Label says "organic" and "non genetically modified"? Buyer beware!

Like many people over the Christmas-New Year holiday season, I had occasion to hunt for items which met the dietary preferences of visitors. In this case a vegetable cheese made from non-genetically modified produce.

With limited time at my disposal I failed to practice what I preach (and actually do adhere to) for the rest of the year – I only read the front label and put the so-called organic non-GM soy cheese in my shopping basket.

Silly me. On arriving home and reading the back of the cheese packet this is what I found:

Omega 3 Soycheese

Product Specifications

Unit Weight: 200g

Pack Size: 70mm wide x 105mm long x 30mm deep

Ingredients

Water, Vegetable Oil (Canola 70%), Soy Extract (18%), Casein (Dairy Protein), Mineral Salts (339, 511), Salt, Food Acids (320,260), Flavour, Colour (Annatto Extract).

So what I had purchased was only 18 per cent soy ingredient, contained an unspecified amount of animal product and, possibly up to 17 per cent of GMO sourced, non-organic canola oil - because the labelling makes no claims at all about this oil.

Australian Eatwell Pty Ltd  (sometimes called DALICH PTY LTD) using the label Simply Better Foods should be ashamed of themselves for a front label that is misleading at best.

Eat well indeed! I won’t get caught like that again.

A reminder of the 2008 Federal Court of Australia ruling against Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1519 OF 2004

BETWEEN: HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL INC

Applicant

AND: KYODO SENPAKU KAISHA LTD

Respondent

JUDGE: ALLSOP J

DATE OF ORDER: 15 JANUARY 2008

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

1. THE COURT DECLARES that the respondent has killed, injured, taken and interfered with Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and injured, taken and interfered with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229, 229A, 229B and 229C of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), (the “Act”), and has treated and possessed such whales killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229D and 230 of the Act, without permission or authorisation under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Act.

2. THE COURT ORDERS that the respondent be restrained from killing, injuring, taking or interfering with any Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) or humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, or treating or possessing any such whale killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, unless permitted or authorised under sections 231,n232 or 238 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Reasons for Judgement

Ramifications of Judgement

It's a new year and time to go to war agin wimmin

Grab your guns boys – it’s time to hunt the sheilas according to A Voice For Men:

“We’re going to have to shift to a war mentality….If you’re new to the Men’s Rights Movement, or you’re a feminist, or just stupid, you might need a bit of background to appreciate the need for this article’s content. A summarized background is provided for you here. This is a war waged against human rights, and those of us who identify as MRAs are a tiny minority fighting an establish mainstream. The past and present attempts to personally smear and destroy individual men seen so far are just the beginning of a fight that we should expect to get ugly. While we must and do continue to adhere to strictly truthful rhetoric and ethical tactics, our opponents don’t, and we should not expect them to. There’s money to be made is denigrating masculinity, and we directly threaten the income of war profiteers.”

“It appears now that 2011 was just a warm up for 2012.

Over the next several days you will find a series of articles on this website regarding an assault on human rights that will sweep the Australian continent. The scope of a planned campaign by the Australian government (The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021) is so far reaching that presenting it without overwhelming readers has been a significant challenge for myself, Kyle Lovett and John the Other. The sheer volume of the content, as well as the staggering loss of civil rights that Australian men are about to suffer is formidable…..

These machinations have now reached the stage of action, and are about to be implemented. They involve, but are by no means limited, to the following:

• The systemic enabling and promotion of child abuse by mothers and other women.
• The Australian government suppression of research that implicates women as child abusers.
• The legal redefinition of domestic violence to include acts such as making purchases without consulting your wife, not listening to your wife or even disciplining your dog.
• The legal redefinition of domestic violence to exclude male victims from that legal definition.
• Arresting and holding men in prison, without bail, on the accusation alone of domestic violence.
• Summarily evicting men from their homes while forcing them to maintain financial responsibility for those homes on nothing more than an accusation from their wives or girlfriends.
• Shifting the burden of proof on domestic violence from the state to the defendant. The accused will be forced to prove he did not commit an act of violence.
• The legal redefinition of rape, and subsequent shift of the burden of proof onto a defendant to prove the he obtained specific kinds of verbal consent for sex.”

