All posts by nedhamson

Activist, writer, researcher, addicted to sharing information and facts.

In the name of religion

Allahu Akbar, they chant in overwhelming frenzy, In vain our men are slain in the name of religion, Take off your rose tinted spectacles, Dare to ponder and look around yourself. You – my dear, average Pakistani – are not…

The post In the name of religion appeared first on sister-hood magazine. A Fuuse production by Deeyah Khan..

Ohio isn’t an anomaly—the anti-choice movement is about punishment

It’s about hating women freedom and punishment for thinking they have their own rights. Too many men still want to be superior because they are lazy and dolts.

Earlier this month, the Ohio state House passed a bill that would ban abortion with virtually zero exceptions when the fetus develops a heartbeat at about six weeks, which is before many women realize they’re pregnant. And as of last week, Ohio’s state House is considering another bill, HB 565, which would confer personhood upon fetuses and criminalize abortion.

Violation of this law, either by offering abortion care or receiving it, would warrant punishment ranging from a prison sentence to the death penalty.

HB 565 is still under consideration by the House health committee and likely won’t be voted on this year. Notably, Ohio’s Republican Gov. John Kasich vetoed a fetal heartbeat abortion ban passed in 2016, but has also signed into law a dangerous bill banning abortion at 20 weeks, in violation of Roe v. Wade’s guarantee of the right to abortion until fetal viability.

As shocking as killing those women for seeking health care may sound, considering one in four women has an abortion before turning 45, Ohio’s HB 565 isn’t isolated. Rather, it’s part of a terrifying, mounting trend of conservative thinkers and anti-choice lawmakers calling for the punishment of those who provide and have abortions.

Earlier this year, prominent conservative columnist Kevin Williamson was terminated from a brief stint at The Atlantic when he adamantly stood by his opinion that women who have abortions should be sentenced to the death penalty by hanging. Suffice to say, the usual band of “free speech” advocates was enraged, as if there’s nothing violent about advocating for a quarter of all American women to be hanged. Williamson’s comments and their high-profile nature brought an uncomfortable, oft-dodged question to the forefront: If anti-choice politicians really do regard fetuses as people, and abortion as murder, what is the appropriate consequence for people who have abortions?

Around the same time Williamson’s comments went viral, Republican Idaho state Sen. Bob Nonini similarly called for policy to subject women who have abortions to the death penalty by hanging. On the campaign trail in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump said there “must be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions. And Ohio is not the only state that has floated legislation of this nature; Oklahoma and Texas have both considered bills to recognize abortion as a felony in recent years.

Other state anti-abortion laws have centered around shaming and punishing women, too—albeit less explicitly. Fetal burial laws in states like Texas briefly required women to pay thousands of dollars out-of-pocket to bury or cremate the remains of their fetus, before being struck down in federal court. An Arizona law enacted earlier this year requires women who have abortions to submit lengthy, detailed explanation justifying their choice. And, of course, there are “rape exceptions” to anti-abortion bills that force survivors to prove their trauma just to receive health care. Each of these policies has costly, invasive, and even traumatic consequences for women seeking reproductive health care.

Mainstream anti-choice politicians have a long history of attempting to pivot from the question of what punishment women who have abortions should face. But in addition to comments from Williamson, Nonini, and Trump, Ohio’s HB 565 should make the anti-choice perspective on punishment—and the value of women’s lives—clear. In recent years, in tandem with the rise of Trump’s political career, there has been a jarring increase in threats, violence and both attempted and completed murders at abortion clinics. This uptick in anti-choice violence has gotten minimal coverage by media outlets, which instead seem more interested in  Republican politicians being yelled at in public.

The reality is that obstructing access to contraception or abortion is a form of reproductive coercion and is inherently violent. One need not look further than the 25 million unsafe abortions that take place every year on the global level, the majority occurring in countries where abortion is illegal or highly restricted. In the U.S., compared with women who were able to access abortions, women who sought but were denied abortion care were more likely to go on to struggle with poverty, physical and mental health, and remain trapped in abusive relationships. For some women with severe health conditions, an unwanted pregnancy and delivery could kill them, which is perhaps part of the reason why the U.S. has the highest maternal death rates in the industrialized world—especially among women of color—with higher rates in states with more abortion restrictions.

