Fed up with factory farming

SUBHEAD: Is factory farming destroying the planet? These five films have an answer!

By Beth Kelly on 25 March 2015 for Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2015/03/fed-up-with-factory-farming.html)


Image above: What does factory farming look like on Kauai? It might look like a milk factory dairy. Like the Pierre Omidyer proposed Hawaii Dairy Farm in Mahulepu Valley. To get an idea of HDF's impact we have superimposed a image of the Aurora "Organic" Dairy Farm (in Boulder, Colorado) over the red line boundary of HDF.  We used GoogleEarth and an mirror image of an aerial photo of the AODF andadjusted the scale and perspective as best we could. From (http://www.cornucopia.org/horizon-factory-farm-photo-gallery/aurora-factory-farm-photo-gallery/). See also (http://www.auroraorganic.com/). Graphics by Juan Wilson. Click to embiggen.

Food is something that we take for granted in the modern world. We go to huge grocery stores, buy incredible amounts of food, and don't give much more thought to it. We might even assume that idyllic farmers are working hard to grow and harvest the best quality and most nutritious food possible. The problem is that this assumption is quite naïve.

Modern agriculture is about as far from this rustic portrait of a small family farm as possible. Farm operations today are more like an industrial factory that cranks out food on an assembly line. Health and nutrition are often sacrificed in favor of efficiency and profits.

A number of recent documentaries expose the harmful effects of agribusiness and factory farming. Here are five documentaries that lift the curtain and show us behind the scenes of modern agriculture:

More Than Honey (2012)

Video above: Official Trailer for movie "More than Honey". From (https://youtu.be/2NT05qEJxUk).

This film takes a close look at bees and their relationship with humankind. It examines a wide variety of honeybee colonies in California, Switzerland, Australia, and China in an attempt to discern what factors account for the widespread decline of the bee population due to colony collapse. More Than Honey suggests that modern chemical pesticides play a large role in destroying bee populations and discusses the dire consequences if bees should become extinct. Viewers rave about the film's breathtaking cinematography, as it is a visually stunning film with a well-told story.

---

Farmageddon (2011)

Video above: Trailer for movie "Farmageddon" From (https://youtu.be/IH_my56FkuQ).

This film is a wake up call for those who are unaware of the way the Federal Government acts against smaller farmers all over America. It details the way that small organic farmers producing healthy and nutritious foods are systematically harassed by the United States government. This harassment is motivated by the influence that large corporate agribusinesses have on the government. By raising awareness of these issues, people will protest the dominance of big business in agriculture and give small family farms a new future.

---

Food, Inc. (2008)

Video above: Official trailer for "Food Inc." From (https://youtu.be/5eKYyD14d_0).

A penetrating look at the industrialized production of food in the United States, this film shows that both animal and plant farming produces food that is not only unhealthy and harmful to the environment, but abuses and oppresses both animals and human employees. The companies that claim to take care of our needs are actually exploiting us for gain. Food, Inc. insists that we can make a difference. By changing our buying practices and voting, we can let these money-hungry companies that we want change.

---

King Corn (2007)

Video above: Trailer for King Corn. From (https://youtu.be/Pr5HQrgg9mM). See full length film here (http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/king_corn_2007/).

Two college friends go on journey through the American food supply. They begin by moving from Boston to Iowa, where they farm one acre of corn. Along the way, they examine how government subsidies create incentives to overproduce corn as well as the consequences of this overproduction. The two also show the prominence of high fructose corn syrup as a cheap food ingredient and the problems this causes for the American diet. The film chronicles the plight of small family farms that cannot compete against the huge agribusinesses that control the industry.

---

Crude Impact (2006)

Video above: Trailer for "Crude Impact". From (https://youtu.be/EwyAA2Zt8CI). See full length film here (https://vimeo.com/33552646).

Our modern society is powered almost exclusively by fossil fuels. Crude Impact takes a critical look at an environmental crisis that is being created by this reliance, spreading awareness to energy and gas companies, major corporations, and the general public who seek to find solutions for this crisis. From global warming to overpopulation, this film takes a hard look at the way using fossil fuels affects human culture. It also examines the issue of “peak oil.” As demand for energy increases, supplies of fossil fuels will dwindle. The resulting exponential rise in the cost of energy could be devastating. The film also examines some potential solutions that would mitigate this disaster.

---

These films challenge us to critically examine where our food comes from. When we have the facts, we can call for change, seek out healthy alternatives, and use our purchasing power to demand the production of healthy food. In addition, we can call upon our leaders to change the system for the better and pay more attention to the sources of our food. Otherwise, we may jeopardize our health and our environment all for the sake of “good-tasting” food.

See also:
Ea O Ka Ania: NZ dairy model isn't Mahaulepu 3/9/15

.

Adjusting to a Finite Planet

SUBHEAD: Today's interpretation of the 5th Amendment on the "Taking" of private property is a threat to the planet.

By Erik Zencey on 11 March 2015 in the Daly News -
(http://steadystate.org/adjusting-the-fifth-to-a-finite-planet-part-1/)


Image above: The shoreline in Mahaulepu near Waiopili Stream. Grove Farms and Hawaii Dairy Farm corporation (controlled by billionaire Pierre Omidyer) plan to develop a commercial mega-dairy operation that will threaten this delicate ecosystem aquifer with tons of urine and fecal matter runoff every day. As it Waiopili Stream is the most contaminated with entero coccus bacteria tracked by the Surfrider Kauai organization. Is it the right of the private property owner to make money in this way? Photo by Juan Wilson.

Infinite-Planet Thinking is deeply embedded in our political economy. It’s there in the expectation that investments will pay off at a continually compounding rate ^[1]. It’s there in the unquestioned consensus among elected officials that economic growth is always good–that it can’t possibly ever be uneconomic ^[2] growth, costing us more in lost natural and social capital than we gain from additional consumption.

It’s there in expressions of concern that some key indicator–housing purchases or starts, car sales, or purchases of other durables–has failed to rise from year to year or quarter to quarter. In a steady state, sustainable economy suited to the planet we actually inhabit, indicators like those wouldn’t rise continually. (Most would fall considerably before leveling off, because policy would promote durability and repairability ^[3], and manufacturers would be given incentives to use modular construction that would allow regular updating of only those components that need it.) Automobile sales would decline steadily ^[4], because a sustainable civilization would invest in mass transit and rapid inter-city rail, turning the private automobile into a major expense that most of us would willingly do without.

One less-obvious place that infinite planet thinking clashes with reality is in American Constitutional law, particularly the case law that has amplified one particular clause of the Fifth Amendment: the clause that forbids government from taking private property for public use without “just compensation.”

The harms that the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause was intended to prevent were familiar to American colonists, as Britain had forced them to bear the costs of war (French and Indian, the Revolution itself) by quartering troops in private homes and by seizing without payment horses, wagons, farm produce, and silage. For a century and a half after the ratification of the Constitution, the Takings Clause was construed to apply only to that kind of physical invasion of property or a taking of title.

Thus, in 1915, when the City of Los Angeles expanded its boundaries and enclosed an existing brickyard that was then held to be in violation of nuisance laws and attendant zoning regulations, no compensation was due to the owner whose operations had been summarily shut down (Hadachek v. Sebastian ^[5]). No physical encroachment, no loss of title, no taking.

That interpretation was overturned in 1922, in Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon, in which the Supreme Court held that a regulatory change could constitute a taking if the regulations go “too far” in limiting uses of the property.

How far is too far?

The court had difficulty saying. Over time, one sturdy guide emerged: following its decisions in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (1978) and Kaiser Aetna v. United States (1979), and using language first proposed in a 1967 law review article ^[6], the court is most likely to find that a regulatory taking has occurred if a property owner has reasonable, investment-backed expectations ^[7] to develop the property in ways that new regulation forbids, and no other avenue of development or use is likely to provide a similar return.

