Category Archives: Farmageddon

The War on White Farmer in South Africa

My Conclusion: The President in South Africa had change the constitution after a landslide vote; so they can redistribute land by taking it from white farmers and giving it to black people. Just what has happen in Zimbabwe when Robert Mugabe call white farmer farms to taken without compensation in Zimbabwe now the same thing in South Africa. I hope the white farmers and other whites in South Africa are ready for is coming.

Advertisements

Bill Gates is backing a quest to create a genetically modified Super Cow, hoping to produce four times more genetically modified milk

Natural News
7 February 2018
Isabella Z

(Natural News) Not content with what nature has provided us, Microsoft founder Bill Gates would like to see a cow that can make more milk than European cows yet be able to withstand heat just as well as African cows. As part of this quest, he is now funding genetic research that aims to create what they consider “the perfect cow.”

It’s part of a $40 million investment Gates has made in the Edinburgh-based nonprofit Global Alliance for Livestock Veterinary Medicines. The funding will also be used for pursuits such as developing stronger crops and researching diseases that can devastate African farmers financially. To that end, scientists are trying to identify the specific genes that can make crops grow faster, resist disease better, offer more nutrition, and withstand extreme weather.

While U.K. International Development Secretary of State Penny Mordaunt applauded the effort when she announced the funding, not everyone is on board with the concept. Meat production requires around 15,000 liters of water per kilogram of beef, which is a very high amount given the widespread water access issues currently plaguing the world.

Moreover, livestock farming takes up almost a third of the land available on the surface of our planet. That land could be used for feeding people rather than animals. In addition, estimates show that if all the grains currently given to livestock were instead given to people, it would create enough food to sustain a further 3.5 billion individuals.

It is also interesting to note that the Gates Foundation pledged $300 million in December to support agriculture research that will allow low-income farmers in Africa and Asia to adapt to climate change. Meat production creates a disproportionate amount of greenhouse gases per protein unit when compared to plants, contributing to the very problem Gates purportedly is hoping to solve with the genetically modified cows.

None of this is surprising coming from Bill Gates

Of course, this is the same Bill Gates whose foundation pushed young tribal girls in India to get risky HPV vaccines by calling them “well-being” shots. Five of the girls passed away shortly after getting the shots. The tribes reported that the girls who were injected experienced adverse events for days and even months after getting the shots. The young girls were essentially used like guinea pigs for trialing vaccines under the disguise of being given healthcare, and there was no informed consent.

We shouldn’t be surprised by any of this; Gates has already made his depopulation intentions clear on more than one occasion. Here he is, in his own words, during a 2010 TED Talk in California: “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about 9 billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

In case you wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt and pass it off as poor wording, he repeated the sentiment in a 2011 CNN interview, telling Dr. Sanjay Gupta: “The benefits [of vaccines] are there in terms of reducing sickness, reducing population growth.”

Now it all makes perfect sense. Pumping African kids with genetically modified milk should tie in nicely with his stated mission of lowering the world’s population.

Sources for this article include:

DailyMail.co.uk

Futurism.com

UK.BusinessInsider.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

Could Canadians See A “Sin Tax” On Meat In The Future?

Josh Sigurdson talks with author and economic analyst John Sneisen about the ridiculous proposal recently featured on state-run CBC News regarding a “sin tax” on meat products. According to a British lobby group, it would be “beneficial” to the environment and health for government to impose a tax on meat products. This group doesn’t seem to see the irony in mankind’s most notable killer and polluter stealing people’s money in order to stop them from being unhealthy and save the environment at the same time. The idea is to tax meat the way many countries tax tobacco, sugar and carbon, all terrible money grabs to begin with. It has been beamed into our brains that we must not take care of ourselves and instead depend on the goverment to take care of us for us. Major corporations benefit from such taxes and regulations as they are further monopolized by the state, driving small business competitors out of the market. The big corporations can afford to deal with the taxes on their products a few layoffs later. Small businesses cannot compete however. This is an attack on those in poverty and within the middle class. This drives up the price of already terrible foods like McDonalds and Burger King. As if the carbon tax wasn’t enough to drive up prices everywhere due to exporting and importing. It’s sad to know people actually support such a ridiculous idea. Interesting that the claim is that the government wishes to enforce rules to make people healthier all the while promoting the notion of depopulation. How’s that for irony? The arrogance of people thinking that others should eat healthier so therefor they should be extorted is another lesson in freedom. Do not bow down to the state. Do not bow down to the theft we call “taxation.” Do not allow a collective mob rule every single part of your life. The unhealthy meats that would be taxed are full of pharmaceuticals from pharmaceutical companies that the government monopolizes in the first place. How about allowing free market demand to take over, bringing in true small business competition and innovation, bringing in more production therefor more jobs with higher wages to take care of these problems without government even entering the picture? Without government standing in the way of competition and propping up massive corporations? Individual demand will ensure the best products win. High quality. Lower price. That which is more environmentally friendly as that is the tide the market is following. How many times do we have to go over this? I thought the left didn’t like major corporate monopolies. I suppose it depends. As long as the limosine liberals have their parents’ money to live off of, they don’t mind extorting everyone else who has a different opinion than them.

