote:
Ah, cat!
It makes the purrfect meal with a catnip garnish...and Chianti.
February 16, 2010 4:38 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (16)
Jo Boxer wrote:
"Why can we eat lambs but not cats?"
We've somehow evolved to eat the flesh of animals who don't eat flesh themselves. In many cultures it's taboo to eat cats and dogs but it's open season for non-carnivorous creatures!
February 16, 2010 4:38 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (7)
Paul Reeve wrote:
I see nothing fundamentally wrong in eating cat . Cat au Merangue would be a typical example of how seefarers of old would have put their pussies to good culinary use . Indeed, a class of vessel came to be named after this succulent dish.
February 16, 2010 4:29 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (10)
Seymour Likely wrote:
They were selling cat at the restaurant next door to the theatre last Christmas.
I saw it on the A board outside: "Puss in Boots"!
February 16, 2010 4:26 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (12)
Peter Cressall wrote:
Donald Heath: have you ever tried cat with mint sauce?
February 16, 2010 4:21 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (4)
Luke Slikely wrote:
I'm SURE my local Chinese & Indian takeaways have been using cats for years!
There's a Burmuda Triangle round here, where a week doesn't go by without a lamp post ad for a "Missing Cat".
The immigrants were nicking ducks and swans from the canal at one point too. They look upon it as FREE FOOD.
February 16, 2010 4:20 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (33)
K Jordan wrote:
I'm a vegetarian and obviously outraged by his comments but putting that aside; human beings only eat herbivores, i'm not sure if that is because eating carnivores would cause us health problems or if we just think that any animal (apart from ourselves of course!) that eats another animal is disgusting but cats eat mice and rats - think about it!
February 16, 2010 4:13 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (7)
Marco Piva wrote:
Horse meat is indeed delicious - and a very "normal" dish in the Italian cuisine. Cat can not be served (in the Vicenza area they serve rabbit calling it in suggestive ways) - and I still can not understand why.
February 16, 2010 4:02 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (5)
If you want to read more depraved comments go to the article
If we continue to eat flesh and consume animal protein, it will be our downfall for numerous reasons. Genetic degeneration (has already began), sickness (increasing), chronic disease (kills more flesh eating people, then any other cause and is preventable) the result is needless suffering, earlier death and genetically inferior new generations.
Those that do not change their ways will not be able to invoke God in to their lives, not until they live up to his expectations.
---------------------------------
Eight out of 10 men and nearly seven out of 10 women in England will be too fat by 2020, according to new data released Wednesday.
Researchers said that while recent research showed obesity among children levelling off, instances among adults show no sign of doing the same.
Some 41 percent of men aged 20 to 65 will be obese by 2020, with 40 percent overweight, according to the figures from the National Heart Forum, based on data from the Health Survey for England. That makes a total of 81 percent.
Among women, 36 percent will be obese and 32 percent overweight -- a total of 68 percent.
By 2050, this will lead to sharp increases in the number of people suffering strokes, high blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes, researchers said.
"These trends demonstrate that the cautiously optimistic picture we presented in November 2009 for a levelling off of future obesity rates among children is not mirrored in adults," said Professor Klim McPherson of Oxford University, who also chairs the National Heart Forum.
"There are already more men who are obese than who are of a healthy weight and by the end of the decade, obese men and women could out-number those who are overweight."
Britons were "being overwhelmed by the effects of today's 'obesogenic' environment, with its abundance of energy-dense food and sedentary lifestyles," he added.
The research used figures from 1993 to 2007 to predict future obesity levels in England. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.906180e1b0b7b0f19676e09ec712c66e.a71&show_article=1
Celebrity chef Beppe Bigazzi upsets viewers with his cat casserole
When you read the story following the link above is basically about a cook who suggested cat stew on a Television cooking show.
While it is of course unthinkable for most feeling humans that we start to eat our pets, the article talks about the historical facts like during hart times people in the region ate cats. All this is well and good and anyone who knows me by now knows that I have become a vegan for moral and for health reasons in 2008. I have since reversed my high cholesterol, I have no more heart palpitations, no more swollen hurting feet, I increased my good cholesterol to what my Dr. Office calls "Marvelous" my blood pressure is that of a 20 year old, I have lost weight and totally reversed my digestive problems I had my whole life. God has blessed me because I am doing the right thing when it comes to my nourishment for my body and respect for his creation, so now he blessed me with good health. I thank God for that.