A full-scale review and critique of Takings case law from a steady state, finite planet perspective would be useful, but no scholar has yet done such thing. Among the trends visible in Takings case law is this one: in a crowded world that lacks ecological resilience, some acts that would otherwise pass for private become decidedly public in their character and consequence. Thus, a person who plants ornamental cedar trees can see them condemned as public nuisances, and cut without compensation, if they carry a form of tree disease fatal to nearby apple orchards (Miller v. Schoene, 1928).

A property owner who wants to fill in a wetland to build a house finds that he can’t–and that he should have known that when he bought the property (Claridge v. New Hampshire Wetlands Board, 1984).

 Whether a man can build houses on land he owns becomes a matter of public interest if the land happens to be environmentally sensitive barrier island, newly protected by coastal zoning laws (Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 1992). And whether the owner of an auto parts store can expand her building is not simply a private decision if the addition would encroach on greenspace the town plan identifies as both a future bikeway and an environmentally useful drainage swale (Dolan v. City of Tigard, 1994).

The problem: under current interpretations of the Takings Clause, ecologically wise decisions about wetlands, barrier islands, and drainage swales require financial compensation to landowners affected by them, making preservation of ecosystem services prohibitively expensive. In Lucas and Dolan, the public was required to compensate the landowner at market prices for preventing the socially undesirable construction.

A spate of hurricanes ^[9] has shown how valuable barrier-island ecosystem services ^[10] can be. If the public has to buy those services back, parcel by parcel, at market prices, suffering the billion-dollar property losses brought by storms begins to look like the least-cost option.

This perverse situation follows logically from the infinite-planet assumptions that lie behind our Anglo-Saxon tradition of property law. An infinite planet has ecosystem services galore–so much that loss of services from any single ecosystem leaves “enough, and as good” remaining. The words are English philosopher John Locke’s, who held that individuals have a right to take from the commons only if their taking meets this proviso.

But Locke went on to argue that once money is invented, private appropriation for sale to others leads to economic growth, which can go on forever, releasing us from this limit. “He, that incloses Land and has a greater plenty of the conveniencys of life from ten acres, than he could have from an hundred left to Nature, may truly be said, to give ninety acres to Mankind.”

Locke is all too obviously an infinite planet thinker ^[11]. Our property law, built on his precepts, finds that a taking occurs when public authority preserves environmental values from private development. We need to reset the Fifth Amendment’s default and run it the other way, to hold that a taking occurs when property owners deprive their fellow citizens of ecosystem services.

Anyone who proposes to develop a plot of land should be required to show that the loss of ecosystem services to the public will be insignificant–that the proposed act meets Locke’s original criterion. If it doesn’t, the property owner should be required to pay the cost of mitigation, or of ecosystem restoration elsewhere, or of providing equivalent services from built capital.

Unfortunately, this is just the line of development the Roberts court foreclosed in its 2013 decision in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District ^[12], the latest in the Court’s infinite-planet Takings tradition. (As Donella Meadows once wryly noted ^[13], if you want to know where the leverage points are in a complex system, look for where the system’s power is pushing hard in exactly the wrong direction.)

If no equivalent mitigation or replacement is possible, and if there is a reasonable, science-backed expectation that loss of those particular ecosystem services would diminish human wellbeing, then the public has legitimate authority to prevent the destruction of those services without providing compensation.

To argue differently is to argue that title to property conveys the right to hold civilization hostage. It’s to argue that if the public wants to secure the blessings of ecosystems to future generations, they’ll have to pony up and buy their children’s future from private owners, parcel by parcel, at current market rates.

That’s not only unrealistic and intergenerationally unjust, it risks the loss of civilization in order to protect the property interests of individuals within that civilization. That’s a very odd thing to do.
Next: three paths forward.

---

Article printed from Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy: http://steadystate.org
URL to article: http://steadystate.org/adjusting-the-fifth-to-a-finite-planet-part-1/
URLs in this post:

[1] a continually compounding rate: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/03/08/203784/ponzi-scheme-madoff-friedman-natural-capital-renewable-resources/

[2] uneconomic: http://www.rightlivelihood.org/daly_speech.html

[3] policy would promote durability and repairability: http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.press-releases.29603

[4] decline steadily: http://www.cnu.org/node/5500

[5] Hadachek v. Sebastian: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/hadacheck-v-sebastian

[6] a 1967 law review article: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1339276?sid=21106086923273&uid=3739584&uid=2&uid=3739256&uid=4

[7] reasonable, investment-backed expectations: http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=law_urbanlaw

[8] Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/glass_house/3565492046

[9] hurricanes: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/hurricane-sandy-vs-hurricane-katrina/?_r=0

[10] valuable barrier-island ecosystem services: http://www.chnep.org/2013agendas/CAC4-17-13_EcosystemServicesReport.pdf

[11] infinite planet thinker: https://books.google.com/books?id=63GNAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA180&lpg=PA180&dq=zencey+locke+second+treatise&source=bl&ots=baKM2wo3yL&sig=LLbOcj_9es-0dosb6o3hPCuC4hc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=I0X3VIzuDJT_yQSL2oKQDw&sqi=2&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=zencey%20locke%20second%20treatise&f=false

[12] Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fb794def-e8a7-4ccb-b518-da9776e10305

[13] wryly noted: http://www.donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/

.

NZ dairy model isn't Mahaulepu

SUBHEAD: No parallels between New Zealand and the heavy, poorly drained clay soils close to the sea at Mahaulepu.

By David Collison on 9 March 2015 in the Garden Island News -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/guest/new-zealand-model-isn-t-mahaulepu/article_4b948be8-c618-11e4-9d23-3fff691ff905.html)


Image above: Taupo, central North Island, New Zealand. Landcorp, a government owned company, currently converting Tahorakuri Forest into large-scale intensive dairy farms. Even in New Zealand big dairy operations are not sustainable. From (http://www.greenpeace.org/new-zealand/en/campaigns/climate-change/smart-farming/liability/).


I was born and raised on a New Zealand dairy farm in the Waikato area of the North Island. For the final few years on the property, I managed the total operation.

I am somewhat confused by the oft-quoted statement, “the New Zealand model,” in regards to the proposed Hawaii Dairy Farm operation at Mahaulepu. Another well-known quotation is “the devil is in the details,” and there seems from press releases to be a dearth of details I would consider relevant.
I am not accusing the developer of ignorance but it appears they are convinced the residents of Poipu and Koloa have it in abundance.

New Zealand is approximately 1,000 miles long and there is no doubt that it is possible to have a “town supply” dairy farm supplying fresh milk from one end of New Zealand to the other — just as it is anywhere in the world, given enough money. However, a successful grass-fed dairy herd requires frequent light rain, well-drained fertile soil and adequate sun without great extremes of temperature.

There are only two main areas in New Zealand that qualify and these are the Waikato area around the city of Hamilton and the Taranaki area around the city of New Plymouth. These two areas are probably the most intense grass-fed dairy areas in the world.

Forty years ago we milked a total of approximately 200 cows plus an average “dry stock” level of 60 heifers and selected calves — all on 163 acres. No stock feed of any type was imported onto this Waikato farm and I’m told these figures have improved since then.

However, that climate is ideal for growing nutrient-rich grass — parti-cularly clovers which replenish the nitrogen in the soil.

These are also grasses that will not grow adequately in a tropical climate. The area is also well away from salt breezes which can burn these grasses, and of course the farm consisted of gently rolling, well-drained soil.

To be successful, the cows need to be highly efficient at converting grass to milk and modern cows are a product of many decades of scientific selective breeding largely employing artificial insemination. All this is in an environment, that has, due to the number of livestock involved, veterinary, research and other support of all types, second to none in the world.

So far, I see almost no parallels between New Zealand and the heavy, poorly drained clay soils close to the sea at Mahaulepu.

As stated, high-producing dairy cows are very efficient at converting grass to milk. Much grass and many gallons of water are daily consumed at one end and waste in the form of manure and urine is ejected at the other. Twice a day, many quarts of high-quality milk are available at the cow’s udder.

To get grass into the cows, three methods can be employed, depending on the weather.

