Your Body, Their Choice


18-07-20 08:03:00,


Stripped of its contextual baggage, the phrase “My Body, My Choice” makes a compelling rallying cry because it conveys a fundamental truth that we all innately understand: I have the claim to my own body and what is done to it. So why, then, are we being asked to believe that when it comes to vaccinations during a declared pandemic it is “Your Body, Their Choice”?

Share this:

Vind ik leuk:
Like Laden…

 » Lees verder

Offering Choice but Delivering Tyranny: The Corporate Capture of Agriculture – Global Research


19-08-19 05:58:00,

Many lobbyists talk a lot about critics of genetic engineering technology denying choice to farmers. They say that farmers should have access to a range of tools and technologies to maximise choice and options. At the same time, somewhat ironically, they decry organic agriculture and proven agroecological approaches, presumably because these practices have no need for the proprietary inputs of the global agrochemical/agritech corporations they are in bed with. And presumably because agroecology represents liberation from the tyranny of these profiteering, environment-damaging global conglomerates. 

It is fine to talk about ‘choice’ but we do not want to end up offering a false choice (rolling out technologies that have little value and only serve to benefit those who control the technology), to unleash an innovation that has an adverse impact on others or to manipulate a situation whereby only one option is available because other options have been deliberately removed. And we would certainly not wish to roll out a technology that traps farmers on a treadmill that they find difficult to get off.

Surely, a responsible approach for rolling out important (potentially transformative) technologies would have to consider associated risks, including social, economic and health impacts.

Take the impact of the Green Revolution in India, for instance. Sold on the promise that hybrid seeds and associated chemical inputs would enhance food security on the basis of higher productivity, agriculture was transformed, especially in Punjab. But to gain access to seeds and chemicals many farmers had to take out loans and debt became (and remains) a constant worry. Many became impoverished and social relations within rural communities were radically altered: previously, farmers would save and exchange seeds but now they became dependent on unscrupulous money lenders, banks and seed manufacturers and suppliers. Vandana Shiva in ‘The Violence of the Green Revolution‘ (1989) describes the social marginalisation and violence that accompanied the process.

On a macro level, the Green Revolution conveniently became tied to an international (neo-colonial) system of trade based on chemical-dependent agro-export mono-cropping linked to loans, sovereign debt repayment and World Bank/IMF structural adjustment (privatisation/deregulation) directives. Many countries in the Global South were deliberately turned into food deficit regions, dependent on (US) agricultural imports and strings-attached aid.

 » Lees verder

It’s Africa’s Choice: AFRICOM Or ‘The New Silk Roads’

It’s Africa’s Choice: AFRICOM Or ‘The New Silk Roads’

07-09-18 07:26:00,

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

When China calls, all Africa answers. And Beijing’s non-politicization of investments and non-interference in internal affairs is paying off big time…

The dogs of war – cold, hot, trade, tariffs – bark while the Chinese caravan plies the New Silk Roads. Call it a leitmotif of the young 21st century.

At the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) in Beijing, President Xi Jinping has just announced a hefty US$60 billion package to complement another US$60 billion pledged at the 2015 summit.

That breaks down to $15 billion in grants and interest-free loans; $20 billion in credit lines; a $10 billion fund for development financing; $5 billion to finance imports from Africa; and waving the debt of the poorest African nations diplomatically linked to China.

When China calls, all Africa answers.

First, we had ministers from 53 African nations plus the African Union (AU) Commission approving the Beijing Declaration and the FOCAC Action Plan (2019-21).

Then, after the $60 billion announcement, we had Beijing signing memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with nine African nations – including South Africa and Egypt – related to the New Silk Roads/Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Additionally, other 20 African nations are discussing further cooperation agreements.

Debt trap or integration?

That does not exactly paint the picture of the BRI as a vicious debt trap enabling China to take over Africa’s top strategic assets. On the contrary, the BRI is seen as integrating with Africa’s own Agenda 2063, a “strategic framework for the socio-economic transformation of the continent over the next 50 years” tackling unemployment, inequality and poverty.

Apart from letting the numbers speak for themselves, Xi deftly counter-punched the current, massive BRI demonization campaign:

“Only the people of China and Africa have the right to comment on whether China-Africa cooperation is doing well … No one should deny the significant achievement of China-Africa cooperation based on their assumptions and speculation.”

And once again Xi felt the need to stress the factor that does seduce, Africa-wide – Chinese non-politicization of investments, and Chinese non-interference in the internal affairs of African nations.

