Europese Commissie (van o.a. de Green Deal) dreigt glyfosaat nog 15 jaar toe te staan

Het Monsanto Tribunaal luidt de noodklok: het lijkt er sterk op dat de Europese Commissie nog eens een vergunning afgeeft voor het kankerverwekkende en DNA aantastende landbouwgif glyfosaat en dat voor 'maar liefst' 15 jaar....... (glyfsaat is het belangrijkste ingrediënt van Roundup) 

Het Tribunaal heeft al 837.000 handtekeningen van EU burgers maar dat is niet genoeg, op 30 september moeten het er minstens 1 miljoen zijn. 

Grootschalige verspreiding van glyfosaat

Sinds glyfosaat op de markt is, begin 70er jaren van de vorige eeuw), is al 70% van de insecten uitgestorven...... Doordat vogels insecten eten is ook de vogelstand sinds de 70er jaren met 30% afgenomen en dan durft men dit toe te schrijven aan het houden van katten, deze leugen gaat zover dat de EU eerder besloot dat katten niet langer vrij mogen rondlopen*, terwijl dezelfde EU keer op keer vergunningen verlengt voor het gebruik van dit levensgevaarlijk gif..... Voorts heeft glyfosaat al aan een fiks aantal mensen het leven gekost, dit vanwege de kankerverwekkende eigenschap van dit smerige gif......

Vergeet niet dat groente en fruit dat is bespoten met dit gif ervoor zorgt dat jij het ook binnenkrijgt, terwijl de meesten van ons al een aardige opstapeling in het lichaam hebben van meerdere soorten landbouwgif en dat moet eindelijk afgelopen zijn.... Het is dan ook bijzonder smerig dat de politici-lobbyisten voor Bayer (de eigenaar van Monsanto) en lobbyisten van Bayer zelf stellen dat de hoeveelheid glyfosaat die je binnenkrijgt zo klein is dat je er geen last van krijgt, echter daarbij verzwijgt dit geteisem die stapeling van meerdere soorten gif in je lichaam......

Als ik het goed begrepen heb is de valsgroene politicus Bas Eickhout nu ook voor een verbod, eerder heeft deze oplichter gekozen voor langer toestaan, moet je nagaan.....?? 

Belachelijk genoeg heeft de EU besloten dat het gebruik van landbouwgif met 50% moet worden gereduceerd, i.p.v. te stellen dat het zo snel mogelijk helemaal afgelopen moet zijn met gif dat insecten en vogels uitroeit en dat de mens ernstige gezondheidsproblemen kan geven, zelfs zo dat er mensen daadwerkelijk overlijden aan deze letterlijke kankertroep

Ook EU politici vormen een volksvertegenwoordiging, wat lullig dan dat ze zich vooral laten zien als bedrijvenvertegenwoordiging..... (één van de belangrijkste redenen om te stoppen met de EU....)

Heb je nog niet getekend, teken dan ajb en geeft het door, we moeten af van gif dat niet alleen dieren maar ook mensen doodt!! Vergeet niet dat ook kinderen deze troep binnenkrijgen en gezien de genetisch gemanipuleerde zaden van Bayer-Monsanto, is de hoeveelheid gif op groenten en fruit nu hoger dan ooit tevoren (door het genetisch manipuleren van zaden kunnen de gewassen uit die zaden enorme hoeveelheden gif verdragen......)

URGENT CALL

Dear Monsanto Tribunal supporter,

The EU is planning to give the green light for a 15 year renewal of glyphosate. The plans for pesticide reduction announced by the EU Commission are effectively countered by the pesticide industry. Pesticide sales still increase every year, biodiversity is suffering and bees and pollinators are disappearing at an alarming rate.

Only a strong signal from society can change this toxic tide. But a brave attempt to do so could stumble on the threshold of success. Unless... you come in!

 

The EU Citizens' Initiative Save Bees and Farmers demands a phase out of pesticides and a change towards nature-friendly agriculture. If 1 million Europeans sign by September 30th, the EU Commission has to come with proposals. But with 900.000 online and paper signatures, we’re not going to make it. The champagne bottles are already cooled in the Bayer-Monsanto offices.

However, they didn’t count on you! 

What can you do?

 If you are an EU citizen, you have probably signed already. Please make sure at least 5 friends or family members do the same by clicking on one of these links. Together we can win!

English  —  savebeesandfarmers.eu

Deutsch — bienenundbauernretten.de

Español — savebeesandfarmers.eu/spa/

Français — savebeesandfarmers.eu/fra/

Italiano — savebeesandfarmers.eu/ita/

Nederland — redbijen.nl

You can also send these signing links in Polish and Romanian.

Finally, you could make a donation to the campaign Save Bees and Farmers to spread the word as far as possible in these last few days. To do so, just click below.

