Roberto Abraham Scaruffi

Sunday 25 May 2014

The European Union Times


Posted: 24 May 2014 11:50 AM PDT

A magnitude 6.4 earthquake struck 18km off Greece’s southern coast in the Aegean Sea, near Kamariotissa, at a depth of 10km. Some injuries and damages were reported as far as Jordan. Hundreds have fled their homes in neighboring Turkey.
The under-sea quake caused an immediate injury in Greece, according to local police, as cited by the AP. Further injuries were reported by Greece’s neighbors as panic-stricken residents fled homes.
There are reports of people feeling tremors all the way in Turkey, Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian territories. Initial reports by the USGS reported a 6.4 magnitude, while the Institute of Geophysics at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki put the strength at 6.3. The epicenter was estimated to be between Samothraki and Lemnos. Local police in the latter city report a part of the airport’s ceiling has collapsed, which caused the one injury – a British female tourist.
“It lasted very long and it was very intense. We haven’t got the full picture of the damage caused yet,” the city’s mayor, Antonis Chatzidiamantis, told Mega TV.
Local media report that the quake was felt in many major parts of Greece, both in the south and the north, in Athens and Thessaloniki. Aftershocks reportedly hit 6.7 in Turkey’s Istanbul, Izmir and Canakkale, as hundreds in the western parts fled their homes, fearing structural collapses. A video has been uploaded by Turkish media, depicting the panic.
Some 20 people were hospitalized due to shock in the city of Gökçeada. “I was on the beach. Rocks started to shake. They were moving under out feet. We ran away. It took 20-25 seconds,” one resident told the Hurriyet newspaper. Other minor injuries have been reported as well.
Turkey’s Prime Ministry Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD) said that 270 people were hospitalized. While most were only suffering from minor injuries or shock, the number also included one person in critical condition who jumped from a balcony in Balıkesir’s Edremit district, Hurriyet Newspaper reports.
Another 30 people in the seaport town of Canakkale and five more in Tekirdag, on the northern coast of the Sea of Marmara, were reportedly injured after jumping out of their apartment windows.
No injures or damages have been reported in Istanbul.
Weak aftershocks from the tremor were felt as far as the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, as well as in parts of Jordan.
While the primary quake in Greece was taking place, Israeli authorities and media reported their own quake, which took place less than two houea prior to the Greek one. It was reported to be a minor 4.1 event, but people were reported to feel the shakes all across Israel.
The event took place in a seismically active region, where instances are quite common. Greek seismologists told local media that aftershocks topping 5.0 magnitude are to be expected shortly, telling the local Ant1 TV that this can certainly be classed as a “severe” quake.
The last such earthquake was in August 2013 – a 5.1 that struck about 125km north of Athens, with witnesses reporting tremors in the capital.
The country does face occasional shakes, but they are usually not very powerful. However, 1999′s 5.9 event was quite devastating, killing 143 people. Part of the same seismic zone, Turkey was in the same year battered by a terrifying earthquake that claimed 20,000 lives in the densely populated north-west.
Source
        
