SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Anna Ghosh, aghosh(at)fwwatch(dot)org, 415-293-9905
Today, the consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch released U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) inspection records from foreign meat plants that reveal troubling examples of how deregulated meat inspection regimes in other countries can put U.S. consumers at risk.

On October 18, 2012, Food & Water Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) for foreign establishment audit checklists for all foreign country audits the agency conducted between 2009 and 2012. It had been customary for FSIS to post the individual plant checklists as part of the country audit reports on its website, but inexplicably, the Obama Administration had stopped that practice.
Food & Water Watch received 155 pages in response to the request, which covered audit checklists from eight countries. Three examples, from Australia and Canada, reveal conflicts of interest and long histories of poor food safety performance.
"These particular establishment audit reports should give U.S. consumers pause about the inadequacy of meat and poultry inspection systems responsible for the safety of products destined for the U.S. market," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. "These records offer further proof that the Obama Administration must stop its efforts to deregulate meat and poultry inspection here in the United States and stop its recognition of privatized inspection schemes abroad. Plus, it is unacceptable that these records had to be obtained through the Freedom of Information Act when they should have been posted to the agency's website in a timely manner."
Nolan Meats - Australian Establishment No. 80
Nolan Meats is a slaughter facility that processes meat from lambs and sheep. It was the "trial" plant selected by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) in 2006 to pilot a new inspection model in which Australian government meat inspectors were removed from the slaughter lines and replaced by company employees (called AQIS Approved Officers or "AAOs"). This new inspection model is based on the HACCP-based Inspection Models Project (HIMP) in poultry and swine that is being conducted in the United States. The alternate inspection model in Australia was originally called the Meat Safety Inspection Program (MSEP); it was recently renamed the Australian Export Meat Inspection System (AEMIS). After several fits and starts, the trial began in earnest in 2008. Data from the trial was provided to FSIS to determine whether this new inspection model should be expanded to all slaughter facilities in Australia.
On March 3, 2011, FSIS posted a Federal Register Notice (76 Fed. Reg. 11752 - 11755) in which it announced the formal recognition of this privatized inspection model as "equivalent" to the U.S. meat inspection system based on the trial. At the time, Food & Water Watch vigorously objected to the FSIS decision and pointed to potential conflicts-of-interest that could occur under such a privatized inspection scheme. Based on FSIS approval, Australia expanded the privatized inspection system to most of its red meat slaughter facilities in late 2011.
FSIS officials visited the Nolan Meats facility on March 21, 2011. In the audit report for that facility, FSIS staff reported:
"Employees of the establishment that work as the AQIS Approved Officers (AAO) conducting post mortem inspection, received financial benefits that are tied to profits generated by the operator of the establishment whose products they inspect. These AAOs receive salaries and profit sharing directly from the establishment. Government officials verify the adequacy of AAO inspection routines and meet the expectations of the CCA (Central Competent Authority). However, the fact that AAOs financial benefits are linked to profits generated by their employer appears to be a conflict of interest that needs the attention of the CCA" (See attached file).
In recent months, the number of imported meat rejections from Australia has increased dramatically, prompting FSIS to call for a review on the entire Australian meat inspection system. Several Australian slaughter establishments have been delisted as being eligible to export to the U.S. as a result of meat rejections. Food & Water Watch sent a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack on January 2, 2013 asking for a status report on the FSIS review and is awaiting his response.
XL Foods, Inc. - Canadian Establishment No. 038
In September and October of 2012, XL Foods, Inc., Canadian Establishment No. 38, was involved in the largest beef recall in Canadian history for E. coli 0157:H7 that sickened 18 Canadian consumers. FSIS issued several "Public Health Alerts" that described the agency's efforts to help the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) recover some 2.5 million pounds of beef products that had been imported from that Canadian plant into the United States.
The contamination was first discovered by FSIS at its border inspection station in Sweetgrass, Montana, when a sample from a shipment of beef from XL was taken for testing. That sample and subsequent samples taken by FSIS inspection personnel tested positive for E. coli 0157:H7 prompting the agency to delist XL Plant 38 on September 13, 2012. It was eventually relisted on December 7, 2012.
In late 2012, FSIS conducted an audit of the Canadian meat inspection system. It included a visit to XL Foods Plant 38. Prior to that, FSIS last visited XL Plant 38 in September, 2009. XL Foods Plant 38 is one of several beef slaughter plants in Canada that has been using a privatized inspection model called the High Linespeed Inspection System (HLIS) in which most of the inspection on the slaughter lines is performed by company personnel. Food & Water Watch recently learned that FSIS had secretly recognized this new inspection model in March 2006.
