Monthly Archives: November 2011

SAIC Banks Billions from Top Secret America, Millions to Put DHS in an Asylum

SAIC Banks Billions from Top Secret America, Millions to Put DHS in an Asylum

The Terrorism Industrial Complex a.k.a. “Top Secret America” may sound like tin foil hat conspiracy to some, but many of you will remember it as the name of an extensive investigation by the Washington Post, whose editors’ intro says:  “[This] is a project nearly two years in the making that describes the huge national security buildup in the United States after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks…  When it comes to national security, all too often no expense is spared and few questions are asked – with the result an enterprise so massive that nobody in government has a full understanding of it.  It is, as Dana Priest and William M. Arkin have found, ubiquitous, often inefficient and mostly invisible to the people it is meant to protect and who fund it.”

Short of storming the Beltway, the American people may never learn just how much of their money has been pillaged, plundered and simply wasted in the name of “national security” since 9/11, but our research suggests it could easily be an amount that exceeds not only the billions in bailout bucks given to the Banksters since 2008 but the trillions paid to the War Profiteers since 2001.  In fact, just as the money being squandered on militarily useless F-22 and F-35 fighter jets  will probably exceed our $1.3 trillion federal deficit (see our previous reports), the often untraceable trillions poured into the post-9/11 “too big to fail”, “war on terrorism”, “homeland security” and “black ops” troughs by our corporate-owned politicians and well-lobbied bureaucrats might easily approximate our $15 trillion national debt.

One of the hundreds of “security contractors” feeding at those troughs is SAIC – formerly Science Applications International Corporation.  Headquartered in McLean VA, SAIC is “a Fortune 500 scientific, engineering, and technology applications company working in national security, energy and the environment, critical infrastructure, and health”.  The company’s 46,000+ employees serve the Department of Defense (DoD), the intelligence community, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal government agencies.  SAIC had revenue of $11.1 billion for its fiscal year 2010.

Since 1995 SAIC has contributed over $3.8 million to political campaigns, split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, with Barack Obama and John McCain being the top recipients.  That amount is eclipsed by the more than $24 million they’ve invested in lobbying since 1997.  And over that same period, SAIC’s penalties for federal contractor misconduct have far exceeded their pay-to-play payola:  SAIC paid a $24.9 million settlement for rigging bids on General Services Administration (GSA) contracts, $5 million to the Air Force for false claims and defective pricing, and all told over $32 million for a dozen different instances of government fraud, ethics and other violations.  Of course, all their penalties and payola combined is chump change compared to the more than $63 billion in defense, security and other federal contracts SAIC has bagged over the past ten years.

Apparently its all forgive and forget at the GSA, because just last week they awarded SAIC a $5 billion telecom systems contract – forgiving their history of bid-rigging, and forgetting that the City of New York recently demanded a $600 million refund on the botched and corruption-riddled “CityTime” system that SAIC installed for them.

SAIC will also be getting at least a $90 million bite out of the $4 billion or so that’s been budgeted to relocate the Department of Homeland Security to what was once St. Elizabeths Hospital, an insane asylum.  Conceived in the Mad Hatter days of Bush-Cheney, the megabucks DHS relocation boondoggle is yet another fiscal insanity that has continued unaffected by any imagined wave of “Change” in 2008.  SAIC’s piece is to implement a “secure and scalable” IT infrastructure.

Why SAIC would be trusted to provide DHS with a “secure” anything for their new 4.5 million square foot Ministry of Truth facility is a mystery to me.  After all, it was only a few weeks ago that they acknowledged the theft of tapes containing the confidential personal information of 4.9 million Tricare military beneficiaries that were allegedly sitting in the car of one of their employees.

Anyway…  False flag op or not, there can be no debate that since 11 September 2001 trillions of taxpayer dollars have been spent to beat the boogeymen, real or contrived.  Has it been worth it?  Do you think Americans are “safer” today than we were ten years ago?  If so, has any security gained been worth the cost, and the personal privacy and freedoms lost?