Since I've become Vegan I share all that it has done for me with people, if they want to listen. I have learned that most people do not want to hear that if they omit animal products they can reverse many of the health problems they have and prevent them if they start early.
I have come to the conclusion that right now, people would rather be or get sick then forgo animal protein consumption. They still hope for miracle cures from drug companies, no matter how many side effects those drugs may possess. Just give me something that I can take, so I do not have to change how and what I eat. People are not ready. It seems things have to get worse before they can get better. It makes me sad, for people but more so for animals because they certainly don't ask for the rotten deal they get. Humans on the other hand have the power to decide what to put in and on to their bodies.
More on the dangerous effect to our health presented by consuming animal protein will be featured in a film by Dr. Colin T. Campbell this summer. This will be ground breaking, a message that is simple but will not be welcomed by those who profit from what makes us sick and those that profit from promising to make us well again. God has a plan and the day will come where we will look back at all the terrible disease that plagued us and wonder what took us so long. But that day will only come if we are willing to listen and learn and be silent long enough to hear the message and then change our ways. The day we start listening to God, God will listen to us.
Back to the article about eating cats.
What is as disturbing to me than the article itself, is the heartless, ignorant and plain stupid comments, some people leave below the article.
Individuals who reduce important issues to clever one liners. Obviously padding themselves on the back for being so clever and crude, Uncaring, heartless, selfish, ignorant and mean.
Is this what we live next too? Is this my neighbor. Is this someone that if I see them in distress on the side of the road I should lend a hand? Are these the same people going to Church every Sunday? Who are these people??? I am trying so hard to give people the benefit of the doubt, trying to believe that humanity is evolving to be better people, kinder to all living creatures, I am trying to believe that Christians are going to extend the kindness they extend to humans eventually also to our fellow earthlings and God's creations the animals as St. Francis of Assisi, but when I read comments like these I say where are the people of good will?
We are all supposed to be brothers and sister but yet there seems to be an alien species walking among us. One that has a stone where "Humans" have a heart.
They can not be humans. I do not want to believe that humans can truly be so callous!
Here are some of the comments: The first one is typical for someone with a one track mind who probably can't walk and chew gum at the same time. As if protecting both unborn babies and protecting animals can't be done at the same time. All life is sacred ! Thank God for a few people speaking on behalf of the poor animals.
Kentucky Fried Cat
or
Kentucky Fried ChickenFebruary 17, 2010 1:34 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Luca, you obviously no idea how cruelly these dogs and cats are killed. They are slowly hanged until dead through suffocation as it is believed it makes the meat more tender. If you want to condone inhumane cruelty, continue eating dog and cat. If not, then shut up.February 17, 2010 1:33 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Look in the mirror, the biggest reason is human, in urban areas we have taken away any decent nesting & feeding areas with out fenced, not hedged gardens, smaller gardens in new developments & concreting over gardens for hard standing for cars.
Yep, we kill more than cats!February 17, 2010 1:11 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Surely more important issues exist.
I wish I could cook my neighbours cat, at least it would prevent the constant mess it makes in my gardenFebruary 17, 2010 1:07 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Dectora Ryan wrote:
I must admit to hesitation about cat ( I am very fond of my cat). I have eaten dog (quite nice), donkey( much better), horse (really very good) and camel (say no more).
February 16, 2010 5:06 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (11)
Not all human food animals are herbivores. Pigs are omnivores like us and are often fed with food derived from other mamalian species. And of course most fish are carnivores or omnivores.
February 16, 2010 5:00 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (8)
P V wrote:
Ah, cat!
It makes the purrfect meal with a catnip garnish...and Chianti.
February 16, 2010 4:38 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (16)
Jo Boxer wrote:
"Why can we eat lambs but not cats?"
We've somehow evolved to eat the flesh of animals who don't eat flesh themselves. In many cultures it's taboo to eat cats and dogs but it's open season for non-carnivorous creatures!
February 16, 2010 4:38 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (7)
Paul Reeve wrote:
I see nothing fundamentally wrong in eating cat . Cat au Merangue would be a typical example of how seefarers of old would have put their pussies to good culinary use . Indeed, a class of vessel came to be named after this succulent dish.