Yes, I donate to Save Bees and Farmers.

In the name of the Monsanto Tribunal, thank you for supporting a pesticide-free EU agriculture!

-------------------------------

Hier een eerder bericht van het Monsanto Tribunaal dat meer uitvoerig ingaat op de problemen met glyfosaat:

So, are you ready for 15 more years of Roundup spraying?
We are not. Help us to bring an end to the toxic age!

EU citizen? Sign www.savebeesandfarmers.eu as a first step. You might have done that already. If not, please do it now. After you have signed please ask friends and family to do the same. Talk to your contacts, mail them, ask them on social media. Ask organisations to send mailings to their supporters. This is important, only together we can turn the light for pesticides from green to red. We need many more signatures before the end of September. We have to win this battle, for it’s the first step to stop glyphosate and other pesticides.

Stand for the cause. Don’t be afraid to give your personal details. These are not asked by the organisation. It is asked for by the authorities so they can take a sample and control if these votes are valid. It is not meant for registration.

       

So please sign and spread the word!

Together we can do it.

Not an EU citizen? Please support petitions and actions against pesticides in your country.

The Glyphosate saga – failing control in the EU and the US

To protect health and environment, the authorities have set up a system. Bodies like the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in the EU and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the US take care of our health and the environment. Or... Do they really?

This system is now exposed as not working. Not for the people, not for the planet. For the pesticide producers, it works perfectly. Almost every product is admitted for sale. How does that work? The agencies don’t do their own studies, they rely on studies provided by the industry. Only these studies. That is because EFSA has adopted a proposal by three BASF employees, the Klimisch Score. All studies must comply with criteria set up by the industry. This was meant to prevent fraud (which is good, see below) but at the same time excludes all independent scientific studies.

EU Citizens’ Initiative on Glyphosate Made a Change

Until recently the Industry studies were secret. That changed after the successful EU Citizens Initiative on Glyposate in 2017. In a very short period, 1.3 million Europeans asked to ban glyphosate. It didn’t lead to a ban, but also not to the 15 years permit that was asked for by Monsanto. Glyphosate got a 5-year permit and that’s why we’re discussing it again now. Another important result was that the EU Commission promised transparency in the process. They said they would make the Industry studies available.

Photo credit: Global 2000/Cristopher Glanzl

Since they didn’t do that fast enough, some Green politicians started a court case and won. In a landmark verdict the EU Court of Justice decided in 2019 that the studies are part of the authorisation and should therefore be made public. The organisation SumOfUs sent in an Access to Documents request and received the studies. They consulted independent experts and what did they find?

Most Studies Used to Allow Glyphosate Are Not Reliable

Finally, independent scientists could have a look at the studies provided by the glyphosate manufacturers. Two experts from the Institute for Cancer Research from the University of Vienna scrutinized the studies with remarkable results. Their analysis shows that out of 53 industry studies, only 2 can be assessed as scientifically ‘reliable’, when using the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines that are used normally for toxicological studies. 34 are ‘not reliable’ and 17 only ‘partly reliable’ to draw conclusions on the question if glyphosate can cause cancer. Moreover, most studies used the wrong methods and not the methods that would show a relation with cancer.

Their conclusion: based on these studies the EFSA could not conclude that glyphosate is not able to cause cancer. There was no basis to contradict the conclusion of the International Institute on Cancer Research (IARC) that glyphosate probably causes cancer.

This is quite explosive information. Products that cause cancer should not be allowed according to the EU regulations. For this means that the EU authorities should have banned glyphosate already in 2017!

And what do the independent scientific studies tell us?

Industry studies are secret, even for most fellow scientists. This is in stark contrast to the way independent scientists work. Before a study is published in a scientific review, it is controlled by fellow experts who are not involved in the study.

Source: glyphosate study Q&A

In this overview you see 53 studies by the producers of glyphosate. None of them show damage to DNA, which is a strong indication to cause cancer. Compare this to the 72 independent studies, among which three quarters concludes that glyphosate and its formulations cause damage to DNA. So we can conclude that the methods used by the producers and accepted by EFSA don’t detect carcinogens. The claims of the industry are not ‘science-based’, they are based on quicksand.

If you want to know more details on the recent study, read this excellent overview and Q&A by Corporate Europe Observatory together with HEAL, Global2000, Pesticide Action Network PAN and SumOfUs.

For an overview of recent studies and health problems with glyphosate see this overview by US Right to Know.

So, the EU system to ‘control’ pesticides does not work. It creates a false sense of security and allows dangerous chemicals to be sprayed widely. Let’s get rid of these dangerous and unnecessary chemicals. Sign www.savebeesandfarmers.eu and spread the call!