Related Image:

Related Videos:

This document contains links shortened using to facilitate emailing.  If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this:

Bayer Behind BPA Study That Preserves Their Profits By Prolonging Your Risks

Bayer Behind BPA Study That Preserves Their Profits By Prolonging Your Risks

Bayer Group (Bayer AG) is a German holding company that ranks #147 on the Forbes Global 2000 and #1 on the Toxic 100 Air Polluters list:

With more than 111,000 employees and over $47 billion in annual revenues, the company’s (dirty) business operations are organized into three subgroups: HealthCare, CropScience and MaterialScience, supported by the service companies Bayer Business Services, Bayer Technology Services and Currenta.  Bayer HealthCare is involved in the research, development and manufacture of health products for “people and animals”.  Bayer CropScience is engaged in crop protection and “non-agricultural” pest control.  Bayer MaterialScience supplies polymers for a wide range of applications.  Bayer AG operates through numerous subsidiaries, affiliates and joint ventures located in Europe, Latin America, Africa, Middle East, North America as well as the Asia/Pacific region, e.g. Bayer Chemicals AG in Germany, Cotton Growers Services Pty. Limited in Australia and Polygal 1998 Ltd. in Israel, among others.

When you hear the name “Bayer” you may think immediately of their flagship product, but Aspirin is only one of many brands you’ll find on their Products A-to-Z List:

Notably missing from this list is Bisphenol-A, or “BPA”, of which Bayer is the world’s largest producer.  In the U.S., the only 5 companies producing it are Bayer, Dow, Momentive Specialty Chemicals (formerly Hexion), SABIC Innovative Plastics (formerly GE Plastics), and Sunoco, “collectively bringing in $6 billion a year in revenue from BPA alone.”

And just what is BPA?  Some sources define it as an “organic compound”, while others say it is “made from petroleum”.  And guess what?  They’re both correct!  Just like Con-Agra can legally label genetically-modified foods as “All Natural” – in the United States at least – it is acceptable in many circles to refer to petroleum as “organic”.  That should make it easy for Big Oil to “Go Green”, since it’s all just a matter of packaging:

And in the U.S. food and beverage industry, that’s just how Bisphenol-A is used.  BPA, an estrogen-mimicking chemical, is used to make plastic containers like baby bottles and to line food and drink cans.  Thousands of BPA studies have been conducted over the years, and many of them have linked the chemical to breast cancer, early puberty, infertility, obesity and a whole host of other health problems.  That was enough for the Canadian government to declare Bisphenol-A to be a toxic substance last year:

That has not been enough, however, for the U.S. Food & Drug Administration or our food and beverage companies to follow suit.  One reason is that some “scientific” studies of the effects of BPA exposure and consumption by people and animals have reported different results.  Studies like this recent one, which concluded that “…the available evidence indicates that BPA exposure represents no noteworthy risk to the health of the human population, including newborns and babies”:

And what other conclusion would one expect from such a study, when BPA producers like Bayer AG were behind it?  As disclosed:

“Four authors of a new report concluding that bisphenol A is safe have ties to companies and groups that benefit from the controversial chemical.  Two of the researchers – Hermann Schweinfurth and Wolfgang Volkel – reported their affiliations in the report’s ‘declaration of interest.’  Two others – Werner Lilienblum and Peter-Jurgen Kramer – have professional websites linking them to the chemical industry…  Schweinfurth acknowledged in his declaration that he works for Bayer Schering Pharma AG, the largest producer of bisphenol A, or BPA, in Europe.  Volkel reported receiving funding from the international industry group BPA Global in the past.  Lilienblum runs a ‘consultancy for the industry.’  And Kramer describes himself as a ‘leading toxicologist in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry’ who is currently ‘developing and shaping’ toxicology in Germany and throughout Europe.”

Using the tainted conclusions of Bayer-sponsored “research” like this as an excuse, profit-before-people corporations like Coca-Cola continue lining their cans with a toxic chemical that they claim to be safe while at the same time assuring the public that they are actively pursuing alternatives.  The obvious inconsistency should give you pause.  After all, if BPA is as safe as they say, then why are they looking for alternatives?

BPA is not the first product Bayer continued to push on the public long after they knew it was a health hazard:

“A division of the pharmaceutical company Bayer sold millions of dollars of blood-clotting medicine for hemophiliacs – medicine that carried a high risk of transmitting AIDS – to Asia and Latin America in the mid-1980’s while selling a new, safer product in the West, according to documents obtained by The New York Times.”