The 2009 audit of XL Foods Plant 38 proved to be a harbinger of things to come. In that audit, FSIS inspection personnel reported:
Unfortunately, these are many of the same issues that were uncovered during the 2012 E. coli outbreak when the CFIA conducted its own internal review of XL Foods Plant 38. Food & Water Watch awaits the publication of the FSIS 2012 audit report on Canada's meat inspection system to verify whether progress has been made, especially at XL Foods Plant 38.
Maple Leaf Consumer Foods, Inc. - Canadian Establishment No. 001
The Obama and Harper administrations have hatched a scheme called the Beyond the Border Initiative (BtB) to deregulate border inspection by allowing Canadian meat processors to ship their products directly to U.S. meat processors without first being scrutinized at the border by FSIS inspectors.
The current inspection system has been in existence since the 1980's and has worked well for U.S. consumers since it prevents contaminated or otherwise adulterated meat products from entering into U.S. commerce. Food & Water Watch has vigorously opposed BtB from its inception since it eases trade between the two countries at the expense of food safety. Food & Water Watch has also cited examples (here and here) of how the current inspection system at the border catches problems before they endanger U.S. consumers.
The United States and Canada have been in talks to conduct a "pilot project" to prove that a deregulated inspection system could work. In October 2012, Food & Water Watch was able to obtain a document that described the pilot in detail. The document also identified Maple Leafs Plant 001 as one of the participants in the pilot project.
In September 2009, FSIS visited Maple Leaf Foods Plant 001 during its audit of the Canadian meat inspection system and found:
Maple Leaf Foods Plant 001 was also part of the 2012 audit conducted by FSIS.
"If this plant is the best that the Obama and Harper administrations can offer, we remain convinced that no pilot should be conducted to test the Beyond the Border initiative for meat inspection," said Hauter. "The Obama Administration should abandon its ill-conceived initiative for meat inspection because it will leave U.S. consumers vulnerable to unsafe meat products from Canada."
Inspection records obtained by the October 18, 2012, FOIA can be downloaded here: https://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/2013_Jan_15_FSIS_foreign_audit.pdf
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500The latest strike brought the total death toll from the Trump administration's illegal boat bombing spree to at least 163.
The US military said Wednesday that it killed four people in its latest attack on a vessel accused—without evidence—of smuggling drugs through routes in the Caribbean, bringing the total death toll from the Trump administration's illegal boat bombing spree to at least 163.
The US Southern Command said in a statement posted to social media that as part of an effort to apply "total systemic friction on the cartels," it "conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations." Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, wrote in response, "That's a lot of words for murder."
Human rights organizations, UN experts, and legal scholars have condemned the US boat bombings, which began last September, as flagrant violations of international law. Earlier this month, following a previous US attack on a vessel in the eastern Pacific, Amnesty International reiterated its position that the strikes "constitute extrajudicial killings, a form of murder."
The boat bombings have continued apace even as they've faded from the headlines amid the Trump administration's illegal war on Iran. The US has carried out nearly 50 separate strikes in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific over the past six months.
As with the war on Iran, which lawmakers did not authorize, Republicans in the US Congress have blocked resolutions aimed at preventing American forces from carrying out additional strikes on vessels in international waters.
Wednesday's bombing came a day after a New York Times investigation found that a strike carried out as part of a joint operation by the US and Ecuadorian militaries "appears to have destroyed a cattle and dairy farm, not a drug trafficking compound," as the Trump administration claimed.
"We are bombing Narco Terrorists on land as well," Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted earlier this month.
US Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said in response to the Times reporting that "this is deeply abhorrent, and raises questions about the intelligence used to justify the administration's boat strikes in the Caribbean."
"Many of us have warned it is likely innocent people are being killed based on dubious evidence," Beyer added. "Those concerns now appear to be justified."
"Courthouse arrests must stop immediately," said congressional candidate Brad Lander.
US congressional candidate Brad Lander is demanding a congressional investigation and civil rights actions on behalf of hundreds of people who have been "illegally abducted" at immigration courts across the country after the US Department of Justice admitted it has been relying on a lie put forward by federal immigration officials as it defended agents' arrests at courthouses.
Jay Clayton, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, wrote a memo on Wednesday to a judge who last September ruled that courthouse arrests could continue, based on US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) guidance which indicated that "ICE officers or agents may conduct civil immigration enforcement actions in or near courthouses when they have credible information" that a person eligible for deportation would be present at a court.
