Daily Kos

Donated British food to be incinerated

Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:25:25 AM PDT

Your government at work.

US red tape is stopping it from reaching hungry evacuees.

Instead tons of the badly needed Nato ration packs, the same as those eaten by British troops in Iraq, has been condemned as unfit for human consumption.

And unless the bureaucratic mess is cleared up soon it could be sent for incineration.

One British aid worker last night called the move "sickening senselessness" and said furious colleagues were "spitting blood".

The food, which cost British taxpayers millions, is sitting idle in a huge warehouse after the Food and Drug Agency recalled it when it had already left to be distributed.

Scores of lorries headed back to a warehouse in Little Rock, Arkansas, to dump it at an FDA incineration plant.

The Ministry of Defence in London said last night that 400,000 operational ration packs had been shipped to the US.

But officials blamed the US Department of Agriculture, which impounded the shipment under regulations relating to the import and export of meat.

The aid worker, who would not be named, said: "This is the most appalling act of sickening senselessness while people starve.

We need to know who made this decision, and see if there's any rational explanation for it. Because if not, he or she deserves some serious tar and feather action.

  • ::

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 158 comments

  •  or, made to eat ALL OF IT before he/she (none / 1)

    goes to bed!
    •  After all, children are starving in China..err (none / 0)

      N.O.
    •  It was on the BBC last night (none / 0)

      Not just Tabloid fodder now.  WOW, jerks.

      "It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08

      by Salo on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 02:13:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We (none / 0)

      should just send it back. Why waste the food? It's unfortunate that it was shipped here to begin with. Another case of piss poor or non-existant planning.

      "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." Thomas Jefferson

      by llih on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 08:53:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This will hasten the end of (none / 1)

        other countries sending aid at all in the event of another catastrophe. Like maybe Hurricane Rita sitting out in the Gulf for a day or so on top of all that lovely hot water and then veering northeast, much like Katrina did and finishing the job Pat Robertson and his co-demons are so earnestly praying to gawdalmatty for.

        Let's see - millions of British citizens (and Spanish and German etc) collect millions of dollars for relief and their governments arrange for it to be shipped and when it arrives where it's needed the US government burns it. Then another tragedy ensues and all those citizens in all those other countries say "fuck you" to the requests for aid and the fascist pricks get to be right that there's no foreign aid offered.

        "And oftentimes, to win us to our harm, The instruments of darkness tell us truths..." Old Will in the Scottish play, Act 1 scene 3

        by banquos ghost on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 10:00:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Like the assistance Canada tried to send right (none / 0)

          away....while Bush was playing guitar....and as O'Reilly said...Canada was just sending aid to embarrass the US!  Damned if you do...damned if you don't.
          Mustn't lose sight of the big picture, tho, to help the needy.
  •  What I fear here... (none / 1)

    ...is both a "sensible explanation" and a "tar and feather action." That is to say that both sides will have their facts and shoot them at each other. On its face I can't imagine why this would happen, food is food in some circumstances, so why the fuck is aid being denied? But the question is why has it happened and can we stop it from happening (if it deserves that effort)? That'll be an interesting answer to hear and debate, and I hope this site will follow up now that the issue has hit the front page.

    it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses | Buy M.I.A.'s Kala! (No, really. Please!)

    by Addison on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:29:58 AM PDT

    •  Government doesn't work! (4.00 / 2)

      the conservatives will say. Time for faith based groups to pick up the slack! Never mind that they've had 5 years to make that government "work" and they haven't done jack shit. If they're so against government, could we start calling them anarchists?

      If your name was George Walker instead of George Walker Bush, your candidacy would be a joke.

      by dole4pineapple on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:31:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yup, you might say that (4.00 / 2)

        government doesn't work is the whole point of this Katrina exercise.  

        Small varmints, if you will.

        by 2lucky on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:35:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Faith based bullshit... (none / 1)

          if this administration has shown us anything, if these faith based jerks get state sponsored religion, the government is surely to make it ineffective...like thhey did FEMA, the Supremes, the Consititution, etc....

          Well thinking of it like that, maybe it's not such a bad idea after all! LOL

        •  They're not anarchists. (4.00 / 2)

          They're nihilists. Anarchists wouldn't object to donated food.

          1. BushCo and their cronies want to destroy the American way of life, especially that of the middle class.
          2. They want to precipitate a massive crash in the environment and the economy -- a crash that will take down most of the world with it, not just the USA.
          3. Once this crash has happened, they will be in a position to grab even more of the pie (even though it will be a much smaller and less tasty pie) through their monopoly on energy production and heavy weapons.
          4. Thus a theocratically-tinged feudalism that will allow them and their descendants to exploit what remains of the population with near-total efficiency.

          Or so the Inner Party believes. They think global warming is a good thing because they believe they stand to profit from it. This is called nihilism. A real philosophical anarchist would decry this sort of destructive exploitation.

          The only thing that stands in their way is their sheer, mind-boggling incompetence.

    •  Mad cow (none / 1)

      Is my best guess as to why there's a hold up.
      •  That was the reason I heard on TV (none / 0)

        •  Are you kidding? (none / 0)

          I can't tell anymore.

          it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses | Buy M.I.A.'s Kala! (No, really. Please!)

          by Addison on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:49:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nope, not kidding (none / 0)

            ...I was busy reading this site when I heard it, so I wasn't paying close attention to what show, etc. However, when I went to the main page here and saw it, I figured others heard it on MSNBC like I did.

            Tho I've written a few posts on it, I'm not sure it's true just yet, but the fact that people believe it can be says just how highly Bushco's stock is these days.

            •  The Countdown (none / 0)

              another poster down thread identified the show as being Countdown, so I wasn't the only one who heard it on MSNBC. So far, they have nothing posted on the site, but if there's any truth to it (which is quite possible), it'll be huge news.
              •  Yep, Mad Cow fears!! Crazy!! n/t (none / 0)

              •  I heard it too. (none / 0)

                They said the meals contained "meat" from Britain and so could not be distributed due to fears of Mad Cow disease.  They didn't even say "beef."  Surely ALL those meals do not contain beef.  If they're really afraid of that, why don't they segregate the beef meals, send them back to Britain and distribute the rest? Ironic that they'll refuse to test or they'll hide the facts about infected cattle in the U.S. and yet make up this crazy nonsense to prevent England from helping.  It's remarkable.  They want to alienate every other country in the world.  It's more obvious than ever to me that BushCo. "hates America," and is working actively every day to bring this country down.