Actually, Bayer AG has a long history of knowingly selling chemicals that kill people.  During World War II, for example, the company was “…part of IG Farben, a conglomerate of German chemical industries that formed a part of the financial core of the German Nazi regime.  IG Farben owned 42.5% of the company that manufactured Zyklon B, a chemical used in the gas chambers of Auschwitz and other extermination camps.”

You can follow the more recent atrocities of the Bayer Group at the “Coalition Against Bayer Dangers” website:

Related Image:

Related Videos:

This document contains links shortened using to facilitate emailing.  If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this:

United Technologies: Black Hawks for Brunei & Billions from a Boondoggle

United Technologies: Black Hawks for Brunei & Billions from a Boondoggle

Doing his part to promote the ever-increasing export of aircraft and weapons to shoot them down “made in America” by our Military and Prison Industrial Complexes, last week U.S. Arms-Dealer-in-Chief Barack Hussein Bushbama wrapped up his 9-day Asia-Pacific sales trip by touting $25 billion in new orders from our “allies” in the region.  Principal beneficiaries included prison labor exploiter Boeing and other Top 10 war profiteers such as GE and United Technologies, whose Sikorsky subsidiary came away with a $325 million order for Black Hawk helicopters from the Brunei Ministry of Defense:

How a tiny Islamic sultanate of only 400,000 people can afford $325 million worth of “Death from Above” and what they plan to do with it are intriguing questions for you and I, but probably of little concern to United Technologies.  Following the money suggests that maintaining their Pratt & Whitney unit’s multi-billion dollar stake in the trillion dollar F-35 Joint Strike Fighter boondoggle takes precedence over any sales to the Sultan:

Pratt & Whitney produces the F135 engine that powers the “next generation” F-35 fighter jet, which according to a study by the Rand Corporation “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run”.  Beginning with a $4.8 billion development contract awarded just weeks after 9/11 gave our defense industry the keys to the Treasury, by 2010 the cost to “complete” the F135 engine was estimated at over $7.28 billion.  On top of that, earlier this year the Department of Defense (DoD) awarded Pratt & Whitney $1.13 billion for F135 engine production, and this month the U.S. Navy gave them another $75 million “to fund a set of studies on feasibility, operational readiness, cost, and implementation of the Joint Strike Fighter engines, which are already in production.  [The money is] in addition to the roughly $16 million each engine costs the government…”

Did you catch that last part?  The Navy is paying a defense contractor $75 million to study the “feasibility, readiness and cost” of their own product!  What do you think their conclusion will be?

The insanity doesn’t end there…  Pratt & Whitney’s potential slice of the trillion dollar F-35 pie is estimated at $100 billion.  That caught the eye of GE and Rolls Royce, who teamed up to offer the “F136” as an alternative engine.  Against the Pentagon’s wishes, a Congress awash in GE payola (over $30 million in contributions since 1989, and over $245 million in lobbying since 1997) funded development of the second engine right up until last April when – in a rare display of fiscal integrity, or more likely deference to the millions United Technologies invested in lobbying and PR (e.g. for its demise – the DoD pulled the plug on the secondary engine program:

Whether that plug remains pulled is anybody’s guess, but I’d wager the madness will continue until We the People pull the plug on what is euphemistically called our “Defense Aerospace Industry”:

Related Image:

Related Videos:

This document contains links shortened using to facilitate emailing.  If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this:

Eleven Reasons Overthrowing the Government Would Fix the Economy

Eleven Reasons Overthrowing the Government Would Fix the Economy

“With revolutions all across the Arab world, riots spreading through Europe, and the continued persistence of the economic downturn, it seems like everyone’s coming to the consensus that perhaps the situation has become so unthinkably bad that previously unthinkable solutions might be necessary.  Government solutions to catastrophic economic collapse have rarely been neat or pretty, but at least in the past they tried to do something bold and mostly succeeded – as opposed to our modern Congress who apparently can’t even agree on the fact that they are responsible enough to spend any money.”

