Richmond, B.C.’s Arjan Bhullar crowned MMA world champion

Simon Little

He's wrestled for Canada in the Olympic, Commonwealth and Pan American Games, but Richmond's Arjan Bhullar is celebrating his biggest win yet.

© Credit: ONE World Championship Arjan Bhullar after winning the One World Championship MMA heavyweight bout on Saturday.

On Saturday, the B.C. born fighter was crowned One Championship Mixed Martial Arts Champion after defeating reigning heavyweight king Brandon Vera with a second-round TKO.

"You visualize it, you plan for it, you train for it, but when it happens there's no feeling like it. Champ. That's for life, that stays baby," Bhullar told Global News.

Read more: UFC fighter Arjan Bhullar knocking down barriers by wearing turban as he enters octagon

"All of those (wrestling) milestones were significant, huge moments in my life, but every single one led to this. It was really a lifetime of work, The goal has always been to be a world champion and that's what this means. It's a great feeling for my family, for my self, for community, for Richmond-born and raised — ah, man, it's awesome."

Bhullar has represented the maple leaf many times, in the ONE Championship he made the decision to highlight his Indian heritage.

With his victory, he became the first MMA champion of Indian descent, and he said he's hoping to inspire more champions from the country he feels a close family relationship to.

"When it came to the fight game, look, we had our GSP (Georges St-Pierre), we had our Carlos Newton UFC champs," he said.

"Back home (in India) this is going to be huge, this gives hope that this is possible, that's what this really means. There's going to be so many more champions coming down the pipe, once they see this is possible."

Read more: Lethbridge fighter Cody Jerome to answer the bell in intercontinental title bout

Bhullar said the win was particularly important now, as India is being ravaged by COVID-19.

"I think the timing couldn't have been better in terms of giving that hope and giving that positivity and giving a good distraction from the harsh reality on the ground."

So what's next for the world champion, now that he's hit the pinnacle?

Video: Meet B.C.’s budd-ing MMA star

Don't be surprised if you see Bhullar in the pro wrestling ring, either with WWE or AEW — both of whom he said he's in talks with.

Wherever his career takes him from here, Bhullar said Saturday's win can never be taken from him — and from the youth he hopes to inspire.

"I never had this, growing up where I could say hey, 'that guy's a world champion, he looks like me, talks like me, he's grown up with the same values," he said.

"If I can do that now for someone else it will just multiply and multiply in terms of success and positivity in this world. And what else is life about except living crazy experiences and leaving it a little better than when you got here?"

'Shocking and horrifying': Israel destroys AP office in Gaza

JERUSALEM (AP) — An Israeli airstrike on Saturday destroyed a high-rise building that housed The Associated Press office in the Gaza Strip, despite repeated urgent calls from the news agency to the military to halt the impending attack. AP called the strike “shocking and horrifying.”

© Provided by The Canadian Press

Twelve AP staffers and freelancers were working and resting in the bureau on Saturday afternoon when the Israeli military telephoned a warning, giving occupants of the building one hour to evacuate. Everyone was able to get out, grabbing a few belongings, before three heavy missiles struck the 12-story building, collapsing it into a giant cloud of dust.

Although no one was hurt, the airstrike demolished an office that was like a second home for AP journalists and marked a new chapter in the already rocky relationship between the Israeli military and the international media. Press-freedom groups condemned the attack. They accused the military, which claimed the building housed Hamas military intelligence, of trying to censor coverage of Israel's relentless offensive against Hamas militants.

Ahead of the demolition, the AP placed urgent calls to the Israeli military, foreign minister and prime minister’s office but were either ignored or told that there was nothing to be done.

For 15 years, the AP’s top-floor office and roof terrace were a prime location for covering Israel’s conflicts with Gaza’s Hamas rulers, including wars in 2009, 2012 and 2014. The news agency’s camera offered 24-hour live shots as militants’ rockets arched toward Israel and Israeli airstrikes hammered the city and its surrounding area this week.

“We have had no indication Hamas was in the building or active in the building,” AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt said in a statement. “This is something we actively check to the best of our ability. We would never knowingly put our journalists at risk.”

Pruitt described the news agency as "shocked and horrified that the Israeli military would target and destroy the building housing AP’s bureau and other news organizations in Gaza.” He warned: “The world will know less about what is happening in Gaza because of what happened today.”

“This is an incredibly disturbing development. We narrowly avoided a terrible loss of life,” he said, adding that the AP was seeking information from the Israeli government and was in touch with the U.S. State Department.

The building housed a number of offices, including those of the Arab satellite channel Al-Jazeera. Dozens of residents who lived in apartments on the upper floors were displaced.

A video broadcast by Al-Jazeera showed the building’s owner, Jawwad Mahdi, pleading over the phone with an Israeli intelligence officer to wait 10 minutes to allow journalists to go inside the building to retrieve valuable equipment before it is bombed.

“All I’m asking is to let four people ... to go inside and get their cameras,” he said. “We respect your wishes, we will not do it if you don’t allow it, but give us 10 minutes.” When the officer rejected the request, Mahdi said, “You have destroyed our life’s work, memories, life. I will hang up, do what you want. There is a God.”

Late Saturday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the building was used by Hamas military intelligence. “It was not an innocent building,” he said.

Israel routinely cites a Hamas presence as a reason for targeting buildings. It also accused the group of using journalists as human shields.