And in the US? Well … see below

Photo credit: Texasgopvote.com

EPA Manipulating Pesticide Research

Managers and staff in the Environmental Protection Agency’s in the US tampered with the assessments of dozens of chemicals to make them appear safer, according to 4 scientists who work at the agency. This happened in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.

The whistleblowers’ job was to identify the potential harms posed by new chemicals. They provided journalists from The Intercept with detailed evidence of pressure within the agency to minimize or remove evidence of potential adverse effects of the chemicals. This included neurological effects, birth defects, and cancer.

Together, the evidence they provided shows a pattern in which the EPA failed to follow the law that oversees chemical regulation. One of the whistleblowers says, ‘Like a lot of us who are in this, we came to work at the EPA because I wanted to preserve the environment for our children’s children. It’s infuriating that I have to push back against managers to do that.’

You can read the amazing and disturbing story on the website of the Intercept. Read more here: The Department of Yes – How Pesticide Companies Corrupted the EPA and Poisoned America.

What’s happening in the glyphosate cancer court cases in the US?

Bayer – Monsanto tried to settle the more than 42,000 court cases on Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (a form of cancer) caused by glyphosate. The company wanted to spend some 10 billion dollars in the settlement. However, by far not all victims agreed. Also, the attempt to stop new cases failed. On May 27th a judge ruled that parts of the plan were ‘clearly unreasonable’.

Following this ruling Bayer announced that they consider to stop selling Roundup products to the public in the US and would only sell it to professional users. The next trial to go ahead is the case of Donnetta Stephens v. Monsanto, set for trial on July 26 in California.

Updates will be published in the Monsanto Roundup & Dicamba Trail Tracker from US Right to Know.

====================================

* Zie: 'Kattenverbod EU te zot voor woorden en het 'groene gehalte' van GroenLinks'

-------------------------------------------

Zie ook: 'EPA is corrupt: met opzet worden gevaarlijke eigenschappen van chemische stoffen verzwegen'

'Bayer probeert het kankerverwekkende glyfosaat alsnog langer 'op het EU menu te houden'' Monsanto is nu in het bezit van Bayer, je weet wel het bedrijf dat medische proeven deed op concentratiekamp gevangenen tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog......

'EU staat op punt alweer miljarden aan belastinggeld weg te geven aan uiterst vervuilende intensieve landbouw en veeteelt' (een bericht van 17 januari 2021)

'Duitsland verbiedt glyfosaat in..... 2024' Eerst nog even alle voorraad aan dodelijk gif uitverkopen, logisch toch dat het niet per direct wordt verboden, Monsanto heeft er immers 'slechts' enkele tientallen miljarden dollars aan verdiend sinds de 70er jaren en ach dat daardoor twee derde van de insecten is uitgestorven, een kniesoor die daarover valt..... Bovendien moet Monsanto (van WOII oorlogsmisdadiger Bayer) in de VS miljoenen aan schadevergoeding betalen aan mensen die kanker hebben opgelopen door het werken met deze letterlijke kankerzooi......

'Verbied het kankerverwekkende pesticide Thiacloprid dat de EU wil herintroduceren na lobby Bayer-Monsanto'

'Monsanto negeerde bewust de kankerrisico's van glyfosaat, waarmee het bedrijf zich schuldig maakte aan moord'

'Duitsland exporteert in EU verboden gif'

'Om mensen te beschermen tegen chemische vervuiling, is een nieuwe aanpak noodzakelijk' Een publicatie van Universiteit Utrecht, waar men ook even naar corruptie en censuur t.a.v. onderzoek naar bepaalde stoffen had moeten kijken, 'maar goed.....'

'Bas Eickhout (GroenLinks EU) strijdt nu voor verbieden van landbouwgif met 'mooie duurzame praatjes' over landbouw' (en zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over deze GroenLinks [AsgrauwRechts] oplichter)

'Monsanto-Bayer to End U.S. Residential Sales of Toxic Pesticide Glyphosate'

'Groups Sue EPA Over Approval of Toxic Herbicide Citing Risks to Endangered Species, Drift Harms'

'EU beslist over een landbouwdeal die de 'Green Deal' van de Europese Commissie tot een lachertje maakt'

'Timmermans (PvdA, Europese Commissie) na watersnood bezig met greenwashing terwijl de Commissie subsidie geeft aan oliemaatschappijen, de veehouderij en glyfosaat langer zal toestaan'

'FAO (VN Wereldvoedselorganisatie) werkt samen met gifmengers en gentech bedrijven'

'Verboden landbouwgif? Verpak de zaden in gif!!' (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

'Monsanto Tribunaal: het wijdverspreide gebruik van pesticiden heeft gezorgd voor een insectenafname van 70% en 30% minder vogels' En dan durft men katten aan te wijzen als oorzaak voor de teruggang van het aantal vogels......

'Landbouwgif-lobby maakt overuren tijdens Coronacrisis'

'Hersen-beschadigende chemicaliën in voedsel' (!!!!)