February 16, 2010 4:29 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (10)
Seymour Likely wrote:
They were selling cat at the restaurant next door to the theatre last Christmas.
I saw it on the A board outside: "Puss in Boots"!
February 16, 2010 4:26 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (12)
Peter Cressall wrote:
Donald Heath: have you ever tried cat with mint sauce?
February 16, 2010 4:21 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (4)
Luke Slikely wrote:
I'm SURE my local Chinese & Indian takeaways have been using cats for years!
There's a Burmuda Triangle round here, where a week doesn't go by without a lamp post ad for a "Missing Cat".
The immigrants were nicking ducks and swans from the canal at one point too. They look upon it as FREE FOOD.
February 16, 2010 4:20 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (33)
K Jordan wrote:
I'm a vegetarian and obviously outraged by his comments but putting that aside; human beings only eat herbivores, i'm not sure if that is because eating carnivores would cause us health problems or if we just think that any animal (apart from ourselves of course!) that eats another animal is disgusting but cats eat mice and rats - think about it!
February 16, 2010 4:13 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (7)
Marco Piva wrote:
Horse meat is indeed delicious - and a very "normal" dish in the Italian cuisine. Cat can not be served (in the Vicenza area they serve rabbit calling it in suggestive ways) - and I still can not understand why.
February 16, 2010 4:02 PM GMT on community.timesonline.co.uk
Recommend? (5)
If you want to read more depraved comments go to the article
If we continue to eat flesh and consume animal protein, it will be our downfall for numerous reasons. Genetic degeneration (has already began), sickness (increasing), chronic disease (kills more flesh eating people, then any other cause and is preventable) the result is needless suffering, earlier death and genetically inferior new generations.
Those that do not change their ways will not be able to invoke God in to their lives, not until they live up to his expectations.
---------------------------------
Eight out of 10 men and nearly seven out of 10 women in England will be too fat by 2020, according to new data released Wednesday.
Researchers said that while recent research showed obesity among children levelling off, instances among adults show no sign of doing the same.
Some 41 percent of men aged 20 to 65 will be obese by 2020, with 40 percent overweight, according to the figures from the National Heart Forum, based on data from the Health Survey for England. That makes a total of 81 percent.
Among women, 36 percent will be obese and 32 percent overweight -- a total of 68 percent.
By 2050, this will lead to sharp increases in the number of people suffering strokes, high blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes, researchers said.
"These trends demonstrate that the cautiously optimistic picture we presented in November 2009 for a levelling off of future obesity rates among children is not mirrored in adults," said Professor Klim McPherson of Oxford University, who also chairs the National Heart Forum.
"There are already more men who are obese than who are of a healthy weight and by the end of the decade, obese men and women could out-number those who are overweight."
Britons were "being overwhelmed by the effects of today's 'obesogenic' environment, with its abundance of energy-dense food and sedentary lifestyles," he added.
The research used figures from 1993 to 2007 to predict future obesity levels in England. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.906180e1b0b7b0f19676e09ec712c66e.a71&show_article=1
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Shameless, Greedy Fashion Designers
Next to elements in the music and movie industry that make money by corrupting people, especially young people, and takes people down a path of self destruction or at least contributes in a huge way, the fashion industry is no better. They all prey on children because they are grooming the next generation of buyers for their products, that is come by through corruption.
Look at what sustains this whole industry. Look at the models, their life style, the drugs, the booze, and the whole unwholesome package. Is your teenage daughter obsessed with her looks? Well guess who is part of the problem? Instead of young vibrant children that enjoy the outdoors, or reading, learn about the environment, learn about nature, how food grows, doing productive things, come home with dirty fingernails and rosy cheeks, climb trees, enjoy the birds and all of God's creatures and develop a wholesome self image, they are obsessed with lipstick, fingernail polish, natuers's rosy cheeks are replaced by rouge, they obsess about their figure, their breasts, boys, their hair, cloths, glitter and jewelry and so on. Is that wholesome???
I say not.
Granted we have to dress. It's nice to have nice cloths. However the high fashions today are so out of most people financial reach, and are mostly ridiculous. The down grated version, more affordable, more wearable are often marketed to the most vulnerable people, the young ones, by using their IDOLS. Girls are made to look litte miniature women all eh while we lament child sexual predators.