Video: Palestinian militants fire hundreds of missiles at Israel after Gaza air strikes (cbc.ca)

Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus, a military spokesman, refused to provide evidence backing up the army's claims, saying it would compromise intelligence efforts. “I think it’s a legitimate request to see more information, and I will try to provide it,” he said.

Conricus said the army is “committed both to journalists, their safety and to their free work.”

For AP journalists, it was a difficult moment. Most of the AP staff has been sleeping in the bureau, which includes four bedrooms in an upstairs apartment, throughout the current round of fighting, believing that the offices of an international news agency were one of the few safe places in Gaza. In a territory crippled by an Israeli-Egyptian blockade, it was equipped with a generator that offered the rare comforts of electricity, air conditioning and running water.

AP correspondent Fares Akram said he was resting in an upstairs room when he heard panicked screams from colleagues about the evacuation order. Staffers hastily gathered basic equipment, including laptops and cameras before fleeing downstairs.

“I am heartbroken,” Akram said. “You feel like you are at home. Above all, you have your memories, your friends. You spend most of your time there.”

Al-Jazeera, the news network funded by Qatar’s government, broadcast the airstrikes live as the building collapsed.

“This channel will not be silenced. Al-Jazeera will not be silenced,” Halla Mohieddeen. on-air anchorperson for Al-Jazeera English said, her voice thick with emotion. “We can guarantee you that right now.”

Early Sunday, Hamas fired a heavy barrage of rockets at the metropolis of Tel Aviv, saying it was revenge for flattening the high-rise building.

President Joe Biden spoke to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the spiraling violence.

“He raised concerns about the safety and security of journalists and reinforced the need to ensure their protection,” the White House said.

Later Saturday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with Pruitt, AP's president, to express concern about the incident. The State Department said Blinken offered his support for independent journalists and noted the “indispensability” of their reporting in conflict zones. He also expressed relief that the AP team in Gaza was safe.

The Foreign Press Association, which represents some 400 journalists working for international media organizations in Israel and the Palestinian territories, expressed its “grave concern and dismay” over the attack.

“Knowingly causing the destruction of the offices of some of the world’s largest and most influential news organizations raises deeply worrying questions about Israel’s willingness to interfere with the freedom of the press,” it said. “The safety of other news bureaus in Gaza is now in question.”

Joel Simon, executive director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, said the attack raises concerns that Israel is targeting the media "to disrupt coverage of the human suffering in Gaza.” He demanded “detailed and documented justification” for the attack.

The International Press Institute, a global network of journalists and media executives, condemned the attack as a “gross violation of human rights and internationally agreed norms.”

The Israeli military has long had rocky relations with the foreign media, accusing international journalists of being biased against it.

The attack came a day after the Israeli military had fed vague — and in some cases erroneous — information to the media about a possible ground incursion into Gaza. It turned out that there was no ground invasion, and the statement was part of an elaborate ruse aimed at tricking Hamas militants into defensive underground positions that were then destroyed in Israeli airstrikes.

International journalists have accused the army of duping them and turning them into accessories for a military operation. The army said the error was an honest mistake.

Josef Federman, The Associated Press

AP editor calls for 'independent investigation' of airstrike

Duration: 03:38 

Sally Buzbee, executive editor of The AP, says the newswire is looking for temporary quarters in Gaza after its office there was bombed by Israel. Regarding Israel's assertions that Hamas was operating in the same building, Buzbee says the AP isn't taking sides, and would like to see "an independent investigation into what happened."
More from CNN

 

Incredible power of ice grinding down the MacKenzie River amazes locals

Duration: 01:04  

 

Pro-Palestinian, Israel demonstrators held in Edmonton amid rising Middle East violence

Slav Kornik

GLOBAL NEWS 

Edmonton was one of several Canadian cities where demonstrations were held amid escalating violence in the Middle East

.

© Global News A pro-Palestine rally is held in Edmonton, Saturday, May 15, 2021.

Both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli rallies were held in Alberta's capital Saturday.

The Drive for Palestine car rally started at the Castle Downs YMCA on 153 Avenue and 115 Street and made its way through the city.

It was estimated over 1,000 people participated in the event — waving flags and honking horns from cars lined up on Castle Downs Road.

"Overwhelming support. (I) love the support from the community. Thank you so much to everybody," Organizer Mousa Quasquas said. "This is not just a Palestinian issue or a Muslim issue or an Arab issue, this is an issue for everyone.

"If you care about human rights, if you care about humanity, you need be here support this."

READ MORE: Pro-Palestinian, Israel demonstrators meet in front of Manitoba legislative building

The rally travelled on Anthony Henday Drive then north on Gateway Boulevard and through the city.

A group of people also gathered for the Stand with Israel rally Saturday at Hawrelak Park. It was estimated that about 60 vehicles took part in the event.

"We wanted to show our support. All over the world you can see millions of people doing the same thing," Participant Dana Kilaouzov said. "We wanted to show it also here in Edmonton."

"We don't gather for hate. We gather for peace, we gather for happiness, we gather for caring for each other...for our families back home. They're struggling down there. For our soldiers, they're fighting a continuous fight that does not stop for not even a minute," participant Yulian Vaks said.