'Schouten (ChristenUnie minister) weigert te voldoen aan advies van de Gezondheidsraad zo min mogelijk landbouwgif te spuiten ter bescherming van omwonenden' (!!!!)

'Bayer gaat harder optreden tegen patiënten die kanker opliepen door glyfosaat' (!!!!)

'Monsanto 'liefdadigheidsorganisatie die zich inzet voor wereldvoedselprobleem......'' (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

Shell, Exxon, Total, Dupont, Dow en anderen lobbyen bij Trump om afval plastic te exporteren naar Afrika

De American Chemistry Council (ACC), een lobbyorganisatie van chemische bedrijven, waar ook oliemaatschappijen als Shell deel van uitmaken, is tegen nieuwe wereldwijde regels om de stroom van plastic naar arme landen op het zuidelijk halfrond te beperken....

Niet vreemd dus dat oliemaatschappijen als Shell, Exxon en Total, plus een aantal grote chemische bedrijven waaronder Du Pont en Dow Chemical, die zijn aangesloten bij de ACC, de Coronacrisis hebben aangegrepen om bij de, wat betreft milieu maatregelen totaal onverantwoorde, Trump administratie te lobbyen tegen beperkingen die zijn opgelegd aan het exporteren van afval plastic.....

Eén van de landen die men wil gebruiken voor het onverantwoord dumpen van gigantische hoeveelheden plastic is Kenya, waar al een enorme stroom plastic uit de VS naartoe gaat........

Als je nu denkt dat genoemde bedrijven en anderen zich inzetten om de productie van eenmalig te gebruiken plastic te verminderen, heb je het helemaal mis, nee zelfs daar weigert men actie op te ondernemen.....

Nogmaals geven dit soort bedrijven aan dat ze lak hebben aan het redden van de planeet zoals wij die kennen, nee: 'Geld über alles....'

Vergeet niet dat Shell al een paar jaar bezig is om haar naam op valse gronden groen te wassen (greenwashing), terwijl de praktijk laat zien dat het bedrijf alles behalve duurzaam bezig is, of zelfs maar poogt echt duurzame doeleinden na te streven, zoals ook uit dit bericht weer blijkt......

Lees het volgende artikel van Unearthed (onderdeel Greenpeace) over deze zaak en zegt het voort, de hoogste tijd dat deze bedrijven tot de orde worden geroepen (boycot Shell, Total en Exxon benzinestations!!), zeker als je ziet dat een aantal van die bedrijven zoals Shell, zich zoals gezegd in het openbaar voordoen als duurzaam bedrijf dat 'zich echt inzet om de klimaatverandering af te remmen en vervuiling tegen te gaan.......'

Oil-backed trade group is lobbying the Trump administration to push plastics across Africa 


Thousands of plastic bottles lay on the ground at the Dandora rubbish dump, an eastern suburb of Nairobi, Kenya's capital. Photo: Jan Hetfleisch/Getty
 

The American Chemistry Council also pushed back against new global rules that will restrict the flow of plastic waste to the global south

A lobby group representing oil and chemical companies, including Shell, Exxon, Total, DuPont and Dow, has been pushing the Trump administration during the pandemic to use a US-Kenya trade deal to expand the plastic and chemical industry across Africa.

Documents obtained by Unearthed show the same lobby group – and the US recycling industry – also lobbied against changes to an international agreement that puts new limits on plastic waste entering low- and middle-income countries.

Several of the companies in the American Chemistry Council (ACC) – including Shell, Exxon and Total but not BP – were the founders of a $1bn initiative that pledges to create “a world free of plastic waste”.

In public letters to top officials at the US Trade Representative (USTR) and US International Trade Commission (USITC), the ACC writes: “Kenya could serve in the future as a hub for supplying U.S.-made chemicals and plastics to other markets in Africa through this trade agreement.” 

The letters also call for the lifting of limits on the waste trade, a move which experts say amounts to an attempt to legally circumvent the new rules on plastic waste, rules which – the documents reveal – the firms had also vigorously opposed. 

Kenyan environmentalists said the proposals would mean that “Kenya will become a dump site for plastic waste”.

US Democratic Senator Tom Udall, who last year introduced legislation to tackle the plastic waste crisis accused the companies of “double dealing.” 

He told Unearthed: “It is outrageous that petrochemical and plastic industries claim the solution to our mounting plastic waste crisis is to produce more disposable plastic. These same companies and corporations then point the finger at developing nations for the plastic waste showing up in our oceans. This double-dealing makes clear what the true source of our plastic waste crisis is: companies and corporations off-shoring their responsibilities to make billions of dollars… Requiring these companies to take responsibility for their excessive waste and pollution is the only way we will tackle our colossal plastic waste problem.”