Ultimately, whether or not women are punished by the courts, restricting abortion is an act of control that has been proven time and again to jeopardize women and their children’s lives. Anti-choice ideology reflects the prioritization of a select minority of people’s personal beliefs over the livelihood and autonomy of women; it is the degradation of women as a unit, stripping women of our humanity to instead confer it upon fetuses. And whether or not women face the death penalty or exorbitant fines for having abortions, the belief that the government can force people to give birth marks a fundamental violation of consent, and threatens our privacy, health, and safety.

Featured Image: Susan Walsh/AP Images

Wednesday Open Thread | So, Little Paulie Manafort Thought That He Could Outsmart Bobby Three Sticks? LMAO!!

So…..we get the news that the Special Counsel has decided to cancel out Paulie Manafort’s plea deal…

WHY?

Because Paulie thought that he could lie to Bobby Three Sticks.

Background:

Special counsel Robert Mueller said in a court filing Monday that Paul Manafort had breached his plea agreement by lying to investigators since signing the agreement.

After signing the plea agreement, Manafort committed federal crimes by lying to

the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Special Counsel’s Office on a variety of subject

matters, which constitute breaches of the agreement. The government will file a detailed

sentencing submission to the Probation Department and the Court in advance of sentencing that

sets forth the nature of the defendant’s crimes and lies, including those after signing the plea

agreement herein.

As the defendant has breached the plea agreement, there is no reason to delay his

sentencing herein.

Manafort still doesn’t get it. He doesn’t get that Robert Mueller, III, doesn’t ask questions that he doesn’t already have the answers to. ….been that way since the beginning.

Now…THE best part about all of this?

Yup. Mueller delayed this until after Trump handed in his open book test.

Releasing a list of the lies Manafort told provide another opportunity to tell a story. A report, if you will. https://t.co/50p1E2Cuo9

— emptywheel (@emptywheel) November 27, 2018

That’s right, Ladies and Gentlemen….Bobby Three Sticks delayed all of this UNTIL HE HAD DOLT45’S ANSWERS IN WRITING.

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

I can’t get past that. Cracks me up everytime I think about it.

A poster on BJ put it in crystal clear focus:

To make the point more explicit, Mueller has Trump’s answer to his questions. If Trump used some of Manfort’s lies, they are now Trump’s lies, and Mueller has them in writing.

And..that’s what you call perjury…..

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

And, then, we get more news yesterday….

Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and visited around the time he joined Trump’s campaign, the Guardian has been told.

Sources have said Manafort went to see Assange in 2013, 2015 and in spring 2016 – during the period when he was made a key figure in Trump’s push for the White House.

It is unclear why Manafort wanted to see Assange and what was discussed. But the last meeting is likely to come under scrutiny and could interest Robert Mueller, the special prosecutor who is investigating alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

A well-placed source has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March 2016. Months later WikiLeaks released a stash of Democratic emails stolen by Russian intelligence officers.

Manafort, 69, denies involvement in the hack and says the claim is “100% false”. His lawyers declined to answer the Guardian’s questions about the visits.

Manafort….Assange……

What could they possibly have to discuss?

UH HUH

UH HUH

YEAH, BABY!!!

Garrett M. Graff

@vermontgmg

Yikes. The extent to which Manafort has apparently never realized that Bob Mueller knows all is incredible. Third time he’s been caught lying by Mueller over this year.

Here is what I think about Manafort lying. Mueller knew he lied when he did. And he didn’t say so until today, AFTER Trump submitted his answers to Mueller. Which is why Trump just melted down

I guess Trump fell into that perjury trap after all.

— Hilts, CAPTAIN Hilts (@geokelley) November 27, 2018

It’s about to be on and popping!

What a time….what a time…

Keep your eyes focused people….they will create all sorts of distractions…but, the real deal is right there, in front of us.

Bangladesh to eject safety inspectors brought in after Rana Plaza disaster

Greed over life!

5649.jpg?width=300&quality=85&auto=forma

Closing Dhaka office will limit international ability to inspect clothing supply chains for brands like H&M, Esprit and Primark

An international inspection regime put in place after the collapse of a Bangladesh garment factory killed more than 1,100 people will be forced to leave the country on Friday, with activists warning of “profound and lasting” consequences for worker safety.