READ MORE: Israeli military says it bombed home of top Hamas leader as violence in Gaza continues

Israeli airstrikes on Gaza City flattened three buildings and killed at least 42 people Sunday, Palestinian medics said. Despite the heavy death toll and international efforts to broker a cease-fire, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signaled the fourth war with Gaza's Hamas rulers would rage on.

In a televised address, Netanyahu said Sunday the attacks were continuing at "full-force" and will "take time." Israel "wants to levy a heavy price" from the Hamas militant group, he said, flanked by his defense minister and political rival, Benny Gantz, in a show of unity.

The Israeli air assault early Sunday was the deadliest single attack since heavy fighting broke out between Israel and Hamas nearly a week ago, marking the worst fighting since their devastating 2014 war in Gaza.

"There's so much suffering going on right now. There's so many laws being broken by Israel," Kalouti said.

"Just today they bombed the Associated Press and Al Jazeera's building, just to shutout the media. But as you can see here, we live in Canada and media's allowed, and I love that we have a democratic state where we can speak our mind and say what we want because unfortunately in Israel they do not allow the people to have rights."

The latest outbreak of violence began in east Jerusalem last month, when Palestinian protests and clashes with police broke out in response to Israeli police tactics during Ramadan and the threatened eviction of dozens of Palestinian families by Jewish settlers. A focal point of clashes was the Al-Aqsa Mosque, a frequent flashpoint that is located on a hilltop compound that is revered by both Muslims and Jews.

Hamas fired rockets toward Jerusalem late Monday, triggering the Israeli assault on impoverished Gaza, which is home to more than 2 million Palestinians and has been under an Israeli and Egyptian blockade since Hamas seized power from rival Palestinian forces in 2007.

— With files from The Canadian Press

SUNDAY SERMON IV

PASSION Peter Gabriel,1989 

Ultima Tentazione di Cristo 

dir.art. M.Fargnoli, F.Albano 

Open ensemble

LIVE

PASSION di Peter Gabriel, Prima esecuzione dal vivo della colonna sonora del film L' Ultima Tentazione di Cristo di Martin Scorsese (1989) da un'idea di Massimo Fargnoli, nell'ambito della rassegna 'Musica dello Spirito'' da lui ideata e diretta in collaborazione con il Comune di Napoli, Assessorato alla Cultura. Napoli domenica 13 dicembre 2015, 

Piazza del Plebiscito. Francesco Albano Open ensemble live 

Francesco Albano : Tastiere, Basso elettrico, Chitarra e Live electronics 

Riccardo Veno : Doudouk, Bansuri, Shalumeau, Flageolet, Ciaramella, Sipsi, Sax soprano 

Edo Notarloberti : Violino Salvio Vassallo : Batteria e Percussioni 

Paolo Cimmino e Francesca Del Duca : Percussioni, Frame drums, Riqq, Darbouka, Djiembe, Bendir, Daf, Gatham, Bodrhran, Caxixi 

Bruno Sacchi e Valentina Gaudini : Voci DYI String Quartet Post produzione audio video a cura di Paolo Lambiase.



Peter Gabriel ~ 'Passion' {Outtakes}


Oraelius
Music for The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)

0:02 ~ The Feeling Begins

4:25 ~ Disturbed

7:40 ~ Passion 

14:32 ~ Cor Anglais Theme 

16:31 ~ It Is Accomplished

21:50 ~ Bass Bowl

25:42 ~ With This Love

29:37 ~ Wall of Breath

35:46 ~ It Is Accomplished 2

42:45 ~ Trills

43:49 ~ Bread and Wine

48:12 ~ The Feeling Begins 2

52:18 ~ Of These, Hope 

53:24 ~ Lazarus Raised

56:59 ~ Location Recording – Morocco 

58:23 ~ Location Recording – Unknown 

Bonus: 1:00:00 ~ It Is Accomplished (Resurrection Remix) by Oraelius 

RELATED LINKS: Oraelius Remixes ~ PETER GABRIEL: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...

Peter Gabriel ~ I/ॐ: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... 

Peter Gabriel ~ I/O: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... 

OPUS GENESIS: https://www.youtube.com/user/SoulDirt... 

The Opus Marcus Podcast: https://opusmarcuspodcast.com

Mid-1990s interview with Peter Gabriel re. scoring Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ. He discusses getting involved with the project, finding the best regional musicians to bring the score to life, and the rough road to financing and completing the "Passion" score.

 

Peter Gabriel & Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - Passion

Undermining the Democratic Process: The Canadian Government Suppression of Palestinian Development Aid Projects

Jeremy Wildeman
30 Pages
1 File ▾
Countless Canadians have for decades been trying to provide support to Palestinians living under military occupation in the occupied Palestinian territories. However, they have often faced strong resistance from pro-Israel advocates and elites in Canada, including their own government. This paper looks at the government suppression of Canadian development sector organisations running Palestinian aid projects 2001 to 2012, including from the perspective of the people running them. Based on document analysis, policy analysis and original semi-structured interviews with coordinators running aid projects, it describes how their work was almost universally undermined by the Canadian government. Tactics uncovered include appointing ardent pro-Israel advocates to an organisation's management, defunding specific projects, defunding entire organisations, launching questionable audits, spurious allegations of terrorism and the forced closure of organisations. This oppression was particularly overt under the Harper Conservative government, but had a basis in earlier Liberal governments. This interference provides an understanding for the fear that exists surrounding Palestinian aid work in Canada and the process by which Canadian aid to Palestinians is rendered ineffective. The paper further argues that while these tactics were likely first honed against Palestinian solidarity work, they were then used against other progressive groups, undermining Canadian civil society and democracy.