Workers sort recycling material at a waste management facility in Maryland. US waste, including plastic, is often shipped overseas to poorer countries. Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty

The ACC is a major trade association for chemical companies, including Dow and DuPont, as well as the petrochemical arms of some of the oil majors. Although BP is a member, it does not produce any plastics and last month sold off its petrochemicals business to Ineos. A spokesperson told Unearthed that their work with the ACC focuses on Castrol lubricants, which are used in the automotive industry. 

Basel Convention

Following public outcry about plastic waste, in May last year, new rules agreed under a global treaty called the Basel Convention mean that as of 2021, almost all countries outside the OECD will be prohibited from trading mixed, contaminated or unrecyclable plastic with the US, because it is one of the few countries not party to the Convention. 

The OECD has not yet ruled on whether it will accept the new plastic waste rulings, following objections from the US. The Basel Convention provides a limited exception which would allow continued trade between the US and the 37 member countries of the OECD, but only if those countries adopt standards on plastic waste as strong as those in the Convention. 

The 187 countries that are part of the treaty will have to partake in a procedure to obtain prior informed consent from importing countries, a procedure which requires checks on environmental processing facilities. 

Unpublished documents obtained by Unearthed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show that the oil and chemical industry lobby group wrote to the Secretariat of the Basel Convention in March 2019. 

It objected to the new rules on the basis that they would create a “regulatory burden”, lead to shipping delays, logistical issues and increased costs. It forwarded its letter to the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) two weeks later, requesting a meeting to discuss its concerns. 

The documents also reveal that the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) – a major trade association representing the US recycling industry – lobbied against the new rules on the basis that they could severely limit US exports, discourage legitimate trade and exacerbate marine litter by preventing plastic from reaching recycling facilities.

“In principle, we would prefer the proposals not be adopted and maintain the status quo,” they wrote in an email sent to USTR on 3 April 2019.

A spokesperson from the ACC told Unearthed the basis of their concerns regarding the new Basel restrictions was that they “could very well limit the ability of African and other developing countries to properly manage plastic waste,” because they will restrict their capacity to export materials to other countries.

Academics, civil society and politicians are concerned that Kenya - and other African countries - do not have the infrastructure to manage increasing plastic production and exports. Photo: Simon Maina/AFP via Getty

ISRI echoed these concerns. A spokesperson told Unearthed that the new restrictions “will prevent countries that lack materials management infrastructure – such as for collection, sorting and recycling – from sending what they can collect to countries that do have recycling and disposal capacity… Without this outlet for developing countries, ISRI worries that an already bad situation will become much worse.”

According to ISRI, in 2018 the US imported more than 92,000 metric tons of plastic waste from non-OECD countries. 

However, in the first six months of that year, US exports to China, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam alone – all countries outside the OECD – totalled 480,432 tons. These exports are five times the US imports in half the time. 

The Trump administration backed the industry position – opposing the implementation of the new rules at the OECD. US opposition has led to concerns over whether the country will seek ways around the changes. 

Dr. Innocent Nnorom, an associate professor in environmental chemistry at Abia State university in Nigeria, who co-authored a recent inventory of plastic consumption in Africa, told Unearthed: “Most countries in Africa do not have the recycling infrastructure for managing increasing plastic waste.

“It appears that loopholes are being sought to continue the trade in plastic waste. Once in Africa, the emerging free trade routes could be used to facilitate transboundary movements to other African countries. The African Union and its member states should be on the look-out.”

Demand for petrochemicals is expected to rocket in coming decades, with companies expected to be looking to low- and middle-income countries to expand the market. Plastic is already the US’ biggest export to Kenya, with sales totalling $58m in 2019.

In their letters to the Trump administration regarding the US-Kenya FTA* earlier this year, the ACC called for it to “prohibit imposition of domestic limits on production or consumption of chemicals and plastic and restrictions on cross-boundary trade of materials and feedstocks”. Feedstocks could include plastic waste for recycling.

They added that the US and Kenya should “enable trade in waste for the purposes of sound management and recycling consistent with relevant international commitments”.

Even so, David Azoulay, an attorney and director of the environmental health programme at the Center for International Environmental Law told Unearthed: “The suggestion to use this potential agreement to preempt any national limitation on plastic production and consumption is a clear indication of the ACC’s objective to leverage such a trade agreement to circumvent global efforts to curb plastic production and use, as well as newly adopted provisions from the Basel Convention to better control the global plastic waste trade.”

US president Donald Trump shakes hands with Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta during a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in 2018. Photo: Olivier Douliery-Pool/Getty

Jim Puckett, executive director of the NGO Basel Action Network commented that it would also contradict the Bamako Convention, a separate treaty in Africa.

