Utah Couple Sues Online Retailer Behind $3,500 Negative Review Post

This is a very frightening look at what is a growing trend in America today.  The site in question?  KlearGear.com.  http://www.kleargear.com/help.html  this is a link to the page that is brought up in this news article.

  We could not find where KlearGear has any claim in their policy saying that customers can not give bad reviews of the site anywhere else online and to even have that as a policy is a breach of the freedom of speech.  Now it's not to say that KlearGear did not at one time have this policy.  We simply do not know nor is there a cached copy of it found anywhere online that we found.  After looking the KlearGear site over, it's not where we would want to do any online shopping for ourselves.  Their product line is interesting novelty geek items.  Nothing that could not be found when searching eBay or Amazon however.  Prices?  A bit high for what you are getting.  Does anyone really need an Iron Man flash drive?

  What we saw on the KlearGear.com site help page that gave us a major red flag was the claim that they own the copyrights to the software behind the site, yet on other parts of the site it seems that they are referring to using Linux and GNU technology for the site.  If you know anything about Linux, there is no such thing as copyrights to the GNU codes.

  Further, the above news story really does not make sense.  There is a lot of information withheld that we are not being told.  How did KlearGear.com get the judgement for the $3,500.00 in question?  That would have required a lawsuit to have been filed and won.  Did the couple ignore a lawsuit?  We are simply not told.  If there was no lawsuit, then all the couple really had to do was file a legal complaint with the 3 credit reporting agencies who would then initiate an investigation.  If the investigation could not substantiate the claim, the claim is then removed from their credit report.  Was this tried?

  The CNN news coverage is sketchy at it's very best.  The bottom line is we do not see anything directly against KlearGear.com that could warrent the above news story and we also can not tell what the real facts are about the case we just looked at.  Again, KlearGear.com is not where we would look to shop, but on the other side of the coin, we also see no reason to avoid the site for anyone who appreaicates the types of offerings the site has.  It's more along the lines that the CNN news story is not a story at all but instead, a mass confusion disinformation piece of media.

  This is why we usually refuse to watch TV anymore.  We all to often have all of these questions after viewing most so called news stories and find out that they were not really news stories at all.  They were just misleading disinformation pieces of trash to fill holes in time slots, in our opinions.  If the above is now regarded as investigative journalism, then they can keep it.  It lacked real investigations and information as we just pointed out.  The only real winner here?  KlearGear for all the free publicity.  For even bad publicity is better than no publicity.  It still brings people to your site.

Related articles

• WebMD Pockets Millions to Stimulate $1 Trillion in Drug Sales
• Cell Phone Use Linked to Lower Grades, Anxiety, and Much Worse...
• Governor McDonnell Announces 25 New Jobs in Henry County
• Vitamin D - One of the Simplest Solutions to Wide-Ranging Health Problems
• Governor McDonnell Announces Federal Action Contingency Trust (FACT) Fund Grants
• Popular Communist Plan Email Propaganda Exposed

Our Food Supply In Serious Jeopardy Lawsuits Show

Neonics Briefing DSCN1748 (Photo credit: Xerces Society)

By Dr. Mercola

Research has shown that many pesticides are neurotoxic and can cause disruptions to your neurological system and your brain. The reason why neurotoxins still enjoy widespread use on our food supply is really more about the bottom line for farming operations than it is about the science of human health.

Research has clearly and consistently linked pesticide exposure to Parkinson’s disease. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also 

considers 30 percent of insecticides to be carcinogenic.

All of these toxic chemicals are permitted on farms growing conventional and genetically engineered crops, and a large number of them can end up on your plate when you purchase conventionally-grown fruits and vegetables and/or processed foods.

But pesticides also have a dramatic impact on the health of our ecosystem. Neonicotinoids, such as Imidacloprid and Clothianidin, kill insects by attacking their nervous systems. These are known to get into pollen and nectar, and can damage beneficial insects such as bees.