https://www.academia.edu/37660610/Undermining_the_Democratic_Process_The_Canadian_Government_Suppression_of_Palestinian_Development_Aid_Projects?pls=RWLSxnqyad

Economic Impact of GMOs
Researched By Nogenics, https://www.facebook.com/groups/Nogenics/
GMO Bio-Piracy, Bt & GMO Companion Chemical Pesticides

1-According to an India Today Report

 2- According to ‘The Ecologist’ Reported

3- Why Bt Technology is an Economical Disaster in the Making

4- The Economic Health Impact of Bt Toxicity and GMO Poisonous Companion Pesticides -

Conclusion

https://www.academia.edu/3419876/Global_Economic_Impact_of_GMOs

The Neoliberal Food Regime: Neoregulation and the New Division of Labor in North America 

Gabriela Pechlaner Department of Social, Cultural and Media Studies, University of the Fraser Valley 

Gerardo Otero  Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Simon Fraser University 

 Abstract

We undertake a comparative investigation of how neoliberal restructuring characterizes the third food regime in the three North American countries. By contrasting the experience of the two developed countries of the United States and Canada with that of the developing country of Mexico, we shine some empirical light on the differential impact of neoliberal regulatory restructuring on the division of labor in agriculture within the North American Free Trade Agreement region. In particular, we investigate these countries’ agricultural production markets, trade, and food vulnerability—with an emphasis on Mexico—as analytical points for comparing and contrasting their experience with this neoliberal restructuring. We start with a synthesis of food- “neoliberal food regime.” We then discuss our case-study countries in terms of food vulnerability and resistance in Mexico, their differential relationships to trade liberalization, and what these trends might mean for the evolution of the neoliberal food regime. We conclude that, while dominant trends are ominous, there is room for an alternative trajectory and consequent reshaping of the emerging regime: sufficient bottom-up social resistance, primarily at the level of the nation–state, may yet produce an alternative trajectory

https://www.academia.edu/1048900/Gabriela_Pechlaner_and_Gerardo_Otero_2010_The_Neoliberal_Food_Regime_Neoregulation_and_the_New_Division_of_Labor_in_North_America_Rural_Sociology_75_2_179_208

 

The Third Food Regime: Neoliberal Globalism and Agricultural Biotechnology in North America

Gabriela Pechlaner and Gerardo Otero*

The agricultural sector is currently being shaped by two powerful dynamics as many nations reorganise their national agriculture according to free trade and other supranational agreements while new agricultural biotechnologies are increasingly adopted. This interrelationship between regulatory change and genetic engineering appears set to form the basis of a new food regime. In this article, we compare the role of national and international regulations relating to the technology, and the impact of local resistance to it, in the advanced capitalist countries of Canada and the USA and the developing country of Mexico. Similar to food regime perspectives, our study concludes that neoliberal regulatory reorganization is an important component of the evolving food regime.

Further, Mexico bore the brunt of the technology’s negative social impacts, demonstrating how it exacerbates existing inequalities between developed and developing nations. Resistance movements in the country have been sufficient to call into question the inevitability of a homogenous reorganization of agriculture, however. Evidence suggests that such resistance could modify, or even derail, this technology’s role in individual nations, and consequently, in the unfolding food regime as a whole

https://www.academia.edu/1048912/Gabriela_Pechlaner_and_Gerardo_Otero_2008_The_Third_Food_Regime_Neoliberal_Globalism_and_Agricultural_Biotechnology_in_North_America_Sociologia_Ruralis_48_4_351_371

Civil society challenges the global food system: the International Monsanto Tribunal

Nienke Busscher

Lidewij van der Ploeg

Julia Gabella

Amalia Leguizamón

2020, Globalizations

299 Views16 Pages

1 File ▾

Social Movements,

Globalization,

Human Rights,

Food Systems,

Agriculture

 ...more ▾

Show more ▾

The global food system has severe implications for human health, soil quality, biodiversity, and quality of life. This paper provides an analysis on how transnational alliances challenge the global food system. We illustrate this by focusing on the activities and hearings of the International Monsanto Tribunal (IMT), held in the Hague in 2016. The IMT provided a platform for civil society and enabled transnational alliances to demand attention for local struggles and legal disputes in relation to Monsanto’s products. With the involvement of independent and renowned experts, the knowledge exchange between local victims and civil society was enhanced, and the IMT reinforced social movement’s goals towards demanding justice for the negative effects associated with the global food system. The advisory opinion determined that Monsanto’s practices are in violation with human rights standards. The IMT exemplified that there is an immediate need for structural change in the current global food system.

https://www.academia.edu/38703134/Civil_society_challenges_the_global_food_system_the_International_Monsanto_Tribunal

 

Bigger is Not Always Better: Drivers and Implications of the Recent Agribusiness Megamergers

