THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
In a series of shocking “demand” emails containing screen captures showing lists of Natural News articles, Apple has demanded Natural News stop publishing articles critical of abortions or Satanism, threatening to block the Natural News app from all Apple devices if Apple’s demands are not met.
This is the first time that a dominant tech company has overtly come out in defense of Satanism while threatening to censor a prominent publisher that exposes the evils of Satanic influence. Many people will see this as yet more proof that Apple, along with other tech giants, is literally aligned with Satan and is exploiting its power of censorship to silence those who criticize Satanism.
With Democrats now openly pushing infanticide and the legalization of the serial killing of infants, tech giants like Apple are serving as the censorship “speech police” to silence all criticism of the gruesome practice. In threatening Natural News over our coverage of infanticide and abortions, Apple is staking out the position of being pro-infanticide, and anyone who dares to speak up for innocent children is deemed by Apple to be engaged in “hate speech.”
According to Apple, opposing the murder of children is now “hate speech”
Yes, you read that correctly: Speaking out to stop the mass murder of newborns is now “hate speech” according to the deranged, mentally ill Leftists who run Apple, Twitter, Google, YouTube, Facebook and Snapchat. Techno-fascism has now become a movement of mass infanticide that demands the silencing of those who oppose it. “Hate speech” means standing up for the innocent and demanding an end to the murder of children.
Here’s one of the many screen shots sent to Natural News by Apple, along with a warning that these stories would result in our app being blocked:
Apple claims all these articles are “objectionable content” that people might find “offensive.”
Some of the headlines named by Apple as “objectionable” include these important reports on Satanism, vampirism and blood harvesting from children, vaccines, cannabis, freedom of speech, the failed war on drugs, anti-Semitism and much more:
Here’s another screen shot sent to Natural News by Apple, along with demands to remove all this content or face the consequences:
There are more screen shots, too, sent to Natural News by Apple, indicating that Apple is trolling all Natural News content and trying to find examples of stories to be “offended” about. Some of the other content the Apple says is “offensive” includes articles about abortion, infanticide, censorship, the LGBT agenda and illegal migration.
Fight back against Apple censorship
We must all fight back against Apple censorship. There are several ways you can help us do that. We need your help to take action now and let Apple know that we will not be silent in the face of techno-fascism and censorship:
First, fill out this Apple feedback form for the iPhone, and tell them you don’t want Apple censoring the Natural News app:
You can also Tweet to the official Apple account (assuming you haven’t yet been banned by Twitter, another evil tech giant). The official accounts of interest include:
@Apple
@AppStore
@tim_cook
@AppleSupport
When you tweet Apple, tell them to stop trying to control Natural News and stop censoring our app.
Finally, watch and share my full explanation here:
Like all the tech giants, Apple has been consumed by truly demonic forces and now demands the silencing of all those who oppose evil, murder or tyranny.
MICHELLE OBAMA'S PUBLIC SCHOOL LUNCH RULES FOR THE MASSES; BUT HER DAUGHTERS GET GOURMET STYLE FARE AT PRIVATE SCHOOL; SHE & BARACK FEAST ON FABULOUS STATE MEALS IN U.S. & ABROAD
The federal government is taking steps to fine schools that do not comply with first lady Michelle Obama’s school lunch rules.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service issued a proposed rule Monday to codify parts of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which was championed by Mrs. Obama.
The regulation would punish schools and state departments with fines for “egregious or persistent disregard” for the lunch rules that imposed sodium and calorie limits and banned white grains.
A West Virginia preschool teacher was threatened with fines for violating the rules by rewarding her students with candy for good behavior in June 2015. The teacher ultimately did not have to pay, but the school had to develop a “corrective action plan” with training on the policies.
The government now seeks to make fines enforceable by regulation. Section 303 of the law requires that the federal government “establish criteria for the imposition of fines” for all the Department of Agriculture’s child food programs.