On top of that we drag down other beings with us by killing thousands of animals if not millions to make cute fur trims. There is NOTHING CUTE about that. Our children would recoil if they saw how these poor creatures are killed.
Those that can't afford sable or fox, get cloths trimmed with rabbit of other farmed animals. They can be produced at little cost (MONEY), lives don't matter, animals are kept in atrocious conditions that are like concentration camps before killed, skinned (but much of import fur from China comes from animals that are not killed before skinned, they skin them while they are alive (saves time and avoids damage to the fur. YES THAT IS TRUE!) to make pretty cloth for the "average" consumer. Most of them never wonder what goes in to producing this fur collar, or trim (that has nothing to do with staying warm) they never bother looking at the suffering God's creatures on earth, that are sacrificed for our vanity and selfishness.
Of course the fashion industry counts on everyone ignorance and lack of self education. They propagandize and use distraction, like attacking organizations or individuals that fight for the tortured animal, trying to divert the issue away from what they are doing.
Lets be clear they have the power of MORE MONEY on their side and the have the power of people on their side who are captive in a world of consumerism, vanity, shallow wants they believe are needs, and all that is a powerful potion.
No matter how much money most animal rights organization raise, I bet it pales in comparison to the fur and fashion industry. That is like David & Goliath.
Fur is a fabric? No! Lets make it clear. Fur is NOT a fabric. You CAN NOT MAKE FUR. You can not WEAVE fur, it is ripped of the body of an animal that can be dead but is often still alive. Either bred and cages, or trapped, often wounded and in pain often left without food or water, treated like garbage. People say: "But it' s just an animal!"
What does that men???
That makes is OK to be cruel? I don't understand that sentence... "It's just an animal!!!"
Is that sort of like back in the day when white people said "It's just blacks they don't feel pain like whites!" that made it OK to whip them, talk down to them, keep them in cages, ridicule them, hang them? You did not have to feel compassion because they were different? Is that it?
If they are not like us (whites) then we can treat them cruelly, use them, buy and sell them, enslave them. White people gave themselves permission and eased their conscience by declaring black people as sub human.
Last night I watched in tears "The Lena Baker Story" Hope & Redemption. The only women ever send to the electric chair in Georgia, the state where I live. This happened in 1944. It is very difficult to imagine how such an atrocity could ever take place. What and injustice. But again when you decide or a segment of society decides that they can treat other beings as they please because they themselves are "Superior" then you get to understand why any atrocity, any cruelty can take place.
Lena was abducted, held captive, abused, beaten, raped, and when she could not take it anymore she shot her abuser half self defense half by accident as they struggled over the gun. Those that made themselves the superiors set in judgment and send her to the chair, she never stood a chance. There was no justice. Those whites that felt some sort of struggle with their conscience looked the other way, or looked down, but did nothing. They did not speak up for right!
It was gut wrenching and made me ashamed to belong to the white race.
Today I am ashamed to belong to the human race. Because we are doing the same thing. We humans are making us to be the superiors and give ourselves the right to do as we please with anything else. We have no mercy, no compassion, no respect!
Now we treat animals as less then animals. We deny them food, shelter, take their lives, their companions, kill their babies and take their milk, their skins, the list is endless, and we do it in cruel painful ways.
We treat them as sub animals when we say we can't do this or that to a dog or cat but we can do it to a cow or fox, or wolf. We make some of them villeins and some of them saints and therefore give ourselves permission to do as we please. And with us I mean all of us Humans, black, white, brown, beige, yellow, we all are now treading animals with the same disdain as whites treated blacks. It's all very disturbing. We have not learned a thing!
Animals feel pain just like we do!!! They have lots in common with the human animal.
So what does "It's just an animals mean??? Oh because we have a God.. religion... we are civilized? Is that the difference, we sure don't act like we love God. We act like we Love ourselves and hate God's creation. We act as if Humans are the ONLY LOVABLE creature on earth and even then half the time we kill each other. Violence begets violence!
In order to get any fur you first have to kill an innocent being on God's earth. It can only begotten through VIOLENCE.
