Public Comment Period for this rule closes December 12, 2005
Send an email to EPA here!
Postal address appears below

Organic Consumers Association

Public comments are now being accepted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on its newly proposed federal regulation regarding the testing of chemicals and pesticides on human subjects. On August 2, 2005, Congress had mandated the EPA create a rule that permanently bans chemical testing on pregnant women and children. But the EPA's newly proposed rule, misleadingly titled "Protections for Subjects in Human Research," puts industry profits ahead of children's welfare. The rule allows for government and industry scientists to treat children as human guinea pigs in chemical experiments in the following situations:

1. Children who "cannot be reasonably consulted," such as those that are mentally handicapped or orphaned newborns may be tested on. With permission from the institution or guardian in charge of the individual, the child may be exposed to chemicals for the sake of research.
   
2. Parental consent forms are not necessary for testing on children who have been neglected or abused.
   
3. Chemical studies on any children outside of the U.S. are acceptable.

Send a letter to EPA here!

OCA's focal concerns with this proposed rule specifically involve the following portions of text within the EPA document (Read the full EPA proposed rule here:
PDF --- HTML):

70 FR 53865 26.408(a) "The IRB (Independent Review Board) shall determine that adequate provisions are made for soliciting the assent of the children, when in the judgment of the IRB the children are capable of providing assent...If the IRB determines that the capability of some or all of the children is so limited that they cannot reasonably be consulted, the assent of the children is not a necessary condition for proceeding with the research. Even where the IRB determines that the subjects are capable of assenting, the IRB may still waive the assent requirement..."

(OCA NOTE: Under this clause, a mentally handicapped child or infant orphan could be tested on without assent. This violates the Nuremberg Code, an international treaty that mandates assent of test subjects is "absolutely essential," and that the test subject must have "legal capacity to give consent" and must be "so situated as to exercise free power of choice." This loophole in the rule must be completely removed.)

70 FR 53865 26.408(c) "If the IRB determines that a research protocol is designed for conditions or for a subject population for which parental or guardian permission is not a reasonable requirement to protect the subjects (for example, neglected or abused children), it may waive the consent requirements..."

(OCA NOTE: Under the general rule, the EPA is saying it's okay to test chemicals on children if their parents or institutional guardians consent to it. This clause says that neglected or abused children have unfit guardians, so no consent would be required to test on those children. This loophole in the rule must be completely removed.)

70 FR 53864 26.401 (a)(2) "To What Do These Regulations Apply? It also includes research conducted or supported by EPA outside the United States, but in appropriate circumstances, the Administrator may, under § 26.101(e), waive the applicability of some or all of the requirements of these regulations for research..."

(OCA NOTE: This clause is stating that the Administrator of the EPA has the power to completely waive regulations on human testing, if the testing is done outside of the U.S. This will allow chemical companies to do human testing in other countries where these types of laws are less strict. This loophole in the rule must be completely removed.)

70 FR 53857 "EPA proposes an extraordinary procedure applicable if scientifically sound but ethically deficient human research is found to be crucial to EPA’s fulfilling its mission to protect public health. This procedure would also apply if a scientifically sound study covered by proposed § 26.221 or § 26.421--i.e., an intentional dosing study involving pregnant women or children as subjects..."

(OCA NOTE: This clause allows the EPA to accept or conduct "ethically deficient" studies of chemical tests on humans if the agency deems it necessary to fulfull its mission. Unfortunately, the EPA report sets up no criteria for making such an exception with any particular study. This ambiguity leaves a gaping loophole in the rule. Without specific and detailed criteria, it could be argued that any and every study of chemical testing on humans is "necessary." This loophole in the rule must be removed, based on this inadequacy of criteria and definition.)

Send an email to EPA here!

Or by mail: Send two copies of your comments to:
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB)
Office of Pesticide Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 7502C
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC, 20460-0001
Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2003-0132

By Darren Weeks

Thanks to Dennis Hodges for sending me the item from Capitol Hill Blue entitled GOP memo touts new terror attack as way to reverse party's decline.