Posted: 24 May 2014 05:37 AM PDT
Bruce Nuclear Plant on Lake Huron
A Canadian proposal that calls for a nuclear waste storage facility less than a mile away from the Great Lakes is coming under heavy fire from Michigan lawmakers and environmental groups, who are now attempting to stop the project.
Under a plan crafted by energy supplier Ontario Power Generation (OPG), the company would construct a “deep geologic repository” (DGR), which would feature waste storage sites more than 2,200 feet underground to store nearly 53 million gallons of both low and intermediate-level nuclear waste. The location of the proposed site, however in Kincardine, Ontario, just three-quarters of a mile away from Lake Huron has drawn criticism from numerous groups who fear potential contamination.
The fact that Lake Huron is connected to all the other Great Lakes via waterways has also drawn concern, since the five bodies of water make up the largest collection of freshwater lakes on the Earth and provide drinking supplies to tens of millions of Americans and Canadians.
According to the Detroit News, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have continued criticizing the plan, and are now proposing legislation that calls on the federal government to get involved. In addition to requesting that President Obama stake out a position on the issue, state Senate and House members are asking Secretary of State John Kerry to officially ask the International Joint Commission established to mediate disputes over the Great Lakes to rule on the matter.
The legislation would also “stop the importation of radioactive waste into Michigan from Canada.”
“Building a nuclear waste dump less than a mile from one of the largest freshwater sources in the world is a reckless act that should be universally opposed,” Michigan Rep. Dan Lauwers (R-Brockway Township) said in a statement Monday, as quoted by the Huffington Post.
While lawmakers continue to get involved in the situation, Michigan’s Senators in Washington have also urged the State Department to bring the IJC into the debate, environmental groups have come out against the plan.
“Burying nuclear waste a quarter-mile from the Great Lakes is a shockingly bad idea, it poses a serious threat to people, fish, wildlife, and the lakes themselves,” said Andy Buchsbaum, regional executive director for the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes Regional Center, in a statement to the Detroit News.
Notably, the proposed plan has garnered the support of the most Kincardine residents and other neighboring communities, many of whom have jobs within the nuclear industry.
For its part, OPG has maintained that its facility would be a safe place to store radioactive material such as rags, mop heads, paper towels, clothing, and more. According to the Associated Press, the low-level material the company plans to bury beneath the earth would decay in 300 years, while the intermediate-level material, described as “resins, filters, and used reactor components” would take more than 100,000 years to decay.
Despite the company’s confidence, however, one former OPG scientist recently looked at the plan and came away unconvinced, saying the radioactivity of the materials that would be buried has been “seriously underestimated.” Dr. Frank Greening wrote to the Canadian panel charged with reviewing the proposal, arguing the material is sometimes 100 times more radioactive than estimated. In some cases, the material is 600 times more radioactive.
“My first feeling was, look, you messed up the most basic first step in establishing the safety of this facility, namely, how much radioactive waste they’re going to be putting in the ground, you admit you got that wrong, but now you’re telling me that everything else is okay,” Greening told Michigan Radio, according to Huffington Post. “You can’t just fluff off this error as one error. It raises too many questions about all your other numbers. And I’m sorry, I now have lost faith in what you’re doing.”
Asked about Greening’s findings, OPG spokesman Neal Kelly told the Toronto Star the facility would still be safe even if the evidence bears out.
“Some of his points are valid, and were already under review within OPG for future revisions to the waste inventory,” he said, adding the DGR’s design is “very, very conservative…The safety case would still be strong, even if these factors were to bear out.”
Source
        
Posted: 24 May 2014 05:28 AM PDT

Extremist Israeli settlers have vandalized a church in the southern city of Beersheba ahead of a visit by Pope Francis.
Israeli police said the outside walls of the church were sprayed with anti-Christian graffiti on Friday.
Security officials suspect that the move is the latest in a series of hate crimes, with Israeli extremists as the main suspects.
They say there has been a recent spate of hate crimes, mainly in the form of vandalism and graffiti, targeting churches and mosques.
Christian leaders have condemned the recent anti-Christian hate crimes by Israeli extremists.
Israeli settlers also regularly carry out price tag raids against Palestinians and their properties.
Price tag attacks are acts of vandalism and violence against Palestinian properties as well as Islamic holy sites.
The United Nations has recorded “399 attacks” of this kind by Israeli settlers, which have “resulted in Palestinian injuries or property damage.”
Earlier this month, the former chief of Shin Bet, the Israeli security agency, said Tel Aviv does not stop the “price tag” attacks against Palestinian properties, because it lacks the desire to do so.
“We don’t see results because we don’t have the intention to,” Carmi Gillon said, adding that in the Shin Bet “there’s no such thing as can’t – there’s don’t want to.”
The Pope will begin a three-day visit to Jordan and the occupied Palestinian territories later on Saturday.
Source
        