Jennifer Clapp

155 Views42 Pages

1 File ▾

Mergers & Acquisitions,

Food Policy,

Agriculture,

Agricultural Biotechnology,

Multinational Corporations

 ...more ▾

Abstract: The global agrifood industry is undergoing profound upheaval, with a spate of mergers, acquisitions and deals that are consolidating the sector. The mergers announced in 2015 and 2016, for example -- including Dow and Dupont, ChemChina and Syngenta, and Bayer and Monsanto -- are poised to change the face of the agricultural inputs sector. This paper examines the political and economic dynamics surrounding these large transnational agribusiness megamergers and reflects on the broader implications of these deals for global environmental and food politics. The paper advances two arguments. First, it makes the case that the current wave of mergers is in some ways similar to past waves of consolidation in the sector, but also different in important ways. Past mergers in the sector were driven largely by technological innovation and integration along with strengthened intellectual property protection. Further technological innovation and integration remains important for today’s mergers, but it is not the only driver. The current mergers are also deeply shaped by increased financialization in the agrifood sector that has prioritized investor demands for profits in ways that encourage corporate consolidation. Second, the paper argues that past episodes of consolidation in the sector had important implications for questions of economic fairness, farmer autonomy, environmental sustainability and political power, and that the proposed mergers are likely to result in even more pronounced effects on these fronts. Yet while these concerns are wide-ranging, the evaluation measures used by regulatory bodies to assess the impacts of the mergers only partially capture the ways in which they affect economic fairness, and say little on questions of environmental impact, farmer autonomy, and power inequities.

https://www.academia.edu/34400144/Bigger_is_Not_Always_Better_Drivers_and_Implications_of_the_Recent_Agribusiness_Megamergers?pls=RWLSxnqyad

Monsanto: Origins of an Agribusiness Behemoth

Brian Tokar

2019, The Fight Against Monsanto’s Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides, edited by Mitchel Cohen

133 Views17 Pages

1 File ▾

Show more ▾

Today’s Monsanto (now part of Bayer) is a far more specialized operation than it was in the 1990s. While the Monsanto of the early 2000s to 2010s focused almost entirely on biotechnology, seeds, and a limited range of agrochemicals, especially its Roundup brand herbicides, it was once a broadly diversified chemical manufacturer, one of only four to be listed among the top ten U.S. chemical companies in every decade from the 1940s - 1990s. To better understand the company’s emergence as the leading developer and promoter of genetically manipulated agriculture and Roundup herbicides, it is important to first examine its history.

https://www.academia.edu/38057991/Monsanto_Origins_of_an_Agribusiness_Behemoth

'Reckoning for Roundup Rolls On': Ninth Circuit Court Upholds Verdict in Case Against Monsanto

Edwin Hardeman was awarded $25 million in his case which showed Monsanto was responsible for his cancer diagnosis after decades of using Roundup.

by Julia Conley, staff writer

Published on Friday, May 14, 2021
by Common Dreams



A customer shops for Roundup weed killer in San Rafael, California, on July, 9, 2018. (Photo: Josh Edelson//AFP via Getty Images)


"The reckoning for Roundup rolls on."

So said George Kimbrell, legal director of the Center for Food Safety, on Friday after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco affirmed a lower court ruling against Monsanto (since acquired by Bayer) which found the chemical giant responsible for the cancer suffered by users of its signature herbicide Roundup.

The 9th Circuit rejected an appeal by Bayer in Hardeman vs. Monsanto, in which Edwin Hardeman accused the company of failing to disclose the dangers glyphosate poses to human health. Hardeman was awarded $80 million in the case, which was later reduced to $25 million.

"Today's appeals court ruling is another reminder the Biden administration should act and revoke the registration of glyphosate immediately."
—George Kimbrell, Center for Food Safety

Hardeman was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma in 2015 after two decades of using Roundup as an herbicide on his 56-acre property. His case was one of several high-profile lawsuits against Monsanto over its use of glyphosate. The company agreed to pay $10.9 billion to a total of about 125,000 people last year, all of whom alleged the use of Roundup was to blame for their cancer diagnoses.

The Environmental Protection Agency backed Bayer in its latest appeal in Hardeman's case, in which the company claimed the jury verdict should be nullified because states don't have the authority to deviate from federal regulations for herbicides.

The three-judge panel ruled that California's failure-to-warn law was consistent with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

"FIFRA did not impliedly preempt Hardeman's state failure-to-warn claims," the court said.


Bayer also claimed that the World Health Organization's classification of glyphosate as a carcinogen should not have been entered into the court record as evidence. The judges ruled that "that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting" the evidence.

The Center for Food Safety, which filed an amicus brief in support of Hardeman last year, called the ruling a major victory "for all those who care about protecting human health and the environment and holding corporations accountable for the harm they cause."

Kimbrell said the group was "gratified that the Ninth Circuit unanimously rejected Monsanto's arguments that Mr. Hardeman and thousands of others harmed by their products are prohibited by federal law from suing to redress their injuries. The Court also properly upheld the reliance on the World Health Organization's classification of glyphosate as a probable carcinogen."

Despite international experts' warnings about glyphosate and decisions by policymakers in Austria, Germany, and other countries to phase out or ban the chemical, the EPA still claims that glyphosate is "unlikely to be a human carcinogen."

"Center for Food Safety is currently challenging the federal approval of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as unlawful for a number of reasons—including cancer risks to farmers and farmworkers from exposure," said Kimbrell. "Today's appeals court ruling is another reminder the Biden administration should act and revoke the registration of glyphosate immediately."

Who Funds the Climate Crisis?