“The effort to enlarge trade in waste and harmful chemicals in between the US and Kenya is a rather insidious effort that, if taken across Africa would go head to head against Africa’s Bamako Convention – a treaty which prohibits virtually all plastic waste imports into Africa as well as the import of many hazardous chemicals,” he told Unearthed.

Kenya

Environmentalists are concerned the deal could also undermine national efforts to limit plastic consumption, including new rules on plastic bags. 

Sub-Saharan Africa is thought to lead the world on plastic bag laws, according to reports, with 34 countries adopting taxes or bans.

Dorothy Otieno, the plastics programme co-ordinator at the Centre for Environment, Justice and Development (CEJAD) in Kenya, told Unearthed that this trade deal could threaten the momentum and change created by these efforts. 

“As a country we have made strides to reduce the plastics that are used here, and which end up as waste – there is a ban on use and manufacture of carrier bags and recently a ban on plastic in protected areas – so this trade deal would diminish what we have achieved as a country.” 

But Kenyan politicians and trade groups said such fears will be addressed. Negotiations began several weeks ago, but have recently stalled due to coronavirus concerns.

Cornelly Serum, an MP for the ruling Jubilee Party and member of the Trade and Industry Parliamentary Committee, told Unearthed: “Fears that under the trade deal use of plastics might be reintroduced into the country are valid… Trade associations planning to expand their businesses in Africa – and mainly in Kenya – are welcome but cannot use the deal to introduce materials that have so far been banned and as a parliament we will not allow any protocols likely to ruin our economy.”

Carol Karuga, CEO of broad-based lobby group the Kenya Private Sector Alliance, added: “It does not augur well to ban use of plastics materials in the economy and later reintroduce the same through a trade deal… The deal before it is finally agreed will have to be checked at all levels.”

Otieno also expressed concerns about the impact of more waste. “There would be an increase in waste – some will be reused and recycled but the majority will end up in dump sites. We will end up in a situation where Kenya will become a dump site for plastic waste,” she said.

“It clogs our waterways and our drainage systems and leads to flooding. We also see the effect of pollution from the burning of plastics – it produces dioxins and furans that lead to respiratory diseases… Somebody can burn these wastes right next to your house and suffer the impacts. We also see the aesthetic value of our towns being reduced because of plastics.”

Last year, some of the ACC companies – including Shell, Exxon and BASF – alongside major consumer goods and waste management companies launched the Alliance to End Plastic Waste (AEPW), committing $1bn, in part to finance waste management projects to clean up and prevent plastic waste in Africa and Asia. 

In the public letters, the ACC wrote that: “There is a global need to support infrastructure development to collect, sort, recycle, and process used plastics, particularly in developing countries such as Kenya. 

“Such infrastructure will create opportunities for trade and investment and help keep used plastics out of the environment, thereby reducing marine litter… The U.S. and Kenya can play a strong role together in promoting innovative circular economy solutions in East Africa that enable universal access to better waste management capacity and for used plastics in all countries.”

Voor de rest van het artikel, zie het origineel.

* FTA: Free Trade Agreement, ofwel vrijhandelsverdrag.

Zie ook:

'Microplastics doden ons lichaam, tijd voor actie!!'

'Microplastics ongevaarlijk aldus TNO en kunststofverwerkende industrie......'

'Alarmerende hoeveelheid microplastics gevonden in het lichaam van kinderen'

'Shell en Exxon lobbyen voor het behoud van eenmalige plasticverpakkingen'

VS – Duitse verhouding dreigt te exploderen

Finian Cunningham schreef een artikel over de verzuurde verhouding tussen de VS en Duitsland, een verhouding die nu zelfs op ontploffen staat.......

Voor deze vijandigheid is de VS en dan m.n. het beest Trump de hoofdverantwoordelijke. Met zijn eis aan de andere NAVO partners minstens 2% van het BNP te spenderen aan illegale oorlogsvoering en de voorbereiding daarop, heeft Trump een aantal EU lidstaten, waaronder Duitsland tegen zich in het harnas gejaagd..... Omgekeerd jaagt Duitsland de VS tegen zich in het harnas, daar de regering Merkel van zins is te bezuinigen op defensie, terwijl het nu iets meer dan 1% spendeert aan defensie.

Ongelofelijk dat de slaafse reguliere media het wat dit betreft volledig eens zijn met Trump, terwijl men bij die media meer dan voldoende personeel heeft om uit te zoeken waarom de VS zo enorm veel geld uitgeeft aan oorlogsvoering..... 