                (¯`*._(¯`*._(-IMPEACH-)_.*´¯)_.*´¯) It's not too late!

                by nehark on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 03:26:23 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  If this mad cow meme is true (none / 0)

                  then I wonder our government even allowed those meals to enter the country? I mean, why waste British taxpayer money by allowing it to be delivered here at all?

                  ...but wait, that would require planning and foresight, qualities we all know our current government do not possess!

                  •  Why... (none / 0)

                    ...would our government care about British taxpayer money?  I mean, "what didn't go right?"

                    (¯`*._(¯`*._(-IMPEACH-)_.*´¯)_.*´¯) It's not too late!

                    by nehark on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:38:42 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Accidentally entered? (4.00 / 2)

                    Beef is not allowed from Great Britan because of BSE. There are some other restrictions on other meat and animal products because of the outbreak of FMD (foot and mouth disease) a few years ago.
                    Sorry, I hate Bush as much as anyone on this site, but he simply has nothing to do with the current import restrictions on British meat.
                    There is a case to be made that we are more likely to have BSE in our cows than Britain. Perhaps the current regulation needs to be revised. I just don't think you can look the other way and allow the restricted or banned meat into the US. It's not like we don't have enough meat in this country, or from other non-BSE regulated countries.
                    There are 8 major animal diseases around the world that we do not have here in the US. If one of these gets into our country, it will be an economic disaster.
                    Your friendly USDA employee. I'm with the gubmint, and I am here to help.

                    "Being a Humanist means trying to behave decently without expectation of rewards or punishment after you are dead. - Kurt Vonnegut"

                    by jkbiscuit on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 08:00:47 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  But that was my point (none / 0)

                      I don't doubt anything you're saying, but if that's so, then why was this foodstuff allowed to enter the US at all? Isn't that the job of some US Customs agent somewhere, who works for our federal government, who answers to Dubya???
                    •  Mad Cows and madder people... (none / 0)

                      From our side of the pond:

                      BSE has been squeezed out of the British beef herd, as a result of rigourous regulations. We now have, arguably, the safest beef around, and the EU has officially ended the export ban.

                    •  Um.... (none / 0)

                      We have BSE right here in this country, and it's in my state (Washington).

                      Want to be a living kidney donor? I need one from someone with a bloodtype of B or O. Drop a note at riverheart.livejournal.com.

                      by Kitsap River on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 09:20:08 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

    •  No profit motive: Cost-plus on donations sucks (none / 0)

      If there is anything that this administration should teach us, it is to follow the money.

      Much of the Katrina relief was turned back in order to not risk pre-existing contracts with emergency providers.  Halliburton (or whoever the ghoul of the day is) isn't going to make a big profit managing volunteers handing out donated British MREs.  The paperwork and safety issues will be used to slow that down.  But trucking in ice from death valley, or long-life bottled water from some nice red state   on a pre-existing contract would be quick paperwork, (but maybe slow shipping).

      Sure, privatization works, but it just needs some guaranteed government-enforced monopoly profits to provide the requisite profit motive.

      •  FEMA sends Katrina Ice Trucks to Maine (none / 1)

        You may have the answer (not risking pre-existing contracts with emergency providers like Halliburton).  Otherwise, could sheer incompetence  and/or stupidity explain this?  Why in hell wouldn't they divert them to Galveston?

        The trucks started arriving this weekend, and they're expected to keep coming through Sunday.

        City officials say they have no idea why the trucks are here, only that the city has been asked to help out with traffic problems. But the truck drivers NEWSCENTER spoke to said they went all the way down to the gulf coast with the ice -- stayed for a few days -- and then were told by FEMA they needed to drive to Maine to store it.

        The truck drivers, who are from all over the country, tell us they were subcontracted by FEMA.
        They started arriving over the weekend, and city spokesperson Peter Dewitt says as many as 200 trucks could come to the city by the end of the week.

        The trucks are storing the ice at Americold, a company with a warehouse on Read Street in Portland. People who live nearby say all the traffic has been baffling them for days.

        The trucks can only unload 4 at a time -- so the city is allowing some of them to sit at the International Marine Terminal and at the Jetport's satellite parking lot.

        No one NEWSCENTER talked to has any idea when, or even if the ice will go back to the gulf coast.

        WCSH/WLBZ

  •  Well, as Barbara Bush would say (4.00 / 4)

    those poor people are used to suffering. Just like jail is for poor people who break the law. If you're rich like W, and ALL of Jeb's kids, it's a youthful indiscretion. Could you imagine Clinton getting away with using cocaine? Or if Chelsea so much as jaywalked, what would the right wing be saying.

    As for tarring and feathering, the whole administration is due for it.

    If your name was George Walker instead of George Walker Bush, your candidacy would be a joke.

    by dole4pineapple on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:30:01 AM PDT

    •  Take heart with this: (none / 1)

      today Tyco's Kozlowski and Schwartz got a nice dose of accountability they could never have imagined was meant for them.  

      As a former employee of Tyco, it was a fine moment.  

      Small varmints, if you will.

      by 2lucky on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:40:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Mad Cow? (4.00 / 3)

    Me, just mad. Real mad. All I see here is:

    Dollas Dollas... cha-ching...

    for Halliburton.

    U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1999 it was 1:475.

    by Lode Runner on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:30:23 AM PDT

    •  Officially it'll all be about BSE, even though (none / 0)

      we've got plenty of that here at home and don't have to worry about importing it.

      I suppose British blood donations would be burned too, right?

