Re: Toxic Molds allredy On The Drug Fields Of Colombia,

[Guest guest]

-http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/ref/coca_eradication US

suppied tens of thousands of gallons to the Columbia goverment who

used a fleet of crop dusters to spread round up (glyphosate) over

hundreds of thousands of acres to kill coca. it didn't kill the coca,

but killed banana, corn, yucca plants and other crops,

and unleashed a fusarium epidemic.

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/monsanto121503.cfm Monsantos

roundup produceing deadly fusarium.

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/dw_contamfs/glyphosa.html

EPA, drinking water

http://www.abcbirds.org/pesticides/Profiles/glyphosate.htm

hazards of glyphosate

-- In , snk1955@... wrote:

>

>

> (javascript:void(0)

> (http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/pressroom/pressrelease/index.cfm?

sendemail=1)

>

> Senate to Consider ONDCP Reauthorization Act to Revive

Controversial

> Herbicide Spraying

> New Report Calls Proposed Research Reckless, Unnecessary and Waste

of

> Taxpayer Money

>

> USDA, State Department, CIA and DEA Previously Rejected

Unpredictable and

> Unsafe Drug Control Strategy

>

> For Immediate Release: Tuesday, April 4, 2006. Contact: Tony

Newman

> 646-335-5384 or Tommy Mc 646-335-2242

>

> A new report shows that a proposed Congressional plan to require

the Office

> of National Drug Control Policy to revive research into toxic

fungal “

> mycoherbicides†is extremely reckless, dangerous and unpopular,

even with White

> House Drug Czar Walters. These mold-like biological agents

would be sprayed

> on drug crops in foreign countries, such as Colombia and

Afghanistan, where

> coca and opium are illegally produced. The report, “_Repeating

Mistakes of

> the Past: Another Mycoherbicide Research Bill_

> (http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/Mycoherbicide06.pdf) ,â€

tracks thirty years of failed research and calls

> the current bill language, “duplicative, [holding] no promise of

success,â€

> and a massive waste of millions in taxpayer dollars.

> The use of mycoherbicides has been rejected by every U.S.

government agency

> that has studied them, including the Department of Agriculture,

the State

> Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Drug

Enforcement

> Administration. Mycoherbicides were shown to be harmful to the

workers who handled

> them; toxic to non-target crops, such as food, flower, and licit

drug crops;

> persistent in the environment for months or years; and ineffective

against

> resistant coca and poppy strains.

> Further, the report, commissioned by the Drug Policy Alliance,

shows that

> the proposed unilateral deployment of mycoherbicides will be

perceived globally

> as biological warfare with potentially negative diplomatic

consequences.

> “If it becomes law, this bill will have very deleterious

consequences for

> the United States and its relations with the rest of the world,â€

said

> Bigwood, author of the study. “The proposed unilateral

deployment of

> mycoherbicides by the United States in foreign countries would be

considered a

> violation of the Biological Weapons Convention, and would likely

increase support for

> the insurgencies in Colombia and Afghanistan. We must hold

ourselves

> accountable to the same standards regarding biological weaponry as

we hold our

> allies and enemies alike.â€

> The House of Representatives recently passed the Office of

National Drug

> Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2006, which contains

language requiring

> research into the use of mycoherbicides against drug crops. The

U.S. Senate

> will consider the House version of the bill and is expected to

offer its own

> version of the ONDCP Reauthorization Act sometime this spring.

> The authors of the mycoherbicide language recommended there be

field studies

> using mycoherbicides in target countries, such as Colombia and

Afghanistan,

> where drugs are illegally produced. The bill’s authors also

wrongly insinuate

> that the use of mycoherbicides against drug crops has not been

adequately

> studied, which is utterly false. The mycoherbicides developed for

use against

> drug crops have been studied by several U.S. and foreign

government agencies

> for the last thirty years in both the laboratory and the field.

> During his Congressional testimony before the House International

Affairs

> Committee on May 11, 2005, White House Drug Czar Walters

said: …“Because

> the controversy around mycoherbicides is such that it is likely to

create an

> environment of †" when we already have an effective herbicide

[Roundup] †"

> concern about other agents being introduced to the environment.

The Colombian

> government has also said that it is not interested [in

mycoherbicides]. Again,

> it is not clear that this particular organism is specific to

coca… If you

> were to spray it †" and it is not specific to coca †" it could

cause

> considerable damage to the environment, which in Colombia is very

delicate. In order to

> start testing this [mycoherbicide] in an open area, it is

suggested that one

> would be using it… Again, when you spray a foreign substance in

areas where

> people are farming †" in proximity to people and farm animals,

you have to be

> sure it is safe. And… if you are going to do this in a

democratic environment,

> you have to have the people’s confidence that it is safe…â€

> In 1998, Senate bill S.2522, the Western Hemisphere Drug

Elimination Act,

> which authorized $23 million for a three-year “Master Plan for

Mycoherbicides

> to Control Narcotic Crops†was passed by Congress. A year

later, “Plan

> Colombia††" counternarcotics and counterinsurgency aid to the

Colombian

> government âˆ' was framed. An integral part of Plan Colombia was

that the Colombians

> would use the mycoherbicide Fusarium oxysporum against coca

crops.

> Governments, the news media and NGOs throughout Latin America

balked at the U.S. plan,

> which was passed in August 2000.

> Before Plan Colombia passed Congress, mycoherbicides had been the

subject of

> a June 2000 National Security Council (NSC) meeting. NSC members

expressed

> concern that the use of mycoherbicides in Colombia could be

perceived as U.S.

> unilateral entry into biological warfare, and there was fear of

setting this

> precedent and of possible responses to it. As a result, when

President

> Clinton signed the Plan Colombia legislation into law, he waived

the use of

> mycoherbicides there.

> “We hope the Senate will thoroughly consider the potentially

disastrous

> effects of mycoherbicide spraying, and as they draft their version

of the bill

> that they remove the mycoherbicide language,†Bigwood said.

“We urge the

> Senate to reject any bill requiring that the U.S. government

retest mycoherbicides

> for drug crop elimination, either in the United States or in

other

> countries.â€

> View a copy of the report _here_

> (http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/Mycoherbicide06.pdf) .

>

>

>

>