“Under section 303, the Secretary or a State agency may establish an assessment against any school food authority or school administering the Child Nutrition Programs if the Secretary or the State agency determines that the school or school food authority failed to correct severe mismanagement of any program, failed to correct repeated violations of program requirements, or disregarded a requirement of which they have been informed,” the proposed rule states.
The government insisted that fines would be limited only to schools, school food authorities, and state agencies that have “failed to correct severe mismanagement of any program, disregarded a requirement of which it has been informed, or failed to correct repeated violations of program requirements.”
“It is important to note that the statutory scheme only anticipates assessments be established in instances of severe mismanagement of a program, disregard of a program requirement of which the program operator had been informed, or failure to correct repeated violations [emphasis in original],” according to the proposed regulation. “These criteria suggest that violations that would result in assessments would be egregious or persistent in nature, remaining unresolved after the normal monitoring and oversight activities have failed to secure corrective action.”
The Food and Nutrition Service is targeting schools that refuse to comply with Mrs. Obama’s lunch rules and said monetary penalties are a “useful tool” to get non compliant cafeterias in line.
“However, there have been cases, albeit few, where program operators have failed to correct Program violations through the normal administrative review requirements and technical assistance,” the agency said. “This proposed rule would provide both the Department and State agencies the authority to establish an assessment after the normal monitoring and oversight activities have been unsuccessful in correcting program violations.”
“The Department anticipates assessments would be established only on rare occasions in securing corrective action,” they added. “However, it should serve as a useful tool when egregious or persistent disregard of Program requirements occurs.”
Calling the fines an “assessment” against a school, the agency said the fines would amount to 1 percent of the total amount the school was reimbursed for lunches for the first fine. A second fine would equal up to 5 percent of the total meal reimbursements, and 10 percent for a third or subsequent fine.
The fines could be hefty if an entire state agency were flagged for persistent violations. For instance, Alabama received $210,937,195 in cash payments through the school lunch program in 2015. One percent would total $2.1 million. A 10 percent fine would cost $21 million.
The Food and Nutrition Service did not respond to a request for comment on the proposed rule, or how much the estimated fines would total.
The agency said in the proposed regulation that the fines are “intended to improve the integrity.”
The proposed rule would also apply to private organizations participating in federal childcare nutrition programs, including “institutions, sites, sponsors, day care centers, and day care providers.”
The agency said they would allow schools to appeal the fines “given the fiscal consequences of this provision.” The rule would also give the agency the authority to terminate any school’s participation in the National School Lunch Program if they do not pay the fines.
Increased monitoring of state agencies as a result of the rule would cost states $4.3 million in 2017, and $22.7 million over five years.
Michelle Obama announced Tuesday at the White House new school nutrition rules
Students Give Michelle Obama's School Lunch Initiative An F
Published on Apr 7, 2014
Alex discusses the extremely flawed Michelle Obama school lunch initiative on the heels of a recent Blaze article in which countless tweets with pictures show the sad cafeteria trays of many disgruntled students and parents.
Mark Levin: Michelle Obama’s school lunch rules have cost cafeteria worker jobs
Michelle Obama’s prison style school lunch
Michelle Obama’s School Lunch Program Is Food Tyranny
Sen. Ted Cruz said Saturday that the nation should push back against the “hysteria” over food made with genetically modified organisms, saying these innovations in science should be celebrated for the positive impact they’ve had both at home and abroad.
Speaking the Iowa Agricultural Summit, Mr. Cruz said he is sick of politicians “blowing smoke” in Washington and vowed that Iowans have no bigger ally then him when it comes to pushing back against the federal government.
Mr. Cruz said GMOs helped to provide food for people across the globe and strengthen farms across the nation. He said that people who oppose GMOs and want to buy organic food can do that.
“People who decide that is what they want, they can pay for it already, but we shouldn’t let anti-science zealotry shutdown the ability to produce low-cost quality food for billions across the globe,” Mr. Cruz said.
The freshman lawmaker and tea party was among a slate of candidates to sit down Saturday for a question and answer sessions at the first annual Iowa Agricultural Summit, which was put together by Bruce L. Rastetter, a GOP power broker who has made millions off the agricultural industry.
During a question and answer session, Mr. Cruz knocked the approach that the Obama administration and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took to international affairs, describing it as a foreign policy of “appeasement.” He said he is the biggest advocate of legal immigration in the Senate.
Defending his opposition to wind tax credits and renewable fuel mandates, Mr. Cruz said he will fight for limited government.
“When it comes to getting the federal government out of your lives, trying to stop the EPA, trying to stop OSHA, trying to stop federal regulators from descending on your farms and making it harder for you to produce, for you to do your jobs, you have no greater friend and ally then I am,” Mr. Cruz said. “I have every bit of faith that businesses can continue to compete, can continue to do well without having to go on bended knee to Washington, asking for subsidies, asking for special favors.
I’ve always said that food and chemical corporations work with public university scientists “behind closed doors” to manipulate the public—and now our movement has irrefutable PROOF. But first, let me start at the beginning…
When our movement got big companies to change, Dr. Kevin Folta, from University of Florida appeared on the scene. Every time we made headway on an important issue, Kevin Folta, who claimed to be an unbiased scientist, was there to refute our claims and throw some ad hominem attacks. Here are a few examples (many more are documented at the end of this post):
“The fact that she is able to mobilize this army of blind followers who reject science and follow her words, to smear and harm the reputations of companies that are doing nothing wrong.” – The Atlantic, 2/11/2015
Kevin M. Folta, the chairman of the horticultural sciences department at the University of Florida, described Ms. Hari’s lecture at the university last October as a “corrupt message of bogus science and abject food terrorism.” – quoted in New York Times, 3/15/2015
“There’s something that dies inside when you are a faculty member that works hard to teach about food, farming and science, and your own university brings in a crackpot to unravel all of the information you have brought to students.” — Folta’s Blog, Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
My intuition and common sense knew that this guy HAD to be connected to these corporations in some way, but he kept denying any connection. And I believed he was causing irreparable harm to our healthy food movement because the media believed that he was an unbiased scientist.
Well, NOT ANYMORE.
This week an unprecedented major investigative report was published in the NY Times about how the chemical and food industries work with public university scientists to advance their agendas to the public. Hundreds of emails have now been revealed between University of Florida Professor Dr. Kevin Folta, Monsanto, the biotech front groups, and their PR firm Ketchum after a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request was submitted by the nonprofit group U.S. Right To Know.
Why would Monsanto work with a public scientist in the first place?
Some powerful entities in the chemical and food industries have a financial incentive to try to discredit us in the work we have all done together and now we know how they are using public scientists like Dr. Kevin Folta as sock puppets to advance their message. We’ve come a long way in our food movement and things are finally starting to change – people are getting healthier and the food industry is responding to us, but why is someone like Dr. Kevin Folta on a mission to stop our progress?
Not only was Folta repeatedly dishonest about his ties to Monsanto, but on “several occasions” according to the NY Times, Folta took word for word answers and commentary from Monsanto’s PR firm Ketchum to use as his own words. Previously he claimed he never used the text written for him by the PR firm Ketchum.
Monsanto sells Roundup, the chemical that is sprayed on the majority of GMO seeds. The main ingredient in Roundup was recently classified as a probable carcinogen. They are in panic mode trying to repair their image and will do anything to confuse the public.
Folta attempted to derail my speaking event at the University of Florida. He has also been interviewed by major media outlets such as The Atlantic, NPR, and the NY Times acting as an unbiased third party source, telling reporters he has no financial ties to Monsanto or the biotech industry all while acting as the ringleader and chief of my critics.
Monsanto thanks Folta for attending my talk at The University of Florida
One of the emails discovered by USRTK.org showed Lisa Drake, an executive at Monsanto cheering Dr. Folta on after he attended my talk at his University last fall. Dr. Folta wrote a blog post attempting to discredit my talk including a false accusation that I refused to answer questions from the audience. (FYI – Here’s the photographic evidence of the long line of teachers and students that I answered questions from.) I still find it bizarre that if he wanted to ask me a question so bad that he didn’t stay to meet me face to face. Instead he spread dishonest information about my talk all over social media, in forums and on his blog, acting more like an online troll than a distinguished science professor.
Seeing this email sent shivers down my spine and left me with a lot of questions. First and foremost, my talk was not about the dangers of GMO foods, it was about the story of quitting my corporate career to become a food activist sharing examples of major food companies changing their policies. Who wrote that paragraph summarizing my talk that Lisa Drake referenced? Why was a Monsanto executive sending this message to Folta? Did they ask him to attend my talk? Are they paying him to attack activists like myself? At the time I had no idea why this professor was so aggressive towards me but now it’s starting to make sense.
I’ve tried to explain to various reporters in the past that many of our critics are part of the larger entrenched food and chemical lobby that doesn’t agree with having more transparency (labeling GMOs) or doesn’t want to remove the controversial chemical additives from our food. The reporters have always said but what about the “public university scientists” that have no ties?
This investigation finally begins to explain that.
Why I am also submitting a FOIA request
In light of this email and the incredible amount of reputational damage Dr. Folta has waged on me personally and our healthy food movement (see a sampling of his public comments below), I am submitting a formal request to the University of Florida to have all documents and correspondence released to the public from Dr. Kevin Folta regarding my name Vani Hari and Food Babe.
I believe obtaining these correspondences will serve the public in greater transparency on how the food industry uses “independent” third-party scientists and professors to control science and deliver their PR and lobbying messaging.
I’ve often wondered why companies like Monsanto go through such great lengths to stop transparency about GMOs… If their food is safe, why don’t they want to label GMOs? Why would they pay public university scientists to advance their message?
Xo,
Vani
Quotes from Kevin Folta:
Folta calls me a crackpot, accuses me of food terrorism, blackmail, villifying farmers and compares me to a dog.
“Vani is very good at marketing herself and telling people what they want to hear. She is very good at playing into the current popularity of vilifying farmers and large-scale agriculture. But really, she’s her own company, and she’s the spokesperson.” – The Atlantic, 2/11/2015
Kevin M. Folta, the chairman of the horticultural sciences department at the University of Florida, described Ms. Hari’s lecture at the university last October as a “corrupt message of bogus science and abject food terrorism.” (Her fee was $6,000.) Dr. Folta added, “She found that a popular social media site was more powerful than science itself, more powerful than reason, more powerful than actually knowing what you’re talking about.”. – quoted in New York Times, 3/15/2015
“She really conflates the science. If anything, she’s created more confusion about food, more confusion about the role of chemicals and additives.” – NPR, 12/4/2014
“To have someone like Hari go out and make up nonsense that only digs into public opinion against these technologies is really frustrating for us.” – The Atlantic, 2/11/2015
“That’s not healthy activism or change based on science. That’s coercion, fear mongering and (yes) terrorism to achieve short-sighted political non-victories in the name of profit and self-promotion, ironically the same thing she accuses the companies of.” — Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“Vani Hari would be spreading her corrupt message of bogus science and abject food terrorism here at the University of Florida. Oh joy”. – Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“Responding to the Food Babe is like telling a funny joke to my dog at a party. Everyone there gets it– except for the dog. She just tilts her head to one side and looks at me like I’m stupid.” – Response to the Food Babe. This is Boring, 3/19/2015
“There’s something that dies inside when you are a faculty member that works hard to teach about food, farming and science, and your own university brings in a crackpot to unravel all of the information you have brought to students.” — Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“If this is a charismatic leader of a new food movement it is quite a disaster. She’s uninformed, uneducated, trite and illogical. She’s afraid of science and intellectual engagement. She’s Oz candy at best.”- Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“What if Hari were to take a long look in the mirror and decide that while scaring people into boycotts and book buying pays the bills, the legacy associated with it is embarrassing. Time will frown on Hari, and it already is happening. While adored by internet fans, scientists, physicians, the food industry, farmers and science fans see her clearly as the empty information vessel she truly is.” – The Value of Vani, 12/12/2014
“Her discussion was a narcissistic, self-appointed attack on food science and human nutrition. There is a vein in my head that pulses when I hear someone deliberately misrepresent science for personal celebrity, and it was pounding.” – Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“I was really proud to see that the student audience was not buying it. Throughout her presentation that was about Hari in the spotlight and “me-me-me”, students got up and left. She left gaping pregnant pauses where previous performances got applause– only to hear nothing. Not even crickets.” – Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“While microphones stood ready in the audience to answer questions, there was no public Q&A period where a scientist that knows the research could publicly challenge her false assertions.”- Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“I guess I’m just angry because I didn’t get to lock science horns with The Food Babe. I would have liked to have asked a few questions that she could never answer.” – Food Babe Visits My University, 10/21/2014
“I listened to her talk about herself and provide lots of false information to my students, and waited for the opportunity to ask dismantling questions from one of the two microphones in the room”. – A Letter To Support My Claims Against the Food Babe, 11/16/2014
“As we attempt to illuminate products, technology and method to feed a growing population, Hari’s shameful resistance to reality needs to be met. We’ve done that, and I’m proud of the push back…” – The Value of Vani, 12/12/2014
“Recently I’ve given a number of talks and interviews where I’ve been described as the “guy that stood up to the Food Babe”. While standing up for science is important, I’d rather be described as the guy that changed her mind because I took the time to teach the facts.” – The Value of Vani, 12/12/2014
“I cannot think of someone so clueless that thinks she’s so clue-full. The bravado to manufacture completely wacky statements is beyond arrogance, and to criticize students who approach her from a scholarly evidence-based point shows she’s fully subscribed to her own deception.” – Vani Hari’s Kooky Response to Critical Students, 1/26/2015
Folta discredits Food Babe campaigns to remove controversial chemicals from the food supply:
“Bread is a foam. Even culinary experts will tell you. It was a perfectly safe food additive for years, until she came along and decided that Subway bread was essentially a yoga mat.” – The Atlantic, 2/11/2015
“The fact that she is able to mobilize this army of blind followers who reject science and follow her words, to smear and harm the reputations of companies that are doing nothing wrong.” – The Atlantic, 2/11/2015
“Safety always has to be the number one concern. And an understanding of safety is contingent on an understanding of the chemical in question. But she lacks the scientific prowess to be able to tell when something is truly a threat, and when something poses no threat.” – The Atlantic, 2/11/2015
Additional Evidence: Folta denies any ties to Monsanto on his blog:
“In another thread she encourages those curious to call the university, because “a certain professor who promotes Monsanto… has spread a lot of nonsense”. Again, she speaks from no evidence, leveling false allegations against a public scientist that only wants her to back her claims with science. How do I ‘support Monsanto’?”- A Letter To Support My Claims Against the Food Babe, 11/16/2014
“She also took the liberty of making a false association between a public scientist and university professor to a company that does not exist, purely to discredit him. Here are two clear falsehoods that Hari stands by. Why anyone would take any advice from her, ever, is beyond me.”- A Letter To Support My Claims Against the Food Babe, 11/16/2014
Folta’s personal email to Food Babe (3/19/2015): “I work as an independent, public scientist. Companies have no control of my research, my results or my opinions.”
“You’ll also see from my publications that almost all of my funding comes from public sources, like USDA, NSF and NIH. I’m not a “Monsanto scientist” as you’ve suggested. My only “industry funding” is for strawberries– a strawberry industry of family farmers that grow a nutritious fruit. Yes, I answer questions on GMO Answers. I am not paid, I’m grateful for the forum, and if you gave me a page on Food Babe.com to answer questions the answers would be exactly the same.”