That guidance from May 27 of last year "does not and has never applied to civil immigration enforcement actions in or near Executive Office for Immigration Review immigration courts," reads Clayton's letter.
"The undersigned were specifically informed by ICE that the 2025 ICE Guidance applied to immigration courthouse arrests," Clayton wrote. "This regrettable error appears to have occurred because of agency attorney error."
The letter represented a "jaw-dropping admission" by the DOJ, said New York University law professor and Just Security editor Ryan Goodman.
The ICE guidance has been used to underpin numerous arrests at courthouses for more than a year—those of the husband of Monica Moreta-Galarza, who was violently thrown to the ground by an ICE agent when she protested the detention at 26 Federal Plaza in New York City; Dylan Lopez Contreras, a Bronx high school student who was arrested when he showed up for a legal asylum hearing last May and was only released this month; and others across the country whose names and stories haven't made national headlines.
Clayton said his office became aware of the far-reaching error on Tuesday when it received an email issuing a "reminder that the May 27, 2025 Guidance does not apply to Executive Office for Immigration Review (Immigration) courts, regardless of their location.”
The US attorney wrote that Castel's opinion from last September, in which the judge ruled ICE's guidance clearly allowed arrests at immigration courts, "will need to be reconsidered and re-briefed for the court to adjudicate Plaintiffs’ APA [Administrative Procedure Act] claims against ICE on the merits."
Clayton issued the filing as part of an ongoing case in which immigrant rights groups sued over the Trump administration's arrests at routine immigration court hearings.
That case, said Goodman, is now one of more than 90 that Just Security has been tracking in which a court either "determined the Trump administration submitted false information or the administration admitted it."
Amy Belsher, an attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union, told NBC News that the revelation about the ICE guidance is "yet again another example of ICE’s brazen disregard for the lives of immigrants in this country."
"It is now clearer than ever that there is no justification for ambushing and arresting people who are showing up to court," Belsher said.
Lander, the former city comptroller who is running to represent New York's 10th Congressional District, called Clayton's filing "a genuine bombshell, even by Trumpian standards."
"ICE has been lying for a year," said Lander in a video posted on social media. "Not just to you and me and to asylum seekers, but to courts and to prosecutors."
We just caught ICE in a bombshell lie.
They do NOT have the authorization they've claimed to arrest immigrants at 26 Federal Plaza.
Courthouse arrests must end now. There's never been a stronger case for why this rogue, lawless agency should be abolished. pic.twitter.com/MXIoJetffZ
— Brad Lander (@bradlander) March 25, 2026
"Courthouse arrests must stop immediately," he said. "It was time to abolish ICE a year ago. It surely is today."
"The US war in Iran is going so badly that it’s restarted the US war in Iraq."
The Iraqi government on Wednesday issued a scathing statement accusing the US of bombing a medical clinic situated in a military base west of Baghdad, killing seven members of Iraq's armed forces and wounding more than a dozen others.
Sabah Al-Numan, a spokesperson for the Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani, called the attack an act of "heinous aggression" and a "crime." The US said it is "aware of the reports" of the strike on the clinic at Habbaniyah military base, but denied targeting the facility. Asked about the strike during a briefing on Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that she would "have to check with the Pentagon on that."
The Iraqi prime minister's office said the nation's government and military "possess the right to respond by all available means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations," calling the clinic attack a "violation of international law and the established norms governing relations between states" and warning that it "undermines the relationship between the peoples of Iraq and the United States of America."
Iraq's immediate response to the attack was to summon the US Embassy's chargé d’affaires in Baghdad and deliver "a strongly worded official note of protest." The prime minister's office said it also intends to file a formal complaint with the United Nations Security Council.
"The US war in Iran is going so badly that it’s restarted the US war in Iraq," Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the US-based Center for International Policy, wrote in response to the developments.
Dan Caine, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged during a press conference last week that American attack helicopters "have been striking against Iranian-aligned militia groups" in Iraq "to make sure that we suppress any threat in Iraq against US forces or US interests. The US is known to have roughly 2,500 troops stationed in Iraq, which American forces invaded with catastrophic consequences in 2003.
The bombing of the Iraqi clinic came as the US-Israeli war on Iran—and the massive regional conflagration sparked by the illegal assault—headed toward its fifth week with no end in sight.
On the first day of the war, an elementary school in the southern Iranian city of Minab was bombed, killing around 170 people—mostly young children. Trump administration officials have publicly denied targeting civilians—and the US president initially blamed Iran for the school bombing—but preliminary findings by the US military reportedly found that American forces were responsible for the attack.