For fossil fuel companies, what drives their profit is ownership of carbon in the ground. That's why they have spent billions of dollars stoking the climate denial industry and fighting regulations.

by Cynthia Kaufman
Published on Friday, May 14, 2021
by Common Dreams



A protester holds a banner at the rally outside JP Morgan Headquarters in Manhattan, New York. (Photo: Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)


First the good news: The technology needed for a carbon-free economy in every country in the world already exists. It is affordable, most of it will make our lives better, and making that transition rapidly would cost less than cleaning up the disasters anticipated by inaction on climate.

Now the not so good news: To achieve the very ambitious goals scientists have put forth to keep the planet habitable, such as reducing emissions and carbon capture, we need to act quickly; because the human and social costs to those living in the path of destruction, a disproportionate number of whom are low-income people of color, is incalculable.

Who is slowing the transition to a just and sustainable society?

There are many businesses still profiting off antiquated and destructive technology; many politicians who are still funded by them; and many in the world of finance who still see them as business partners.

Fossil fuel companies, like all corporations, are designed for generating profit. As society changes to require sustainable practices, many companies will be able to shift their business models to achieve the triple bottom line of profit, people, and planet. But for fossil fuel companies, what drives their profit is ownership of carbon in the ground. That’s why they have spent billions of dollars stoking the climate denial industry and fighting regulations.

We are not all on the same side in the fight for a sustainable future. There are many businesses still profiting off antiquated and destructive technology; many politicians who are still funded by them; and many in the world of finance who still see them as business partners. A company like Enbridge’s core business is building fossil fuel infrastructure. They are not going to shift to a green business model.

Stop the Money Pipeline


While the fossil fuel companies themselves cannot be counted on to become champions of the transition to a sustainable economy, the world of finance can change and remain profitable. And it is this group of actors that we need to pressure. Stop the Money Pipeline shares information on those funders and fights to expose their work. The key funders of Enbridge’s Line 3—a 1,097-mile crude oil pipeline extending from Alberta to Superior, Wisconsin—are Liberty Mutual, Blackrock, Wells Fargo, and JP Morgan chase. They are direct funders and insurers of the pipeline. If they withdrew their support the project would be stopped.

Less direct, but equally important in propping up the fossil fuel industry are the pension funds, such as California’s CalPERS and CalSTRS. They are among the largest investment funds in the world, and as public entities they should be acting in the public interest. These investors give companies like Enbridge a social license by investing in them.

Institutional investors and banks are not likely to stop funding the fossil fuel industry until we pressure them to do so. Earlier this year activists succeeded in getting the $246 billion New York State Common Retirement Fund to begin divesting from fossil fuels. Fossil Free California has been working for seven years to get CalPERS and CalSTRS to divest. It has been a strange fight, since the funds have already lost billions of dollars in value by staying in what is clearly a dying sector of the economy and Governor Newsome has asked them to use their investment strategies to speed the transition to a sustainable economy.

As the major fossil fuel companies are beginning to lose value, some investors are moving away from them. But passive funds still include them in their indexes. And fossil fuel companies are seen as legitimate businesses operating according to community norms. Big pension funds such as CalPERS and CalSTRS are holding onto passive funds arguing that they can help the fossil fuel industry to become better social actors. Enbridge and Exxon-Mobil might be heading for the precipice, but the banks and pension funds are the ones who fill their gas tanks.

Our role in the fight

For years the climate fight was seen by many as a matter of consumers voting with their dollars to shift how society functions. The concept of the personal carbon footprint was popularized in a 2005 British Petroleum campaign and encouraged people to look at individual consumers as the cause of the climate crisis. We need to come out of the fog of individualistic thinking and get clear about who is slowing us from making the transition from fossil fuels as quickly as we need to. And we need to take away the social license of the fossil fuel companies as quickly as we can. The way to do that is by focusing on their funders.

Scientists predict we have until 2030 for human society to make massive shifts in how we use energy that would allow the world can remain habitable. The present fight against the expansion of Enbridge’s Line 3 gas pipeline and the Dakota Access Pipeline is a test of grassroots mobilization. Right now, indigenous leaders, water protectors, youth climate activists, and people who live in the vast areas likely to be destroyed by spills and leaks from the pipelines, are engaged in a big fight to stop the expansion.

For those of us living in the rest of the country, we can support those activists by taking away the social license of the funders and insurers of those projects to make it impossible for them to go forward. By moving investments to climate-safe pension funds, pressuring J.P. Morgan Chase, the largest funder of the fossil fuel industry and Blackrock, the world’s largest investor in the fossil fuel industry to divest, we can help stop the pipeline of money that is fueling the climate crisis before it’s too late.



Cynthia Kaufman is the author of "The Sea is Rising and So Are We", "Challenging Power: Democracy and Accountability in a Fractured World" (2020), "Getting Past Capitalism: History, Vision, Hope" (2012), and "Ideas for Action: Relevant Theory for Radical Change" (2016). She is the director of the Vasconcellos Institute for Democracy in Action at De Anza College. She blogs at cynthiakaufman.wordpress.com.

Canada’s Refusal to Waive Intellectual Property Rights on COVID-19 Vaccines Should Be a Crime Against Humanity

The COVID-19 vaccine production process fails its own capitalist sniff test.

by Shree Paradkar

Published on Sunday, May 16, 2021
by Toronto Star


Protesters picket outside Johnson & Johnson Offices during the Global Day Of Action For A People's Vaccine on March 11, 2021 in Cape Town, South Africa. The group demanded that governments suspend patent rules at the World Trade Organization on COVID-19 vaccines. (Photo: Brenton Geach/Getty Images)

The U.S. surprised the world last week by throwing its weight behind waiving intellectual property rights for COVID-19 vaccines. Under pressure to respond similarly, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said: “I can assure you Canada is not interfering or blocking. Canada is very much working to find a solution.”