Posted: 24 May 2014 05:01 AM PDT
Konstantinos Daikos, Greek MEP Candidate of the People’s Association – Golden Dawn
It’s been several years now since the fate of the seed trade was decided in a massive gathering. The American companies Monsanto and Dupont Pioneer, along with the Swiss Syngenta, today control about 60% of the world’s seed market. On the whole, the 10 biggest corporations in the field control about 80% of the global seed trade.
The danger created by this concentration is that they now wield unprecedented global power, through the control of food. The consequences of this are beyond political, with farmers and the environment itself having to suffer from serious problems. The companies mentioned above have begun to grow and market hybrid and genetically modified seeds, spending large sums of money in order to convince farmers to cultivate them.
For the international seed monopolies, hybrids are advantageous as they would force farmers to buy seeds from them every year, since they cannot use the previous years seeds. On top of this, with GMO seeds, the next year will have plants develop with different features or unable to multiply. With this method, these companies acquire control of farmers by holding hostage their crop. Deceptive marketing ploys for these seed include claims that hybrids are able to resist disease better than traditional seeds, after their scientists managed to create hybrids selected for these characteristics. What they hide is that you have to buy their special fertilizer and chemicals to be able to grow and sustain these mutant plants, which of course brings them additional financial benefit. It’s safe to say that these same scientists could find more efficient disease-resistant methods for traditional crops, but they of course refuse to do so, and the reasons are obvious.
Greeks should not forget that these companies have powerful ties and friendships with politicians, who consistently make decisions and adopt laws, which basically aimed at preventing farmers to have independent grain. One example of this is a regulation which obliges grain producers to buy “certified” (from these companies) supposed seeds, so they can receive public subsidies, which is very inappropriate, since grain subsidies have absolutely no connection with certified seed.
The big scam arrived on the verge of implementation in May 2013, via Brussels, with a “regulation on plant reproductive material”, which pretty much forbade the production of seeds and varieties of it that were not included in the “Community list” by all, even individuals. Therefore, farmers would be forced to buy the seeds being sold by companies mentioned in the beginning.
Their objective: The destruction of the conservation and cultivation of natural varieties of trees, cereals and vegetables. In the long term, the security of our food already was in immediate danger, since it is controlled by Airline companies who spray pesticides. The burden on the environment from the use of pesticides and fertilizers required would be tremendous, and finally the rural population itself would be bound to the will and malicious plans of these companies. Fortunately, at the moment, the committees of the European Parliament have rejected this regulation. But soon it will return to the table with the political shake up in the European Parliament, probably with even less likely to pass, but we should still not be complacent.
Greek and European nationalists must oppose their evil plans for complete control of our lives, even of our diet. Our strength and dynamism can unmask them and stop them in their tracks! The Golden Dawn is ready to draw the line and battle in the European Parliament. The lies must end and along with these the decades of attempts to confuse and dominate our lives in every way and mean, within and beyond our national borders. We can prevent their grandiose plans and help to guide agricultural production according to natural laws and for the benefit of the European people, not Monsanto!
Source
        