War on Meat Eaters: Britain’s Got Talent’s Alesha Dixon Wants To Make Eating Meat Illegal

LadBible
10 January 2018
Chris Ogden

Given that it’s Veganuary and everything, it’s unsurprising that plant-powered people are piping up a bit more in public. But now one prominent vegetarian has perhaps been a bit bolder than usual.

Britain’s Got Talent judge Alesha Dixon has gone on the record saying that if she ran the country she’d make killing animals for meat completely illegal.

When asked what laws she’d change if she could, Alesha also said that she’d shut down every slaughterhouse in the country and ban smoking completely. She’s not messing about.

Credit: PA“I’d make smoking illegal and I’d ban the slaughter of animals for food or anything,” Alesha told the Daily Mail as part of a Q&A.

“So I’d close down every factory responsible for either and make it illegal to smoke or eat meat. Everyone would be fine, trust me!”

The farming and tobacco industries might have something to say about that, Alesha.

Former Mis-Teeq member Alesha became a pescetarian in 2012, meaning that she’s given up eating meat but continues to eat fish and seafood.

Dixon, who said she gave up meat for health reasons and her love for animals, suggested in an interview last April that it was the influence of her mum which made her make the jump.

“My mum is vegan and I think she’s had a big influence on me over the years,” she explained. “I guess she finally cracked me.”

Alesha, who won Strictly Come Dancing in 2007 and became a judge on the show before jumping to Britain’s Got Talent, admitted that she also no longer drinks cow’s milk, opting for almond milk instead.

She said that she doesn’t regret making the decision, although she admitted to still consuming other dairy products.

“I listen to what my body wants,” she said, before adding: “I feel great for it!”

Credit: PA
While Alesha may be pretty chuffed with her decision, a real devil’s advocate could say that she’s ignoring the harm the dairy and egg industries also do to animals.

For example, veal is technically a by-product of milk production as the only use for male cows is basically for sperm, but hey, that’s by the by.

You might think that Alesha’s demands are a tad strict, but it’s probably safe to say she won’t be running for Prime Minister any time soon. No doubt that will come as good news to you bacon sarnie lovers out there.

My Conclusion: Celebrities like Alesha Dixon who want animals off the menu deny human exceptionalism are the Celebrities we should be boycotting and pay no attention to them like not watching her movies, tvshow, nor listening to her music she sings. We need to support our Farmers and Ranches because they depend on you buying their products; especially organic farmers. Farmers and Ranches are extremely important to our local and regional community. Those who want meat banned are totalitarian who want more government and less freedom for each individuals. The Elites will still be eating meat. We need to use our freedom of speech to fight back against Animal Rights Agenda which is also part of Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 as well as the globalist depopulation plan.

War on Meat Eaters: Experts Say We Should Tax Meat Eaters the Same Way We Tax Smokers

Source:Futurism
Date: 26 December 2017
Author: Lou Del Bello

Cows confined to a factory farm, a large source of emissions and land and water use. A meat tax could discourage this practice.

Meet the Meat Tax

Eating too much meat and smoking both have an impact on the public, from an environmental and health perspective. Meat production degrades the environment by releasing greenhouse gas emissions and using up a disproportionate amount of land and water per unit of protein, while smoking leads to enormous health bills that the public often has to pay for.