Met dat laatste woord begint het al: de VS voert deze eeuw de ene illegale oorlog na de andere, oh nee dat klopt niet >> de VS begon deze eeuw illegale oorlogen tegen Libië en Syrië, terwijl de eerste en de tweede van de 21ste eeuw, respectievelijk die tegen Afghanistan en Irak, nog lang niet waren afgelopen en zelfs nu nog steeds bezig zijn...... Overigens is de VS vanaf 1945 bijna onophoudelijk in  oorlogen verwikkeld geweest en dat in landen waar het niets te zoeken heeft....*

Daarnaast heeft de VS meer dan 800 militaire bases over de wereld, alsof dat is te bekostigen met een appel en ei.... Voorts zijn er nog de vele geheime militaire acties die commando's onder bevel van de CIA uitvoeren, waar het haar uitkomt, niet moeilijk te bedenken dat deze illegale acties ook al kapitalen aan belastinggeld kosten....

Dan is daar nog het enorme aantal illegale standrechtelijke executies van verdachten middels drones, je weet wel, waarbij meer dan 90% van de slachtoffers niet eens werd verdacht zoals het doel, deze 'collateral damage' ('bijkomende schade') bij deze geplande moorden (dubbel op, ik weet het) bestaat dan ook voor het overgrote deel uit vrouwen en kinderen (tot en met 'big beautiful baby's', woorden die psychopaat Trump nogal eens gebruikt als hij ferme taal uitslaat over VS niet welgevallige regimes).

Het meest lullige van al is wel dat NAVO-lidstaten Duitsland, GB, Frankrijk en Italië al 3 keer meer aan oorlogsvoering spenderen dan Rusland...... Wat betreft de VS en de andere NAVO-staten samen: deze landen geven in totaal meer dan 10 keer zoveel uit aan oorlogsvoering dan Rusland en China bij elkaar!!!

Gelukkig houdt Duitsland de rug recht t.o.v. Trump, ondanks dat Richard Grenell, de uiterst onbeschofte VS ambassadeur voor Duitsland, meent de Duitse regering openlijk 'door het slijk' te moeten trekken...... Waarover FDP politicus Wolfgang Kubicki volkomen terecht stelde dat de ambassadeur zich niet heeft te bemoeien met de binnenlandse politiek van een andere (bevriende, Ap) staat. Volgens Kubicki gedraagt Grenell zich als de commandant van bezettende troepen en wat mij betreft is daar geen spelt tussen te krijgen......

Dit jaar is het overigens 70 jaar geleden dat terreurorganisatie NAVO werd opgericht en dat wordt natuurlijk in Washington gevierd, waar de echte baas van de NAVO huist...... Een veelgehoorde leugen is trouwens dat de NAVO werd opgericht als reactie op het Warschaupact van de Sovjet-Unie, het is zoals je al begrijpt totaal andersom..... Je kan je zelfs afvragen of de Koude Oorlog was begonnen en de Berlijnse muur was gebouwd als de NAVO niet had bestaan...... (de vraag stellen....)

Voorlopig is het grootste gevaar voor de westerse wereld, de enorme groei van armoede, ongelijkheid en achterstand van een enorm aantal mensen (waar velen van hen ook nog eens worden uitgebuit, Ap), zoals de Organisatie voor Economische Samenwerking en Ontwikkeling (OECD) concludeerde......

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van Finian Cunningham, eerder gepubliceerd op Sputnik en door mij overgenomen van Information Clearing House, de foto komt van het Sputnik artikel:

US-Germany Rift Set To Blow

By Finian Cunningham 21-03-2019

March 22, 2019 "Information Clearing House" - This is going to get very ugly. Germany is openly defying US President Trump's demands to spend more on its NATO budget. Already the American ambassador to the country is crying foul, prompting German calls for his expulsion.

Of all the countries in the European Union, it is Germany that's been mostly on the receiving end of Trump's wrath since he entered the White House. In two years, the bilateral relation between Washington and Berlin has plummeted under the weight of Trump's withering verbal attacks.

The American president has assailed Germany for unfair trading practices over its lucrative auto exports; and he has virtually accused Berlin of treason in its dealings with Russia for natural gas supply, threatening to slap economic sanctions on German firms over the Nord Stream 2 pipeline (NS2) project under the Baltic Sea.

Germany has vehemently rejected Trump's accusations, saying its auto industry is a big investor in creating American jobs, and that its energy policies are a sovereign matter based on objective market principles.

But above all his complaints, Trump has continually rebuked Germany for not spending enough on NATO commitments, sniping that the country is freeloading on American military protection. At a NATO summit last year, Trump hectored German Chancellor Angela Merkel to raise her country's annual military budget to the designated NATO target of 2 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

For many years, especially after the end of the Cold War, German military spending has lagged at around 1 per cent of GDP. Trump contends that, as Europe's largest national economy, Berlin should at least double its defence budget.

Latest figures, however, show that German military spending is nowhere near reaching the 2 per cent target that Trump has been fulminating about. Indeed, the trend appears to be one of declining expenditure by Berlin on military, not increasing.

That caused earlier this week US ambassador Richard Grenell to decry Germany's "failure" to live up to its NATO commitments.