Posted: 24 May 2014 03:56 AM PDT

Ecological economists such as Herman Daly write that the more full the world becomes, the higher are the social or external costs of production.
Social or external costs are costs of production that are not captured in the price of the products. For example, dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico that result from chemicals used in agriculture are not included as costs in agricultural production. The price of food does not include the damage to the Gulf.
Food production is a source of large social costs. Indeed, it seems that the more food producers are able to lower the measured cost of food production, the higher the social costs imposed on society.
Consider the factory farming of animals. The density of operations results in a concentration of germs and in animals being fed antibiotics. Lowering the cost of food in this way contributes to the rise of antibiotic resistant superbugs that will impose costs on society that will more than offset the savings from lower food prices.
Monsanto has reduced the measured cost of food production by producing genetically modified seeds that result in plants that are pest and herbicide resistant. The result is increased yields and lower measured costs of production. However, there is evidence that the social or external costs of this approach to farming more than offsets the lower measured cost. For example, there are toxic effects on microorganisms in the soil, a decline in soil fertility and nutritional value of food, and animal and human infertility.
When Purdue University plant pathologist and soil microbiologist Don Huber pointed out these unintended consequences of GMOs, other scientists were hesitant to support him, because their careers are dependent on research grants from agribusiness. In other words, Monsanto essentially controls the research on its own products.
In his book, Genetic Roulette, Jeffrey M. Smith writes: “Genetically modified (GM) foods are inherently unsafe, and current safety assessments are not competent to protect us from or even identify most dangers.” The evidence is piling up against such foods; yet the US government is so totally owned by Monsanto that labeling cannot be required.
Pesticides damage birds and bees. Some years ago we learned that ingestion of pesticides by birds was bringing some species near to extinction. If we lose bees, we lose honey and the most important pollinating agent. The rapid decline in bee populations has several causes. Among them are the pesticides sulfoxaflor and thiamethoxam produced by Dow and Syngenta.
Dow is lobbying the Environmental Protection Agency to permit sulfoxaflor residues on food, and Syngenta wants to be able to spray alfalfa with many times the currently allowed amount of thiamethoxam.
As the regulators are more or less in the industry’s pocket, the companies will likely succeed in their efforts to further contaminate the food of people and animals. The profits of Monsanto, Dow, and Syngenta are higher, because many of the costs associated with the production and use of their products are imposed on third parties and on life itself.
Many countries have put restrictions on GMO foods. Lawmakers in Russia equate genetically engineered foods to terrorist acts and want to impose criminal penalties.
The French parliament has approved a ban on GMO cultivation in France.
However, Washington lobbies foreign governments on behalf of its agribusiness and chemical donors. Dick Cheney used his two terms as vice president to staff up the environmental agencies with corporate friendly executives. Just as the political appointees at the SEC would not let SEC prosecutors bring cases against the big banks, environmental regulators have a difficult time protecting the environment and food supply from contamination. The way Washington works is that the regulators protect those they are supposed to regulate in exchange for big jobs when they leave government. The economist, George Stigler, made this clear several decades ago.
The public favors labeling of genetically engineered food, but Monsanto and the Grocery Manufacturers Association have so far been successful in preventing it. On May 8 the governor of Vermont signed a bill passed by the state legislature that requires labeling. Monsanto’s response is to sue the state of Vermont.
The opposition to labeling by agribusiness is suspicious. It creates the impression of hiding information from the public. Normally, this is not good public relations. Currently, foods are mislabeled when genetically engineered food is labeled “natural.”
Breakthroughs in science and technology allow mere humans to play God with insufficient information. The downsides of genetic engineering are unknown, and the costs could exceed the benefits. What economists term “low cost production” might turn out to be very high cost.
Neoclassical economists do not lose sleep over external costs, because they think that there is always a solution. They think that the way to deal with pollution is to price it so that the entity that most needs to pollute ends up with the right. Somehow this is thought to solve the problem of pollution. Neoclassical economists think that it is impossible to run out of resources, because they believe man-made capital is a substitute for nature’s capital. It is a fantasy world in which we become ever more productive and better off and never run out of anything.
Ecological economists see the world differently. Nature’s capital, such as mineral resources and fisheries, are being depleted, and the disposal sinks for wastes are filling up, with land, air, and water being polluted. Every act of production produces useful products and wastes. As external costs and the depletion of nature’s capital are not measured, we have no way of knowing whether an increase in output is economic or uneconomic. All we can tell is whether the costs that are measured are covered by the price of the product.
What this means is that in a full world, neoclassical economics becomes less meaningful and is less able to contribute to our understanding of problems. It cannot even tell us whether GDP is rising or falling as we do not have a measure of the full cost of production.
Source
        
Posted: 24 May 2014 02:48 AM PDT

Over 400 cities worldwide will see millions marching against the US chemical and agricultural company Monsanto in an effort to boycott the use of Genetically Modified Organisms in food production.
Marches are planned in 52 countries in addition to some 47 US states that are jointing in the protest.
“MAM supports a sustainable food production system. We must act now to stop GMOs and harmful pesticides,” said Tami Monroe Canal, founder of March Against Monsanto (MAM) in a press release ahead of the global event.
The movement was formed after the 2012 California Proposition 37 on mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food initiative failed, prompting activists to demand a boycott of the GMO in food production.
“Monsanto’s predatory business and corporate agriculture practices threatens their generation’s health, fertility and longevity,” Canal said.
The main aim of the activism is to organize global awareness for the need to protect food supply, local farms and environment. It seeks to promote organic solutions, while “exposing cronyism between big business and the government.”
Activists claim that Monsanto spent hundreds of millions of dollars to “obstruct all labeling attempts” while suppressing all “research containing results not in their favor.”
Birth defects, organ damage, infant mortality, sterility and increased cancer risks are just some of the side-effects GMO is believed to cause.
“That is what the scientists have learned about, that the genetically modified foods will increase allergies that they are going to be less nutritious and that they can possibly or very contain toxins that can make us ill,” Organic Consumers Association’s political director Alexis Baden-Mayer told RT.
GMOs have been partially banned in a number of countries, including Germany, Japan, and Russia but yet in most countries across the globe still feed GMOs to their animals.
Citing the US example, Baden-Mayer told RT that “it is hard to distinguish the company Monsanto from the players in the US government.”
“Most of the genetically modified crops grown in the US, almost all of them end up in factory farms, concentrated in animal feeding operations,” stating that US has enough grassland to pasture and raise “100 percent grass-fed beef” and produce even more grass fed beef than is raised on “modified corn and soy.”
One year ago over 2 million people in 436 cities in 52 countries worldwide marched against the largest producer of genetically engineered seeds.
Source
        
Posted by Roberto Abraham Scaruffi at 08:36