A restraining order imposed by the Bangladesh high court will come into force on 30 November, forcing the Accord for Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh to close its Dhaka office, limiting its ability to inspect thousands of factories supplying clothes for brands including H&M, Esprit and Primark.

Continue reading…

Looking to fungi, spiders and other natural insect killers for less toxic alternatives to synthetic pesticides

Mistake NUMBER ONE, 2, 3,4,,,? Thinking that humans know enough to outsmart nature’s means of dealing with imbalance of systems. Article_Biopesticides_Main2.jpg

In the 1940s, scientists discovered the insect-killing properties of synthetic chemical compounds, including DDT, chlordane and lindane. Such products were cheap to produce and very effective at protecting crops and fighting insect-borne disease. But by the 1960s, it was apparent that these chemicals which can persist in nature long after initial use were accumulating in the environment. Whats more, many were harmful to birds, fish, reptiles and mammals.

Much of this came to light through Rachel Carsons revelatory book Silent Spring, published in 1962, but scientists already had begun to look for less toxic pest control alternatives. Researchers at University of California, Berkeley, and University of California, Riverside, defined in 1959 the principles of what would later be called integrated pest management (IPM) an environmentally sensitive approach to controlling insects and other pests that relies on a combination of tools. Today, biopesticides are part of the IPM toolbox.

Biopesticides are pesticides made from substances found in nature that offer a less toxic alternative to man-made chemicals. As a class theyve been used for a long time, but most traditional biopesticides havent been able to compete with synthetic pesticides on cost and effectiveness. Researchers around the world now are working to change that by manipulating chemicals found in plants, animals, bacteria and fungi. Theyre discovering new ways to use natures arsenal to build better biopesticides and so reduce the need for less environmentally friendly pest control.

Niche Market

A lot of the pioneering research around biopesticides focused on insect pheromones chemicals that insects use to communicate with each other says Jim Seiber, a professor emeritus of food science and environmental toxicology at University of California, Davis. The use of these chemicals to alter insect behavior when sprayed on crops or used as bait traps, for example, worked to some extent, but not nearly as well as synthetic insecticides. Most people like instant results,says Seiber. You could spray DDT and see the dead insects out there and count them. You couldnt get those same results with biopesticides.

As a result, biopesticides became a niche market, today accounting for roughly 3 percent of the global annual market for pesticides. There have been a few commercial standouts, though. The popular insecticide spinosad, for instance, was derived from a kind of soil bacteria discovered at an abandoned rum distillery in the 1980s.

pesticides Australian Blue Mountains funnel web spider

Venom from the Australian Blue Mountains funnel spider contain substances that only kill certain insects, giving it promise as a source of an environmentally friendly pesticide. Photo courtesy of Graham M. Nicholson, University of Technology, Sydney

By the 1990s, scientists were documenting increasing problems with synthetics. Some had been used so extensively that insects were evolving resistance. Biochemist Glenn King turned to spiders for a potential solution.

Spiders are professional insect killers,says King, a professor at the University of Queensland, Australia. Venom from spiders, scorpions, snakes and other predatory animals contain a mix of biologically active compounds called peptides. These small molecules kill prey in various ways. Some affect the nervous system. Others injure the cells and damage living tissues in other parts of the body. Some are specific to specific prey animals.

The idea was that, unlike manmade chemicals, the venom peptides wouldn’t leave residues that could persist in the environment for years, and because they targeted specific types of insects, they wouldn’t harm fish, reptiles, birds or mammals. King discovered a few molecules in the venom of the Australian Blue Mountains funnel web spider that could kill certain insects but wouldnt harm other insects or vertebrates. In 2005, he founded a biotech company called Vestaron to turn these small molecules into biopesticides that farmers could use to protect their crops. The idea was that, unlike man-made chemicals, the venom peptides wouldnt leave residues that could persist in the environment for years, and because they targeted specific types of insects, they wouldnt harm fish, reptiles, birds or mammals. 