      The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit. Somerset Maugham

      by verasoie on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:37:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And Canada would surely sell us unsafe drugs. n/t (none / 0)

        Small varmints, if you will.

        by 2lucky on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:42:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Considering (none / 0)

        That if you visit Britian, you can no longer give blood in the US, I would imagine they would be.
        •  Wait, what? (none / 0)

          Sometimes the jokes write themselves. Sometimes they run for President.

          by Sixfortyfive on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:09:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  US citizens (none / 0)

            Who visit Britian are enegliable to donate blood (or so I've been told by people who've been to Britian).

            So it would therefore be safe to assume that donations of blood from Britian would not be accepted.

          •  Ban on certain people (none / 0)

            Basically if you spent more than 6 months in the UK between 1980 and 1996 then you are not supposed to give blood.

            Robert.

            •  90 days cumulative (none / 0)

              Read further down in the article. I've been deferred until further notice due to a 4 month business trip 1985. Until this deferral, I had given regularly at our local hospital, and later, at the Blood Bank of Iowa. I'm pissed that there's not yet a test so I can resume donating.

              History will not forgive us if we do not try and convict the neocoms for their crimes, every last one of them...

              by Jesterfox on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 06:05:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Even if you were vegetarian when you lived there (none / 0)

              A friend who was vegan when living in England in the 80s, was told she could not donate blood.
              •  Blood donations (none / 0)

                I'm banned from giving blood in Ireland for two reasons.

                Firstly because I have spent more than 6 months in the UK in the last 20 years.  This is a BSE issue.

                Secondly because I have received a blood transfusion.  This is either a BSE thing, or a hepatitis thing since Ireland had problems with contaminated blood previously.

                These two restrictions came in recently and, judging by the increase in appeals for blood donations, have massively reduced the ready blood supplies.  I get letters from the blood transfusion board at least once a month asking for donations.  It's a bit depressing.

            •  most strict on Africa (none / 0)

              The rest of Europe has the same ban as the UK, but with a longer required time period. 2 years, IIRC.

              The Africa ban is scary. It says if you were born in Africa, lived in Africa for any period of time, or had sexual contact with anyone who is either of the first two, you're banned for life.

              That's an eye-opener on how bad it is there.

              "Can we all get along?"

              by hotspur on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 11:59:17 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Can't waive that regulation, apparently (none / 0)

        We can suspend the minimum wage (for the good of the people), but forget about suspending the regulations regarding well processed food!

        This is just more compassionate conservativism at work...

        I think I MAY NEED A BATHroom break?

        by marchmoon on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 08:43:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  in all fairness (none / 1)

          It's the prevailing wage they're waiving. Not the federal minimum wage. Likely many of them will be paying pretty close to the minimum, but still.

          Coupled with no-bid contracts handed out to the likes of Bechtel and Kellogg, Browne, & Root (forgive me if I've misspelled either -- errr... wait: Screw 'em if I misspelled 'em), this stands to be an awe-inspiring windfall for the Neocon Death Cult's corporate buddies.

          Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

          I love my country. Can I have it back, please?

          by swilldog on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 03:40:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  ban was suspended, at least 10 days ago. (none / 1)

          The problem was solved as of the September 10th Times article: "But last night, five days after the first batches of aid arrived from Britain and after negotiations with the British Government, the agency waived the ban, paving the way for the food to be distributed to those who need it."

           Here is the url to their article written September 10: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,23889-1773364,00.html

  •  Maybe the FDA (4.00 / 5)

     was looking at British birth rates and decided their food was really contraceptives. Only thing I can think of over at Lysenko Central.
  •  Rational explplanation? (none / 0)

    We've yet to see one.  On most anything.

    What a vicious slap in the face to a generous outpouring of help in a time of humanitarian crisis.  

    Seriously, our only real ally in Iraq is Britian and to declare their sustenance "unfit for human consumption" is so inhuman and so like Bush.  

    Small varmints, if you will.

    by 2lucky on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:32:57 AM PDT

    •  Anyone else remember the day after... (none / 0)

      When all the wingers could do was take the opportunity to badmouth the rest of the world for not offering aid?

      Did anyone doubt for a second at that point that they were only doing that so they could refuse the aid when it was given?

    •  Both sides can be *mad* (4.00 / 4)

      What if the British MRE's had been distributed and consumed?  Would some people on the left be screaming about how we used the poor as guinea pigs?  Would some people here be flipping out because we exposed poor children to mad cow disease?  In either case, the irrational fears would trumped the rational ones.  If they are good enough for British troops, presumably they are good enough for general consumption.  The risk of mad cow is very small in any case.  
      Before people start jumping all over my case, I just wanted to point out that irrational fearmongering goes on on our side as well.  Before you know it, a humanitarian gesture gets turned against the giver.  We should keep this knee jerk reaction of the left in mind if the MRE's eventually end up as burning cinders instead of shepherd's pie.  

      -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

      by goldberry on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 04:42:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  a billion dollars gets stolen in iraq (4.00 / 2)

    another 9 bil goes missing

    they are about to destroy food worth millions

    they put chronies into positions of power

    they give no bid contracts to their buddies

    the chief of procurement was just arrested and indicted

    they are about to embark on rebuilding the gulf coast with the use of conservative experimental policies, that have never been proven succesful anywhere

    why get upset?

    i say let the cons keep going, till they totally hang themselves

  •  the beef industry strikes again (4.00 / 4)

    the article suggests this might have to do with mad cow, which the British source says is ludicrous because "If they are trying to argue there is a BSE reason then that is ludicrously out of date. There is more BSE in the States than there ever was in Britain and UK meat has been safe for years."

    True - but who would lose if the FDA acknowledged that British beef is okay again? (As okay as beef ever is, anyway.) I just don't see Bush (or anybody he appointed) signing the executive order to suspend that particular rule.

    Of course, if he were an actual human being...

    If we eliminate the slippery slope argument, pretty soon we'll eliminate all argument and everybody will agree.

    by m3 on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:38:15 AM PDT

    •  Earlier diary (none / 0)

      Mentioned this reasoning, but it was German food they were burning.  