 » Lees verder

Show us the science and give us the choice! – twee Amerikaanse collega’s schetsen een beeld van wat ons te wachten staat? – Stichting Vaccin Vrij

Show us the science and give us the choice! – twee Amerikaanse collega’s schetsen een beeld van wat ons te wachten staat? – Stichting Vaccin Vrij

16-08-18 07:47:00,

Openbaar, gemakkelijk toegankelijke wetenschap en keuzevrijheid – het zijn logische eisen van verantwoordelijk ouders. Voordat zij ‘iets’ laten inspuiten bij hun kinderen willen ze weten hoe, en door wie onderzocht is of het veilig is. En ze willen ook zelf kunnen bepalen of ze hun baby’s wel of niet laten vaccineren! Als we iets kunnen leren van hoe raar het kan lopen in een democratie, is dat wel van de Amerikanen. De Verenigde Naties lijken wat betreft vaccineren meer op een fascistische dan democratische staatsvorm.

De hetze tegen ouders die niet vaccineren, de toegenomen druk, en de eenzijdige en manipulatieve berichtgeving in de media in Europa zijn allemaal zaken waar de Amerikanen al jaren mee kampen. En nu er een globale bewustwording gaande is, lijkt het of de gevestigde orde alles uit de kast haalt om de mensen nog wat langer in haar greep te houden. Op dit moment is de situatie in USA qua vrijheidsbeperking erger dan bij ons. En daarom ook zo leerzaam. Is dit ons voorland? Of telt een gewaarschuwd mens voor twee?







Barbara Lou Fisher is de mede-oprichtster van National Vaccine Information Centre (NVIC). Ze schreef verschillende boeken, waaronder ‘A shot in the dark’ over de – nog immer voortdurende – gebrekkige werking en risico’s van het kinkhoestvaccin. Ze was tientallen keren te zien op nationale televisie in Amerika en verscheen in The Greater Good, Shots in the DarkVaccines RevealedThe Truth About Vaccines en andere documentaires.
Websites:, en

Joseph Mercola is arts en initiatiefnemer van een van de grootste natuurlijke gezondheid-bewegingen in USA. Zijn slogan: Neem de controle over uw gezondheid in eigen hand. Hij informeert de burger over schaduwkanten van pillen en vaccins, en natuurlijke manieren om gezond te blijven. Zijn nieuwsbrief heeft meer dan 1.5 miljoen abonnees.
Websites: en






Over de auteur: Door Frankema is moeder van twee ongevaccineerde, inmiddels volwassen kinderen. Zij is schrijfster van het boek: ‘Vaccinvrij – ouders,

 » Lees verder

Australia’s Hard Choice Between China And US

Australia’s Hard Choice Between China And US

15-01-18 10:06:00,

Authored by Lachlan Colquhoun via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Canberra has always deftly balanced between Beijing and Washington but it may soon need to choose one over the other…

Australia has always believed that it doesn’t have to choose between its economic relationship with China and its defense alliance with the United States. But 2018 is already shaping up to be the year of the hard choice.

It would be convenient for Australia if it was able to maintain its balancing act, but a confluence of global factors has stripped away the fiction that it can separate the economic benefits it gets from China and its post-World War II position as one of America’s closest strategic allies.

There is a lot at stake, including potentially Australia’s ongoing prosperity.

China is clearly not happy with Australia’s adherence to the US alliance and if it follows through on veiled threats to boycott Australian exports and limit investment, Canberra’s loyalty to Washington could come at the expense of significant economic pain.

China’s hawkish Global Times newspaper, widely viewed as a mouthpiece for the ruling Communist Party, spared no niceties in an op-ed last week that warned Australia against “interference” in the South China Sea (SCS) territorial disputes.

Australia was “kissing up” to the US and risked “poisoning” its relations with China, which could “adopt strong countermeasures which will seriously impact Australian economic development.” Australia hasn’t taken a position on SCS spats, but has said it favors “freedom of navigation” in the area, echoing the US’ position.

US President Donald Trump with Australia’s Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at the ASEAN Summit in Manila, Philippines November 13, 2017. Reuters/Jonathan Ernst

China is Australia’s biggest trading partner, taking around a third of Australia’s exports. The two countries signed a free trade agreement (FTA) which came into effect at the end of 2015 and two-way trade now exceeds US$110 billion a year.

Chinese students comprise 38% of foreign students in Australia and prop up the university sector with their fees, bringing in US$18 billion per year.

The number of Chinese tourists is also booming.

 » Lees verder