A. In fine weather, the cows walk to and from the milking facility to the grass, where it is processed through the cow.

B. If there is a danger of causing too much mud, the grass can be harvested with a forage harvester and brought to the cows.

C. A combination of both A and B.

All this grass consumed, unfortunately, also transfers fertility from the soil, and means must be employed to return as much manure as possible to the fields.

Given the density of livestock on what is potentially a very muddy area during long wet spells, I would presume there will be adequate concrete “hard standing areas,” as well as this obvious requirement around the milking facility. As has been pointed out from many previous letters, there will be a large accumulation of manure and urine.

In the A option, 80 percent will be deposited on each field. There will still need to be a method to collect and regularly spread the balance accumulated around the milking facility. In the B option, this operation becomes a major exercise. And the C option, of course, would be something in between.

Any such intensive dairy operation requires rotational grazing — that is where the cows are moved on a daily basis from one field to the next to allow grass to recover and be ready for the next cycle.

If cows are allowed to create too much mud while in the field during very wet weather in such poor draining clay soils, grass will be slower to recuperate. After each grazing the deposited manure must also be spread (by tractor and chain harrows) so that accumulated deposits are not too deep for grass to grow through or the grass will die.

Given the money available, the initial proposed stocking rate should be feasible but as I have tried to explain above, the area is far from ideal. Additional stocking rates will, of course, only exacerbate the problems.

As a permanent resident of Poipu adjacent to the Grand Hyatt, I have major concerns.

1. Those of us who have been brought up around livestock are used to animal smells. Those whose lifestyles subject them to perhaps only vehicle exhaust fumes at worst and the scents of flowers and trees at best, will most likely find any smells emanating from the farm highly objectionable. To say there will be no smells, irrespective of wind direction, is delusional.

2. If the cow manure is not spread while fresh, the smell becomes much more pronounced and certainly objectionable to even those with less acute olfactory senses.

3. In the 25 years I have resided in the area, we have experienced heavy periods of rain at times that would almost certainly, despite all precautions, cause discharge of unacceptable pollutants into the ocean.

4. Items 1, 2 and 3 will also certainly impact my property values and those of my neighbors as well as detrimentally affecting the tourist industry of the area which is, of course, one of the primary engines of Kauai’s economy.

.

Ugly show at the Cow Palace

SUBHEAD: What did we learn from Hawaii Dairy Farm open house? How guile, disinformation, issue avoidance works.

By Diane de Vries on 27 February 2015 in TGI -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/guest/what-did-we-learn-from-hdf-open-house/article_a46ced8e-be4b-11e4-bf8f-73d0a52e287a.html)


Image above: A herd of cattle pause in the Cow Palace parking lot after their arrival for the 63rd annual Grand National Rodeo, Horse & Stock Show in Daly City, California on Thursday, April 3, 2008. From (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Cow-Palace-won-t-be-sold-after-all-3218092.php).

[IB Publisher's note: Been through this on many occasions when the development speculators bring in their consultants to do a smoke-and-mirror show for the "public".  It's all public relations and eye-wash. They are merely there to grease the skids on the next big ugly thing coming our way. This is another mess to blame on Pierre Omidyer.]


I don’t know about the rest of you but Thursday night’s dairy farm meeting at Koloa School cafeteria left me angry, disappointed and completely frustrated.

I went with the hope that some of my concerns would be answered or that I would feel reassured the dairy personnel or their contractor, Group 70 International, had things under control and knew what they were doing. Instead, we received no new information but were asked to break into groups and walk to tables set up around the periphery of the room where we could have our questions “addressed.”

Were they addressed? Not at all. Instead, Group 70 personnel stood with sharpie pens in hand, next to large white note pads and wrote down the questions people were asking. There were no answers at all. In fact, the engineer supposedly responsible for the dairy’s Waste Management Plan (WMP), was not even able to say how many cows would be grazing per paddock. How could he have been the person who “designed the WMP” as the head of Group 70 told the audience?

A copy of the dairy’s current WMP is on friendsofmahaulepu.org. That plan specifies the number of acres in each paddock, the herd size and the plan’s design to rotate 105-115 cows per paddock. When asked the question about how many cows HDF plans to graze per acre, the engineer told all who were clustered around that he would have to “look into that.” And so it went.

The only thing that happened was that people with black sharpies wrote down questions to be addressed, hopefully, in the draft Environmental Impact Statement at some future unspecified date.

So no one heard any confirmation of the total cow waste to be produced, how the surrounding streams and nearby ocean are to be protected from contamination by runoff with irrigation or rains or storms, and we heard nothing about how this farm meets any sustainable criteria when the dairy plans to import grain and export the milk to be processed elsewhere by another company before it is fit for consumption by the public somewhere.

The most unsettling aspect of this meeting was the fact that the Group 70 International architects and engineers seemed to be unaware of the concerns people were voicing as they made remarks like, “Oh, you’re concerned about contamination of the drinking water in the Koloa Wells, we’ll write that down.”

As I traveled from station to station watching the faces of so many concerned members of our community I found myself wondering, “Is their ignorance feigned or real?” Neither was comforting.
So folks, I don’t know about everyone else but the reactions I saw and experienced myself, I’d say the night was a complete bust! I invite others to do the same. We need our editor and the public to know.

[IB Publisher's note: Below are three recent letter in the Garden Island on the issue of the HDF Cow Palace.]

Dairy a Risky Proposition As a frequent visitor to Kauai and the Koloa/Poipu area, we urge the citizens of this beautiful island to really ask the tough questions. We are former natives of Wisconsin, our families have roots there and some are still involved in the dairy business. We have witnessed firsthand the inception of these huge, futuristic “modern-agriculture” practices to rural communities. This is not advanced thinking, as Susan Fukumoto so aptly stated at the Koloa meeting last Thursday evening. First, there are thousands and thousands of gallons of waste that has to be dealt with on a daily basis! Where will it go? Will it be spread over unoccupied land in the guise of “fertilizer?” In your back yard? Shipped as sea cargo for the ocean? Second is the smell. Trust us — our parents still live in their 145-year-old farmhouse and it’s unbearable when the wind shifts to the northeast. Instead of a valuable property that could be sold at a comfortable profit in their golden years, now it doesn’t have a prayer on the real estate market. These are only two of many, many issues. Kauai would be the loser in this proposal. Ken and Laurie Hartwig Mayville, Wisconsin 1 March 2015

Perhaps a Dairy is Not End Goal Thirty years ago our family was invited to a tour of the Koloa Mill by the manager John Hoxey. We met John at the mill offices. On the wall was a map of the entire area. The map showed all the area under cultivation for sugar from Koloa to Mahaulepu and the amount of rain that each section had annually. What was really interesting was all the roads that were on the map. Mr. Hoxey explained that it was Grove Farm’s 50-year plan for development of Mahaulepu. The map was about 10 to 15 years old at that time. Now why would a man (Pierre Omidyar), who is a developer of high-end resorts, Hanalai Plantation Resort, want a dairy? Is the long-term goal really a dairy? Kathie Bedwell Koloa, Kauai 28 February 2015