In a new report, investment analysts suggest passing on the costs of the meat sector’s impacts to those directly responsible, the same way we tax smokers. The simple idea of the so-called meat tax is that if your burger ends up costing as much as a plate of caviar, you may decide to explore vegetarian options.

“Meat consumption is also one sector where both the issues of environment and health overlap,” Rosie Wardle, head of investor engagements with the Farm Animal Investment Risk and Return (FAIRR) Initiative, told Futurism.

“We feel that everyone should have the right to a healthy and nutritious diet,” she said, “and ideally that should help promote a shift towards eating more plant proteins, which is healthier and better for the planet.”

The analysis explores three fields in which damaging practices have been successfully targeted with various tax schemes by governments, and asks whether meat could be the fourth. Over 180 countries already impose a tax on tobacco, 60 jurisdictions have rolled out a carbon tax scheme, and there is a tax on sugar in at least 25 countries.

A new meat tax “would generate money that could be spent in healthcare,” Waller explained. She added that while nothing has been executed yet, “we are seeing these proposals coming up more and more. It’s becoming a discussion item.”

A Growing Army of Carnivores

Nordic countries such as Denmark and Sweden were among the first to recognize the mounting threat of unchecked meat consumption driven by a booming global population. In 2016, the Danish Council on Ethics proposed a tax on red meat based on climate impacts. In Sweden, the Green party also called for a climate tax on food, asking for the introduction of a climate label to help consumers understand the footprint of their dietary choices.

 

Cows confined to a factory farm, a large source of emissions and land and water use. A meat tax could discourage this practice.
Image Credit: franzl34/Pixabay

According to Oxford University’s Our World in Data project, global meat production has grown almost five fold since 1961. Asia alone produces between 40 and 45 percent of the world’s meat. In Asia, production has increased 15 fold since 1961, and is projected to continue to grow in the future.

The threats associated with this trend are more complex than those posed by tobacco, carbon or sugar. The meat industry is not only a big source of carbon emissions; red meat over-consumption has also been linked with increased risk of diabetes, cancer and the spread of antibiotic resistance.

However, eating meat is not necessarily bad for you if done in moderation. Additionally, in places where hunger or malnutrition are still rife, introducing beef, pork or poultry to more plates would have clear health benefits.

Barring Meat, Boosting Inequality?

“Consumers respond to price changes in different ways,” Josef Schmidhuber, deputy director of the trade and markets division at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), told Futurism. “Some will immediately adapt their behavior when prices change, other will stick to their old habits.”

Generally, people who are poorer adapt quicker to fluctuating prices, a trend that economists call “elastic demand.”

“So if you have a beef tax, who will you tax out of the market? Those who are poorer,” explained Schmidhuber. “And that’s a bad idea, because you penalize those who need to increase their meat consumption. We call this model ‘regressive tax.’”

On the other hand, Schmidhuber argues, a tax on meat will have little impact on those who consume too much, as this group often has extra money to spend on expensive meat. The tax would therefore fail to target the group that most contributes to the problem.

A softer approach to the problem is offered by the nudge theory, for which the economist Richard Thaler was awarded the 2017 Nobel Prize. It suggests that rather than punishing people for making the wrong choice, we could make it easier for them to do the right thing.

In the case of meat consumption, tissue culture could soon do this by providing a substitute that is close enough to the animal product that more people will switch with no regrets. Soy-based main dishes already have a place on most supermarket shelves, but visionaries are experimenting with vegetable meat that looks so much like beef that you can see it sizzle on the grill and even bleed.

However, there is no one-size-fits-all solution to the problem. While money is poured into developing more sustainable foods, the idea of a meat tax remains attractive, especially in rich countries. “Based on our findings, and looking at the pathways other products have been on to get to the tax,” Wardle said. “We think we may have something on the table within the next five to 10 years.”

My Conclusion: Reason why the elites want to eat fake meat that made by nothing but plants base ingredients. For me I have nothing against recipes that is made by 100% plant base ingredients but you can’t call meat unless it contains meat or it either vegetarian (if contains diary or eggs ingredients and no meat) or vegan (if contains 100% plant base ingredients, no animal products). In the video above now they trying make meat from bacteria do you don’t have to kill animal to get meat; but it won’t contains the same nutrient value as meat that from a animal that have been killed for. That why I prefer meat that from a animal rather that from a bacteria that is grown in a lab to make meat because of the nutrient value.