Pure crazy comes to you courtesy of:

Snaphot from Whois

Il Papa speaking in doomsday code in 2012

CODE:

“Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself.”

TRANSLATION:

Gay marriage = Armageddon.

Oi, Bennie! A gay couple saying “I do” is not about to stop babies being born by the millions, cause ethnic genocide or result in mass extinction of the human species.

Whale Wars 2012: Sea Shepherd alleges Japanese whaler Yushin Maru 3 has entered Australian territorial waters

The Sydney Morning Herald
Whalers chase activist ship into Australian waters: Sea Shepherd
9 January 2012

Sea Shepherd Organisation on 9 January 2012:

The Yushin Maru #3 is presently (at 1400 Hours AEST) 5 nautical miles off the beach at MacQuarie Island. The Sea Shepherd ship Bob Barker was attempting to shake the tail of the Yushin Maru #3 at MacQuarie. According to a 2008 order of the Australian Federal Court, Japanese whaling vessels are prohibited from entering the territorial waters of Australia.

 * Macquarie Island: a Tasmanian State Reserve managed by the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service.

UPDATE

From The Age online 11 January 2012:

THE Gillard government has complained to Japan after a whaling vessel went deep into Australian territorial waters in pursuit of a protest vessel.
Hours after Japan said yesterday it would release three Australian protesters who illegally boarded a whaling security ship, it emerged that another vessel of the Japanese fleet went as close as four nautical miles to Tasmania's Macquarie Island in pursuit of the activists' long-range ship Bob Barker.
This brought the Japanese ship, the whale catcher Yushin Maru No. 3, inside Australia's 12 nautical mile territorial limit, where domestic laws ban whaling.
A spokesman for Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said the government had complained to Japan about the incursion.
''We have asked our embassy [in Tokyo] today to reiterate to the Japanese government that whaling vessels are not welcome in Australian territorial waters,'' the spokesman said.

Kyodo News states three protesters aboard the Shonan Maru 2 to be transferred to Australian custody

Headline in Kyodo News online on 9 January 2012:

Japan to transfer custody of 3 antiwhaling activists to Australia

ABC News reports on 10 January:

Three Australian anti-whaling activists being held on a Japanese ship after they snuck onboard at the weekend will be transferred to Australian custody, Japan's Kyodo news service is reporting. According to reports, Japanese government sources say criminal charges will not be laid against the three men because they did not cause injury to crew members of the Shonan Maru 2 or to the body of the ship.
Japanese government sources say they will consult with the Australian Government on the transfer of the three men.

Could it possibly be that the Government of Japan, besides objecting to the boarding of its own coast guard-manned ship, the Shonan Maru 2, was also less than impressed with the fact that this ship had decided to leave the whaling fleet as it approached the Antarctic killing grounds and come so close to mainland Australia in order to harass the MY Steve Irwin?

UPDATE:

According to the Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun on 9 January 2012:

Attorney General Nicola Roxon said she hoped a deal could be reached with Japanese authorities to release the three.
"We are representing our views most strongly that they should be released promptly and returned to Australian soil," Roxon said.
In addition, the attorney general also said the ministry patrol ship, which is providing security to the whaling vessels, is not welcome in Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone.
"The ship, people need to remember, is not directly involved in whaling activities, but it is clearly providing a support role, and that may give us some other options if it was trying to come into our territorial waters," she said.

Monsanto & Co. begins 2012 in court - again

The Charleston Daily Mail, 27 December 2011:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Several hundred Nitro area residents gathered Tuesday at the Charleston Marriott as attorneys attempted to forge a mediation in a class action lawsuit against the former Monsanto Company.