Dairy Farm History Raises Questions Regarding HDF Does HDF want to consider relocating their eventual 2,000 dairy cow herd now, before having to move it later? The history of milking cow dairies on Kauai is one of relocating here and there until they all moved off the island of Kauai. In 1905, Mr. HP Faye started the Waimea Dairy as a part of his Waimea Sugar Mill Co. His in-laws had a dairy in Moloa’a prior to his marriage. He suggested to the Lindsay family they relocate their dairy to Waimea, which they did. Over many years, Waimea Dairy flourished through the late 1960s when the milk was delivered by milkmen as far as Hanalei. The dairy herd was about 278 milking cows. As a young teenager, through high school, I worked many dairy hours. We mulched sugar cane tops and mixed this with pineapple bran skins that were dried. We even picked keawe-tree beans as school kids during World War II for 10 cents a burlap bag! There was no “milk-flo” feed coming during the war. Keawe-tree beans kept cows cleaner, along with sugar-cane tops and pineapple bran. Waimea Dairy was always very careful about cleanliness of the cows, pastures and pasteurizing plant. Near the end of 1969, the Faye family faced a required major expense to update the pasteurizing plant. The decision was made to accept an offer from MeadowGold Milk Co. of Honolulu. They would buy the herd, take over operations, and lease the facilities. All went well until MeadowGold stopped control of nauseous odor and biting flies. Waimea Sugar Mill Co. closed operations and Kikiaola Land Co. then owned the Waimea Dairy facility. After Hurricane Iniki, Kikiaola converted the many sugar plantation homes into the Waimea Plantation Cottages. Now came the problem of dairy causing a problem with guests at the Waimea Plantation Cottages; a resort. Kind of like HDF being near the Hyatt Resort, hey? As a result, Kikiaola evicted MeadowGold, who then moved their dairy to Moloaa; not to process milk, but to produce milk from the cow herd and send to Honolulu for processing and selling. It was not very long that the local residents of Moloaa managed to evict MeadowGold, claiming bad odors and dirty runoff that polluted Moloaa Bay. This begs the question: Why not relocate the HDF now? There are many parcels that should not result in eventual eviction. Example: Kahili Mountain area. This location is away from residential complainers and business ventures. The special New Zealand grass will flourish there. The higher the elevation, the better the growth. The soil is more porous and less likely to generate major runoffs. Surely, Mr. Case and his 16,000 acres of former Grove Farm lands can find a more suitable location that is still “ag” than historical Mahaulepu. I rest my case. Alan Faye Princeville, Kauai 26 February 2015

See also:

Ea O Ka Aina: Another Pierre Omidyer Screwup 2/24/15 
Ken Silverstein resigns from Omidyer's First Look Media, slams company's 'Incompetence'.

Ea O Ka Aina: Hawaii Dairy Farm Factsheet 10/11/14
HDF's sole owner is Pierre Omidyar, through his venture capital company Ulu'pono Initiative.

Ea O Ka Aina: The Hail Mary Pass 8/27/14
Pierre Omidyar, the founder of Ebay who has his telescopic sights set on Kauai.

Ea O Ka Aina: Omidyar - NSA - Snowden 12/17/13
Pierre Omidyar's PayPal corporation said to be implicated in withheld NSA documents.

Ea O Ka Aina: Beach Blockage Push Back 6/8/12
Montage Resorts, an ultra luxury hotel developer owned by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.

Ea O Ka Aina: Preserving What's Left 1/15/12
Billioniare Pierre Omidyar  to develop an uberluxe sites along the the Hanalei River ridge.

Ea O Ka Aina: Hawaii's Farm Future 9/27/10
Speakers such as Kyle Datta, a founding partner with Pierre and Pam Omidyar's Ulupono Initiative


.

Another Omidyar Screwup

SUBHEAD: Ken Silverstein resigns from First Look Media, slams company's 'Incompetence'.

By Jackson Conner on 24 February 2015 for Huffington Post -
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/23/ken-silverstein-first-look-media-resigns_n_6738766.html)


Image above: Pierre Omidyar lands with heavy boots on all he touches. From (http://www.inc.com/issie-lapowsky/pierre-omidyar-invests-$50-million.html).

First Look Media is going through yet another messy break up with one of its journalists.

Investigative reporter Ken Silverstein announced over this weekend that he was leaving the company after only 14 months on the job. In a series of private Facebook posts published by Jim Romenesko, Silverstein blasted First Look's managerial "incompetence," calling the company a “pathetic joke” for squandering millions of dollars on long-time Rolling Stone writer Matt Taibbi's never-launched satirical site, Racket.

"I am one of a many employees who was hired under what were essentially false pretenses," Silverstein wrote.

"We were told we would be given all the financial and other support we needed to do independent, important journalism, but instead found ourselves blocked at every step of the way by management’s incompetence and bad faith ..."

Funded by billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omiydar, First Look was supposed to be home to a number of high-profile, stand-alone publications helmed by some of journalism's biggest names. But the only publication First Look has succeeded in launching is The Intercept, which focuses on national security and features the work of Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill.

Silverstein originally worked for Racket when he joined First Look, but when the project was shuttered, he transferred to The Intercept, where he lasted two months.

"You know what’s cool about being a former employee of First Look/The Intercept?" Silverstein wrote on Facebook. "That Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Betsy Reed and Pierre Omidyar all believe in Free Speech and the First Amendment so they won’t mind my writing about my time working for and with them."

"Tentative title: “Welcome to the Slaughterhouse,” he continued.

Silverstein aimed much of his ire directly at Omiydar, whom he claimed cares little for the personal well-being of the Racket staff despite promising to treat his employees with "dignity."

"[W]hen the company pulled the plug some months back, it fired the remaining staff and told them to clear out of the office immediately, that very day, to take their things and get out and FL would generously give them one month severance," wrote Silverstein. "I am pretty sure the Koch Brothers treat fired workers with greater respect." (Silverstein later clarified that the company had given employees three months of severance pay.)

In a statement to The Huffington Post, The Intercept said Silverstein clashed with various members of the staff before his departure.

"Ken Silverstein joined the staff of The Intercept this past December, roughly two months ago," the statement read. "Last week, in the wake of repeated conflicts with Intercept editors, researchers and fact checkers, he resigned. We wish him the best of luck in the future."

Silverstein and Taibbi are among several several First Look employees who have critiqued their former employer on their way out the door.

Natasha Vargas-Cooper -- who along with Silverstein conducted a two-part interview with "Serial" prosecutor Kevin Urick -- resigned from First Look in January and began working at Jezebel.

Vargas-Cooper criticized the company on her blog for failing to print an email correspondence between Urick and "Serial" host Sarah Koenig.

Though Silverstein appears to have deleted his Twitter account, Taibbi tweeted his former colleague words of encouragement early Monday morning:

Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi  ·  Feb 22 Good luck to Ken Silverstein, a terrific reporter who (to an absurd degree) had the worst experience of all of us at FLM and deserves better.

Silverstein declined to comment further on his departure.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Hawaii Dairy Farm Factsheet 10/11/14
HDF's sole owner is Pierre Omidyar, through his venture capital company Ulu'pono Initiative.

Ea O Ka Aina: The Hail Mary Pass 8/27/14
Last two "moneymakers" are the work of Omidyar, who has his telescopic sights set on Kauai.

Ea O Ka Aina: Omidyar - NSA - Snowden 12/17/13
Pierre Omidyar's PayPal corporation said to be implicated in withheld NSA documents.

Ea O Ka Aina: Preserving what's left 11/15/12
A plan by Ohana Real Estate Investors whose principal investor is billioniare Pierre Omidyar.

Ea O Ka Aina: Beach Blockage Push Back 6/8/12
Montage Resorts, an ultra luxury hotel developer whose properties are owned by Omidyar.

Ea O Ka Aina: Hawaii's Farm Future 9/27/10
Speakers such as Kyle Datta, a founding partner with Pierre Omidyar's Ulu'pono Initiative.

.

Hawaii Dairy Farm Factsheet

SOURCE: Diane de Vries (diane.e.devries@gmail.com)
SUBHEAD: HDF’s sole owner is Pierre Omidyar, through his venture capital company: Ulu’pono Initiative.


By Staff on 4 October 2014 for Friends of Mahaulepu -
(http://friendsofmahaulepu.org/hawaii-dairy-farms-critical-facts/)


Image above: Portion of New Chester Dairy for 4,000 cows in Grand Marsh, Wisconsin. Note the use of sand to suppress and manage cow waste at this mega-dairy. From website of cow restraint and dairy accessories. (http://www.freudenthalmfg.com/stalls/freestalls_dogbone.html).

Hawaii Dairy Farms is slated to be located in the Mahaulepu area of Kauai on a 582-acre pasture parcel of Important Agricultural Land (IAL) leased from Grove Farm. The overall design and construction is being done in partnership with Dairy SolutioNZ, Ltd., a consortium of New Zealand’s top dairy industry companies, and local business partners.  Jim Garmatz, a dairyman with more than 25 years experience, will manage dairy operations.