Do you want your sweet child to wear something with a trim, dyed in candy colors, that came from violence and killing, a bunny fur? Then on Easter you see those Easter Bunnies and say "Ohhh how cute!" Do you see the hypocrisy? Or you the adult... Do you think wearing things, useless things, that come from violence and death will bring good karma?
Fur is the skin and coat of an animal that is no different then our skin, it serves a purpose. The animals can not live without that skin, we should respect that and leave it be. It is born with it and it should be the only one wearing it. In today's world we DO NOT NEED fur to stay warm. The model in the picture below could really use something on her legs, like pants or pantyhose.? Lets be clear we can be perfectly fashionable without killing.
Now we are supposed to believe that fur is making a come back because it is so cold.
What a crock.
If it's all because it's cold then how about putting some pants on girl.
These fashion designers just don't get it. They are all on my blacklist. I will not buy anything from any of these designers and I am telling anyone and everyone that stand still long enough just how out of style, cruel and disgusting these people are. This coat would be more elegant without that bulky fur on it anyway!
GREED GREED GREED
VANITY VANITY VANITY
Halston (Blood Fashions)
Speciesism
Speciesism is a term coined by Richard Ryder in 1970. The word refers to the widely held belief that the human species is inherently superior to other species and so has rights or privileges that are denied to other sentient animals. (See Painism). ‘Speciesism’ can also be used to describe the oppressive behaviour, cruelty, prejudice and discrimination that are associated with such a belief. In a more restricted sense, speciesism can refer to such beliefs and behaviours if they are based upon the species-difference alone, as if such a difference is, in itself, a justification.
Ryder used the term as a deliberate ‘wake-up call’ to challenge the morality of current practices where nonhuman animals are being exploited in research, in farming, domestically and in the wild, and he consciously drew the parallel with the terms racism and sexism. Ryder pointed out that all such prejudices are based upon physical differences that are morally irrelevant. He suggested that the moral implication of Darwinism is that all sentient animals, including humans, should have a similar moral status.
In his first privately published leaflet entitled Speciesism, Ryder asked a number of rhetorical questions:
Since Darwin, scientists have agreed that there is no ‘magical’ essential difference between human and other animals, biologically- speaking. Why, then, do we make an almost total distinction morally? If all organisms are on one physical continuum, then we should also be on the same moral continuum.
The word ‘species’, like the word ‘race’, is not precisely definable. Lions and tigers can interbreed. Under special laboratory conditions it may soon prove possible to mate a gorilla with a professor of biology — will the hairy offspring be kept in a cage or a cradle?
It is customary to describe Neanderthal Man as a separate species from ourselves, one especially equipped for Ice-Age survival. Yet most archaeologists now believe that this nonhuman creature practised ritual burial and possessed a larger brain than we do. Suppose that the elusive Abominable Snowman, when caught, turns out to be the last survivor of this Neanderthal species; would we give him a seat at the UN or would we implant electrodes in his super-human brain?
A second edition of this leaflet, illustrated and with the name and address of David Wood added, was circulated around the colleges of Oxford University where it was seen by the young Australian philosopher Peter Singer. A little earlier, the novelist Brigid Brophy, having read some of Ryder’s letters about the treatment of animals published in the Daily Telegraph (e.g. 7th April and 3rd May 1969), introduced Ryder to the Oxford philosophers John Harris and Roslind and Stanley Godlovitch who invited Ryder to contribute a chapter on Animal Experimentation to their forthcoming collection of essays entitled Animals, Men and Morals, subsequently published by Gollancz in 1971. In this contribution Ryder bases his moral objection to painful animal experimentation upon his principle of ‘speciesism’. This historic book was subsequently reviewed by Peter Singer who then approached Richard Ryder to find out more about his ideas on the subject. Singer invited Ryder to share the authorship of his forthcoming book, Animal Liberation. Ryder declined, but gave much research material to Singer that had already been used by Ryder for his book Victims of Science (1975). Peter Singer has frequently acknowledged his debt to Ryder for the term speciesism which Singer, as a Utilitarian, has used skilfully. The term is now in most English dictionaries and is much employed by philosophers.
Ryder points out that there is no absolute barrier between species and that transgenic animals and so-called chimeras contain the genes of several species. How would we treat hominids of a different species if some turned up, he asks, or aliens from outer space? The latter may be highly intelligent, autonomous and of a different species, but should intelligence or autonomy or species affect moral status? Suffering, surely is the essential feature. (See Painism).