It's important to note that both parties are controlled by the elites. Both help contribute to the overall agenda of a one-world socialist system.

The reason this article is so relevant, is that it serves to further illustrate how terrorism is nothing more/less than a tool that is used today to manipulate the masses. It is all a part of the Hegelian Dialectic. There must be opposing forces that clash in order to move society in a certain direction, the ultimate synthesis or result of which is the tyrannical system the elite wish to implement.

They've been working to build a world-wide command and control structure for generations. For various reasons, it has eluded them. However, they've learned from their past mistakes and have fine-tuned the process of mind control into a very well defined science.

But not all of us have to fall into the trap, do we?

When we read articles like the one which appears below, we have to be careful to remember not to fall into the pitfall of hating Bush. I honestly believe that it is the purpose of the elites to get people to hate/blame the present administration. Whether that administration is a republican administration or a democratic administration, they are there for you to hate. They are there for you to blame. That is their purpose.

Meanwhile, the real policy-makers who hide in the shadows come out unscathed by the controversy and treachery.

Bush is a puppet. Just like Clinton was a puppet. We hated Clinton because of his immorality, lying, cheating, killing, his delivering of our military secrets to the communist Chinese.

We will hate Bush for his leading us into a war that was both unnecessary and destructive to our sovereign interests. As James Madison said, "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."

When we focus upon the present administration, we lose sight of the larger picture — the fact that all administrations are controlled and working to implement the plan of communitarian socialism.

The president, along with most elected leaders today, are strawmen. They are there to be objects of your hate and disdain. When they become thoroughly damaged beyond usefulness, they leave office and are replaced with a new traitor, equally committed to the destruction of national sovereignty and individual liberty.

Thus, the process goes forth, driven by an unseen hand. The names and faces of traitorous leadership continues to change; Americans remain confused as to why things continue to worsen, despite a constant changing of the guard.

There's an oft-used phrase from the business world that must be applied to dialectical thinking. The importance of "thinking outside the box" of the range of issues and rhetoric that is presented to us by the various channels of media today, cannot be stressed enough.

If Americans are ever going to cease being deceived, we have to learn to question everything that is presented to us as fact. We have to learn to examine it from every angle. Why are we being told what we are being told? For whose benefit is this propaganda being disseminated?

We are lied to on a daily basis. Unfortunately, having been raised in a society that has been freer than the rest of the world, Americans have become soft and trusting. We've been taught at an early age, that our government is a revolutionary one.

Indeed, all governments have their roots in revolution.

But Americans have been taught that our Founding Fathers fought for, and won liberty; The U.S. government is what they established for us. Hence, by extension, it only stands to reason that the government of the founders would be a benevolent one. It would never lie to us, would it? Perhaps, it would be incapable of betrayal.

Such preposterous notions fail to consider the numerous warnings the founders gave us about the likelihood of government running amok.

Samuel Adams once sneered,

"The truth is, all might be free if they valued freedom, and defended it as they ought. ... If therefore a people will not be free; if they have not virtue enough to maintain their liberty against a presumptuous invader, they deserve no pity, and are to be treated with contempt and ignominy."

It is the responsibility of all who cherish liberty to defend it. The person whose mind is captured by deception and falsehood, is doomed to the servitude of the shyster. Liberty can only exist, when it first exists in the mind. An independent thinker is a free thinker. One who fails to believe what they are told, without verification, is the only candidate to possess liberty.

James Madison said,

"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors, must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives."

We cannot have knowledge, if we fail to think. It is the slave who fails to challenge. If we fail to challenge ideas, we become mental slaves. Enslavement of the mind is the precursor to the enslavement of mankind. If we assume we are being deceived, we will question what we are told. When we question, we obtain a better posture for dissecting the reality behind the daily propaganda.