Representatives of the West Virginia Supreme Court mass litigation department and the attorney's law firms would not allow media access to any of the plaintiffs, saying those settlement discussions were confidential.

The case is scheduled to begin trial Jan. 3 in Putnam Circuit Court before specially-appointed Circuit Judge Derek Swope. If a settlement is not approved before then, jury selection is expected to begin next week and the trial is predicted to take up to six months.

The mass-litigation mediation involving 193 cases of alleged personal injury and wrongful death is being presided over by Circuit Judges Booker T. Stephens of McDowell County and Circuit Judge Alan D. Moats of Taylor County…..

The Charleston Gazette, 3 January 2012:

As jury selection began Tuesday in the class-action lawsuit seeking medical monitoring for those who may have been exposed to hazardous chemicals produced at Monsanto's former Nitro plant, the judge expanded a gag order on the lawyers prohibiting comments to the media.

"No lawyer is to discuss anything about the case," said Mercer County Circuit Court Judge Derek Swope. "If asked, you are to have no comment, end of story."

Swope's comments came after Monsanto lawyers filed a motion Tuesday asking him to hold lead plaintiff attorney Stuart Calwell in contempt of court for comments he made concerning the case to the Gazette and other local media outlets.

The judge did not immediately rule on the motion, but indicated he would hear arguments and rule later.

Swope was appointed to hear the case after Putnam Circuit Judge O.C. Spaulding was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig's disease and retired at the end of the year…….

Background

Court rejects Monsanto’s attempt to hide behind government contractor defence, 28 September 2011.

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

What looks suspiciously like crudely constructed Japanese propaganda concerning the Forest Rescue protesters boarding of Shonan Maru 2

The YouTube legend accompanying the two videos shown below state that they were created by the Institute of Cetacean Research:

These videos were provided by Japan's Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR)

The first video shows boats launched by Sea Shepherd's vessel MY Bob Barker (between 4-6 January 2012) engaging with the Yushin Maru No. 3 which forms part of the Japanese Government-sponsored whaling fleet operating in the Southern Ocean.
Yet it is tiltled Three Australians board Japanese whaling ship.

If the video origin statement is correct, then it is a clumsy attempt by the whaling industry or its supporters to imply that the three Forest Rescue protesters - who boarded the Shonan Maru 2 in waters off Australia's west coast on 7 December 2012 - were involved in a physical confrontation with that ship.

The Australian protesters were many hundreds of miles away from the MY Bob Barker and were not engaged in anything but peaceful protest when they boarded the Shonan Maru 2.


http://youtu.be/GELv0KXv6zA

The second video titled How To Slow Down A Japanese whaling research vessel SS Style attempts to equate the crew of the Bob Barker with Third Reich SS personnel - who ironically were former allies of the Government of Japan during World War II and, presumably much admired by them then.


http://youtu.be/wCHmXkDjE_U

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott gets his industrial relations figures muddled yet again

On 6 January 2012 The Australian reported:

Speaking in Brisbane yesterday, the Opposition Leader said the rate of industrial disputation had increased since the government changed and the Fair Work Act was brought in and it was important the review of the act ordered by Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten addressed these problems.

On the same day The Sydney Morning Herald also reported:

THE crop of industrial disputes across the nation has been described as run of the mill by the Workplace Relations Minister, Bill Shorten.

Mr Shorten said the rate of industrial disputation was far lower in Australia than a decade ago - a claim challenged by the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, who spoke of his pride in the Howard government's record on industrial relations.

In Australia the Federal Coalition Government under Howard was in power between the federal elections of 2 March 1996 and 24 November 2007. The Federal Labor Government under Rudd and Gillard has been in power from 3 December 2007 to the present day.

Work Choices was enacted over the period 14 December 2005 to 27 March 2006 and the Fair Work Act was enacted over the period 7 April to 26 May 2009.

So who is right, Abbott or Shorten? I am giving the point to Shorten.