I understand there are issues within the factory farms when animals are mistreated and been pump up with antibiotic, pharmaceuticals and hormones just in order to get more from them. With animals raised on a organic farm they tend to have the best lives out there; because farmer never pumped them with antibiotic, pharmaceuticals, and hormones; farmer ensure the animals are well taken care of and getting the maximum animal welfare. They quality of meat, milk and eggs from animals raised on organic farm are better and healthier. Farming should be based on quality not quantity of the product from the animal because animal can only produce so much so farmer maybe get the animals to produce the best.

Animal rights and vegan extremist are using the environment as an excuse to push their agenda set up by the elites and to have cattle farming  and ranching done way with. And we won’t have a choice to eat a meat from a animal but instead we be eating meat that is either lab grown or Genetically Modified. The fake meat that is plant base will be GMO based.

The taxation on meat and any other products is just flat out wrong because its based on an agenda by the elites to have cattle farming and ranching done away with as well eating meat and any other animal products done away with. But the elites will still be eating meat and any other animals; well as organic farms and they will not touch GMO because they know it is harmful to human health as well as to animals. Treating those who eat meat as smokers is just flat out wrong and those who are push for it; they will not get away with. Once people recognize the evil within the animal rights and climate movement; they will reject it. It’s up to us to speak out against the animal rights movement, Climate Change scare (which they try to use the weather or the environment in order scare us into submission), the anti-human movement, the nature rights movements; how do they do it? First they either create or find a problem; then they try to get us to reaction; then they offer the solution. Problem, Reaction and Solution. That why I created Eco Liberty Blog on wordpress so can educate and inform people while the mainstream media will not cover what I’m covering. And Why we can be good human as well as good environment stewards.

War on meat eaters: Taxes on Meat Could Join Carbon and Sugar to Help Limit Emissions

bloomberg
12 December 2017
Emily Chasan

Move over, taxes on carbon and sugar: the global levy that may be next is meat.

Some investors are betting governments around the world will find a way to start taxing meat production as they aim to improve public health and hit emissions targets set in the Paris Climate Agreement. Socially focused investors are starting to push companies to diversify into plant protein, or even suggest livestock producers use a “shadow price” of meat — similar to an internal carbon price — to estimate future costs.

Meat could encounter the same fate as tobacco, carbon and sugar, which are currently taxed in 180, 60, and 25 jurisdictions around the world, respectively, according to a report Monday from investor group the FAIRR (Farm Animal Investment Risk & Return) Initiative. Lawmakers in Denmark, Germany, China and Sweden have discussed creating livestock-related taxes in the past two years, though the idea has encountered strong resistance.

Greenhouse gas emissions from livestock are about 14.5 percent of the world’s total, according to the Food & Agriculture Organization, which projects global meat consumption to increase 73 percent by mid-century, amid growing demand from economies like India and China. That could result in as much as $1.6 trillion in health and environmental costs for the global economy by 2050, according to FAIRR, a London-based initiative created by Coller Capital.

“Investors are starting to consider this in a similar way to how they have considered climate risk,” said Rosie Wardle, who manages investor engagements at FAIRR. “It’s kind of accepted now that we need to address livestock production and consumption to meet that 2 degree global warming limit.”

The Guardian newspaper reported on the FAIRR report earlier Monday.

Sugary Drinks

FAIRR’s sustainable protein engagement plan, currently supported by 57 investors with $2.3 trillion under management, plans to ask 16 major food multinationals this year to “future proof” their supply chains by diversifying their protein sources.

The possible impact of a meat tax could be similar to sugar taxes. While sugar taxes aimed at fighting obesity in the U.S. have faced some resistance, similar levies have been implemented in 18 countries and six U.S. cities, according to data compiled by Bloomberg Intelligence. When Mexico imposed a special tax in 2014 on sugary drinks, it lowered per capita consumption of those beverages by 6 percent in 2014, 8 percent in 2015 and 11 percent in the first half of 2016, according to Mexico’s National Institute of Public Health.

The idea of taxing meat has been hamstrung by fears of creating a political backlash by taxing farmers, FAIRR said in the report.

