by David Bacon

Thousands of demonstrators marched and rallied outside the shareholders meeting of Wells Fargo Bank, demanding that the bank stop foreclosing on homeowners.  (PHOTO BE DAVID BACON)

­Thousands of angry homeowners, immigrants, union members, Occupiers and community groups converged on the annual shareholders meeting of Wells Fargo Bank. In a carefully choreographed protest, simultaneous marches left Justin Herman Plaza on the city’s waterfront, site of the Occupy San Francisco encampment last fall. Demonstrators walked up parallel streets into the financial ­district, where they encircled the block in which the meeting was set to take place, in the Julia Morgan ballroom of the Merchant’s Exchange Building.

Beforehand, some demonstrators had moved into the building’s lobby, while others chained themselves together, putting sleeves around their arms to make it hard for police to cut them apart to arrest them.

A group of religious, union and community representatives had purchased shares of stock in the bank beforehand, supposedly allowing them to attend the shareholders meeting. Some even held proxies, allowing them to vote the stock belonging to others. As the rally swirled outside, and speeches and songs filled the streets now vacant of their normal traffic, the police closed off the building and refused to let the shareholders inside. María Poblete, from the housing rights organization Just Cause, and Cinthiya Muñoz, from Alameda County United to Defend Immigrant Rights, spoke from a flatbed truck in front of the bank, reminding the crowd of the reasons they’d brought their protests to the bank’s doors. “Shareholders want to meet about how to best reap profits from foreclosures, for-profit prisons and detention centers, student loans, and tax evasion,” Poblete shouted.

“Today the bank can see that there’s no more business as usual. We say no!” Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf, however, closed the meeting to the shareholders kept at bay by the police outside. “Wells Fargo’s actions today demonstrate what communities across this country have been experiencing for years: Wells Fargo is indifferent to the havoc they are wreaking in our communities and they do not want to be held accountable,” said Wallace Hill, whose home was foreclosed on by Wells Fargo in Oakland.

Earlier in April, housing rights activists met with Jon Campbell, Wells Fargo’s executive in charge of social responsibility. They proposed a series of measures to meet the crisis faced by families whose homes are underwater, and a moratorium on foreclosures. Campbell refused to consider any of their demands. The bank is the U.S.’s largest servicer of home mortgages.

“We are the 99%, and we won’t take no for an answer!” Muñoz shouted from the flatbed truck. Fifteen protesting shareholders were finally permitted across police lines, and went into the meeting.

When Stumpf began a presentation congratulating the bank for making a $15.9 billion profit last year, in the midst of foreclosures and a recession, they interrupted him. Police converged on them, took them out of the meeting, and cited and released them. Nine others were arrested outside.

Afterwards, the remaining shareholders approved a $19.8 compensation for Stumpf’s last year’s labor.

“The bank is pleased with the progress we’ve made in a tough economy,” bank Vice President Oscar Suris told the media. “We’ll continue focusing on our customers, and that includes our customers who are going through difficult economic times.”

­

by Mike Adams
Natural News
Part 1 of 2

The day will soon come that informed women will refuse to date, marry or have children with men who follow poor nutritional habits.

“You eat junk foods? Put your pants back on and get out!”

You see, scientific evidence is mounting on the relationship between food choice and genetic integrity. Men who eat a lot of processed meats, fast foods and junk foods have low sperm quality. But it’s more than just an infertility question… it’s also a question of the transgenerational genetic integrity of his offspring.

A man who pursues an unhealthy diet, it turns out, not only increases the risk of numerous diseases in his direct offspring (cancer, diabetes, infertility, etc.), he also increases that risk for multiple generations of offspring.

This was recently demonstrates in a laboratory study conducted by Georgetown University Medical Center and presented at the American Association for Cancer Research (http://www. naturalnews.com/029198_cancer_epigenetics.html) which showed that cancer risk attributable to the junk food fed to parent rats was passed through two generations even if the direct offspring ate a healthy diet.

In other words, for all you women out there, if you choose to have children with a man who’s eating junk foods, not only will your children have an increased risk of disease, but their children will, too! And that’s true even if your children follow a healthy lifestyle!