Firstly because there was an equal rise and fall in the annual instances of industrial relations disputes in the four years since Labor gained government and disputes only rose in one year out of three since 2009 – Tony Abbott was in error in seeing an increased rate directly related to the 2009 Fair Work Act. Secondly, because Abbott misrepresents industrial relations disputes under the Howard Government - in those eleven years dispute instances randomly rose in five years and randomly fell in six years.

Thirdly, the industrial relations landscape was varied enough between 1996 and 2011 for Shorten’s overall assessment to be accurate.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS):

1996

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/B66FAAFB13622C15CA25722500073791/$File/63210_1296.pdf

1997

The number of working days lost in 1997 was 528,800, a decrease of 399,700 (43%) from the 1996 calendar year.  The number of disputes  reported in 1997 (446) was 18% less than in 1996, with the number of employees  involved decreasing by 46% to 312,700.

1998

There were 518 industrial disputes reported in Australia in 1998, 71 more than the previous year according to data released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This is the first increase in the number of disputes for a calendar year since 1995.

Nationally the number of disputes (514) and number of employees involved (347,000) increased by 15% and 10% respectively in 1998 compared to the previous year.

1999

There were 717 disputes during 1999, the highest number since 1992 (728). The number of employees involved in industrial disputes (459,900) and working days lost (649,600) were the highest since 1996.

2000

There were 691 disputes during 2000, a decrease of 5% compared with 1999 (731).

The number of employees involved in industrial disputes decreased by 30% to 324,800 during this period.

2001

During the twelve months ended December 2001, there were 675 disputes, 23 less than in the twelve months ended December 2000 (698).

2002

During the twelve months ended December 2002 there were 766 disputes, 91 more than in the twelve months ended December 2001.

2003

During the twelve months ended December 2003, there were 642 disputes, 124 less than in the twelve months ended December 2002.

During the twelve months ended December 2003, there were 439,400 working days lost, 180,400 more than in the twelve months ended December 2002.

2004

During the year ended December 2004, there were 691 disputes, 48 more than in the year ended December 2003.

During the year ended December 2004, there were 379,800 working days lost, 59,600 less than in the year ended December 2003.

2005

During the year ended December 2005, there were 472 disputes, 220 less than in the year ended December 2004.

2006

During the year ended December 2006, there were 202 disputes, 270 less than in the year ended December 2005.  

2007

During the year ended December 2007, there were 135 disputes, 67 less than in the year ended December 2006.

During the year ended December 2007, there were 49,700 working days lost compared with 132,600 in the year ended December 2006.

2008

During the year ended December 2008, there were 177 disputes, 42 more than in the year ended December 2007.

During the year ended December 2008, there were 196,500 working days lost compared with 49,700 in the year ended December 2007.

2009

During the year ended December 2009, there were 236 disputes, 59 more than in the year ended December 2008.

During the year ended December 2009, there were 132,700 working days lost compared with 196,500 in the year ended December 2008.

2010

During the year ended December 2010, there were 227 disputes, 9 less than in the year ended December 2009.

During the year ended December 2010, there were 126,600 working days lost compared with 132,700 in the year ended December 2009.

2011

During the year ended September 2011, there were 197 disputes, 36 fewer than in the year ended September 2010.

During the year ended September 2011, there were 214,400 working days lost compared with 144,100 in the year ended September 2010.**

** December 2011 ABS industrial dispute statistics should be released in March 2012.

Battle of the Blogotariats

In the dying last quarter of 2011 that terrific Australian blog aggregate site, Blogotariat, decided to change its format and content and I’ve been groaning ever since.

Now before you rightly mutter than I’m a geriatric blogger who dislikes change which challenges my ability to read or negotiate a website easily, I have to say I’m not alone in my groaning – Maud up the Street is fair choleric over its metamorphosis into Punch & HuffPo Downunder (or any combination of the commercial media-owned ‘blogs’ you like to name) and she is not the only one.

But never fear, for those who liked the old Blogotariat (which actually promoted Aussie blogs) there is still hope of ol’ Bloggo goodness being read here.