It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Colombia To Spray Herbicide On Coca Leaf In National Parks

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   
In a USA funded program the Colombian Government has announced plans to spray the herbicide glyphosate, on all national parks in an effort to rid the country of the raw material used in the production of coc aine. The country's national parks and reserves are increasingly being used to plant the coca with 17000 hectares manually removed this year alone. Recent studies have shown that the coc aine on the streets in the US has not decreased significantly at all since 2000, the year Colombia first introduced herbicide use against the coca plants.
 



www.int.iol.co.za
Environmentalists say spraying with the herbicide glyphosate, in a programme funded by the United States, will damage pristine jungle environments and harm indigenous peoples.

Two-thirds of Colombia's 80 000 hectares of coca leaf - the raw material for coc aine - was planted in 13 of the country's 51 nature reserves at the end of 2004, according to satellite data from the United Nations.

Colombia is the world's largest producer of coc aine and has received more than $3-billion in mainly military aid since 2000 from the United States - the largest consumer of the drug - to fight the outlawed industry.

President Alvaro Uribe is currently in the United States, where he is meeting US officials to lobby for continued aid. He planned to tell the officials spraying has been a success.

The government points to a study by the Organisation of American States that concluded the chemicals used do not harm either humans or the environment. Glyphosate is commonly used by farmers around the world.




Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I think this is a very damaging response to the "War on Drugs". This can cause severe ecological damage to the environment as well as put a large indigenous population at risk.

It is a poison, it is designed to kill and no amount of studies can take that fact away.

[edit on 18-9-2005 by Mayet]




posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet

The government points to a study by the Organisation of American States that concluded the chemicals used do not harm either humans or the environment. Glyphosate is commonly used by farmers around the world.





I think this is a very damaging response to the "War on Drugs". This can cause severe ecological damage to the environment as well as put a large indigenous population at risk.

It is a poison, it is designed to kill and no amount of studies can take that fact away.

[edit on 18-9-2005 by Mayet]


Darn where is foxey loxey when you need him? The sky is not falling Mayet the article clearly says it will not harm anyone or did you skip over that part of the article?????



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Do not harm the environment? So why would they be spraying herbecides in a forest?
Typical government bs.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   
spray it in your own backyard.see how you like chemicals in you enivornment.dont we have enough polluters out there does this really cry a need for.i agree b.s lets hope it does not get into our soda pop.doh....



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   
A herbicide is a chemicle designed to kill plant matter. They are spraying it in a National Park. 2+2=4


[edit on 18-9-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I don't know if anybody except the government officials who made the descision could think it was a good idea. Getting rid of plants that are used to produce coc aine just does not outweight spraying chemicals over that huge of an area. At one point they were telling people to apply DDT directly to their skin as a bug repellant, and spray it in their house... at least until all the mutated babies started coming. And it seems people still haven't learned

Also, since when is the US allowed to boss other countries around and tell them what to do with their own land? Are they going to spray poison over all the places that marijuana and magic mushrooms naturally grow too? .



The government points to a study by the Organisation of American States that concluded the chemicals used do not harm either humans or the environment.


I'm not buying it...

Do we really need a "WAR ON PLANTS"? How many billion is this one going to cost?

Can we please just stop destroying everything. God.

[edit on 18-9-2005 by Yarcofin]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by Mayet

The government points to a study by the Organisation of American States that concluded the chemicals used do not harm either humans or the environment. Glyphosate is commonly used by farmers around the world.



Darn where is foxey loxey when you need him? The sky is not falling Mayet the article clearly says it will not harm anyone or did you skip over that part of the article?????


Shots, I may skip in the park but never over articles.......


www.corpwatch.org...
But critics say the program indiscriminately wipes out legitimate subsistence crops as well as natural plants, and kills birds, mammals and aquatic life.
The chemicals are applied by aircraft and frequently fall on Columbia's indigenous peoples, subjecting them to a variety of health afflictions, critics add.
"This spraying campaign is equivalent to the Agent Orange devastation of Vietnam - a disturbance the wildlife and natural ecosystems have never recovered from," said Dr. David Olson, director of the World Wildlife Fund's conservation science program. "And it is occurring on the watch of the current Congress and [executive] administration, supported by taxpayer dollars."
Though carried out by Colombian police and military authorities, the aerial fumigation program utilizes U.S. government aircraft, fuel, escort helicopters and private military contractors.
The herbicide approved for the program, glyphosate, is manufactured by the U.S. based Monsanto Corporation and is commonly referred to by the trade name Roundup.
Glyphosate is a non-selective herbicide, meaning that any plant exposed to a sufficient amount of the chemical will be killed.
The chemical has been sprayed over tens of thousands of acres in Colombia since the early 1990s, but the eradication program has done little to curtail the supply of coc aine that comes into the U.S. every year.