In July 2018, Michigan-based Vestaron began selling its first biopesticide derived from these peptides. The product, called Spear-T, kills aphids, mites, thrips and whiteflies common pests of greenhouse-grown veggies and ornamental plants. CEO Anna Rath says Vestaron plans to bring to market a family of peptide-based biopesticides in the next few years for use on field crops, too.

The company is also turning to bacteria to help expand where and how their products might be used, Rath says. It recently inserted a gene for producing a caterpillar-killing peptide derived from spider venom into a protein derived from a bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). When caterpillars chew on leaves that have been sprayed with the product, theyll eat a little of the protein, which pokes tiny holes in their gut, helping to increase the penetration of the insecticidal peptide.

Botanicals and Fungi

Other researchers are working to manipulate chemicals from plants and  fungi to build better biopesticides.

For the past few decades, farmers around the world have employed essential oils, including neem oil an extract from the Asian neem tree as insecticidal botanicals. Essential oils, including neem, break down quickly in nature. This makes them environmentally friendly, but not very effective. Recently, scientists have started to experiment with encapsulating these botanicals in nanoparticles that could help to protect the active compounds from breaking down as quicklyan idea thats been tried successfully with some medicines in the human body.

pesticides neem

Seeds from the Asian neem tree yield an oil that can help protect crops from insect pests. Source: Wikimedia Commons, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

Fungi are another particularly promising source of biopesticides. Theyre major disease-causing agents in nature,says Raymond John St. Leger, an entomologist at the University of Maryland. Many have evolved to parasitize specific insect hosts, devising gruesome methods for finishing them off. For instance, some ant fungi turn their hosts into zombies infecting the ants brain and causing it to move to an area conducive to fungal growth before killing it and releasing fungal spores through the top of the ants head.

That natural specificity is a boon, because it means scientists can search for a fungus with a specific host range for instance, one that kills bloodsucking flies but not bees or butterflies, says St. Leger.

But fungi work slowly, so St. Leger and University of Maryland Ph.D. candidate Brian Lovett now are working on ways to genetically modify fungi for a quicker kill. They and other colleagues have inserted venom peptide genes from spiders and scorpions into fungi. Theyve taken their experiment to Africa, where theyre testing its efficacy in aerosol form on malaria-causing mosquitoes in an enclosure specially built to prevent accidental release.

Challenges Remain

Despite the scientific excitement around new biopesticide technologies, most remain untested in the marketplace. When it comes to using in agricultural applications, in the end, all that matters is what farmers think,says King.  

None of the researchers sees biopesticides as a perfect replacement for synthetics, for either farming or public health applications.

“Chemicals are going to continue playing a role for a long time to come,”says St. Leger, who sees the recent innovation in biopesticides as creating more options for pest management, not a single solution. No one product will offer a long-term fix, since pests are constantly evolving resistance. These biopesticides are prone to resistance just like any other pesticide, so if they aren’t used appropriately and rotated with other forms of pest control, they — as synthetics before them — could contribute to harder-to-kill pests.

If history has taught us anything, St. Leger says, it’s that pest management requires constant innovation.

View Ensia homepage

The post Looking to fungi, spiders and other natural insect killers for less toxic alternatives to synthetic pesticides appeared first on Ensia.

US Farmers Store Record Soybean Crop as China Dispute Weighs

Pay to play – who’s paying more than farmers?

News
American farmers still working to get out their remaining soybeans after a weather-plagued harvest season are struggling to figure out what to do with a record crop now their traditionally dominant export market is largely closed.
USSoybeanCropHeroImageAP1.jpg?itok=EEQMJ
Contributed Author: 
David Pitt, Associated Press
Topics: 

Trump threatens to cut GM subsidies in retaliation for U.S. job cuts

LOL – the subsidies? for electric cars that GM is pulling back from until it rethinks approach – no harm to GM just big talk from 45! U.S. President Donald Trump threatened on Tuesday to eliminate subsidies for General Motors Co in retaliation for the automaker cutting U.S. jobs and plants, and the automaker also took fire from Canadian political and labor leaders for cutbacks there.

topNews?d=yIl2AUoC8zA topNews?i=033Xf7E6xx4:Li4BOLUObGU:V_sGLi topNews?i=033Xf7E6xx4:Li4BOLUObGU:-BTjWO