Plant protein, however, is already capturing a sizable amount of demand for protein, pushed partially by millennials and a trend toward incorporating more vegetarian food into Western diets. About 4 in 10 Americans and Canadians are actively trying to incorporate more plant-based food into their diets, according to a Nielsen Co. global survey.

Gates, DiCaprio

A venture capital fund owned by Tyson Foods Inc., made its second investment last week in Beyond Meat, which creates a plant-based burger that’s also backed by billionaire Bill Gates and Leonardo DiCaprio and sold in thousands of U.S. grocery stores and restaurants. Tyson took an initial 5 percent stake in the burger creator last year. Green Century Capital Management asked the poultry powerhouse in an August 2016 shareholder proposal to explore more plant-based protein opportunities.

Tyson started work on the Beyond Meat deal several months before receiving the proposal amid growing“consumer interest in all forms of protein,” said Gary Mickelson, a spokesman for the Springdale, Arkansas-based company.

“Besides all of the risks that are in the meat industry, where you are talking about huge amounts of emissions and water pollution, this is about diversifying and figuring out what areas can lead to growth,” Marissa LaFave, shareholder advocate at Boston-based Green Century, said in an interview.

The firm, which oversees about $500 million, plans to introduce more plant-based proposals at food companies this year, according to LaFave, who said companies including General Mills Inc., Campbell Soup Co., Unilever NV, Kraft Heinz Co., Kellogg Co. and Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. are already introducing more plant-based food. Danone SA agreed to acquire WhiteWave Foods, a top maker of nut and soy milks, for a 23 percent premium last year, and said in July that the acquisition is expected to help sales.

Tyson, which described itself for years as a producer and marketer of chicken, beef and pork, is quickly recasting its image. The company now calls itself “one of the world’s largest food companies and a recognized leader in protein.”

My Conclusion: UN want to tax meat until it is too expensive eat. Forced us to go Vegan in the name of stopping climate change. I know this have nothing to do with saving the planet and being to the animals; this is about control of what can eat what we can’t eat. Remember “whoever control the food control the people. Tax on meat will put farmers and butchers out business and that what the elites had plan and they will still eating meat; after they got their way of contriving people of what they can eat.

Here a link I have posted about  https://ecolibertyblog.wordpress.com/2016/08/06/war-on-meat-eaters-un-suggest-tax-meat-until-its-too-expensive-to-eat/ so you can look it up. Reason why I added “War on Meat eaters” because we are at war with those people who want to force us to go Vegan in the name of stopping climate change. Remember people they using the climate change and CO2 as pollutant nonsense and the environment to scare us into submission. If we want enjoy the freedom to eat meat we must say “NO” to taxes on meat and fight it.

Major Grocery Retailers Across North America Reject Genetically Engineered Fish

Source:Natural Blaze
Date: 17 November 2017

BIG NEWS – despite biotech & the FDA pushing their unlabeled franken-creatures onto dinner plates, major chains have listened to the public and are rejecting sales!

WASHINGTON, D.C., HALIFAX. November 17, 2017 – As the world’s first sale of genetically engineered fish is underway in Canada, the top food retailers across Canada and the U.S. have made public statements that they have no plans to sell the genetically engineered salmon.

Sobeys (TSX:SBY) is the latest and last of Canada’s national retailers to inform customers that it will not be selling the genetically engineered Atlantic salmon.(1) Sobeys joins the two other top retailers Loblaw (L.TO) and Metro (MRU.TO); the three together represent over 50 percent of the Canadian food retail market. The Overwaitea Food Group, along with regional retailers such as Federated Co-operatives Limited and Longo’s have also said they will not sell genetically engineered salmon.

“Now that some genetically engineered salmon is being sold in Canada unlabeled, it is vital that consumers have this information from their grocery stores,” said Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of CBAN.

The Canadian stores join major North American chains Walmart (NYSE:WMT), Costco (NASDAQ:COST) and Whole Foods (WFM:US) as well as nearly 80 other U.S. retailers including Kroger (NYSE:KR), Trader Joe’s, Target (NYSE:TGT), and Aldi in making a commitment to not sell genetically engineered salmon.(2)

“People have a right to know where their food comes from and exactly what’s in it, so that they can make informed choices about what they eat,” said Dana Perls, senior campaigner at Friends of the Earth U.S. “Shrouding this genetically engineered fish in secrecy is unfair to consumers, to say nothing of the fact that genetically engineered salmon are unsustainable and pose serious potential health and environmental risks. We thank these forward-thinking retailers for their leadership and for listening to consumers.”