      Outta here, I don't deal well with sites that condone racism.

      by fabooj on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:41:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good lord (none / 0)

        If that's true, it hurts me personally, as I'm US Army contractor (save it, I've heard it already) working in Germany.  An American wrote into the Stars and Stripes to complain that Germans had barely given anything towards Katrina aid, so why should we keep having them build things on our bases (pretty much every construction worker on a base is German).

        Fortunately, at least one letter was published that corrected this mistaken belief.

        They have donated and what do we do?  Throw it back in their faces, either by rejecting the donations in the first place, or scrapping them.

        More accurately "A Texan in Bavaria," but would YOU give up UID 422?

        by A Texan in Maryland on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:32:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  wow (none / 1)

    is there any doubt that this is the most incompetent administration ever? I mean seriously, absolutely the MOST INCOPETENT EVER.

    "People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution. They don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible." --J.R.

    by michael1104 on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:39:16 AM PDT

  •  You want to believe, believe, believe ... (none / 1)

    ...that there is a rational explanation. It's hard to imagine that all 400,000 ration packs have spoiled. Is the British stuff better than American MREs and somebody was afraid of competition when this is discovered?

    Or maybe they thought it was British tea, and we can't have any of that coming into the country.

    Seriously, I really want to hear who decided what and why, and soon.

    I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land. -- Mark Twain

    by Meteor Blades on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:40:39 AM PDT

    •  Canned bullly beef... (none / 1)

      and digestive crackers, OXO bullion and a spot of Darjeeling for the Brigadier?

      Better food, meeting Halal, Sikh dietary requirements.

      Probably someone thought that Americans would not eat the funky curry vindaloo and treacle tarts or British-style boiled puddings...

      Someone in NOLA that is used to rice and beans and getting something called "Kendal Mintcake bar" might balk at the contents of a British MRE, perhaps.

      Then again, if one is really hungry...

      They might have done better with French MREs...Duck Paté, Earthenware-Dish "Cassoulet", Cockered Stewed in Red Wine...sounds more up the alley of food-conscious NOLA anyway.

      Some soldiers have reported that the trading value of RCIRs (Ration de Combat Individuelle Rechauffable) when on exercise with MRE eating troops is 1 RCIR for 5 MREs on average. In Somalia, a crate of RCIRs would get you a US field cot.

      People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

      by rgilly on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:38:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Beef party (none / 1)

      Let's throw those nasty British MREs back into the harbor where they deserve to be! No taxation without... wait...

      I've gotten this all wrong, haven't I?

  •  Tarred and Feathered (none / 0)

    Aaarrh matey, they need to be shown the buisnees end of a cutlass.  Arrrh that was so yesterday.

    When life gives you scurvy, make lemonade.... Seriously make some lemonade - it'll clear that shit up right away.

    by Edanger6 on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 12:43:04 AM PDT

  •  Calm down everybody. (4.00 / 2)

    I appeal for everyone to take a deep breath and calm down. The only source for this story is a british tabloid - not exactly a newspaper of reference.

    Look at their homepage. It's a sensationalist publication. I've searched Google News, trying to find confirmation, but I've found none.

    I sincerely hope that it is a hoax. If it's not, and we're not looking at an overly romanced distortion of the story by the Mirror, this is something huge.

    The American federal government destroys food aid because they can't publicly admit that British meat is safe ?!? This would outrage the whole population. Every newspaper would pick up the story instantly.

    But... It's more likely to be debunked on snopes.com in a few weeks.

    •  Well there is this AP article (4.00 / 4)

      (here)
      reprinted in something called "Air Force Times". It doesn't say that the food will be destroyed but it does say it's been parked somewhere waiting for Condi to give the okay. I hear she's busy though, what with the new fall lines.

      If we eliminate the slippery slope argument, pretty soon we'll eliminate all argument and everybody will agree.

      by m3 on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:05:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There would be reason to calm down if this wasn't (4.00 / 5)

      SOP.  

      From Sept 10 yahoo news

      A German military plane carrying 15 tons of military rations for survivors of Hurricane Katrina was sent back by U.S. authorities, officials said Saturday.

      The plane was turned away Thursday because it did not have the required authorization, a German government spokesman said.

      The spokesman, speaking on customary condition of anonymity, declined to comment on a report in the German news magazine Der Spiegel that U.S. authorities refused the delivery on the grounds that the NATO military rations could carry mad cow disease.

      The spokesman said U.S. authorities had since given approval for future aid flights, but it was unclear whether the German military would try again to deliver the rations

      Small varmints, if you will.

      by 2lucky on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:14:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Mirror may be a tabloid (none / 0)

      but its not News of the World for feck's sake.

      It's even a step or two up from Murdoch's SUN.

    •  Thank you. (4.00 / 2)

      The issue here is longstanding US FDA regulations concerning British (and, more generally, European) meat products, particularly beef.

      The Guardian, the source of this article, is a vehemently left-wing publication, and even more vehemently anti-Bush. Quite simply, they've found a headline that sells papers to a particular type of reader. Not to say that the Guardian hasn't had its share of scoops - the British tabloids can be pretty aggressive - but it is hardly The Lancet.

      I'm surprised that those on this site - normally in favor of a (rather EU-like) precautionary principle - are striking out against a measure which, if applied in a case much less provenly lethal than BSE (say, for example, GMOs) they would wholeheartedly applaud.  If I recall correctly, BSE has a thirty year gestation period. In 2000, the Hendley Cup was marred by the smoke of burning cows in the fields nearby. That was certainly less than thirty years ago, and the Guardian has imbibed quite a bit of Blair's propaganda to so quickly proclaim that BSE is a thing of the past.

      Seriously, if one is for restrictions on the international movement of food products on the basis of health and safety regulations, one should not discriminate on the basis of motive. Certainly not without a much more scientific basis for that discrimination than has been seen on this thread.

      Imagine what we would say if the Administration waived the import restriction for British beef and, in a year, a number of Katrina victims were to have been poisoned by BSE: "Bush caused brain damage" would be the headline. If we insist that our leaders abide by a precautionary principle, as perhaps we should, we should not be shocked - shocked! - when they react accordingly.