“So how about we propose a tiny, modest, infinitesimal alteration: just overthrow the whole f’n thing and start from scratch.  After all, it’s the young, well educated millennials that are getting the hardest shaft from the downturn, and it’s the young, educated and unemployed who start revolutions.  There’s not much else that will kick off a revolution faster than grinding poverty and an excess of free time, especially when you add in upward of $100,000 in student loan debt, piled on in pursuit of what ended up being an empty promise given by baby boomers who have their healthcare paid for by the government, but pale with horror when their children demand the same.  So whether we completely re-write the Constitution (which we can totally do by the way), or violently storm the capital, here are 10 ways in which overthrowing the government would help get the economy back on its feet…”



The U.S. Air Force paid Lockheed Martin – the federal contractor that is first in funding, first in fraud, and principal beneficiary of the $1 trillion F-35 boondoggle that eclipsed their F-22 disaster – about 412 million taxpayer dollars each for their problem-plagued and now program-cancelled F-22 fighter jets.  With some 170 [Cr|R]aptors still “in service” – but never once used in combat anywhere in the world – that’s over 70 billion taxpayer dollars paid to Lockheed for planes that have been absolutely useless militarily.  And what did our Pentagon decide to do last week to remedy the situation?  Why, GIVE LOCKHEED MARTIN ANOTHER $7.4 BILLION to “upgrade” their grounded F-22 fleet, of course!

Related Image:

Related Video:



This document may contain links shortened using to facilitate emailing. If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this: Also our thanks to the web designs miami beach, web designers miami beach and web developers miami beach who support our efforts.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: A One Trillion Dollar Boondoggle That is “Too Big to Fail”

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: A One Trillion Dollar Boondoggle

The constitutionality of “the United States Congress Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction” a.k.a. “the Supercommittee” created on August 2nd by the “Budget Control Act of 2011” is a question few of our corporate-controlled politicians or media pundits have the intestinal fortitude to debate.  And we don’t have the bandwidth to address the issue here, so we leave it for now to you, the reader, to pursue:

Regardless of legitimacy, the Supercommittee is charged with issuing a recommendation for at least $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade by this Wednesday, November 23rd.  If it fails to agree on a package or the full Congress fails to pass it, a so-called “trigger mechanism” would enact $1.2 trillion in “automatic spending cuts” which cannot be traced back to any specific Senator or Representative.  This fiction thus enables our politicians to make unpopular budget cuts without any personal accountability to their constituents or the American people as a whole.

Allegedly included in those automatic spending cuts is a $600 million reduction in defense spending – which may actually be a reduction in future increases only, and therefore not really a reduction at all.  Real or not, if those “cuts” are triggered then CIA Director turned Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta says one of the first casualties will be the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program:

That makes perfect sense from the perspective of those at the Pentagon and elsewhere who DON’T WANT THIS PLANE (*** watch the video series linked below ***).  In the following article published by The Atlantic, author Dominic Tierney tells the rest of this shocking tale of unbridled corporate greed, political corruption and wanton Washington waste:

[Start of The Atlantic article]


The U.S. will ultimately spend $1 trillion for these fighter planes. Where’s the outrage over Washington’s culture of waste?

The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an impressive aircraft: a fifth generation multirole fighter plane with stealth technology. It’s also a symbol of everything that’s wrong with defense spending in America.  In a rational world, U.S. military expenditure would focus on the likely threats that the United States faces today and in the future.  And at a time of mounting national debt, the Tea Party would be knocking down the Pentagon’s door to cut waste.  But the only tea party in sight is the one overseen by the Mad Hatter, as we head down the rabbit hole into the military industrial wonderland.

The F-35 is designed to be the core tactical fighter aircraft for the U.S. military, with three versions for the Air Force, Navy, and the Marine Corps.  Each plane clocks in at around $90 million.  In a decade’s time, the United States plans to have 15 times as many modern fighters as China, and 20 times as many as Russia.

So, how many F-35s do we need?  100?  500?  Washington intends to buy 2,443, at a price tag of $382 billion.  Add in the $650 billion that the Government Accountability Office estimates is needed to operate and maintain the aircraft, and the total cost reaches a staggering $1 trillion.  In other words, we’re spending more on this plane than Australia’s entire GDP ($924 billion).

The F-35 is the most expensive defense program in history, and reveals massive cost overruns, a lack of clear strategic thought, and a culture in Washington that encourages incredible waste.  Money is pouring into the F-35 vortex.  In 2010, Pentagon officials found that the cost of each plane had soared by over 50 percent above the original projections.  The program has fallen years behind schedule, causing billions of dollars of additional expense, and won’t be ready until 2016.  An internal Pentagon report concluded that: “affordability is no longer embraced as a core pillar.”  In January 2011, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a champion of the aircraft, voiced his frustration: “The culture of endless money that has taken hold must be replaced by a culture of restraint.”