Now sure, if you’re not concerned about your family line, then just mate with anybody who can produce sperm — and there are a lot of those to choose from. But two, three or four generations from now, the sperm that you chose to combine with your own eggs may turn out to be a ticking genetic time bomb that ends your family line forever through DNA mutations leading to disease and infertility. The genopocalypse I call this coming wave of global infertility the “genopocalypse,” which of course means the “genetic apocalypse.” This is all explained in a video I recently posted on www.Natural- News.TV which you can view at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=0985DE77D4487C0ECA329AEE5F90D764.

The genetic integrity of the human race is collapsing due to exposure to DNA-altering toxic chemicals in foods, medicines, household products and personal care products. The cumulative toxic burden in first-world citizens has now reached such a high level of toxicity that genetic integrity may no longer be guaranteed from one generation to the next.

Infertility rates are skyrocketing, and even when babies are born through infertility intervention clinics, they suffer far higher rates of genetic mutations and abnormalities than babies conceived naturally.

We are now watching the genetic migration of the human race. It is slowly transitioning to a race of infertile mutants who express very high rates of diseases like cancer and health conditions like infertility. No one knows whether genetic integrity can be recovered once it compromised. The very nature of gene inheritance leaves that doubtful. The upshot of all this is that people who want a family future must be careful to choose healthy reproductive partners. Beyond the quality of the person you are deciding to have children with, you need to consider the quality of their eggs and sperm.

W­atchout for damaged eggs So far, we’ve talked about how women need to watch out for damaged sperm. But the good news for men is that sperm regenerates every few days, so by simply changing your diet right now, you can begin to produce healthier sperm a few days later. Switching to a healthy diet for 3 – 6 months can result in radically improved sperm quality.

But even this has its limits: The upper limit of male sperm viability is still heavily influenced by the diet of his mother during her pregnancy. Yep: The nutritional factors present during the growth of the fetus also strongly influence the lifetime reproductive viability of males.

For women, it’s even more serious. Women, you see, are born with all the eggs they’ll ever have in their lives. Those eggs were formed as a fetus, and the health of those eggs is largely determined by the diet of the pregnant mom carrying the female fetus.

So if you’re a woman, it is your mom’s diet that determined the genetic integrity of the eggs you carry right now. And changing your own diet won’t regenerate healthier eggs. So if you’re a man seeking a healthy partner to have children with, you need to ask about not just the diet of your female partner, but also the diet of her mother during that pregnancy.

It’s getting tricky, isn’t it? There’s nothing quite like interrogating your future mother-in-law about her eating habits… But it gets even more complicated than that. Next week 2nd part: Irradiated women’s eggs

por Dan Molinski

BOGOTA — The International Court of Justice begins hearing arguments Monday in a long-running dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua over a Caribbean archipelago and the maritime borders surrounding the islands, which some say hold massive deposits of oil.

The case has been going on for over a decade and in 2007 the Hague-based court ruled Colombia has sovereignty over the San Andres archipelago’s three main islands–San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina–based on a 1928 treaty between Colombia and Nicaragua.

The new hearings by the court, which will run for two weeks, are to settle ownership of other, smaller islands in the archipelago not covered in the 1928 treaty, and to also settle the nations’ maritime borders in the area.

The islands are 140 miles east of Nicaragua and 480 miles northwest of Colombia.

Even after the 2007 ruling by the court, the United Nations’ highest judicial body, Nicaragua President Daniel Ortega continues to affirm Nicaragua is the rightful owner of the islands. Managua says the 1928 treaty that ceded the islands to Colombia is invalid because it was signed while the U.S. occupied Nicaragua.

In 2010, Colombia awarded national oil company Ecopetrol (ECOPETROL.BO, EC) and Spain’s Repsol YPF SA the rights to explore for oil in the vicinity of the San Andres islands, hoping it would allow Colombia to become an offshore oil driller for the first time and boost overall production.

San Andres marches in support of Colombia’s claim to disputed island

by Brandon Barrett

Colombia Reports

Residents of San Andres organized a march supporting Colombia’s sovereignty of the archipelago after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) began hearing Nicaragua’s claim to the territory Monday.

Colombia has maintained control over the territory, which includes the islands of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina, since the 1928 Esguerra-Barcenas Treaty. Nicaragua has long disputed the treaty which was put into effect while the country was under U.S. military occupation.