This is typical non-confrontational Canadian prevarication. “Not blocking” in this case still functions as a block.

Callous capitalism dictates that we get what we pay for. Ergo, the rich get more, the poor … bring their suffering on themselves. The proposal to waive certain patents on vaccines and medicines was brought forward in October by South Africa and India, well before any vaccines had been approved to prevent COVID-19. It has the support of some 100 nations, but the World Trade Organization works by “consensus,” meaning every one of its 164 members has to agree to the proposal. If you’re ever looking for the quintessential definition of structural discrimination, this is it. Create a coalition in the name of progress, but build in foundational structural barriers to equal access.

All this is happening against the backdrop of rich nations over-ordering vaccines, hoarding them, while blocking badly hit poor nations from accessing them.

By some counts, Canada has ordered enough vaccines to inoculate our population four times over. Meanwhile, where the virus feasts on humans, it continues to mutate dangerously making life unsafe for all — and exposing our myopic decision-making in the bargain.

So when Trudeau says he wants Canada to play mediator, to bring about a balance between protecting companies and improving vaccine access to poorer countries, he’s talking about a balance between profit and life. “Our” profit, “their” lives.

Callous capitalism dictates that we get what we pay for. Ergo, the rich get more, the poor … bring their suffering on themselves.

Except, the pharmaceutical companies claiming ownership to the recipes to the vaccines didn’t even bring these products to the market with their own funds. The COVID-19 vaccine production process fails its own capitalist sniff test.

As intellectual property rights expert Achal Prabhala outlines on The Dig podcast, the U.S. and other rich nations gave companies such as Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca billions of dollars — billions — in no-strings-attached grants to do the research, meaning no risk to the companies if they failed. Then they paid the companies billions of dollars — billions — in preorders so the companies were guaranteed buyers even before coming into the market. Now, they enjoy a global monopoly — largely funded by taxpayer labor.

As a result, poorer countries might not get vaccinated until 2023, according to some estimates.

We’ve seen this circus before with the same criminal consequences.


In 1996, antiviral therapy for HIV/AIDS was developed but was inaccessible to about 95 percent of the world’s people living with HIV, according to The Lancet.

That’s because one year prior, the creation of the World Trade Organization allowed companies to turn what were domestic patents into global ones. Nongeneric drugs cost about $10,000 a year at the turn of the century and were well out of the reach of many people. Calls for affordable generic antiretroviral drugs met by threats and lawsuits from pharmaceutical corporations. It took years to battle monopoly rights and finally make therapy affordable.

Meanwhile, people simply died.

In the case of smallpox, another deadly disease eradicated from the West but ravaging the developing world, it took a 1965 pledge by then U.S. President Lyndon Johnson to fund a program to wipe the disease off the Earth.

What about COVAX, the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access program, that is supposed to offer equitable access to vaccines? The U.S. and G7 nations committed to vaccinating at least 20 percent of developing countries by the end of 2021, but herd immunity requires 70 to 85 percent of the people to be vaccinated.

COVAX is so underfunded the vaccines don’t even reach front-line workers in poor countries. It has also been undermined by rich nations that jumped to the front of the queue by striking their own bilateral deals with pharmaceutical companies.

Opposition to the patent waiver has come with healthy doses of paternalism: Is this really the answer to the problem? Nations outside the U.S. and Europe don’t have the know-how to produce it. The waiver process is so long, it’s not worth it. And so it goes.

Look deeper and it gets messier.

The Indian government halted all exports of vaccines to combat its own deadly surge, leaving 91 countries depending on it in the lurch. “This colossal mess was entirely predictable, and could have been avoided at every turn,” Prabhala and pharmaceutical lawyer Leena Menghaney wrote in The Guardian. If only rich nations had nipped vaccine monopolies in the bud, they say.

Meanwhile, thousands die of this disease, daily. The patents remain in place. Canada is still “considering” supporting the waiver.

Shree Paradkar, a Toronto Star race and gender columnist, is the 2018-2019 recipient of the Atkinson Fellowship in Public Policy. Shree has been a journalist in Bangalore, Mumbai, Singapore, and Toronto. Follow her on Twitter: @ShreeParadkar

Report Reveals Major Corporations Are Funding Lawmakers Behind Anti-Democracy Bills

"It is now more urgent than ever to build a just transition away from fossil fuels and fight off attacks against protest and our freedom to vote, so that we can have a planet our communities can thrive on."

by Brett Wilkins, staff writer

Published on Monday, May 10, 2021

by Common Dreams

A participant holds a sign at a march celebrating the defeat of President Donald Trump in Manhattan on November 7, 2020. (Photo: Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Numerous corporations have funded the political action committees of state lawmakers backing the recent spate of anti-voter and anti-protest bills, even as many of the companies have spoken out in defense of voting rights and democracy, a report published Monday by Greenpeace USA revealed

"Even though a growing number of companies have spoken out in defense of democracy and voting rights, many of these same companies contributed to legislators sponsoring anti-voter or anti-protest bills during their most recent election campaigns."
—Greenpeace report

The report (pdf)—entitled Dollars vs. Democracy: Companies and the Attack on Voting Rights and Peaceful Protest—says that 44 state lawmakers sponsored at least one anti-protest bill and one anti-voter bill in the past year. It also reveals that 53 of the 100 top corporate donors to lawmakers sponsoring anti-voter bills also rank among the top 100 contributors to anti-protest measures.