      •  Not a tabloid (none / 0)

        The Guardian is not and never has been a tabloid.  It was (until last week) a broadsheet and has now adapted the Berliner format, so you're wrong there.

        Vehemently left wing?  Depends on your definition of left wing --Blair is centre right, so if it's imbibed his propaganda what exactly does that make them?

        Anti Bush, you say that like it's a bad thing.  I know it seems strange, but a large proportion of the British population think he and his are dangerous nutters -- the Gruaniad is actually more moderate than its readers.

        Are you planning to call DKos left wing and anti bush in the same sort of smarmy tone that indicates that those terms devalue all following discussion?  Or are you going to throw Michael Moore in as well (after all the BBC funded him early on)

        Glingle

      •  correction (none / 0)

        "The Guardian, the source of this article, is a vehemently left-wing publication"

        Nope wrong - left of center maybe but not vehemently anything really.

      •  The Guardian (none / 0)

        The Guardian (Grauniad to its fond readers, arising out of wonderfully wayward proofreading during the 1970s)is a distinguished liberal left-of-centre newspaper, and has pursued honourable and thoughtful journalism for over a century.

        It is owned by a trust, which ensures its independence from political bullying and the attentions of multi-nationals and megalomaniacs. As a result, it is hated by the British right wing.

        Its website, Guardian Unlimited, is the most-visited newspaper site in the world, has a larger readership in the USA than in Britain, and is free to read.

        It runs Doonesbury in the UK, which is a good guide to its outlook generally.

        Check out the cartoons by Steve Bell.

        I should say that, of all the British rags, it is closest to a natural home for most Kossacks.

        Leave our Grauniad alone!

      •  I agree with positive comments re: Guardian, (none / 0)

        but this was in the Daily Mirror--an absolute tabloid,,,lots of fun tabloid, but not a source of real news.  did you mean the Guardian and if so would you post the URL.  I could only find a Times article in my Google searches--Here is the url to their article written September 10: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,23889-1773364,00.html

        The problem was solved as of the September 10th Times article: "But last night, five days after the first batches of aid arrived from Britain and after negotiations with the British Government, the agency waived the ban, paving the way for the food to be distributed to those who need it."

        But the tone of the article was they were pissed off that the FDA didn't immediately take our food.

  •  1st we dumped that tea.... (none / 0)

    and now the beef. Perhaps our friends across the pond will learn that cash (esp. cash worth more than ours) will always be welcomed...never burned or dumped into Boston Harbor.

    Didn't they hear the Dubster say "cash money"?

    On a serious note, I bet this is gonna play foul in the UK....yup, even the Murdoch rags. The Guardian will have a field day. Great way to win friends and influence people, Dub and Condi.

    Couldn't they have discreetly burned it w/o letting people know? This is how I know they aren't bright enough for a halfway decent conspiracy.

  •  Good. (none / 0)

    Maybe Bush's last ally, Blair, will think better of his golden boy now.

    (On Olbermann tonight they said the food had been called "unfit for human consumption" because of the possibility of Mad Cow.)

    Mugs~ I do miss you so... Every, single, day.

    by Bob on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:01:10 AM PDT

  •  Part of the Human condition (4.00 / 4)

    I fear that fast-moving situations like Katrina's aftermath will always produce horrible stories like this because someone in the chain of command is trying to deal with two conflicting pieces of advice or information.
    Try this small scale version:
    You come across a road accident. A helmeted motorcyclist is lying unconscious.
    1. You must remove his helmet in order to perform mouth-to-mouth.
    2. You must never remove an accident victims helmet; he or she may have a spinal injury and you could damage his spinal cord.

    Whoops.
    Have to move those refugees, but those school buses don't have A/C. The temperatures are soaring; folks could die in the heat.
    The Brits have sent a bunch of Ready-Meals, but they don't strictly conform to our Health and Safety standards.

    This is why it's so important to practice and drill. It gives planners a chance to spot these conflicts in advance.
    When faced with a Catch-22, often the simplest course of action is the most destructive: to do nothing.

    "Laugh while you can, monkey-boy" - Emilio Lizardo

    by jeno mules on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:02:52 AM PDT

  •  Incompetence, stupidity, MAJOR PR fiasco! (none / 0)

    Although it does raise a vital question. To what extent should FDA, importation laws, etc. be waived during a time of emergency?
  •  Even if "unfit for human consumption" (none / 1)

    Which is a silly thing to say seeing as how the British troops are living off the exact same rations, then why not let some of the thousands of starving dogs get some of the grub.  It's a lot better than just incinerating the tons of food that the British went through so much trouble to send over.

    Legalize Qualo. Those in Chicago - listen to Boers & Bernstein on 670 AM 2-6 M-F. Libertarian Democrat Represent!

    by Larry Horse on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:05:05 AM PDT

  •  Koz, stop wasting our time. Can't you take a (2.50 / 2)

    minute and check your facts?  Like a very simple question, why has the government stopped this food from coming in?  You are treating us like idiots, or making this site a British Tabloid.

    So why did the government do this?  And then challenge their reasoning.  Journalism 101, or what?  I can easily think of a couple of reasons why this may, or may not make sense.  No time for running this site?  what's going on?

  •  Just one more (none / 1)

    valuable resource flushed away.

    Truckloads of ice, doctors, medical supplies, rescue supplies, fuel, more food, water..........

    The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on.

    Haven't they ever heard of waste not, want not?
    But I guess when there are so many billions of dollars to spend in your buddy's businesses, why conserve?  

    The incompetence of these clowns is truly monumental.  Haven't they heard that there haven't been any more human cases of BSE in the UK?  We're acting like they're eating poison over there!

    Couldn't we at least send the meals to people that are truly starving to death, right this minute, in Africa?

    Let's see how quickly other countries will rush to try and ease the burden in the U.S. when a need arrives ever again.

    Shame, shame shame!!!!

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -Plato

    by Bcre8ve on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:21:34 AM PDT

  •  Republican Katrina Response: (none / 1)

    The fuck-up that just keeps fucking-up. Just more of the pervasive Bushco idealogy of,"Hey, we aren't the ones doing the dieing, so what's the problem?"