Above all, Ryder and other anti-speciesists have challenged the usual Judaeo-Christian assumption of Western societies that the human-being has some semi-divine status. “I have never yet heard” Ryder has said “any rational argument in support of speciesism — except, of course, sheer bloody self-interest.”
Ryder went on to become a leading campaigner for animal protection, modernising the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) as its Chairman, and helping to put animals into politics internationally. He also became Director of the Political Animal Lobby, founder of Eurogroup for Animals and first Chairman of the Liberal Democrats Animal Welfare Group. Ryder refers to speciesism in all his main writings. (See Ryder Animal Revolution : Changing Attitudes Towards Speciesism, Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1989, revised edition Berg, Oxford, 2000; The Political Animal : The Conquest of Speciesism, McFarland, 1998 and Putting Morality Back into Politics, Imprint Academic, 2006.) For a full treatment of Ryder’s wider-ranging ethics see his Painism: A Modern Morality, Opengate Press, 2001.
Link to the Wikipedia article on Richard D Ryder
WWW.RICHARDRYDER.CO.UK
Did the Nazis make lampshades out of human skin?
Look at what sustains this whole industry. Look at the models, their life style, the drugs, the booze, and the whole unwholesome package. Is your teenage daughter obsessed with her looks? Well guess who is part of the problem? Instead of young vibrant children that enjoy the outdoors, or reading, learn about the environment, learn about nature, how food grows, doing productive things, come home with dirty fingernails and rosy cheeks, climb trees, enjoy the birds and all of God's creatures and develop a wholesome self image, they are obsessed with lipstick, fingernail polish, natuers's rosy cheeks are replaced by rouge, they obsess about their figure, their breasts, boys, their hair, cloths, glitter and jewelry and so on. Is that wholesome???
I say not.
Granted we have to dress. It's nice to have nice cloths. However the high fashions today are so out of most people financial reach, and are mostly ridiculous. The down grated version, more affordable, more wearable are often marketed to the most vulnerable people, the young ones, by using their IDOLS. Girls are made to look litte miniature women all eh while we lament child sexual predators.
On top of that we drag down other beings with us by killing thousands of animals if not millions to make cute fur trims. There is NOTHING CUTE about that. Our children would recoil if they saw how these poor creatures are killed.
Those that can't afford sable or fox, get cloths trimmed with rabbit of other farmed animals. They can be produced at little cost (MONEY), lives don't matter, animals are kept in atrocious conditions that are like concentration camps before killed, skinned (but much of import fur from China comes from animals that are not killed before skinned, they skin them while they are alive (saves time and avoids damage to the fur. YES THAT IS TRUE!) to make pretty cloth for the "average" consumer. Most of them never wonder what goes in to producing this fur collar, or trim (that has nothing to do with staying warm) they never bother looking at the suffering God's creatures on earth, that are sacrificed for our vanity and selfishness.
Of course the fashion industry counts on everyone ignorance and lack of self education. They propagandize and use distraction, like attacking organizations or individuals that fight for the tortured animal, trying to divert the issue away from what they are doing.
Lets be clear they have the power of MORE MONEY on their side and the have the power of people on their side who are captive in a world of consumerism, vanity, shallow wants they believe are needs, and all that is a powerful potion.
No matter how much money most animal rights organization raise, I bet it pales in comparison to the fur and fashion industry. That is like David & Goliath.
Fur is a fabric? No! Lets make it clear. Fur is NOT a fabric. You CAN NOT MAKE FUR. You can not WEAVE fur, it is ripped of the body of an animal that can be dead but is often still alive. Either bred and cages, or trapped, often wounded and in pain often left without food or water, treated like garbage. People say: "But it' s just an animal!"
What does that men???
That makes is OK to be cruel? I don't understand that sentence... "It's just an animal!!!"
Is that sort of like back in the day when white people said "It's just blacks they don't feel pain like whites!" that made it OK to whip them, talk down to them, keep them in cages, ridicule them, hang them? You did not have to feel compassion because they were different? Is that it?
If they are not like us (whites) then we can treat them cruelly, use them, buy and sell them, enslave them. White people gave themselves permission and eased their conscience by declaring black people as sub human.