By DOUG THOMPSON
Capitol Hill Blue

A confidential memo circulating among senior Republican leaders suggests that a new attack by terrorists on U.S. soil could reverse the sagging fortunes of President George W. Bush as well as the GOP and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."

The closely-guarded memo lays out a list of scenarios to bring the Republican party back from the political brink, including a devastating attack by terrorists that could "validate" the President's war on terror and allow Bush to "unite the country" in a "time of national shock and sorrow."

The memo says such a reversal in the President's fortunes could keep the party from losing control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections.

GOP insiders who have seen the memo admit it's a risky strategy and point out that such scenarios are "blue sky thinking" that often occurs in political planning sessions.

"The President's popularity was at an all-time high following the 9/11 attacks," admits one aide. "Americans band together at a time of crisis."

Other Republicans, however, worry that such a scenario carries high risk, pointing out that an attack might suggest the President has not done enough to protect the country.

"We also have to face the fact that many Americans no longer trust the President," says a longtime GOP strategist. "That makes it harder for him to become a rallying point."

The memo outlines other scenarios, including:

--Capture of Osama bin Laden (or proof that he is dead);

--A drastic turnaround in the economy;

--A "successful resolution" of the Iraq war.

GOP memos no longer talk of "victory" in Iraq but use the term "successful resolution."

"A successful resolution would be us getting out intact and civil war not breaking out until after the midterm elections," says one insider.

The memo circulates as Tuesday’s disastrous election defeats have left an already dysfunctional White House in chaos, West Wing insiders say, with shouting matches commonplace and the blame game escalating into open warfare.

"This place is like a high-school football locker room after the team lost the big game," grumbles one Bush administration aide. "Everybody’s pissed and pointing the finger at blame at everybody else."

Republican gubernatorial losses in Virginia and New Jersey deepened rifts between the Bush administration and Republicans who find the President radioactive. Arguments over whether or not the President should make a last-minute appearance in Virginia to try and help the sagging campaign fortunes of GOP candidate Jerry Kilgore raged until the minute Bush arrived at the rally in Richmond Monday night.

"Cooler heads tried to prevail," one aide says. "Most knew an appearance by the President would hurt Kilgore rather than help him but (Karl) Rove rammed it through, convincing Bush that he had enough popularity left to make a difference."

Bush didn’t have any popularity left. Overnight tracking polls showed Kilgore dropped three percentage points after the President’s appearance and Democrat Tim Kaine won on Tuesday.

Conservative Pennsylvania Republican Senator Rick Santorum told radio talk show host Don Imus Wednesday that he does not want the President's help and will stay away from a Bush rally in his state on Friday.

The losses in Virginia and New Jersey, coupled with a resounding defeat of ballot initiatives backed by GOP governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in California have set off alarm klaxons throughout the demoralized Republican party. Pollsters privately tell GOP leaders that unless they stop the slide they could easily lose control of the House in the 2006 midterm elections and may lose the Senate as well.

"In 30 years of sampling public opinion, I’ve never seen such a freefall in public support," admits one GOP pollster.

Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin says the usual tricks tried by Republicans no longer work.

"None of their old tricks worked," he says.

Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) admits the GOP is a party mired in its rural base in a country that's becoming less and less rural.

"You play to your rural base, you pay a price," he says. "Our issues blew up in our face."

As Republican political strategists scramble to find a message – any message – that will ring true with voters, GOP leaders in Congress admit privately that control of their party by right-wing extremists makes their recovery all but impossible.

"We’ve made our bed with these people," admits an aide to House Speaker Denny Hastert. "Now it’s the morning after and the hangover hurts like hell."

By Darren Weeks

I would like to extend a very heartfelt word of appreciation to Jerry who agreed to cover the cost of the Sweet Liberty web site bill for the year. Because of Jerry's love for the country and the truth, the Sweet Liberty site will continue.

Again thanks, Jerry.