Food being managed Globally would be worse than Food managed Federally by the FDA. Whatever happened to Locally? Grow and Buy Local.

[www.thedailybell.com]

[sounding like a broken record]

This is not a legitimate source for data. It's full of hyperbole, wild conjecture, and frankly, NewSpeak. How on earth does the G20's pronouncement that food insecurity leads to political instability, an indisputable fact since at least Hittite times, result in a potential attempt at hegemony by the Anglosphere, whatever the heck that is? Further, how does it aid any of us here to be better, more responsible participants on this site? What does this have to do with responsible agriculture and the Raw Vegan lifestyle we are trying to promote here?

It seems to me that the tenor of the article is in direct opposition to what most of us here stand for, and I really am wondering why you are posting stuff like this over and over . . .

Tamukha,

I thought this is exactly what we're all about. I thought we all want to own a small piece of land, grow our own food, be self-sufficient, and eat raw without anyone tampering with our food or forcing us to eat genetically modified, processed, unhealthy food. And we are always fighting for our Health Freedom and if this article is true, it looks like the globalists want to take over our food supply, just after the US government took it over about a week ago. I thought some of us are thinking we have to be vigilant so that growing and eating our own raw food is not outlawed.

You said:

"how does it aid any of us here to be better, more responsible participants on this site?"

I think bringing Food Freedom News to everyone's attention is helping us to be more responsible participants on this site.

You said:

" What does this have to do with responsible agriculture and the Raw Vegan lifestyle we are trying to promote here?"

Like I said previously - if this does take place, we may not be able to grow and eat RAW VEGAN food anymore.

I believe in being vigilant and pro-active, rather than 'wait and see' what happens and bury my head in the sand.

And I think the Other Health Related forum is the perfect place for this type of information and news sharing relating to the Raw Vegan Lifestyle.

"I believe in being vigilant and pro-active, rather than 'wait and see' what happens and bury my head in the sand. "

I agree...

seems to me I recall recently some woman saying...

...let's just pass the bill & then we'll see what's in it...

Personally, I would rather take a pro-active stance instead of waiting & seeing.

...whatever happened to that woman...Oh yeah, she was sent packing...thank God.

Also, I love The Daily Bell website. I think it's great, they're Independent Thinkers. It's very legitimate info. More so than Wikileaks, which anybody can edit and lie. I don't know what 'NewSpeak' is....

Here is another source for the information about this subject that may be more acceptable to you:

Zoellick: G20 Must Act to Stabilize Food Prices

[news.yahoo.com]

I like to read the Comments on the Articles - it looks like most people agree with me that More Centalized Control of the Food Supply is not a good thing.

KidRaw,

I read the Daily Bell article. I don't think it discusses what you think it does--this has nothing whatsoever to do with backyard gardening, for instance. It discusses centralized food control only in the first paragraph, whereupon it veers off into CT. The Yahoo article has more actual information, but unnecessarily mentions economic systems in a way not germane to Zoellick's statement, but at least they're thorough and documented. I do not read the comments at Yahoo, because for me, the point is the information in the article, not what anonymous posters think of it. It's not an excerpt from "The Economist," it's Yahoo, LOL.

IMO independent thinking does not occur if it not be necessarily tied to facts. The Daily Bell appears to possess a very tenuous grasp on these. What on earth is the "Anglosphere" and what does it have to do with anything? But this is why I used an Orwellian term to describe it initially. I would beware of attributing "independent thinking" to a website of unknown origin whose contributors have unproven expertise. Just because it reiterates what you believe doesn't make it independent of thought; it makes it familiar. One's own ability to reason information out based on objective data can be considerd independent thinking, for sure.

Lastly, I thought you were in the US, but maybe you are in Europe or Africa? Because Zoellick is talking about sensible, mostly aid food distribution in the other hemisphere, but it does not apply to the US.

Tamukha, we seem to be talking about two different aspects of a subject.

One would be FACTS, which you seem to be saying is all that we can post on any subject. Facts are the Past or the Now.

FACTS is only One Facet of an Issue.

But I think we also do discuss Opinions and Commentary and even Conjecture (into the future) on this board on any given subject.

Most articles would give FACTS and Commentary and Opinion and Conjecture or Consequences or Projections into the future.

I think the article does a very good job of telling us the facts, and giving commentary, opinion and what may be (conjecture) the consequences of Global Control of Our Food Suply.

I was not aware that we may only give FACTS on this board and not Commentary, Opinion, Conjecture, Consequences, Projection on any issue.

I would think a well-rounded article would consist of FACTS, Opinion, Commentary, Conjecture, Projection, Consequences, etc. And certainly a Discussion on the board would consist of those concepts.

To Invalidate anything other than FACTS in a post seems limiting and marginalizing and paints us into a box.

I don't think it serves we Responsible Raw Foodists in our quest for Food Freedom.

KidRaw,

I appreciate what you are saying and basically agree. When I say "facts" I'm referring to what is verifiable, because this is the best foundation from which to formulate the reasoning for an opinion. Conjecture, what is generally referred to as an educated guess or inference, is something we engage in every day on these boards. It usually proceeds from what is verifiable. Speculation is technically one further step removed from what is verifiable. Then we have wild speculation, which boarders on that which cannot be proven, and fantasy, which is of course, make-believe. You can certainly draw reasoned conclusions and make intelligent surmisings about something you don't have full facts about. I do. But it still has to have some connection to what is plausible and/or real.

I can talk all day long about how, after much investigation, I have surmised that, like in the "Diskworld" literature series, the planet is not round, but a big plate that sits on top of several elephants who cruise through space on the back of a giant tortoise. I can use all kinds of astronomic information to back me up, and I'm sure I could find lots of anonymous opinions on the interwebs to support my idea. But this doesn't make what I believe valid.

Not everyone's opinion, and I am referring to sources of information online, is equal. Not every opinion is equally correct. It is said that there are two sides to every story. Wrong: there are more than two sides to every story. But only one is likely to be the most accurate. There is information of greater and lesser quality and value, and its quality and value is not determined arbitrarily by how much you or I wish it were true or think it reflects our preconceptions. Its quality and value are a direct reflection of how well it represents reality. And, spiritual philosophy aside, reality is not subjective.

Failing Elite Food Gambit?

[www.thedailybell.com]