Grenell is something of a Trump cypher. It is not the first time the envoy has harangued Germany in terms that his boss in the White House could have almost written for him. Grenell has been slamming Berlin over the Nord Stream 2 gas project with Russia and in its dealings with Chinese telecoms giant Huawei.

His condemnations this week regarding Germany's military budget have again sparked furore among the country's politicians and media, eliciting further public callsfor the envoy to be expelled owing to his alleged gross interference in Berlin's internal affairs. "An ambassador is not supposed to act like the spokesman of an occupying power," said Wolfgang Kubicki, the deputy leader of the Free Democrat Party (FDP).

The New York Times this week reported "the timing couldn't be worse" for US-German relations. 
Next month marks the 70th anniversary of the founding of the NATO alliance. A major celebration is due to take place in Washington DC for the occasion. The atmosphere will be severely chilled by Germany's truculent defiance of Trump to boost its commitment to NATO.

Out of some 30 members in the US-led NATO bloc, only seven countries have managed to raise their military budgets to the 2 per cent of GDP target that Trump has clamoured for. That target figure predates Trump's presidency. But since the end of the Cold War, many European members of NATO have reduced military spending. Trump has made it an obsessive issue and has even threatened to pull the US out of NATO if European members don't pull their financial weight.

Germany and others should call Trump's bluff and say, "go ahead!" — pull your troops, missiles and warplanes out of Europe. US forces in Europe have never been about "protection" and have always been about "projection" of American hegemonic power over European vassals, in particular, to prevent a normal and natural relationship with Russia progressing.

The American obsession with military spending needs to be vigorously challenged. What is this pathological addiction for? It is of course about milking the civilian economy to fatten the profits of giant military companies. It's a racket that requires the poisoning of international relations with Russia and China, among others, in order to sustain the charade of syphoning off public money.

The greatest security threat to Western societies is the massive growth of poverty, deprivation and inequality, according to a new OECD report. The whole scaremongering about Russia and other "foreign enemies" is a risible ruse for the obscene misuse of public money by a military-industrial complex that is a colossal parasite on society. A laughable contradiction is that Trump is supposed to be a "Russian puppet", according to his domestic political enemies, and yet he is pushing the anti-Russia pretext on behalf of the military-industrial complex more than any president.

Germany and most NATO members are just right to ignore Trump's dictate about dubious defence spending. The money would be much better invested in productive and genuinely beneficial social development.

One senses a showdown looming between Washington and Berlin. Germany has for too long been allowing itself to be kicked around by an American "occupying power". Under Trump, the insulting humiliation has only become more acute. How long can Berlin tolerate this abusive taskmaster? Especially when there is growing opposition in the German and wider European public despising the American overlord and its dictates.


Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

This article was originally published by "Sputnik" - 

See also:

German Defense Spending Is Falling Even Shorter. The U.S. Isn’t Happy.

Germany: US ambassador Richard Grenell should be expelled, says FDP deputy leader: US Ambassador Richard Grenell is acting like "a high commissioner of an occupying power," the deputy leader of the Free Democrats (FDP) has said.

=======================================
* Zie:
'VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII........' (tot het jaar 2000, intussen is het aantal moorden opgelopen tot meer dan 22,5 miljoen......)

'VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen..........'

'List of wars involving the United States'

'CIA 70 jaar: 70 jaar moorden, martelen, coups plegen, nazi's beschermen, media manipulatie enz. enz.........'

Zie verder op Sputnik:

© AFP 2019/ PETRAS MALUKAS

US Senator Confident Some NATO States Will Agree to Host New American Missiles After Exit From INF

© AP PHOTO / MATTHIAS SCHRADER

Germany Plans to Cut Military Budget in Spite of Trump’s Calls to Reach NATO Target

Zie ook:
'Hunter Biden zit in de Oekraïense 'witwas val''

'VS stelt Duitsland een ultimatum (chantage): geen Russisch gas via NS2 anders volgt een handelsoorlog.....' Chantage o.a. ten behoeve van het bedrijf van Hunter Biden, intussen heeft Trump aangekondigd dat de bedrijven, o.a. een deels Nederlands bedrijf, die blijven meewerken aan Nord Stream 2 (NS2) gesanctioneerd zullen worden..... Zie daarvoor: 'Donald 'Darth Vader' Trump verklaart ruimte tot oorlogsgebied en laat Duitsland en haar bedrijven weten dat men zich heeft te schikken naar de VS wensen'
Voor meer berichten over Nord Stream 2, klik op het label NS2, direct onder dit bericht.

'Oekraïne, een mislukte, corrupte en fascistische staat........' (o.a. met aandacht voor Biden en zijn zoon)

'Alarm Code Geel: Lara Rense (NOS) voedt Rusland-haat' (zie ook de links in dat bericht)