The Hague-based court ruled in favor of Colombia’s sovereignty over the archipelago in 2007. The new hearings, which are expected to run for months, seek to determine the ownership of several smaller islands not included in the original treaty, as well as settle maritime borders in the area.

The two groupings of islands are thought to be rich in oil. Colombia’s state-owned oil company Ecopetrol began drilling on the island in 2010 before President Juan Manuel Santos suspended operations due to environmental concerns, although analysts think the move was made to avoid a political spat with the Central American country.

­Spain cuts medical services to undocumented immigrants

by Prensa Latina

Spain´s Socialist Workers Party (PSOE) called xenophobic the conservative PP government decision to cancel free medical services to illegal immigrants.

PSOE General Secretary Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba exposed the conservative government of Mariano Rajoy defense of education and health fund ammendments in Congress hearing of the 2012 general budget.

They are feeding sinister rumors on the immigrants´ health care “abuse” which is false and xenophobic, stressed the leader of the main opposition force.

Denounces Obama’s continual bypassing of Congress

by Steve Watson
Infowars.com

Appearing on Infowars Nightly News Wednesday, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul said that he fears the international police agency Interpol has been granted too much authority to operate without oversight in the United States.

Paul suggested that new powers granted to Interpol by president Obama could see U.S. citizens arrested or even extradited by the agency under foreign laws.

“I’m kind of concerned about having an international police force in our country with the ability, maybe, to extradite US citizens and send them to another country.” The Senator said.

“Egypt, as you know over the last few months has been holding some American pro-Democracy workers in their country and they were going to try them on trumped up political charges. So a couple of months ago I said ‘you know what, we send two billion dollars to a country that treats us this way?’ So I tried to hold up their foreign aid, and as a consequence, part of what I was doing, they released our American citizens.”

“Then they came home and Secretary Clinton went and released their aid. I wrote her a letter and said she shouldn’t do it because these prosecutions were still ongoing.” The Senator said.

“They also made the U.S. taxpayer pay a five million dollar ransom for these Americans to come home, promising they would come back to stand trial. But this week we have learned that Egypt has asked Interpol for a national warrant, they have these red letter warrants, that can be used anywhere in the world.­”

The Senator has also penned a letter to the president regarding the matter this week.

“Most people say ‘that could never happen inAmerica, we would never let that happen’, but Interpol is doing this in other countries.” Paul noted.

“Saudi Arabia ask Interpol to return a Saudi journalist from Malaysia, who had said something about Mohammed that they had found offensive, and they were going to accuse him of blasphemy.” The Senator added.

“Interpol picked him up in Malaysia and took him back to Saudi Arabia. He will now face the death penalty. But the scary thing is he is being picked up by Interpol. What kind of authority does Interpol have in the United States?”

The Senator pointed out that it was Obama who granted Interpol immunity to operate by way of Executive Order 12425, adding an amendment altering restrictions on other Governmental agencies to the limits the US Constitution.

Paul then spoke more generally regarding the administration increasingly attempting to bypass the Congress on important matters.

“One of the interactions in the last couple of weeks, it was very very telling,” said Paul, “was the interaction between Senator Sessions and Secretary Panetta in a committee, in which Panetta said that if we go to war, of course we’ll consult with the UN and get their approval. Sessions asked him ‘isn’t there a role here under the constitution for Congress?’ And Panetta basically just kept going on about NATO, the UN, and then he finally said ‘we would probably inform Congress of what we are doing, but never in there was there any understanding that they had to get approval or permission from Congress.”

When asked what could be done about such attempts to skirt Congress, the Senator cut straight to the point.

“I think the first thing is to try and stop him in his tracks.” Paul said.

“We tried very hard on the Libya motion. In fact, when he went to war in Libya we introduced his own words from 2007 when he ran for office and said that no president should unilaterally go to war without Congressional authority, which basically just re-states the Constitution.”

“And then he went around and did exactly the opposite when he became president. And this is not the first time a Democrat or a Republican has changed their mind once they became president, they believe in limitations on presidential power until they actually become president.”

The Senator spoke at length regarding other issues including moves to control and censor the internet, the backlash against the TSA, and his father’s ongoing campaign, and the rumors of him being nominated as a candidate for Vice President.