The genetically engineered salmon was first sold into the Canadian market in June of 2017. It remains unlabeled and its sale locations are not disclosed, making it nearly impossible for consumers to make informed purchases.

In the wake of controversy over the U.S. approval, the U.S. instituted an import ban on genetically engineered salmon until labeling standards are established.

A full list of stores that have made commitments to not sell genetically engineered seafood and salmon and letters sent to companies by Friends of the Earth U.S., CBAN and allies, and a list of coalition partners are available at www.gefreeseafood.org and www.cban.ca/retailerstatements

NOTES:
(1) www.cban.ca/retailerstatements
(2) www.gefreeseafood.org

The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) brings together 16 groups to research, monitor and raise awareness about issues relating to genetic engineering in food and farming. CBAN members include farmer associations, environmental and social justice organizations, and regional coalitions of grassroots groups. www.cban.ca/fish

Friends of the Earth fights to create a more healthy and just world. Our current campaigns focus on promoting clean energy and solutions to climate change, ensuring the food we eat and products we use are safe and sustainable, and protecting marine ecosystems and the people who live and work near them.

That why the Globalists want us to be vegans and not be able to eat real meat.

Source: Eco Liberty
Date: 9 September 2017
Author: Matthew Miller

The animal rights movement are funded by the Globalist like George Soros to push us to vegans and not be able to eat real meat which contain the real essential nutrients like protein, Omega fatty acids, Vitamin B12 and so on; the Lab grown meat are not going to contain those essential nutrient. The Globalist knows we need to eat meat as well eating plant to keep healthy; they’re going keep on eating meat and eating a high fat diet because our body needs fats especially for our brain because our brain contains mostly fat. The Globalist does not want us to be healthy because want to control us to continue their depopulation agenda. If a human is healthy and able to think for themselves they will be difficult to control and hinder their depopulation agenda; that why they don’t want us to be healthy. That why the Globalist are pushing for a tax on meat. I have covered many article from other news source abut Globalist wanting to tax and them to ban us from eating meat and any animals products. This is like the boil frog syndrome method; went you try to put alive frog in boiling water the frog will jump out straight away; but when you put a frog in lukewarm water them turn up temperature slowly allow the frog to adjust to raising temperature and the frog will be cooked before frog even knew he was being cooked. That why the globalist are slowly planing through their agenda otherwise the people might get spooked and they people will wonder what going on? I put on this information because people might know what going on? This video about Jon Rappoport speaking on Infowars about the lab grown meat and the Animals Rights Agenda.

You have it. The war is not just on meat but on Farmers and Ranchers. I have seen Propaganda video and films and one of then was created by Greenpeace to attack the dairy industry. I know there are problems and issues with the dairy industry but they don’t the problem and issues solved they want the dairy industry to be deindustrialized and done away with. Also animal rights activist animal out of entertainment like Rodeo, Circus, Zoos and even they don’t want you to able to own a animal. That way we much say fight back against the animal rights movement and any other globalist funded movement with our freedom of speech the globalist are trying have freedom of speech done away with; so we don’t have voice. Let our voices be heard while we still the internet and freedom of speech.

Bill Gates, Google’s Brin fund lab-grown meat for the masses

Jon Rappoport's Blog

Bill Gates, Google’s Brin fund lab-grown meat for the masses

by Jon Rappoport

August 25, 2017

Wikipedia: “In 1998 Jon F. Vein of the United States filed for, and ultimately secured, a patent (US 6,835,390 B1) for the production of tissue engineered meat for human consumption, wherein muscle and fat cells would be grown in an integrated fashion to create food products such as beef, poultry and fish.”

Step right up and try a delicious burger grown from animal cells in a lab. What could go wrong?

True, there’s no fat in it, and the cells were grown in sketchy fetal bovine serum, and certain, ahem, “growth factors” may have been added, but don’t worry. Slather on the mustard and mayo, close your eyes, and munch.

Rest secure in the knowledge that Bill Gates and Google “don’t- be-evil” co-founder, Sergey Brin, are pumping money into the ongoing research. Brin Burger…

View original post 553 more words