Has Monsanto Hidden a Feudal Star Chamber Inside the Food Safety Law?

People need to understand the immense difference between statutory law (or civil law?) and common law.

(WASHINGTON DC) - HR 875 was an early version of the current food safety law. It includes a star chamber - a "court" outside of the legal system, with unlimited funding through raids and fines and with no oversight whatsoever, which could impose any "remedy" on anyone, not excluding seizure of all they own, limitless imprisonment, torture or execution/assassination. It should be read carefully until its innocuous seeming words, reveal the ways in which it establish a secret court and fascist rule. http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/04/food-safety-as-totalitarian-weapon.html. As the cherry on top, it would be administered by Monsanto.

Was this section inserted into the current law or is it in the 1200 pages of new food safety regulations the FDA wants appended to the law and is trying to rush through?

Perhaps ordinary people or common law eagles will take time to go over the Food Modernization and Safety Act which was rammed through Congress by the Democrats (with Republican support) late at night, using a series of unconstitutional moves, and will as well, look through the massive load of new regulations the FDA has just dropped on the country with a short deadline for comments, to see if this star chamber section - or any other version of one - got inserted.

Michael Taylor, Monsanto VP and lawyer who now runs the FDA food safety division, designed the food safety bills http://farmwars.info/?p=594, and He probably didn't include such a court by accident. He also probably didn't say forget that section, when sections from various bills (including HR 875) were used to create S 510, the final food safety bill. Monsanto may or may not have had to postpone inserting it then since the bill was getting a great deal of negative attention.

Which is why it is important to check not only the current law, and if it is not there, to investigate whether it is buried somewhere in the 1200 pages of new regulations to the law.

Unless one understands the law (and most of us do not understand there are two kinds, that only common law that offers people protection and justice, and that the courts are not using it), it can seem as if the government is making reasonable demands through the mind-boggling new regulations being imposed on everything people do now. Based on common law, these regulations are not meaningless and non-binding, but the government is grossly violating people's rights and breaking 100s of years of precedents in doing so.

People need to understand the immense difference between statutory law (or civil law?) and common law.

The precedents in common law are on the side of the farmers who are being crushed by Monsanto, and on the side of people. But the cases are being tried outside of common law. And if the star chamber section is in the food safety law or its regulations, "cases" wouldn't have to be based on anything verifiable or even real at all, and people could be "tried" and punished in secret, outside of any real or even public court altogether. This may sound incredible but the UK government is pushing for exactly this - a secret court - right now. http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/81120-orwellian-secret-courts-in-the-uk-britain-on-the-brink-of-tyranny In the US, one might say things are even worse since the government's efforts to set up a secret court appears to be secret, buried as it is under, of all things, "food safety." Vandana Shiva has called food safety, "food fascism." It is true in terms of what they are doing to farmers and other food food producers http://www.opednews.com/articles/Monsanto-and-the-big-fat-l-by-M-Gray-101031-319.html and in the video of Vandana Shiva she says food safety is about corporate rule. But if that secret court is buried in the law or regulations, we are not looking at food fascism but simply out and out fascism.

To have some idea of how powerful the difference is between the two types of law and how freeing common law is, this video might be useful. The bank part is equally good. www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4ZcTwsubzk

What is obvious is that the exposure of how the courts are working (for corporate entities, not for justice) and that they are outside of common law, is threatening to the elite, for the man leading the group in the UK successfully challenging the bogus legal system, was dragged off, without charges, without a warrant, to a secret court himself.

"In what is the first ever conviction of its kind anywhere in the world, the former US President and seven key members of his administration were yesterday (Fri) found guilty of war crimes. ....<

"War crimes expert and lawyer Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law in America, was part of the prosecution team.

"After the case he said: 'This is the first conviction of these people anywhere in the world.' "

".... human rights activist Boyle said he was hopeful that Bush and Co could soon find themselves facing similar trials elsewhere in the world. .... Boyle then referenced the Nuremberg Charter which was used as the format for the tribunal when asked about the credibility of the initiative in Malaysia. He quoted: 'Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit war crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any person in execution of such a plan.' "

"The US is subject to customary international law and to the Principles of the Nuremberg Charter said Boyle who also believes the week-long trial was “almost certainly” being monitored closely by both Pentagon and White House officials.

Professor Gurdial Singh Nijar, who headed the prosecution .... was optimistic the tribunal would be followed up elsewhere in the world where 'countries have a duty to try war criminals' and he cited the case of the former Chilean dictator Augustine Pinochet who was arrested in Britain to be extradited to Spain on charges of war crimes.

The Pinochet case was the first time that several European judges applied the principle of universal jurisdiction, declaring themselves competent to judge crimes committed by former heads of state, despite local amnesty laws. ....

Moazzam Begg ... director for the London-based human rights group Cageprisoners .... added: 'When people talk about Nuremberg you have to remember those tried were all prosecuted after the war. ....Right now Guantanamo is still open, people are still being held there and are still being tortured there.' "

"In response to questions about the difference between the Bush and Obama Administrations, he added: 'If President Bush was the President of extra-judicial torture then US President Barak Obama is the President of extra judicial killing through drone strikes. Our work has only just begun.' "

Exposing what Obama's FDA under Monsanto is doing to establish a secret court - a star chamber with total power in which Monsanto's Michael Taylor would be the "administrator" and act as the judge, jury and executioner of the star chamber he created - would be invaluable for breaking the stranglehold Monsanto has held over the US. Bringing to light a secret court would make obvious the falseness and danger of the food safety laws and regulations, but more, it would lay bare the depraved totalitarian intent of this government.

Common law versus the civil (statutory) law used by the courts are doing, is at the heart of why farming cases are being lost by FTCLDF and won by those using common law.

But as its legal system - not only corrupt but actually false at its foundation - becomes known, one can see that the government has readied itself for the people demanding common law. Governments here and in the UK (which alsoMonsanto. shared in Iraqi war crimes) is seeking, whether publicly or through stealth, to roll back rights since the Magna Carta or even earlier, and move toward a literally feudal system of law. Here, via surreptitious insertion of fascist power, Monsanto's Michael Taylor would rule as kings once did - people would have no rights whatever and anything whatever could be done to them.

Shall one joke that at least the food would be safe? Since Monsanto's GMOs are sterilizing and deadly, the pesticides are poisonous to bees and all life, and the Obama administration which forced through the food safety act, is rapidly approving them all, and since the court would not have to have anything whatever to do with food safety, it would be a multiply black joke.

"Food safety" is stepping in to become an even more bogus cover than "terrorism" for the elite running our government. It is a more profound disguise, so banal, so innocuous, yet buried in it is the means by which the elite running the government, can to do anything it wishes, go after anyone who bothers them or has anything they covet.