The F-35 is meant to be the future of U.S. tactical airpower, but the program harks back to the Cold War, when we faced an aggressive great power rival.  The world has changed.  The odds of great power war have declined dramatically.  We still need a deterrent capacity against China and Russia, but how much is enough?  In a decade’s time, the United States plans to have 15 times as many modern fighters as China, and 20 times as many as Russia.  Meanwhile, new challenges and threats have emerged.  We should be focusing our military spending on the types of campaigns that we’re actually likely to face: complex asymmetric wars against weaker opponents, where manpower and intelligence are critical.

And it’s hard to square the military largesse with our rampant debt.  Republicans want to slash billions from programs like early education, in Representative Jeb Hensarling’s words, to “save our children from bankruptcy.”  So where is the outrage at the F-35’s outlandish cost?

Some just don’t seem to care.  When it comes to defense, Republicans are the champions of big government and massive expenditure.  The F-35 is too big to fail.  At the same time, many Democrats keep quiet for fear of looking weak on defense – unless, like Senator Bernie Sanders, they’re from Vermont.  Other politicians are bought off with pork.  Defense suppliers are spread throughout dozens of states, giving everyone a reason to look the other way.

Any serious effort to balance the federal budget will require significant cuts in defense spending.  And the F-35 is a prime target.  The 2010 bipartisan Bowles-Simpson Commission on deficit reduction suggested canceling the Marine Corps’s version of the F-35, and halving the number of F-35s for the Air Force and Navy – replacing them with current generation F-16s, which cost one-third as much.  This would save close to $30 billion from 2011 to 2015.  The plan went nowhere.

We used to be content to outspend Australia on aircraft.  Now we literally spend Australia on aircraft.

[End of The Atlantic article]

Related Images:

Related Videos:

This document contains links shortened using to facilitate emailing.  If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this:

Good Will Hunting Warned Us About Corporate Greed and the Rising Kleptocracy Years Ago

NSA, National Security Agency, Now Spying on Americans

In his job interview at the NSA (‘N’ow ‘S’pying on ‘A’mericans), “Good Will Hunting” warned us about corporate greed and the rising Kleptocracy, and everything Matt Damon said back in 1997 applies equally if not more so today.  In under three minutes, here’s a big part of what’s wrong with America:

If you can’t view the video, or if he’s talking too fast for you to follow, here’s the transcript:

NSA Interview

So, why do you think I should work for the National Security Agency?

Well, you’d be working on the cutting edge. You’d be exposed to the kind of technology that you wouldn’t see anywhere else because we’ve classified it. Super string theory, chaos math, advanced algorithms…


Well, that’s one aspect of what we do.

Oh, com’on, I mean, that is what you do. You guys handle 80 percent of the intelligence workload. You’re seven times the size of the CIA.

We don’t like to brag about that, Will. So, the way I see it, the question isn’t Why SHOULD you work for the NSA? The question is: Why shouldn’t you?

Why shouldn’t I work for the NSA? That’s a tough one. But I’ll take a shot. Say I’m working at the NSA, and somebody puts a code on my desk, somethin’ no one else can break. Maybe I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I’m real happy with myself, cus’ I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East and once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels are hiding… Fifteen hundred people that I never met, never had no problem with get killed. Now the politicians are sayin’, “Oh, Send in the marines to secure the area” cus’ they don’t give a shit. It won’t be their kid over there, gettin’ shot. Just like it wasn’t them when their number got called, cus’ they were off pullin’ a tour in the National Guard. It’ll be some kid from Southie over there takin’ shrapnel in the ass. He comes back to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, cus’ he’ll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile he realizes the only reason he was over there in the first place was so that we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And of course the oil companies used the little skirmish over there to scare up domestic oil prices. A cute little ancillary benefit for them but it ain’t helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. They’re takin’ their sweet time bringin’ the oil back, of course, maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and fuckin’ play slalom with the icebergs, it ain’t too long ’til he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So now my buddy’s out of work. He can’t afford to drive, so he’s walking to the fuckin’ job interviews, which sucks because the shrapnel in his ass is givin’ him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he’s starvin’ cus’ every time he tries to get a bite to eat the only blue plate special they’re servin’ is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what did I think? I’m holdin’ out for somethin’ better. I figure fuck it, while I’m at it why not just shoot my buddy, take his job, give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected President.