1. HDF, misrepresented critical facts to State and County:
   • HDF’s plan stated the farm soil had a high clay component, easily compacted and very hard (HDF Plan pg 7). Later, when discussing pasture irrigation and the management of urine and manure deposits, HDF described the soil as “free draining volcanic soil” (HDF Plan pg. 51 & 93). See Exhibit 1.  After being called on it by members of the public, HDF has finally tested their proposed farm’s soil and now reports the soil is nearly all clay. Water will pool on it as will waste and thus be subject to runoff and discharge to the ocean. HDF reports that there will be rapid run off after the clay soil receives in excess of 1/5 inch of rain per hour. (See table on pg 14, HDF’s new CNMP)
     
     
   • HDF tested and confirmed soil type only after April, 2014. They had already determined their herd size, without regard for the soil’s ability to produce the grass crop that the cows would need or the soils ability to absorb the waste dropped by the cows. Both their original and new plan call for all waste to remain on the farm but there was no testing of their soil beforehand to confirm that their soil type would support their plan to be a zero waste elimination dairy (one that keeps the waste on the pastures and use what falls elsewhere on the farm).
     
     
   • HDF’s original distributed Fact Sheet stated “NRCS permit- Completed.”
     
     
   • In fact, NRCS (National Resource Conservation Services) does not issue permits.
     
     
   • HDF reported the storm risk in 24 hours over the past 25 years as 6.6 inches (HDF Plan, pg 18 re: the milking parlor roof). See Exhibit 2. The actual 24hr/25yr rain event in Maha’ulepu (per US Weather Service) = 9.7 inches.
     
     
   • After residents obtained US Weather Service records and sent them to the State, HDF’s new plan calculates the 24hr/25yr rain event in excess of 10 inches.
     
     
   • When discussing effluent pond management, HDF reported the multiple day rainfall risk as 1.89 inches per day, 8 inches below the US Weather Service records (HDF Plan pg 87). In so doing, HDF understated the risk of waste runoff.  See Exhibit 2.
     
     
   • 25 year plan, required by State, should have included Hurricane event (Iniki-1992).
     
     
   • HDF does not have an emergency plan for a 25 year storm event.
     
     
   • Per HDF, their Plan emulates the ‘successful’ Dairy Farm model in New Zealand (NZ).
     
     HDF failed to disclose the NZ dairies have caused nationwide environmental pollution: http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-Water-quality-land-use-web-ammended.pdf
     
     
   • HDF plans to graze with a stocking density (cows per acre) greater than any other US dairy.
     
     
   • HDF refers to their proposed operation as “Hawaii’s first grass fed dairy”. In addition to their new CNMP, they even make that claim in a full page ad in the most recent issue of Kauai Family:“Located in Maha’ulepu, the farm will be Hawaii’s first grass fed dairy.” See Exhibit 3.  In fact, their plan still calls for 6.6 pounds grain feeding per cow/per milking daily. Their ad ignores Mauna Kea Moo, a Big Island grass fed dairy. It also ignores the definition of “grass fed” per the USDA: Grass (Forage) Fed – Grass and forage shall be the feed source consumed for the lifetime of the ruminant animal, with the exception of milk consumed prior to weaning. The diet shall be derived solely from forage consisting of grass (annual and perennial), forbs (e.g., legumes, Brassica), browse, or cereal grain crops in the vegetative (pre-grain) state. Animals cannot be fed grain or grain byproducts and must have continuous access to pasture during the growing season. Hay, haylage, baleage, silage, crop residue without grain, and other roughage sources may also be included as acceptable feed sources. Routine mineral and vitamin supplementation may also be included in the feeding regimen. If incidental supplementation occurs due to inadvertent exposure to non-forage feedstuffs or to ensure the animal’s well being at all times during adverse environmental or physical conditions, the producer must fully document (e.g., receipts, ingredients, and tear tags) the supplementation that occurs including the amount, the frequency, and the supplements provided.
   
   
   
   • HDF’s plan states they will be a zero waste dairy, no manure or urine to leave the farm. However, HDF does not disclose the volume of manure and urine to be deposited daily by the 1800 + cow herd (approx. 200 tons manure and 10,400 gallons urine/day).
   • HDF has no plan for preventing waste run off during rain storms, a high risk considering farm’s clay based soil and volume of waste.|
   • HDF’s initial plan submitted without a drainage study or hydrologic model. Large sections of current plan have been redacted by HDF, claiming confidentiality.
   • When asked about emergency/backup plan for overflow or discharge of waste, HDF representatives said “We’ll just deal with it when it happens.”
   • HDF plans on spraying fields with waste water collected from cow waste dropped in milking parlor (approx. 10% of daily waste) washed into effluent collection ponds. (New Plan redacts nearly all discussion of effluent pond management)
   • HDF did not disclose manufacturer’s warning against spraying from their planned overhead irrigation system when winds exceeding 10 mph (a frequent occurrence in Maha’ulepu Valley).
   • HDF’s new Plan reports “The average local temperature is in the ideal 43 and 70 degrees Fahrenheit range for Kikuyu”.   See Exhibit 4.  All who live here know that statement is false. The actual average air temperatures in Maha’ulepu range between 69-77 degrees Fahrenheit. In the summer months, however, there are many days in Maha’ulepu in the high 80’s and even a few in the low 90’s. Kikuyu grass is not reported to grow well in the actual temperature ranges of Maha’ulepu.
   • HDF distributed fliers and said their milk would be good for Kaua’i’s children. HDF, however, has contracted to ship all milk from Kauai, selling it to Meadow Gold for process and sale. Once sold to Meadow Gold, distribution will be determined by Meadow Gold.
   • On the grass feed for the cows, HDF stated they consulted with Chin Lee, PhD, University of Hawaii, published grass and grazing specialist. However, when contacted, Dr. Lee said he had “NOT” been a consultant for HDF.  See Exhibit 5.
   • When residents asked about the type of grass for grazing, HDF said that there were four types of kikuyu grass and that they “would have to check with their expert, Dr. Lee.” When Dr. Lee was contacted, he advised there are “129 varieties of kikuyu grass, and that he did not know what HDF was planting.”  See Exhibit 5.
   • HDF’s plan for the 582 acre farm designates approx 476 acres for grazing (120 three to four acre fenced paddocks). HDF’s 1800+ cow herd will be divided into mobs of 300-330 using 6 fenced paddocks per day.
   • In response to a series of hypothetical questions about a dairy operating on 582 acres, its potential grass yield as feed for a herd and advisable stocking density (cows per acre), Matt Stevenson, Certified Professional in Range Management of UH- CTAHR responded that the maximum herd size should be about 378 lactating cows for a 580 acre farm. “580 acres x 7500 lbs/acre = 4.35 million lbs available forage per year total assuming, unrealistically, uniform production, no droughts, and no pests/diseases…This is not a recommendation for any particular property.” See Exhibit 6. His response is very balanced with clear statements that more information is necessary but the best management practices he applied do not come close to supporting even the initial 880 pregnant cows that HDF plans to import.
   • Mauna Kea Moo, a new Big Island dairy, will have 200 dairy cows and 100 beef cattle on 1,400 acres. They plan to produce milk and cheese. That dairy was five years in planning and has four + acres for every cow, much like most U.S. grass fed dairies except in areas where there are long winters prompting grass fed dairies to provide even more acreage per cow.
     
     
2. HDF’s sole owner is Pierre Omidyar
   Through his venture capital company: Ulu’pono Initiative.
   
   
3. The total farm size is 582 acres
   In Maha’ulepu Valley, home to multiple endangered species.
   
   
4. Planned Herd Size: 1,880-2,000 cows
   
   
5. Planned Farm Development:
   • 476 acres committed to grazing (120 fenced paddocks)
   • 106 acres devoted to milking parlor, calving barn, effluent ponds, raceways, drainage ditches, office buildings, sheds, overhead irrigation system pump stations, etc.
     