According to the report, the top 10 corporations that have invested the most money in lobbying for anti-protest bills since 2017 are all fossil fuel companies.

The 10 companies that have contributed the most to state lawmakers sponsoring both anti-voter and anti-protest bills are: AT&T, Dominion Energy, Zurich North America and its subsidiaries, Berkshire Hathaway and its subsidiaries, UnitedHealth Group, Mednax Services, Charter Communications, State Farm Insurance and its subsidiaries, Phillip Morris USA, and Vistra Energy (FKA Energy Future Holdings) and its subsidiaries.

"Even though a growing number of companies have spoken out in defense of democracy and voting rights, many of these same companies contributed to legislators sponsoring anti-voter or anti-protest bills during their most recent election campaigns," the report notes.

It states:


Of the 100 companies who endorsed the April 14 "We Stand for Democracy" statement opposing "any discriminatory legislation or measures that restrict or prevent any eligible voter from having an equal and fair opportunity to cast a ballot," 12 contributed to the sponsors of 43 anti-voter bills analyzed.

Five of the 10 companies that donated most to sponsors of state anti-voter legislation also rank among the top 10 corporate donors to sponsors of anti-protest bills. Similarly, in the wake of the white supremacist attack on the Capitol, at least 130 companies "paused" political action committee (PAC) contributions to members of the "insurrection caucus." But at least 47 of these companies contributed to the sponsors of anti-voter legislation introduced since the January 6th insurrection.

Additionally, the report says the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes the For the People Act—a sweeping plan to expand voting rights, rein in dark money, and strengthen federal ethics rules passed by the House of Representatives in March—even though many individual chamber members have raised concerns about the types of attacks on democracy that the bill aims to address.

Executives from Boston Consulting Group, Deloitte, Ford, IBM, Microsoft, and United Airlines who have voiced opposition to state-level anti-democracy legislation currently serve on the chamber's board of directors, according to the publication.


BREAKING
We just released a report on the corporations funding the elections of extremist politicians behind the bills attacking our freedom to vote and our right to protest https://t.co/wfxhasMhpg
— Greenpeace USA (@greenpeaceusa) May 10, 2021


The report notes that anti-protest bills target communities of color and "are a direct response to Black Lives Matter and other BIPOC-led movements, laying bare their racist intent."

Folabi Olagbaju, director of democracy campaigns at Greenpeace USA, said in a statement that "a healthy democracy is a precondition for a healthy environment. When everyone's vote counts and when everyone's constitutionally guaranteed right to peacefully protest is protected, our government becomes more accountable and capable of meeting the demand for racial justice and enacting solutions to the rapidly accelerating climate crisis."

"We hope this report sheds light on who is behind the attack on our democracy and right to protest, and that it will push corporations to take a stand for strong national standards for voting rights and election reform, and quit supporting politicians who sponsor or vote for anti-voter and anti-protest legislation," Olagbaju continued. "It's time to ensure all of us have a say in key decisions that affect us all and our elections reflect the will of the people, not corporations."

"It is now more urgent than ever to build a just transition away from fossil fuels and fight off attacks against protest and our freedom to vote, so that we can have a planet our communities can thrive on," he added.

"Corporate platitudes are not enough—we must build a system that ensures our elected leaders listen to every American. Our time is now: Democracy cannot wait."
—Jana Morgan, Declaration for American Democracy

Jana Morgan, director of the Declaration for American Democracy coalition, said that "despite the promising news of corporations speaking out against anti-voter laws in states like Georgia, Greenpeace's latest report demonstrates that there's more to be done to make the promise of democracy real for us all."

"It's time to end the dominance of big corporations and big money in our politics, and ensure that our politicians are held accountable to the will of all Americans, and not just the wealthy and powerful," Morgan continued. "To do so, corporations and our political leaders must support passing the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. These transformative bills will ensure that politicians govern in the best interest of the people, and ensure the freedom to vote for all Americans."

"Corporate platitudes are not enough—we must build a system that ensures our elected leaders listen to every American," she added. "Our time is now: Democracy cannot wait."

The new Greenpeace report follows a Sunday Insider article revealing that several companies have broken their vows to stop contributing to the PACs of U.S. lawmakers who supported the so-called "Big Lie" that former President Donald Trump won the 2020 election. Offenders include Cigna, JetBlue, Koch Industries, and Toyota.

After the January 6 Capitol siege, several companies vowed to stop PAC donations to lawmakers who voted against Biden’s certification.

Others made vaguer statements — and since have restarted donations.https://t.co/BRT6ZQkGWG pic.twitter.com/q0Ww8iAmpm
— Insider (@thisisinsider) May 9, 2021

Additionally, corporate PACs are indirectly funding some of the 147 U.S. lawmakers who voted against certifying President Joe Biden's 2020 election victory by donating to congressional committees including the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee. AT&T, Cigna, Intel, and Pfizer have all donated thousands of dollars to such committees, according to Insider.