    The sleep of reason produces monsters.

    by Alumbrados on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:34:54 AM PDT

  •  Disgusting, (none / 0)

    and highly likely this will be turned into an excuse to do away with necessary FDA restrictions.

    What an excellent day for an Exorcism... SCI/Kenyon

    by DianeL on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 01:54:18 AM PDT

  •  hey I had a diary on this... (none / 0)

    ...completely ignored.  Thx.

    Bitterly yours

    Salo.

    "It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08

    by Salo on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 02:08:03 AM PDT

  •  This was alos on the BBC last night (none / 0)

    Not just a Tabloid story.    The Mirror is not exactly a Tabliod like the Enquirer. when they get a big story wrong they fire the editor--Peirs Morgan got himself fired for instance.

    "It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08

    by Salo on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 02:17:45 AM PDT

  •  not trying to be a troll, BUT (none / 0)

    there is no place for beef rations in the katrina aftermath. there is actually no place for beef under any circumstances, but certainly not in any situation whatsoever where storage tempteratures and/or mad cow are even remotely an issue.
    •  if they're MRE's (none / 1)

      wouldnt that suggest they can survive a long time?

      Cicero : If you're going to back a policy do it wholeheartedly. You'll win no points for timidity.

      by PoliMorf on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 04:29:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep (none / 0)

        MREs are meant for consumption out in the field, where refrigeration is an extremely impractical luxury.  Soldiers only eat them when it would be difficult to operate a regular dining facility.  I cannot recommend them for the taste (I've tried one).  However, I did not try it while starving, in which case my opinion of it would probably be improved.

        Whatever beef meals are in those MRE pouches have been preserved such that they can sit in 100+ degree heat for a few years and still be safe and nutritious.  How several years in 100+ degree heat affects the flavor is a different matter entirely.

        If anything, they wouldn't be bad to keep on hand the next time we get hit by a monster hurricane, which is an ever-increasing possibility.

        More accurately "A Texan in Bavaria," but would YOU give up UID 422?

        by A Texan in Maryland on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:42:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Beef beef (none / 0)

      I like beef.  Most Americans like beef.  I'll guess that most Katrina survivors also like beef.  Any MRE (or British equivalent) is manufactured to last several years without climate control.  Soldiers carry those packets when they're out in the field and eat them while sitting on the dirt, often without running water.

      It probably wouldn't be that great on your digestive system to eat MREs every day for a year, but short term, they don't seem to do active soldiers any harm.

      More accurately "A Texan in Bavaria," but would YOU give up UID 422?

      by A Texan in Maryland on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:46:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm guessing... (none / 0)

      ....a few days of starvation and you'd be changing your mind awfully damned fast. You sound very well-fed to me.
  •  A Promotion on the Horizon? (none / 0)

    "We need to know who made this decision ..."

    So that Bush can quickly arrange a promotion?

    •  Yup, (none / 1)

      just like everything else posted on this site, it's Bush's fault yet again!

      And blogs want to represent themselves as news outlets?

      Come on... Bush has enough of a track record to bitch about, but to blame him for this issue (about which all details are not yet known) is a bit on the absurd, don't you think?

      •  you're right (none / 0)

        it's really Clinton's Fault !!!

        blame may also be asigned to H. Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Kennedy.

        Cicero : If you're going to back a policy do it wholeheartedly. You'll win no points for timidity.

        by PoliMorf on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 04:35:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  No patience (none / 1)

        I have no patience for this kind of shit anymore.  Guess what?  When it comes to the federal response to the Katrina crisis, the buck stops with Bush.  Why don't you follow the link in my sig line and read about the horror stories of Katrina survivors.  Then come back here and try to rationalize the murderous incompetence of this man.
  •  Katrina Meal Plan (4.00 / 5)

    It's easy to understand--every foreign free meal eaten means one less domestic food transaction.

    Better to have disaster victims spend what cash they have with them on burgers and happy meals than to be hurting the US "restaurant industry" by keeping their money in their pockets and eating free oreign rations.

    And if they have no cash, FEMA can buy MRE's from the highest bidder, and hand them out now and then. Just because there's a crisis, why should things be different from business as usual?

    Rations like that keep for a hell of a long time--they don't go bad for years, in most cases--that's the idea of emergency rations. Also, the materials in military rations have to meet high standards, in most countries.

    This whole Katrina Administration has been and is about shameless profiteering at the expense of the people.

    Why should this be any different?

    What you see is what you get, but what you don't see is what ends up getting you.

    by Existentialist on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 03:21:12 AM PDT

  •  I might be tempted to make a joke... (none / 1)

    ...about the oxymoronic term "British food" or about whether the UK version of MRE's are any worse than hours, but this isn't the time.  This is the sort of thing that pisses people off and makes me wonder whether the rest of the world might let us twist in the wind next time.
  •  The Food Just Needs To Be Warmed Up (none / 0)

    Yet they insist on overcooking it in an incinerator? The Bush Administration can't even cook right!

    "The best way to determine what a person wants is by surveying what he gets." -Erle Stanley Gardner

    by KOTCrum on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 03:49:54 AM PDT

  •  Reason seems transparent (none / 0)

    That's several million American taxpayer dollars that won't be going to KBR, if the donated food packs are allowed through.

    The KZ, as much as possible, is being turned into another mercenary paradise.

    KZ - Katrina Zone.

    And, yes. That's a double-entendre.

  •  Imagine if Iraq passed such a law n/t (none / 0)

  •  Bush FEMA Procurement Chief Safavian Arrested (none / 1)

    Arrested for corruption. I guess David H. Safavian is the one that made sure FEMA had spent lots of money in the right places and bought lots of dreck to distribute in case a disaster hit, so we could throw out or incinerate all those unwanted donations.

    He's in the jailhouse now.