Related Images:

Related Video (Note: This is not fiction):

YUM! Brands: KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell & Food Stamps for Unsafe Foods

YUM! Brands: KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell & Food Stamps for Unsafe Foods
Global Revolution 1: American Revolution 2: Day 64: Communication 1
IronBoltBruce’s Kleptocracy Chronicles for 19 Nov 2011 (g1a2d0064c1)
How many examples of greed and corruption must you see before you act?

Thanks to the American Frozen Food Institute and other corporate lobbies pouring on the payola, our bought and paid for puppet politicians in Washington have determined that a slice of pizza is a healthy vegetable if served to our kids at school, but not if served to our poor by a restaurant.  And up until this week YUM! Brands – the global conglomerate that owns well-known junk food chains like KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell – was working hard to correct that contradiction.  Not by eliminating the obvious insanity of classifying pizza as a vegetable, of course, but by lobbying to approve the use of EBT cards (a.k.a. “food stamps”) to make purchases at their restaurants.  According to

“Yum [had] lobbied government officials in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Kentucky to allow its restaurants to participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which is administered by the states.  The nearly five-decade-old program distributed a record $64.4 billion in the 2010 fiscal year.  ‘Everybody wants to get a piece of that action,’ says Marion Nestle, a New York University professor of nutrition and public health.  ‘Right now it’s going to grocery stores; restaurants think that’s not fair.’  [But health] advocates howled when they learned that fast-food giant Yum! Brands (YUM) wants to let low-income Americans use food stamps at its Taco Bell and KFC restaurants.  Now the U.S. Agriculture Dept., which funds the food stamp program, has also voiced its opposition and is encouraging states not to give Yum a green light. ‘For us to be indifferent to the quality of the food is just a serious mistake,’ says Kevin Concannon, the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services. ‘We should promote access to healthy foods.'”

I’m sure Mr. Concannon meant to end that sentence with “…except when it comes to school lunches for our children”.

Anyway…  Regardless of whether you pay with food stamps or Federal Reserve notes, the food you buy at KFC, Pizza Hut or Taco Bell may (remotely) taste “Southern”, Italian or Mexican, but a portion of its ingredients – the exact amount being kept as secret as the Colonel’s recipe – may actually be Chinese and consequently unsafe by American standards:

“China has become an agricultural powerhouse and leading food exporter.  Though supermarket labels may not always indicate it, a growing portion of the American diet is now made in China.  In 2009, 70 percent of the apple juice, 43
percent of the processed mushrooms, 22 percent of the frozen spinach and 78 percent of the tilapia Americans ate came from China.  Unfortunately, it’s not just China’s food that’s reaching American shores – it’s also China’s food safety problems.  The shortcomings in China’s food safety system were highlighted when ingredients tainted with the chemical melamine entered the global food supply…  [Melamine] contaminated Chinese dairy products, sickening 300,000 children and infants in China, six of whom died…  The melamine scandal played out across the globe, ending up in the food supplies of corporate producers including Mars, Unilever, Heinz, Cadbury and YUM! Brands, Inc. (which owns Pizza Hut, Subway and other fast food chains).”

I find no consolation in the likelihood that whatever YUM! is doing to “us”, they are also doing to “them”:

“Urban consumers in China are increasingly embracing American-style diets.  Eating out is the fastest-growing segment of Chinese consumer food spending.  Much of this spending ends up at KFC, owned by Yum! Brands.  KFC opens a new restaurant in China every 18 hours and purchases one quarter of all chicken thighs produced in China – literally billions of pieces of meat.  In 2010, Yum! Brands earned 36 percent of its profits from its 3,200 KFC and 500 Pizza Hut restaurants in China – more than it made from the 19,000 KFC, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and other company restaurants in the United States.  China now faces a new ‘era of obesity,’ mirroring U.S. overconsumption of fatty foods.”

Related Image:

Related Videos:

This document contains links shortened using to facilitate emailing.  If you are concerned that we would use them to cloak phishing or malware, you should open them with this: