[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Executions, reprisals and counter-executions - SS Polizei Regiment 19 versus the French Resistance

Paratrooper kills german soldier and returns wedding photos to his family after 68 years

AMeRiKaN GULaG...

'Christian Warrior Training' explodes as churches put faith in guns

Major insurer gives brutal ultimatum to entire state: Let us put up prices by 50 percent or we will leave

Biden Admin Issues Order Blocking Haitian Illegal Immigrants From Deportation

Murder Rate in Socialist Venezuela Falls to 22-Year Low

ISRAEL IS DESTROYING GAZA TO CONTROL THE WORLD'S MOST IMPORTANT SHIPPING LANE

Denmark to tax livestock farts and burps starting in 2030

Woman to serve longer prison time for offending migrant men who gang-raped a minor

IDF says murder is okay after statistics show that Israel killed 75% of all journalists who died in 2023

Boeing to be criminally INDICTED for fraud

0:35 / 10:02 Nigel Farage Embarrasses Rishi Sunak & Keir Starmer AGAIN in New Speech!

Norway to stockpile 82,500 tons of grain to prepare for famine and war

Almost 200 Pages of Epstein Grand Jury Documents Released

UK To Install Defibrillators in EVERY School Due to Sudden Rise in Heart Problems

Pfizer purchased companies that produce drugs to treat the same conditions caused by covid vaccines

It Now Takes An Annual Income Of $186,000 A Year For Americans To Feel Financially Secure

Houthis Unleash 'Attacks' On Israeli, U.S. And UK Ships; 'Trio Of Evil Hit' | Full Detail

Gaza hospital chief says he was severely tortured in Israeli prisons

I'd like to thank Congress for using my Tax money to buy Zelenskys wife a Bugatti.

Cancer-causing radium detected in US city's groundwater due to landfill teeming with nuclear waste from WWII-era atomic bomb efforts

Tennessee Law Allowing Death Penalty For Pedophiles Goes Into Effect - Only Democrats Oppose It

Meet the NEW Joe Biden! 😂

Bovine Collagen Benefits

Milk Thistle Benefits for the Liver, Gut & More

Anthocyanin Benefits for Health

Rep. Matt Gaetz Points Out CNN’s Dana Bash Used Hand Signals During Debate (VIDEO)

Viral Biden Brain Freeze During Debate Sparks Major Question: Who’s Really Running the Country?

Illegal Alien Charged in Rape of Disabled Child in Boston OUT OF JAIL


Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Judge Who Ruled Humans Have ‘No Food Rights’ Resigns, Takes Job with Monsanto Law Firm
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.truthistreason.net/judge ... kes-job-with-monsanto-law-firm
Published: Oct 16, 2011
Author: http://www.truthistreason.net/judge-who-
Post Date: 2011-10-16 20:23:55 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 240
Comments: 22

Judge Who Ruled Humans Have ‘No Food Rights’ Resigns, Takes Job with Monsanto Law Firm Posted on Oct 14, 2011 in Health, Food News & Big Pharma Kevin Hayden – TruthisTreason.net

Source: Food Freedom by Rady Ananda

As courts and bureaucrats continue to assert that citizens have no fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice, we find Monsanto lurking nearby. The Wisconsin judge who recently ruled that we have no right to own a cow or drink its milk resigned to join one of Monsanto’s law firms.

Former judge Patrick J. Fiedler now works for Axley Brynelson, LLP, which defended Monsanto against a patent infringement case filed by Australian firm, Genetic Technologies, Ltd. (GTL) in early 2010.

In another link, Myriad Genetics, which holds the exclusive U.S. patent on human genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, granted the license to GTL in 2002. These human genes are associated with breast and ovarian cancer.

In 2009, the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation (PubPat) sued the PTO, Myriad Genetics, and principals at the University of Utah Research Foundation, charging that patents on genes are unconstitutional and invalid. The suit also charges that such patents stifle diagnostic testing and research that could lead to cures and that they limit women’s options regarding their medical care.

In an absurd ruling this year, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the patent on these human genes, even though the DNA sequence occurs in nature. The court decided that simply because researchers had been able to extract it, the firm owns it. Of course, under this thinking, all of nature can be patented if human technology allows extraction.

“The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has granted thousands of patents on human genes – in fact, about 20 percent of our genes are patented. A gene patent holder has the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even looking at a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing has been delayed, limited or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents,” commented ACLU.

That any official would approve gene patents is bad enough – discovering nature is not inventing it. But in the Wisconsin case, Judge Fiedler ruled that humans:

“Do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;” “Do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;” “Do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer;” “Do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice;” and Cannot enter into private contracts “outside the scope of the State’s police power.”

Ruling against raw milk forces consumers to drink genetically modified, antibiotic-laden milk from cows fed an unnatural diet of pesticide-loaded feed. No doubt that makes Monsanto a major fan of Patrick Fiedler. His decision was rendered on Sept. 9 and he stepped down from the bench on Sept. 30.

This case begs for competent legal counsel who can get the outrageous decision overturned.

Hat tip to SedonaEarthKnits and some investigative work by semi-anonymous bloggers.

Share on Facebook • Stumble It! • Add to del.icio.us

Related Articles:

Food and Depopulation: Monsanto’s Monopoly Biotech Terrorist Monsanto Continues to Seize More Control Over Food and Destroy Farmers Vanity Fair Covers Monsanto’s Evil Deeds in 6 Page Report India Sues BioTech Terrorist Monsanto for ‘BioPiracy’ of Native Eggplant Species

Tiny URL for this post: tinyurl.com/6zsz9a

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 19.

#8. To: tom007, noone222, JamesDeffenbach (#0) (Edited)

Judge Fiedler ruled that humans:

“Do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;” “Do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;” “Do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer;” “Do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice;” and Cannot enter into private contracts “outside the scope of the State’s police power.”

I'd be interested in your opinions on this guy presuming to single-handedly overturn a US Supreme Court decision?

Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 47 (1905)

"The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty [to submit his books and papers for an examination] to the State, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights." .....

Hale vs. Henkel was decided in 1905 in the U.S. Supreme Court. Since it was the Supreme Court, the case is binding on all courts of the land, until another Supreme Court case says it isn't. Has another Supreme Court case overturned Hale vs. Henkel? The answer is NO. As a matter of fact, since 1905, the Supreme Court has cited Hale vs. Henkel a total of 144 times. A fact more astounding is that since 1905, Hale vs. Henkel has been cited by all of the federal and state appellate court systems a total of at least 1600 times. None of the various issues of this case has ever been overruled."......

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

or, nevermind....i guess it's just more proof the CONstitution is a dead letter, and we are ruled by a private corporation.

"...I spent over 30 minutes presenting many Supreme Court decisions that supported the defendant's position. The prosecution concluded his statements, and to my amazement, the judge told the jury that they could only consider certain facts, none of which were the facts I had given.

As soon as the trial was over I went around to the judge's office and he was just coming in through his back door. I said, "Judge, by what authority do you overturn the standing decisions of the United States Supreme Court. You sat on the bench while I read that case law. Now how do you, a District Judge, have authority to overturn decisions of the Supreme Court?" He says. "Oh, those were old decisions." I said, "Those are standing decisions. They have never been overturned. I don't care how old they are; you have no right to overturn a standing decision of the United States Supreme Court in a District Court."

PUBLIC LAW V. PUBLIC POLICY

He said, "Name any decision of the Supreme Court after 1938 and I'll honor it, but all the decision you read were prior to 1938, and I don't honor those decisions." I asked what happened in 1938. He said, "Prior to 1938, the Supreme Court was dealing with Public Law; since 1938, the Supreme Court has dealt with Public Policy. ...."

freedom-school.com/the-ucc-connection.html

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2011-10-17   15:40:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#8) (Edited)

My guess, and it's just that, would be that the former States had all joined the FEDERAL SOCIALIST SECURITY compact (by 1935) that changed their roles from sovereigns to that of subsidiaries. The Supreme Court often waits for a perfect case to arrive that suits their needs in order to craft law (legislate) from the bench. I've read many times that the case arrived in 1938 and was: ERIE R. CO. v. TOMPKINS, 304 U.S. 64 (1938)

The States became "STATES" and as beneficiaries / receivers of FEDERAL (RESERVE) benefits as a matter of policy forfeited a good deal of their sovereignty over their own citizens. This actually amounted to the creation of a separate jurisdiction that operates through public policy, ie POLICE STATE).

pol·i·cy

Origin: 1350–1400; Middle English policie government, civil administration < Middle French < Latin pol+t+a polity

EDIT: I wanted to add that in studying case law on numerous occasions I have had difficulty locating cases that were applicable to an individual as most are related to corporations (fictions).

noone222  posted on  2011-10-18   7:59:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 19.

#22. To: noone222 (#19)

ERIE R. CO. v. TOMPKINS, 304 U.S. 64 (1938)

that's my understanding as well...thank you.

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2011-10-18 09:05:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 19.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]