    What you see is what you get, but what you don't see is what ends up getting you.

    by Existentialist on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 04:24:25 AM PDT

  •  Great Time for That (none / 0)

    NOW they decide they don't mind government regulation after all!!
  •  Now we know (none / 0)

    where Brownie went after GWB sent him packing to get him out of the way, maybe George is going to turn the ration packs over to Haliburton and they can charge us to feed the troops in Iraq, bottom line and profit ya know .
    PEACE!
  •  Ever Try To Bring Sausage Into The U. S.? (none / 1)

    Being of Polish-Lithuainian grandparents, I have tried (on occasion) to bring back various sausages from Europe.  Every single time, the sausages have been confiscated when I got to Customs.  This is true even of smoked sausages (closer to jerky).  The explanation I have received is U.S. Dept. of Agriculture rules.  

    Since this is the same food one would be served in Poland or Germany or a host of other European countries, it boggles the mind.  However, I think the government is consistent about enforcement of regulations that require the meats be processed in facilities that meet USDA standards before they may be imported.

  •  Unfit for Consumption (none / 0)

    The only thing unfit for consumption was Dubya's speech to the nation the other night!  The real reason the rations were refused was because they might actually have contained something nutritious - and we certainly don't want that do we!  How is Mickey D's going to make money?

    The revolution starts now--in your own back yard, in your own home town

    by brit librarian on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 05:38:03 AM PDT

  •  Creutzfeldt-Jakob fears? So what? (none / 1)

    I don't understand why Mad Cow Disease would be an issue anyway; this country can't go any more fucking insane than it already has done. If Republicans were to contract a wasting brain disease, how would we even tell?
  •  Do they WANT this to be a failure???? (none / 0)

    I know that gov'ment is gov'ment, but I am completely perplexed by this on two levels.

    1st - Considering the little Iraqi jail incident are we really ready to continue insulting our British allies?

    2nd - Where is the PR cronie who makes a phone call, screams at some idiot bureaucrat for an hour and has the damn food released and sent to Houston, Baton Rouge, or any one of far too many places where hungry mouths are waiting?

    Personally, if I was REALLY hungry, I think I would take a risk of mad cow.

    Sad and Tired.

    Peace.

  •  bizarre (none / 0)

    So the government is not willing to lift outdated regulations to help feed hungry evacuees, but it will lift quite important gas quality restrictions to keep the price down for its consumers. Yuck.

    One can't spell MEAT without EAT and ME.

    by leberquesgue on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 06:18:28 AM PDT

    •  yes, and it will relax epa (none / 0)

      rules so Halliburton et al can fuck the gulf coast, er--I mean, "rebuild," but won't relax a rule about FDA regs. Isn't there something in their Good Book about straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel?
  •  It just seems like such a waste. (none / 0)

    Even if the meat product needed to be set aside (if only temporarily until testing could be completed), a meal ready to eat (MRE) type product has other foodstuff that could have supplied vital calories to persons in need.  If news accounts are correct, the meals are the same as they send their own troops.  Great Britain has a standard of living equal to that of our own; does anyone honestly think they would send their own troops anything harmful.  Under the circumstances in NOLA, and with informed consent of the risk involved, I think perhaps the people suffering should have had the option to consume the meals.  It just seems like such a waste.  

    BushCo Policy... If you aren't outraged, you haven't been paying attention. -3.25 -2.26

    by Habanero on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 06:28:43 AM PDT

    •  Sounds like (none / 0)

      you espouse a world government POV - why have an FDA when other countries will make the decision for us...
      •  Not even close. (none / 0)

        I espouse a world government point of view?  Not even close.  You will have to support your "question" with some basis in fact and some form of reasoning.  It is a fact that the Brits are very much like us and they have a standard of living equal to our own.  We also both have policymakers that in retrospect, from time to time, seem to have made poor choices.  We are all human and to err is human.  
        Let me ask you whether or not you have ever found yourself in grave circumstances?  One has to make do at such times.  Were you ever active in scouting?  Did you ever have to survive in an environmentally hostile place?  I have in the desert environments of Mexico and in eastern California after an automobile breakdown, and while hiking in the mountains of northeast Arizona.  When the chips are down, you do what you have to do.  

        BushCo Policy... If you aren't outraged, you haven't been paying attention. -3.25 -2.26

        by Habanero on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 07:28:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Several points... (none / 1)

          1.  Do your research on the FDA (see http://www.gmp1st.com/FDA.htm for starters) - I believe that we have the most comprehensive agency on the planet dedicated to making our food and drug choices safe for all of us... so I've got no problem with them holding up food per their guidelines.

          2.  Re: UK's SoL, it really depends on how you measure it (see http://www.business.uconn.edu/redirect/CIBER/sitefiles/resourceguides/vol3/3-1.2.pdf for a perspective).  But given recent history of the disease outbreaks on that continent vs. the U.S.'s, I've made my choice.

          3.  "To err is human" - no argument here.  But the facts re: the fed's (slow) Katrina response have yet to be vetted... unless of course your name is John Kerry who is fundraising at its expense (see http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/092005/brief4.html).

          4.  "You do what you have to do." - you are correct... and you should be held accountable for what you did.  But I don't understand the relevance of this statement given these circumstances, unless you are supporting the rioting which took (and is probably still taking) place in NO...
          •  Counterpoint (none / 0)

            Regarding #1

            We don't know that all meals contained beef.  MREs can range from beef, chicken, peanut butter and jelly, all depending on from where they are sourced.  The other parts of an MRE are still not affected even if the main entrée is canned beef.  As I first stated, they could parse the beef containing meals from the remainder until they pass quarantine.  I have no problem with FDA and it's guidelines.  

            Regarding # 2

            Yes that is your choice.  Let me pose a question to you that I wish for you to answer honestly.  In the interest of your own safety and the public safety benefit of the maintenance of "herd immunity"in humans, are you up to date on all of your vaccinations?  Do you follow the "General Recommendations on Immunization" in the February 8, 2002 Vol. 51 of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report?  If you do great, if you don't then at least leave yourself open to the possibility that there may be some room for latitude in what is possible in certain circumstances.  