Last night I watched in tears "The Lena Baker Story" Hope & Redemption. The only women ever send to the electric chair in Georgia, the state where I live. This happened in 1944. It is very difficult to imagine how such an atrocity could ever take place. What and injustice. But again when you decide or a segment of society decides that they can treat other beings as they please because they themselves are "Superior" then you get to understand why any atrocity, any cruelty can take place.
Lena was abducted, held captive, abused, beaten, raped, and when she could not take it anymore she shot her abuser half self defense half by accident as they struggled over the gun. Those that made themselves the superiors set in judgment and send her to the chair, she never stood a chance. There was no justice. Those whites that felt some sort of struggle with their conscience looked the other way, or looked down, but did nothing. They did not speak up for right!
It was gut wrenching and made me ashamed to belong to the white race.
Today I am ashamed to belong to the human race. Because we are doing the same thing. We humans are making us to be the superiors and give ourselves the right to do as we please with anything else. We have no mercy, no compassion, no respect!
Now we treat animals as less then animals. We deny them food, shelter, take their lives, their companions, kill their babies and take their milk, their skins, the list is endless, and we do it in cruel painful ways.
We treat them as sub animals when we say we can't do this or that to a dog or cat but we can do it to a cow or fox, or wolf. We make some of them villeins and some of them saints and therefore give ourselves permission to do as we please. And with us I mean all of us Humans, black, white, brown, beige, yellow, we all are now treading animals with the same disdain as whites treated blacks. It's all very disturbing. We have not learned a thing!
Animals feel pain just like we do!!! They have lots in common with the human animal.
So what does "It's just an animals mean??? Oh because we have a God.. religion... we are civilized? Is that the difference, we sure don't act like we love God. We act like we Love ourselves and hate God's creation. We act as if Humans are the ONLY LOVABLE creature on earth and even then half the time we kill each other. Violence begets violence!
In order to get any fur you first have to kill an innocent being on God's earth. It can only begotten through VIOLENCE.
Do you want your sweet child to wear something with a trim, dyed in candy colors, that came from violence and killing, a bunny fur? Then on Easter you see those Easter Bunnies and say "Ohhh how cute!" Do you see the hypocrisy? Or you the adult... Do you think wearing things, useless things, that come from violence and death will bring good karma?
Fur is the skin and coat of an animal that is no different then our skin, it serves a purpose. The animals can not live without that skin, we should respect that and leave it be. It is born with it and it should be the only one wearing it. In today's world we DO NOT NEED fur to stay warm. The model in the picture below could really use something on her legs, like pants or pantyhose.? Lets be clear we can be perfectly fashionable without killing.
Now we are supposed to believe that fur is making a come back because it is so cold.
What a crock.
If it's all because it's cold then how about putting some pants on girl.
These fashion designers just don't get it. They are all on my blacklist. I will not buy anything from any of these designers and I am telling anyone and everyone that stand still long enough just how out of style, cruel and disgusting these people are. This coat would be more elegant without that bulky fur on it anyway!
GREED GREED GREED
VANITY VANITY VANITY
Who wears fur? Beautiful Animals and Ugly people
Halston (Blood Fashions)
excerpt from http://blogs.wsj.com/runway/Designers Take Refuge in Warmer Fabrics
Halston’s management team hired a young London-based designer, Marios Schwab, for its collection, and more recently tapped Sarah Jessica Parker to be the designer of the brand’s lower priced “Halston Heritage” line.“It’s been a long time coming but I think we got it right,” said Mr. Weinstein, who was looking decidedly unfashionable with his signature shirt-un-tucked look, at the fashion presentation in a warehouse in Hell’s Kitchen (blogger comments: how appropriate). As he walked around the perimeter of the room, where models lounged on metallic props looking bored, he said, “Sarah Jessica has been a huge influence—she’s coming in ten minutes,” he added. (blogger comment: What about Sarah Jessica Parker, I thought she was on the side of animals? Has she changed her mind and is not going fur too? What gives?)
