Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ian Davies on Wednesday

ISO Standards will. IMO  And who is developing them?

Rob Moore said:

Activist Watch By Sarah Hubbart
Sarah Hubbart is the communications director for the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

What do you think? Who will shape the future of agriculture and food production in this country?

5/15/2012

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Moore yesterday

From the CCA blog- don't know who  Carl is but he seems to have a good handle on the game-

 

Carl Comment 18.2 16 May 2012, 11:48 PM

New  WWF? What is it they do any way for Agriculture?

The Sustainable Development agenda by WWF is simply one thing, get The UN's Agenda 21 involved at the local level by influencing government policy.

Who knows best about beef?

WWF and its green Panda activists with a Leftwing political agenda or

Farmers and cattle ranchers who are actually involve in the productive activity?

The WWF is heavily involved with Goldman Sachs and its dollarisation of the new Carbon Trade Bubble.

WWF is involved in selling and puffing the trade for Climate Change bonds and Carbon Trade.

In fact WWF has Goldman Sachs and Bank of America bankers on its board of directors seeking to influence the cute WWF panda policies. Critical faculties stop with the cute panda, there is more. Continue reading to find out.

At best WWF should stick to its job instead of seeking to shape the producers policies.

Failure to observe this caveat on WWF means meat and food shortages on Australian tables with high prices, hardship for farmers and the destruction of the beef industries by Green activism. It means "GREEN TAPE" regulation.

See here about the conflict of interest by WWF and its Goldman Sachs men chairing the board of directors.

See here http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/board/index.html LAWRENCE H. LINDEN

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=WWF_USA:_Board_of_Directors

If in doubt about the WWF and Goldman Sachs use of "sustainable development", run a search on Goldman Sachs+WWF+Climate Change Bonds.

The WWF has an obvious conflict of interest on its policies with the billion dollar carbon trade and whatever is labelled "sustainable agriculture".

Farmers and Beef producers know best, not ideological leftists and financiers on the take, much less government bureaucrats. Consider the regulation of water and its trading rights, they have rendered profitable agriculture unfeasible by driving the cost of water high enough to force farm closures and the rural exodus of farmers to the cities, destruction of productive food capacity has occurred. At best regulation works for Agribusiness with the muscle to shape and lobby government and influence the funding of the NGOs ever present on public opinion.

Ignore this warning will mean over-regulation of food production, food shortages, high prices and billion dollar profits for the commodity price speculators of which Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Citibank and Bank of America derive their profits from.

 

Oops, blank comment. Please try again.

Reply Agree (1) Disagree (0)Alert moderator

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea yesterday

At the Rockhampton seminar, all parties backed away from setting standards including WWF.

All parties proclaimed that they did not want to send beef producers broke including WWF.

The WWF representative mentioned several already existing sustainability programmes and seemed to be implying that they could all be drawn into the programme. I have no idea if the owners of the programmes have been consulted but in most cases I suspect not.

I was left wondering what role WWF could possibly have in the process that would be of benefit to anyone.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dale Stiller yesterday

Rob,

You can find out who Carl is by going to facebook. Search for Institute of Public affairs.

Once on the IPA page look in Recent posts by Others

Look for my name , click on my post & view all comments.

 

Confirmation of part of what Carl wrote can be found in a article I linked to some pages back in this discussion where WWF got remote unuseable brasillian rainforest given to it & then tried to rake in a possible $60 million by memory in carbon credits.
 
Rob Moore said:

From the CCA blog- don't know who  Carl is but he seems to have a good handle on the game-

 

Carl Comment 18.2 16 May 2012, 11:48 PM

New  WWF? What is it they do any way for Agriculture?

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dale Stiller yesterday

I reread Naked Extortion again last night & on page 7 in Table 1, it shows for the Sustainable Beef roundtable that its status at the time Tim Wilson wrote this paper was that standards have been field tested.

Need to find out more.
 
Joanne Rea said:

At the Rockhampton seminar, all parties backed away from setting standards including WWF.

All parties proclaimed that they did not want to send beef producers broke including WWF.

The WWF representative mentioned several already existing sustainability programmes and seemed to be implying that they could all be drawn into the programme. I have no idea if the owners of the programmes have been consulted but in most cases I suspect not.

I was left wondering what role WWF could possibly have in the process that would be of benefit to anyone.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Davies yesterday

This maybe of interest. Rob P & his groups. http://sustainabilitybusiness.com.au/Conference/

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Geoff Brown yesterday

There is an old "Soviet" joke - that I learned from my Russian and Belarussian (now Belarus) friends when I worked for the Soviets.

2 Russians were standing in a queue waiting for a basic food product (eg Milk.)

Alexei said to Ivan: This queue is very long...

Ivan: I am sick of ths! I am going to go and see the Comrade Brezhnev and shoot him......

After a while Alexei was still queueing for milk and Ivan re joined him.

Alexei: "What happened, Ivan? Weren't you going to shoot comrade Breznev?

Ivan: Da! Da! But the queue there was longer than the queue here!


Jeff Hutcho said:

Did anyone see photos of the empty food shops, line ups for bread etc in the old Soviet Union, back in the 50's and 60's.

Results from the system and the remnants of Lysenkoism , but can show how it can all go wrong, with the wrong policies.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hutcho yesterday

Ian D.

Looking at I.S.O. in relation to meat and meat products gives documents for microbiological standards.

As the I.S.O. organisation is in Switzerland, I wonder who they consulted with to set these quality standards.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Davies yesterday

Hi Jeff, to keep it on topic. WWF & many other NGO's http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/ai388e/AI388E18.htm

Jeff Hutcho said:

Ian D.

Looking at I.S.O. in relation to meat and meat products gives documents for microbiological standards.

As the I.S.O. organisation is in Switzerland, I wonder who they consulted with to set these quality standards.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hutcho 17 hours ago

Livestock producers and members of PRA would love this bit of wisdom from JG member John C.Fairfax -

"Hutcho, why hide from WWF agenda. 

Cattlemen on this site don't seem interested in the real cause of damage to the GBR and you are in a state of denial about it. So let the damage and more unjust restrictive legislation continue."

-

or the permalink -

http://justgroundsonline.com/xn/detail/3535428:Comment:355699

-

Now somebody may realise why I get very p----ed off with some people.

Cheers.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dale Stiller 13 hours ago

Report from Rural Press journalist Brad Cooper about the seminar at Beef 2012 on the roundtable for sustainable beef, has because of being a full page article has been scanned in 3 parts & posted below. Have a read, Brad doesn't mess around in his reporting style and he has cut through to the underlying issues including providing new information not available to those who attented the seminar.

 

 

 

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 32
• 33
• 34
• Next ›
• Page