            Regarding #3 & #4

            Where in any post have I purported to establish blame?  When it comes to surviving in these types of circumstances you prepare yourself.  I am prepared and I can survive in such circumstances.  When people need to survive and a reasonable option such as the donations from a country such as Great Britain become available, I personally, will take my chances and the consequences derived of that choice.  No, I certainly do not condone the rioting that took place; I see no excuse for that.

            BushCo Policy... If you aren't outraged, you haven't been paying attention. -3.25 -2.26

            by Habanero on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 10:58:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Way to go!!! (none / 0)

    Dis the most loyal ally.  And here I thought this Administration valued loyalty above all else.  This is so stupid, it takes someone clever to think it up.  Kinda like you have to know >something< to score zero on a T-F or multiple choice test - how could ANYONE get it wrong so often?!?!?  Who's writing this script.

    John McCain voted against health care for kids.

    by Land of Enchantment on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 06:39:06 AM PDT

  •  It's not "who made the decision" (none / 0)

    ...it's who didn't make a decision.

    Like in all bureaucracies, it's easier to go along with hypertechnical rules than it is to make a common-sense decision.  It's easier to hide behind something stupid than it is to question authority.  You'd be sticking your head up high in a game of whack-a-mole.

  •  I sent this article to my Senator... (none / 0)

    I'd suggest everyone else do the same.  Please.
  •  I heard a similar thing (none / 0)

    about food rations sent from Canada. Apparently the food was refused because of the supposed 'mad cow' concerns. This is after the border has been reopened to Canadian beef. Go figure.

    I also am highly sceptical as to whether every last scrap of food donated by Canada contained beef. The same for the English rations. That's just not reasonable.

    Honestly, someone needs to get their head out of their butt and act sensibly.

    "Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence; Conservatism is distrust of the people, tempered by fear" Wm. Gladstone

    by lcbo on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 07:49:02 AM PDT

  •  There is a general rule here (none / 0)

    When you reduce government size you do not reduce bureaucracy.  Bureaucracy entrenches itself.  Bureaucracy (and the more worthless bureaucrats) know how to survive.  When you reduce government you merely concentrate the bureaucracy.  
  •  > tar and feather action (none / 0)

    If you don't have any tar handy. . . .molasses will do.

    Best Diary of the Year? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/23/03912/3990

    by LNK on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 08:36:07 AM PDT

  •  They did the same thing to the Germans... (none / 0)

    Y'know, it was big news in Germany here, the soldiers loading up a cargo-plane of supplies for Katrina victims. Should have been a good feel-good operation all around, right? Well, the plane was forced to return because the customs forms weren't filled out properly...
    c'mon folks, diplomacy 101 here. If our allies are offering something, don't reject it. I have eaten and drunk in Germany, Britian, and a number of other european countries in the past 6 years, and have yet to get food poisoning. For crying out loud, it's a big fucking middle finger pointed at these people who want to help!
  •  Food, food and more food (none / 0)

    Playing devil's advocate here..

    -Could we have enough food for the evacuees already? A deluge of donations could be very probable at this point.

    -It's much more difficult to serve people military style rations when they've become dispersed throughout the country. With fewer people in shelters now, where exactly are you going to serve this food?
    That said...there's always some sort of use for it. But do we risk pissing off our allies further by using their food to feed our homeless who have nothing to do with Hurricane Katrina?
    Then again, we should've saved the rations for Rita.

  •  Cost-plus on donated goods is zero profit. (none / 0)

    If Halliburton (or whoever) gets a contract for whatever it takes + 10% profit, inhibiting donations makes sense.

    Importing lobster rolls from Maine same-day air express on a cost-plus emergency contract will have a much better chance of having its paperwork all in order.

  •  UN food packets!?! (none / 0)

    Good God!  We can't have UN Food seen or in the hands of people who need food.  Then the UN would be seen as helping them instead of the administration.  Karl Rove can't possibly let this happen.  We've got to stop this now.

    Obstruction of Justice: Most people are idiots... But don't tell them. It'll spoil all the fun for those of us who aren't.

    by d3n4l1 on Tue Sep 20, 2005 at 09:11:53 AM PDT

  •  the british, the beef lobby and the BM... (none / 0)

    ...are in conjunction a powerful force - ask my wife. But as regards the debacle of current debate my guess is that somebody in customs or DHS got leaned on from K Street. Spongiform encephalopathy is not the point nor is it the original cause of halting that shipment, of this i confidently assure you. Mad cow is a joke, an 'erring rouge, a medical macguffin if you will. It is as every other CNN foreign-pandemic scare from the killer birds for their chinese chest colds to the killer bees because they might be africanized.

    The enforcement of illegal tariffs or embargoes takes the form of vast culls of food or drugs, and it is always the importing country that has to foot the bill and shut its mouth. To popularize these protectionist attitudes, our masters have made us paranoid to the point of psycopathy about things which with we've dealt since the dawn of time, like getting sick from an undigested bit of beef (which has been known to cause the Jacob Marleys - the one thing dick cheney truly fears). Crazy diseases break out from time to time, the earth moves, people fall off of things, animals attack, what the fuck is news about any of that? Well can someone tell me then/how come it's all over my CNN?

    One fact of which scientists have been trying to inform us for decades has been successfully newspapered over by the drug companies: if anything's gonna cause an outbreak, it's over-medication. And now Madcow groupthink among K Street and the BM (big media) will starve a couple more Cajun grammas.

    This particular mechanism of macabre collusion is still awful, as in awe-inspiring, if overworn.

  •  unsafe food (none / 0)

    This sounds sadly like the "genetically modified corn" situation, where starving Africans are denied food because it's "unsafe."  Seems to me that starvation is slightly more dangerous than corn that gives you gas.

    I don't know if any in N.O. are still starving, but I know Africa is full of starving people. Where's the outrage?

    •  Starvation politics (none / 0)

      People are not starving because we can't grow enough food. People starve for a lot of reasons, the main ones being in the political arena. There are more drawbacks to gmo foods than that they "give people gas" (one side effect I've never heard of).

      "Being a Humanist means trying to behave decently without expectation of rewards or punishment after you are dead. - Kurt Vonnegut"