These toxic chemicals have been implicated as one of the primary culprits in the mass die-offs of bees, and have subsequently been banned in some countries. The United States, however, is not among these countries...

But the effects of neonicotinoids do not end there. According to recent research by the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the use of neonicotinoids in seed treatments is also responsible for the death of birds, terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates and other wildlife.

Ecosystem Threatened by ‘Gross Underestimate’ of Toxicity of Neonicotinoids

Nicotine-related compounds called nicotinoids were initially introduced as a new form of pesticide in the 1990s, as widespread pest resistance rendered many older pesticides useless. Many seeds are now “pre-treated” with neonicotinoids, which are water-soluble and break down slowly in the environment.

Today, they are the most widely-used pesticides in the world. In fact, you’d be hard-pressed to find a pesticide that does not contain at least one neonicotinoid insecticide. In California alone, there are nearly 300 registered neonicotinoid products available.

The American Bird Conservancy (ABC), one of the leading bird conservation organizations in the US, is now calling for a ban on the use of neonicotinoids as seed treatments, and wants all pending applications for neonicotinoid products to be suspended pending an independent review of the products’ effects on birds, terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates, and other wildlife.

As reported by the American Bird Conservancy1:

“It is clear that these chemicals have the potential to affect entire food chains. The environmental persistence of the neonicotinoids, their propensity for runoff and for groundwater infiltration, and their cumulative and largely irreversible mode of action in invertebrates raise significant environmental concerns...”

ABC commissioned the world renowned environmental toxicologist Dr. Pierre Mineau to conduct the research, which resulted in a 100-page report2 titled The Impact of the Nation’s Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds. Mineau’s report reviews 200 studies on neonicotinoids, including industry research obtained through the US Freedom of Information Act.

The report concludes that neonicotinoids “are lethal to birds and to the aquatic systems on which they depend.” Even more disturbing, contamination levels in both surface and ground water around the world are already beyond the threshold found to kill many aquatic invertebrates. According to this shocking toxicology assessment:

• A single kernel of corn treated with this type of pesticide can kill a songbird
• A single grain of wheat or canola treated with the neonicotinoids Imidacloprid can be fatal to a bird
• As little as 1/10th of a neonicotinoid-coated corn seed per day during egg-laying season can affect a bird’s reproductive capability

EPA Accused of Failing to Adequately Assess Environmental Risks

Disturbingly, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not adequately assessed the toxicity of neonicotinoids. Part of the problem, according to the featured report, is that the EPA is “using scientifically unsound, outdated methodology that has more to do with a game of chance than with a rigorous scientific process.” This has led the agency to grossly underestimate the toxicity of these chemicals. Furthermore 33:

 “The report also charges that there is no readily available biomarker for neonicotinoids as there is for cholinesterase inhibitors such as the organophosphorous pesticides. ‘It is astonishing that EPA would allow a pesticide to be used in hundreds of products without ever requiring the registrant to develop the tools needed to diagnose poisoned wildlife. It would be relatively simple to create a binding assay for the neural receptor which is affected by this class of insecticides,’ said Dr. Mineau.”

Dr. Mineau urges the EPA to require pesticide registrants to also provide the diagnostic tools necessary to diagnose cases of wildlife poisonings. So far, neonicotinoids have garnered the most attention and criticism for their role in bee die-offs—a worldwide phenomenon that took off once these newer pesticides became widely used. As stated by ABC4:

“The serious risk to bees should not be understated, as one-third of the US diet depends on these insect pollinators. The ABC assessment makes clear, however, that the potential environmental impacts of neonicotinoids go well beyond bees.”

 http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/06/18/neonicotinoid-pesticide.aspx  Link to the rest of the story on Mercola.com.

Related articles

• Neonicotinoid Pesticides Harm More than Just Honey Bees
• Gross Underestimate of Toxicity of Neonicotinoid Pesticides
• Neonicotinoids harm birds and soil
• Russia Warns Obama: Monsanto
• Russia Warns Obama: Global War over 'Bee Apocalypse' Coming Very Soon