Speciesism
Speciesism is a term coined by Richard Ryder in 1970. The word refers to the widely held belief that the human species is inherently superior to other species and so has rights or privileges that are denied to other sentient animals. (See Painism). ‘Speciesism’ can also be used to describe the oppressive behaviour, cruelty, prejudice and discrimination that are associated with such a belief. In a more restricted sense, speciesism can refer to such beliefs and behaviours if they are based upon the species-difference alone, as if such a difference is, in itself, a justification.
Ryder used the term as a deliberate ‘wake-up call’ to challenge the morality of current practices where nonhuman animals are being exploited in research, in farming, domestically and in the wild, and he consciously drew the parallel with the terms racism and sexism. Ryder pointed out that all such prejudices are based upon physical differences that are morally irrelevant. He suggested that the moral implication of Darwinism is that all sentient animals, including humans, should have a similar moral status.
In his first privately published leaflet entitled Speciesism, Ryder asked a number of rhetorical questions:
Since Darwin, scientists have agreed that there is no ‘magical’ essential difference between human and other animals, biologically- speaking. Why, then, do we make an almost total distinction morally? If all organisms are on one physical continuum, then we should also be on the same moral continuum.
The word ‘species’, like the word ‘race’, is not precisely definable. Lions and tigers can interbreed. Under special laboratory conditions it may soon prove possible to mate a gorilla with a professor of biology — will the hairy offspring be kept in a cage or a cradle?
It is customary to describe Neanderthal Man as a separate species from ourselves, one especially equipped for Ice-Age survival. Yet most archaeologists now believe that this nonhuman creature practised ritual burial and possessed a larger brain than we do. Suppose that the elusive Abominable Snowman, when caught, turns out to be the last survivor of this Neanderthal species; would we give him a seat at the UN or would we implant electrodes in his super-human brain?
A second edition of this leaflet, illustrated and with the name and address of David Wood added, was circulated around the colleges of Oxford University where it was seen by the young Australian philosopher Peter Singer. A little earlier, the novelist Brigid Brophy, having read some of Ryder’s letters about the treatment of animals published in the Daily Telegraph (e.g. 7th April and 3rd May 1969), introduced Ryder to the Oxford philosophers John Harris and Roslind and Stanley Godlovitch who invited Ryder to contribute a chapter on Animal Experimentation to their forthcoming collection of essays entitled Animals, Men and Morals, subsequently published by Gollancz in 1971. In this contribution Ryder bases his moral objection to painful animal experimentation upon his principle of ‘speciesism’. This historic book was subsequently reviewed by Peter Singer who then approached Richard Ryder to find out more about his ideas on the subject. Singer invited Ryder to share the authorship of his forthcoming book, Animal Liberation. Ryder declined, but gave much research material to Singer that had already been used by Ryder for his book Victims of Science (1975). Peter Singer has frequently acknowledged his debt to Ryder for the term speciesism which Singer, as a Utilitarian, has used skilfully. The term is now in most English dictionaries and is much employed by philosophers.
Ryder points out that there is no absolute barrier between species and that transgenic animals and so-called chimeras contain the genes of several species. How would we treat hominids of a different species if some turned up, he asks, or aliens from outer space? The latter may be highly intelligent, autonomous and of a different species, but should intelligence or autonomy or species affect moral status? Suffering, surely is the essential feature. (See Painism).
Above all, Ryder and other anti-speciesists have challenged the usual Judaeo-Christian assumption of Western societies that the human-being has some semi-divine status. “I have never yet heard” Ryder has said “any rational argument in support of speciesism — except, of course, sheer bloody self-interest.”
Ryder went on to become a leading campaigner for animal protection, modernising the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) as its Chairman, and helping to put animals into politics internationally. He also became Director of the Political Animal Lobby, founder of Eurogroup for Animals and first Chairman of the Liberal Democrats Animal Welfare Group. Ryder refers to speciesism in all his main writings. (See Ryder Animal Revolution : Changing Attitudes Towards Speciesism, Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1989, revised edition Berg, Oxford, 2000; The Political Animal : The Conquest of Speciesism, McFarland, 1998 and Putting Morality Back into Politics, Imprint Academic, 2006.) For a full treatment of Ryder’s wider-ranging ethics see his Painism: A Modern Morality, Opengate Press, 2001.
Link to the Wikipedia article on Richard D Ryder
WWW.RICHARDRYDER.CO.UK
Did the Nazis make lampshades out of human skin?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)