"For every hectare of forest sprayed, another is lost to [pesticide] drift and another to additional clearing of displaced crops," Olson said. The destruction is extensive."

Olson said that wildlife will be directly affected by the application of the chemicals. Frogs and insects will be impacted immediately, and larger animals will suffer weakening and sickness, he said.

"If and when our [human] species matures, we will rightfully view such practices as abominations, crimes against our planet and ourselves, Olson said.




www.rag.org.au...

Abstract. Glyphosate residues in food (from spraying food crops with glyphosate) will increase when more and more genetically modified foods reach the markets. Glyphosate sinks are bone and internal organs. It is unknown what the effects will be on the human body of ingesting glyphosate over a life time. When people reach their 50s how will they stand up to the accumulated glyphosate sludge in their internal organs? And would older people have more brittle bones? And what about people with allergies?

Glyphosate, a herbicide produced by Monsanto since 1971, is more widely known as 'Roundup.' It is available as a weed killer for gardens from supermarkets and hardware stores. To be effective it must be sprayed onto the leaves of the plant. It should be understood that herbicides or weed killers like glyphosate are taken up by the plant and work inside plants. Insecticides or insect killers on the other hand are left on the surface of plants and can be washed off.

Glyphosate is widely used in agriculture. Many weeds are deep-rooted perennials with tubers and rootstocks. This makes them very difficult to eradicate. Through glyphosate all these problems were solved. Because, once past the leaf surface glyphosate moves throughout the plant, reaches deep into the roots and kills.

In 1985 it was reported that glyphosate fed to animals was slightly toxic. Based on animal feeding studies with a single dose it was claimed that the acute toxicity of Roundup to humans was less than table salt and half as much as aspirin (4). A rather crude and unscientific extrapolation. A publication of 1994 gives us some idea about these experiments. A single dose given to rats showed that 30 to 36% of glyphosate passed the gut wall and entered the body (6). Inside the body glyphosate was hardly broken down and showed up in urine. It's breakdown product AMPA was also found, but in minuscule amounts (5). In a follow up study, rats were fed radioactive glyphosate for 14 days. This revealed that 80 to 90% was excreted through faeces and around 10% through urine (6). Similar studies with rabbits, laying hens and lactating goats indicated that 30% of ingested glyphosate got past the gut wall (5).

Ongoing trials found that glyphosate was not fully cleared from the body. Total body clearance of a single dose was after 48 hours in male rats 94-98% and in female rats 82-84% . Another study found that it took rats around 168 hours (7 days) to eliminate glyphosate. Here, a high dose of 10 mg glyphosate per kg body weight was given. Calculations indicated that around 1% of the dose was still present in bone tissue (7). Glyphosate was also detected in egg whites and egg yolks in a study with laying hens using high glyphosate doses (5).

A sub-chronic feeding study with rats showed effects on blood and pancreas. On mice this resulted in reduced body weights (12).

In toxicity studies with pregnant rats and rabbits, glyphosate caused treatment-related effects such as diarrhoea, reduced weight, nasal discharge and death.





www.emedmag.com...

Suggested Reading

Hung DZ, et al.: Laryngeal survey in glyphosate intoxication: a pathophysiological investigation. Hum Exp Toxicol 16:596, 1997.

Sawada Y, et al.: Probable toxicity of surface-active agent in commercial herbicide containing glyphosate. Lancet 1:299, 1988.

Tominack RL, et al.: Taiwan National Poison Center survey of glyphosate-surfactant herbicide ingestions. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 29:91, 1991.




and it is an interesting study on this "Organisation of American States ".

So Shots.. if you agree on spraying "Roundup" on National Parks that contain Flora that will be indescriminately attacked by the herbicide, Fauna that will be indescriminately sprayed and native indiginous residents... Go ahead but I don't think Foxy Loxy or Henny Penny really come into the equation

No the sky is Not Falling

But the sky is certainly dropping poison that will as I said harm and damge the environment and it's inhabitants.

www.chestjournal.org...
www.truthout.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
www.oea.org...



[edit on 18-9-2005 by Mayet]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Oh come on Mayet you have proven nothing by posting sites that are clearly anti Monsanto, that will not change the fact that the government says it is safe.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Well I personally do not feel that everything I posted was anti Monsanto propoganda. I see it more as reality. You quoted one study that says the product is safe. I posted many that says it isn't. I have shown what the results are of tests on animals. I can go find another 100 or so but the evidence speaks for itself. So does experience with personal use of roundup. It is common sense from there about the damage this product can create on thousands of hectares of nature reserves and national Parks. I guess I am hoping you are just being belligerent and picking apart my posting because I cannot comprehend such a blind faith to what the government says or what this product does and destroys. I am puzzled and curious, If the government said it was going to spray your families village by crop dusting roundup and you had children, pets, grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunties, would you allow this to happen just because they told you it was safe? Even though it has been shown to cause such significant damage? Even if it was suspected to cause environmental damage that might not become visible in this generation but the next it is still a dangerous, wrong, immoral, uncaring, frivolous deadly move to make with total disrespect to the planet and the life sustained upon it.