     
6. Grazing patternRotational grazing 300-330 cows per 3+ – 4+ acre paddock, moved at 24 hour intervals.
   
   
7. 1880-2000 head to use 6 paddocks per 24/hr interval.
   
   
8. There will be no shelter facility for the cows.
   
   
9. Cows will sleep on the paddocks On which they graze and where their waste is dropped.
   
   
10. Cow waste production per cow per day: 100-120 lbs manure; 6-8 gallons of urine (total herd waste: 200,000+ lbs. manure and 16,000 gallons of urine per day). In their newest CNMP, HDF has redacted all information about daily waste production and refuses to disclose to the public how their manure, urine, and effluent pond will be managed.State Permit Status: State Permits and approval of the new Plan is pending review by Department of Health (DOH).
    
    
11. State Permit Status:
    State Permits and approval of the new Plan is pending review by Department of Health (DOH). HDF Ads suggest that their operation is already approved. See Exhibit “3.” A grading and grubbing exemption was issued March 17th, 2014 after HDF presented their flawed Plan to West Kauai Soil and Water Conservation Districts (WKS&WCD), a volunteer board unfamiliar with industrial dairy operations and animal waste management. HDF Plan was found deficient by the DOH. HDF has resubmitted a revised CNMP to the DOH. HDF marked their most recent Plan “Confidential.” The DOH forwarded the plan to the Attorney General for review to determine whether HDF can legally keep the facts of their plan from the public. Parts of the new Plan have been released but HDF has redacted large parts of the plan claiming confidentiality.
    
    
12. Federally Listed Threatened or Endangered species at risk:
    Hawaiian Duck, Nene Goose, Hawaiian Owl, Hawaiian Coot, Common Moorhen, Hawaiian Stilt, Newell Shearwater Birds, Blind Cave Spider, Monk Seals, Sea Turtles, and multiple plant species.
    
    
13. There are two bills, one before the US House
    HB 3131: Introduced by Tulsi Gabbard, Colleen Hanabusa, and others and one before the Senate, SB 618,  introduced by Brian Schatz, asking for Special Resource Study, the second step in consideration for designating Maha`ulepu and surrounding areas as a National Preserve.
    
    
14. The National Parks Service released its  reconnaissance study:
    A beautiful tribute to Maha’ulepu and well worth reviewing: www.nps.gov/pwr/upload/mahaulepu_final.pdf

.

Omidyar - NSA - Snowden

SOURCE: Brad Parsons (mauibrad@hotmail.com)
SUBHEAD: Pierre Omidyar’s PayPal corporation said to be implicated in withheld NSA documents.

By Sibel Edmonds on 11 December 2013 for Boiling Frogs Post -
(http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12/11/bfp-breaking-news-omidyars-paypal-corporation-said-to-be-implicated-in-withheld-nsa-documents/)


Image above: Pierre Omidyer and Blenn Greenwald in a partnership? From (http://thedailybanter.com/2013/12/u-s-amnesty-for-edward-snowden-will-not-stop-his-nsa-documents-from-circulating/).

[IB Publisher's note: The billionaire Pierre Omidyar founded Ebay (the owner of PayPal). He has been associated with buying influence in Hawaii. He is developing a gated community, Hanalei River Ridge, with a speculative and controversial subdivision that will greatly affect the view of the natural environment from Blackpot Beach. He is also a significant supporter of Honolulu's Civil Beat. Civil Beat began as an independent website for Hawaiian journalists launched by Omidyar.  It is now in a partnership with Huffington Post it has become a pipeline for journalism about Hawaii (as well as Hawaiian tourism and opportunities for moving here). This is all the more curious after reading the story below as well as a piece in the Huffington Post that follows. Omidyar's interest in NSA spying activities, his opinions of whistleblowers, Paypal's smothering of WikiLeaks and now this partnership with Glenn Greenwald all seem at odds. Which reality do you think applies.]

The 50,000-pages of documents obtained by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden contain extensive documentation of PayPal Corporation’s partnership and cooperation with the National Security Agency (NSA), according to three NSA veterans. To date, no information has been released as to the extent of the working relationship and cooperation between the two entities- NSA and PayPal Corporation.

What’s more, the billionaire owner of PayPal Corporation has entered into a $250 Million business partnership with two journalists-Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras, a journalist duo who possess the entire cache of evidence provided by Edward Snowden. Despite earlier pledges by the journalists in question, only one percent (1%) of Snowden’s documents has been released.

Boiling Frogs Post (BFP) was recently contacted by a retired NSA official who claims that the documents obtained by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden contain extensive documentation pertaining to NSA’s partnership with major U.S. financial institutions, including credit card companies and PayPal Corporation. The official, who requested anonymity, also alleges thata deal was made in early June, 2013 between the journalists involved in this recent NSA scandal and U.S. government officials, which was then sealed by secrecy and nondisclosure agreements by all parties involved.

Upon receiving this report BFP contacted three other high-level former NSA officials for additional information and comments.

On December 11, 2013 we contacted Mr. William Binney, a former top official at the National Security Agency (NSA), and asked him to comment on the legitimacy of the above report, and whether he had any knowledge of the partnership and cooperation between NSA and financial institutions such as PayPal. He confirmed the legitimacy of the report and added:

>The NSA has had the cooperation of major financial institutions, including credit card companies, to obtain all financial transactions of these companies’ clients-international and domestic. Further, the NSA not only obtains and stores the financial data of Americans and foreigners, but it also shares them with other government agencies such as the FBI and DEA.

When asked about the apparent conflict of interest and controversy involving the new business venture between the journalists in question and PayPal’s billionaire owner Pierre Omidyar, he had the following statement:

Sunlight, transparency, is the only cure; the only way to bring about needed changes. This is why the public is entitled to have all the evidence and documents. The partnership with PayPal’s owner, thus, the new ownership of Mr. Snowden’s documents by an individual who is implicated in these documents, presents grave concerns and consequences, and a major conflict of interest for transparency, integrity and whistleblowers.

Russell Tice, a former NSA Intelligence Analyst and Capabilities Operations Officer, also confirmed the report, and stated that based on his knowledge, NSA regularly obtains financial information from major financial institutions, including credit card companies and PayPal. In January 2009, during an interview with Keith Olberman, he stated that information from credit card records and other financial transaction was being collected and stored by NSA (See the interview here)

On December 10, 2013, in an exclusive interview with BFP, Mr. Tice expanded upon the NSA-Financial Institutions collusion:

For NSA, information from financial institutions such as PayPal is equally if not more valuable and sought after than that obtained from social media and other software companies such as Facebook, Microsoft and Google.” He added, “I wouldn’t doubt the existence of evidence and documents implicating corporations such as PayPal within the large cache obtained by Edward Snowden. The partnership and data collection arrangements have existed for many years.”

When asked about his opinion on Glenn Greenwald’s new $250 Million venture partnership with PayPal Corporation’s billionaire owner Pierre Omidyar, multi-million dollar book and movie deals, and recent unexplained immunity from the U.S. government, he stated the following:

“I would be outraged and highly vocal if I were in Edward Snowden’s shoes. For a journalist whom I had placed my trust in to go and withhold documents meant for the public?! For the journalist to make fortune and fame based on my sacrifices and disclosure?! Forming a lucrative business partnership with entities who have direct conflicts of interest?! No. That wouldn’t have been acceptable.”

Despite our submitted requests for confirmation, denial or comments, PayPal has refrained from responding to this report and contained allegations.

Other whistleblowers from the intelligence community have also expressed grave concerns over the serious implications of the recent venture partnership between journalist Glenn Greenwald and PayPal owner Pierre Omidyar. Indeed, the journalists in question have decided to hold back the release of the remaining 99% of the whistleblower’s documents, and have been inconsistent and vague as to when and how much they intend to release further documents. Their decision to withhold the majority of the documents appears to coincide with their new $250 million business venture with PayPal’s Omidyar, and recent mega-bucks book and movie deals.