If I was to believe everything the government says to me, well i guess I would believe there was caches of WMD's in Iraq wouldn't I.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
that will not change the fact that the government says it is safe.


Oh come off it, the government says it's safe and you just abandon all logic and mindlessly agree with them? They are spraying chemicals that kill plants into National Parks, go into your back Garden (if you have one) and soak the place in Herbicide, see what happens. It's not rocket science.

Why don't they just spray Herbicide on the American controlled plantations if they want to get rid of the Cocaine?



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Let's see, we're going to spray tons of Roundup, a non-selective herbicide, into the jungle to destroy a particular plant. This particular plant is the plant used in making a product that is only created because of an extreme demand, particularly in the U.S.

By the way, the government says it is ok and it won't harm the environment or the people.

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one having a huge problem with this. I am very concerned to see that someone doesn't see a problem and believes that the government is telling the truth.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Im all for trying to nip it in the bud, but random spraying of herbacide
. While Columbia get alot of bad press for its corruption etc. They have also endured quite a bit during the war on drugs. Kidnappings, executions and terrorsim aginst the police and citizens by the drug lords and way before Bin laden became a household name in the US.

Im all for taking the fight to them, but you also need to go after the end users as well to reduce demand and defoliating whole areas seems a bit much. Agent Orange anybody



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   
I agree. The Colombian people are some of the best people you'll ever come across, and I hate they are catching it from all sides; the Commies, the drug lords, and us.

Our selfish society, demanding their stupid drug, is causing them to suffer.

Wrong, that is totally wrong and unpardonable.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 04:11 AM
link   
AGENT ORANGE was sprayed on forests also!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 11:25 AM
link   
This is disgusting....not only is this yet another sicko experiment by government pharma freaks,in someone elses back yard, it also reeks of "smoke screen" tactics.
I mean,the good ol USA agencies have never shyed away from a bit of covert drug selling have they?
This has been goin on for decades,no reason to suspect they behave any differently today...
Just check out Gary Webb`s research,or lucky luciano,or the contras, General Noriega,or air america,etc,etc,etc
SMOKE SCREEN CENTRAL.....

Ps,a great read on the subject is the book called "Whiteout",which can be found on the counterpunch website.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Y'all might be interested to know that under those forests lies a lot of oil. Satellites have a hard time 'seeing' these reserves through dense canopies of forest.



Multinational corporations control 80% of Columbia's economic activity, including petroleum and other minerals. The Columbian Army provides security for oil drilling sites in return for cash. Meanwhile, The FARC rebels hold the south of Colombia, suspected to contain billions of barrels of oil beneath its farms and forests. Oil giants like BP and Occidental covet that oil.
eatthestate.org...



Ecuador is not too keen on the idea of spraying either as Columbian herbicide planes often fly over alleged oil rich Ecuador territory. More on US military presence in Ecuador:


The prospect of more US troops in Ecuador represents a first step towards an armed US presence in the Andean nation and has alarmed many local analysts who say it is not so much an anti-drugs initiative as an attempt to assure U.S. control of The Amazon's vast Petroleum reserves.
www.unii.net...
Drugs - Dirty Little War for Oil and Commerce


So you see, there IS more than meets the eye here. The spraying of the herbicide roundup is causing indigenous peoples to be driven from their land and economic mainstays while US troops move in to secure oil rich areas. War on drugs? Psh...



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Oh come on Mayet you have proven nothing by posting sites that are clearly anti Monsanto, that will not change the fact that the government says it is safe.


They also said smoking was...
Opium was...

We can spend all day going on about what they say is safe...



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium

They also said smoking was...
Opium was...


Yes cigarette smoking was accepted up until a few decades ago, However,

I have never in my 60 = years of my life ever heard anyone say Opium was safe:shk:


Yes I do know it is an accepted practice in ASIA but not the US.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 08:13 PM
link   

www.planetark.com...

UNITED NATIONS - Ecuador asked the United Nations on Sunday to pursue research on the threat to health of a herbicide used by Colombia to wipe out coca -- the raw material for coc aine -- grown along their shared border.


In the meantime, the government has asked Colombia to suspend spraying activities within six miles (10 km) of the border, Ecuador's President Alfred Palacio said.

He told the opening meeting of the UN General Assembly's 60th session that studies done to date on the safety of the herbicide glyphosate "suffer from technical and methodological deficiencies."

While glyphosate is commonly used by farmers around the world, previous studies, while flawed, have identified a wide range of potential health risks from the herbicide including chemical burns on the skin, depression, genetic damage, skeletal retardation and various cancers, he said.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join