Crytome.Org’s John Young, whom we sought comments from for this news story, considers the claims by these former NSA insiders valid and legitimate:

Government access to financial transactions has always been top priority for all government agencies, worldwide. Nothing is more important to governments than where the money is, especially money for taxation required to avoid death-stake in the heart of governments. So it is consistent that NSA (and other spies) have access to all on- and off-line financial services providers. As you know, financial services are required to cooperate with their governments, perhaps second only to defense industries, perhaps first due to the need to track worldwide arms sales. Control of arms means control of wealth, and nothing is more appreciated by the few wealthy to offload arms cost to millions of taxpayers.

We asked Mr. Young how he viewed the implications of the same billionaire who is allegedly implicated in these documents, buying out the involved reporters (both of them) and getting ownership of the whistleblower’s leaked documents:

Billionaires are as obliged as financial services to cooperate with governments in order to protect their wealth and to guard against excessive taxation, expropriation, confiscation, prosecution, stigmatization and exclusion from government contracts. Cooperation with governments is essential for wealth accumulation, the greater the wealth the greater the cooperation… Whistleblowing on the whistleblowing industry is overdue, but that will take courage and ingenuity to avoid appearing to have been taken over by those expecting to avoid full disclosure.

Here is what WikiLeaks had to say about Pierre Omidyar and his PayPal Corporation’s war on whistleblowers:

“How can you take something seriously when the person behind this platform went along with the financial boycott against WikiLeaks?” Harrison was referring to the decision in December 2010 by PayPal, which is owned by eBay, to suspend WikiLeaks’ donation account and freeze its assets after pressure from the US government. The company’s boycott, combined with similar action taken by Visa and Mastercard, left WikiLeaks facing a funding crisis.

“His excuse is probably that there is nothing he could have done at the time,” Harrison continued. “Well, he is on the board of directors. He can’t shake off responsibility that easily. He didn’t even comment on it. He could have said something like: ‘we were forced to do this, but I am against it’.”

Whistleblower William Russell, who served with the NSA, U.S. Secret Service, and as an officer and transport pilot with the U.S. Marine Corps, had the following reaction to this exploitive PayPal-Journalist-Government collusion:

I completely agree with these whistleblowers. This is a major conflict of interest and highly convoluted. Omidyar has billions at stake if the details of his cooperation with government is ever exposed. So this guy pays $250 million and buys out the 2 journalists who have the entire cache?! Simply outrageous!”

Sibel Edmonds, the founder and director of National Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC) which represents over 150 government national security whistleblowers, states:

We have been told that these journalists have had over one hundred meetings with U.S. government officials in order to clear what “could be” or “could not be” released. That’s a fact, and it is highly disturbing. On one hand they say the government considers these documents and revelations highly classified and stolen property. Yet, we see a mainstream publisher offering millions of dollars to the journalist, and getting a ‘go ahead’ from the US government to publish it.

We see a billionaire corporate man, never known for being pro civil liberties or Human Rights, and someone who is implicated in these illegal government activities paying off the journalists and getting ownership of the NSA documents. We see a government sanctioned Hollywood mega-million movie deal. We see lies, inconsistencies, contradictions, censorship, voluntary withholding, exploitation of a whistleblower … This smoke and mirrors filled fakery stinks to high heaven

As stated by Guardian’s Rusbridger, who recently gave evidence to the British parliamentary committee about stories based on Snowden’s NSA leaks: Greenwald and the Guardian had consulted with government officials and intelligence agencies – including the FBI, GCHQ, the White House and the Cabinet Office – on more than 100 occasions before the publication of stories.

The enormous conflict of interest and ethical impropriety of PayPal owner Omidyar’s business venture with Glenn Greenwald, the journalist in possession of the documents, is not limited to PayPal being directly implicated in documents exposing NSA’s illegal activities and operations. There are other equally disturbing and outrageous facts that put in question the integrity of the journalists, including their sudden enormous gains, wealth, fame, and the apparent government’s consent.

There is documented evidence illustrating Pierre Omidyar’s historical attitude and position on publishers, reporters and whistleblowers who publicize incriminating government documents. Here is one, coming directly from billionaire Omidyar:


Image above: A screen capture of a tweet by Paul by Omidyar. From original article.

That’s right. The above twit was typed by Omidyar’s own fingers on July 16, 2009.

But please don’t be mistaken. Pierre Omidyar doesn’t only talk the talk. No sir, the man actually walks his talk. Slightly over a year after Omidyar made the above statement he engaged in the following action:

NEW YORK: US-based online payment service PayPal has decided to block financial transfers to WikiLeaks after governments around the world initiated legal action against the whistleblower website.

“PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity,” PayPal said in statement released late Friday.

Wikileaks was not the only whistleblower entity to fall victim to PayPal’s war on government whistleblowers’. In 2011, two years after freezing Wikileaks’ account, Omidyar’s PayPal cut off the account for Bradley Manning Support:

Glyn Moody now points us to the news that PayPal has also decided to cut off the group “Courage to Resist,” which was handling funds for Bradley Manning’s defense effort. PayPal admits there’s no legal basis for this. Apparently, the company just doesn’t believe that some people should be allowed a fair trial.

The report also notes that they’ve had a PayPal account in good standing since 2006, with no problems at all. It’s only once they were taking funds for Bradley Manning that PayPal shut them down. This is somewhat horrifying, frankly, and raises serious questions about PayPal as a business worth trusting.

Then, yet another recent example of violations inflicted by PayPal, this time upon Mailpile. Mailpile attempted to create a webmail client that is built with both security and usability in mind to counter government’s intrusions into hosted webmail accounts:

PayPal, for reasons known only to PayPal, has decided to freeze their funds and won’t let Mailpile access the money that people donated… PayPal is demanding an insane level of detail into Mailpile’s personal finances and business… Even worse, it seems that the folks at PayPal recognize that it holds power over Mailpile, and seems almost to be lording that power over them…

The history of the billionaire’s stand and actions, when it comes to liberties, whistleblowers and freedom of the press, seems to be limited to: opposing, fighting and quashing government whistleblowers at every chance. Simply put, Mr. Omidyar has been consistently maintaining his stand as a billionaire who is pro-government, anti-government whistleblowers, and against transparency.

Omidyar’s pro government and anti-whistleblowers philosophy and principles are shared equally when it comes to his partners and close associates. Here is Mr. Omidyar’s PayPal Partner and close friend- Max Levchin, who says that the NSA isn’t being evil, and that the agency’s violation is for our own good and protection from terrorists:

The NSA is designed to protect us from terrorism, so even if it oversteps its bounds, PayPal co-founder Max Levchin says we shouldn’t hate it. That’s diametrically opposed to the sentiment of many in the tech industry, including Michael Arrington who thinks the NSA’s spying doesn’t stop terrorism — it is terrorism.

“I think it’s ridiculous for a citizen of a country that view his government’s duty to protect me, protect all of us from evil, from harm, from terrorists, from foreign powers meaning ill — to classify a body of government that is designed to figure out what might hit us next and prevent it, throwing them into an evil bucket is just thoughtless.”

To see video interview with PayPal co-founder Max Levchin on need for NSA spying on citizens click here (http://youtu.be/U7CxIL2O1wQ).

This interview was conducted in the summer of 2013. This was right in the midst of the Edward Snowden and NSA Scandal. This is what Pierre Omidyar and his closest friend and PayPal partner believed then. And this is what they believe now. There has been no change either in Omidyar’s or his partner’s position and belief since. There has been zero indication of either of them seeing the light called civil liberties.

PayPal co-founder Max Levchin is not the only PayPal man who is pro-NSA illegal surveillance and corporate-government partnerships in targeting the population at large. Here are other PayPal Men and former partners who have been directly linked to government spying and surveillance operations, and of course, the CIA:

Palantir Technologies, a Silicon Valley firm, is, according to the tipster, providing the technology that enables the mass-surveillance NSA project known as PRISM.

Palantir (which, at time of writing, had not responded to requests for comment) was founded in 2004 by, among others, venture capitalist Peter Thiel and CEO Alex Karp. It’s a sort of second-party data intelligence company–it’s not a public company, but it was founded with early investment from the CIA and is heavily used by the military and the White House. Karp is an ex-PayPal guy, and leveraged his expertise in security he gained at PayPal (which was constantly fighting off hackers) into his new venture.

Here is more on this CIA Company and its originators, all from PayPal’s early days:

Palantir’s advisors include Condoleezza Rice and former CIA director George Tenet, who says in an interview that “I wish we had a tool of its power” before 9/11. General David Petraeus, the most recent former CIA chief, describes Palantir to FORBES as “a better mousetrap when a better mousetrap was needed” …

We must not forget PayPal’s position and its actual business goals. PayPal is an international e-commerce business allowing payments and money transfers to be made through the Internet. It operates in 190 markets and manages more than 232 million accounts, more than 100 million of them active. PayPal allows customers to send, receive, and hold funds in 26 currencies worldwide. It is subject to the US economic sanction list and subject to other rules and interventions required by US laws or the government. All that, and the fact that PayPal has always been a valuable asset and partner of the U.S. government, even when it comes to operations directed against the people’s rights and privacy.

Remember, NSA wants access to our data. All data. Based on the latest revelations we already know that:

“Companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft — they all get together with the NSA and provide the NSA with direct access to the backends to all of the systems you use to communicate, to store your data, to put things in the cloud, and even just to send birthday wishes and keep a record of your life. And they give the NSA direct access that they don’t need to oversee, so they can’t be held liable for it.”

So far, Greenwald and the rest of the mainstream media have been emphasizing a handful of company names valuable to the NSA as great sources of data gathering on individuals – companies and organizations such as Facebook, Google, Apple, Yahoo and Microsoft. Now think about it, if NSA is that interested in garbage personal details we post on Facebook, how interested would it be in a far more telling database such as PayPal, where it can get all our expenditures, money transfers, payments and donations?

Prior to Snowden revelations we had NSA’s easy access to and control of telecommunication companies such as AT&T and Verizon. Recently, based on less than 1% of Snowden’s documents we became aware of NSA’s incestuous partnership with social media and software companies such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Apple.

We still don’t have access to 99% of Snowden’s NSA documents and revelations. Obviously the 50,000+ page documentations includes many other companies and organizations, including those in possession of the public’s financial transaction data. We are talking credit card companies and other related financial institutions. More importantly, we are talking about one of the world’s largest online money transfer entities, PayPal Corporation.

Thus, we all should be alarmed when we see that those implicated in the whistleblower’s documented evidence are now forming a multi-million dollar business venture with those in possession of that evidence.  We all must question the unexplained changes in the U.S. government’s position on the ownership and publication of these documents. We must all be wary when we see how readily mainstream publishers and Hollywood studios are signing up to publicize these documents and the case with some unexplained immunity. We have to ask ourselves: what has changed? What gives?

Only a few months ago there was all this talks about apprehension, jailing, hanging and droning of all parties involved. Only a few months ago the parties involved put on a magnificent show on how they were threatened, endangered, and were going to be persecuted and prosecuted. Then, suddenly, something changed. Something gave. Was it a secret deal struck between the government and the involved parties establishing immunity and support in return for something much more cynical and dark? Was it the involved parties using the cache as a blackmailing tool to secure a $250 million payoff?  Was it a solemn oath to withhold and never release the ‘real’ deal in return for a glamorous life with Hollywood studio deals and multi-million dollar book contracts? 

Which one is it? We have no way of knowing, since lips seem to have been sealed, and the release of the ‘real’ documents has been vaguely put on hold for years to come. On the other hand, thanks to some ‘real’ whistleblowers out there, we are getting some information putting this smoke and mirrors filled stage into perspective. Even if so far we have gotten to see only the tip of this convoluted and corrupted iceberg.

• Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post, the Founder & Director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman’s Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.

---

 Omidyer - Journalism - Greenwald
By Michael Calderone on 16 October 2013 for Huffington Post -
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/16/pierre-omidyar-glenn-greenwald-venture_n_4110014.html)

 
Image above: Pierre Odimyar interview with Huffington Post.  From original article.

During the summer, billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar considered buying The Washington Post, a journalistic prize that went to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos for $250 million. The idea of transforming the Post for the digital age, he said, was “absolutely intriguing.”

It would also be challenging. In an interview with The Huffington Post, Omidyar said overhauling an established media outlet like the Post would lead to "massive cultural change" in the newsroom. Instead, Omidyar decided he could use “an equivalent amount of capital” and build from the ground up.

“News organizations that have been around a while have a lot of traditions and ways of doing things that may have served them for many years but perhaps make them less flexible in the digital era,” Omidyar said. “As an entrepreneur, it just makes more sense to start something new.”

Omidyar has some experience in the news media, having launched public affairs site Honolulu Civil Beat in 2010. And as a philanthropist, he's given to causes promoting transparency and government accountability through his Omidyar Network.

A few weeks ago, Omidyar reached out to Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald to gauge his interest. Omidyar had closely followed Greenwald’s reporting on the extent of the National Security Agency's surveillance, which the philanthropist has publicly expressed concerns about.

It’s then that Omidyar learned Greenwald was already planning a new media venture of his own with journalists Jeremy Scahill and Laura Poitras, each of whom cover national security and surveillance issues. Following their discussions, Omidyar said the two groups decided to “join forces and try to build this together.”

What exactly they’re building is unclear -– even to those directly involved.

“At this point, we don’t know yet how it’s going to be organized,” Omidyar said. “It’s just too early, so we’re going to figure that stuff out as we get to know each other better… It’s been like 10 or 11 days. So normally we wouldn’t be talking about this venture so early.”

They’re only talking about it now because word leaked out. BuzzFeed broke the news Tuesday that Greenwald was leaving The Guardian, with Reuters reporting that Omidyar, who is worth $8.5 billion, was funding the venture. On Wednesday morning, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour tweeted that Omidyar confirmed his involvement to her and the eBay chairman spoke about the venture with Jay Rosen, an NYU journalism professor he had consulted in September.

Omidyar doesn’t yet know how the site will be structured or whether there will be a single editor-in-chief overseeing all the sections. There's clearly a lot to discuss, and Omidyar and Greenwald still haven't met in person.

But Omidyar said his and Greenwald’s visions intersected over the idea of creating a site that promotes independent journalists who are experts in their subject areas, have strong followings and are “not afraid to share their opinions."

Omidyar said that Greenwald, Poitras and Scahill will help determine what support they need in order "to do their kind of journalism," including research assistance, technology and legal support. He stressed that the site will also employ "top editors."

At this point in the process, Omidyar doesn’t have a target number of staffers or launch date. While national security seems pretty well covered off the bat, the site still hasn’t yet hired journalists for other sections, from entertainment to politics to sports.

While there may seem like a glut of general interest news sites already out there, Omidyar suggested technology will play a role in this one finding new ways to "tell stories that engage people." Omidyar said he hopes to bring "more of a Silicon Valley heritage of technology rather than typical digital media publishing technology.”

In a statement on his site, Omidyar noted that the new "endeavor will be independent of my other organizations." Omidyar's Civil Beat, it should be noted, recently partnered with The Huffington Post on the launch of HuffPost Hawaii.

This new venture is not intended to make a profit for Omidyar, who told HuffPost that all revenue will stay within the site. Omidyar described the site as merging his philanthropic interests and desire that there's a strong, free press to hold those in power accountable.

“The role of the press, in particular, the role of the press in a democracy is extremely important, extremely critical, and it’s something that I think we often take for granted in the U.S,” Omidyar said. “But we’ve seen attacks on press freedoms and the fundamentals of newsgathering operations when you have these leak investigations that really put a chill on reporting, as well as, surveillance now also a puts a significant chill on reporting.”

“Even in a country that has such strong laws, the First Amendment, we see some weakening, some attacks on press freedoms,” he continued. “So this an opportunity for me to engage in something I care deeply about and do it operationally -- not simply as a philanthropist."

.