Note: here is a comment by my local congressman from Northern Calif, about what his views are, and what he thinks of Mr. Trump. It’s nice to know there is someone in our government who thinks Trump is a great danger. Note the appended comment about personalities which seems so weird.



  (Mr. HUFFMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, outside this building, more and more 
Republicans bemoan the effect of Trumpism on their party. We should 
take a moment to define this new phenomenon.
  Trumpism is when the whims of our authoritarian President ``trump'' 
the values Republicans once stood for. It is when evangelicals say 
character doesn't matter. It is when ``rule of law'' constitutionalists 
shield Trump by attacking the institutions that guarantee the rule of 
  It is when First Amendment champions join Trump in attacking our free 
press. It is when Russia hawks bow and scrape before a President who 
chooses to believe his pal Vladimir over our own intelligence agencies.
  Trumpism is when this House, which is supposed to conduct serious 
oversight, acts like Trump's lapdog, ignoring or abetting corruption 
and obstruction of justice.
  Because Trumpism threatens democracy, many Republicans are leaving 
their party or, like George Bush's speechwriter, Michael Gerson, are 
calling on voters to deliver a message this fall. Without that 
political jolt, Gerson writes, ``elected Republicans will just keep 
clinging to the USS Trump as it sinks further into the swamp.''
  Now that we have defined Trumpism, let's work together to save this 
country from it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Curtis). Members are reminded to refrain 
from engaging in personalities toward the President.


The Integral Urban House Revisited


By William Olkowski, 12.25.11


The Integral Urban House was a retrofit project which redesigned an old run down house in Berkeley, CA initiated in 1974 with various ecologically friendly components including: food gardens open to the public, chicken, rabbit and crayfish rearing for animal protein, solar hot water, roof top herb garden, greywater systems, wood fired stove, and a waterless toilet.  While it existed it educated many thousands.  The house was considered important enough by Architectural Digest to be considered among the top houses of the 20th century.  It was certainly unusual and is to this day still an innovative example of what could be a worldwide movement to redesign the developed worlds’ residential element.  It was a volunteer project at the start but later got some funding to do the construction work.  The architect was Sim van der Ryn, a professor at UC, Berkeley.  Some further details are covered below as requested by a recent reader (now over 35 years ago).


Helga and myself loved this project and devoted a great deal of personal time at the house during design, construction, conducting public tours and handling the publicity.  People came from all over the world to see the house.  I remember an Italian film crew who were taking videos from the different windows, popping out first in one window and then others.  I wrote the final draft of the book (took about 3 months of daily work, in between other jobs and teaching) with Helga as always, and with Tom Javits making major contributions, particularly in various designs and drawings.


During submission to the publisher, Sierra Club, the chapter on solar energy was deleted and another was substituted without our knowledge.  I just found a copy of this chapter in my piles from back then, but it was lost for a long time.  Not that the chapter was anything special, but it was focused on how people could maximize solar house heating by such simple means as manipulating existing shades and blinds, for example.  Other methods were oriented to how people could do solar projects, ovens, distillations, etc.


Then the book came out under Sim’s name which we felt was unfair and tried to correct.  The second edition carries our names on the cover but again messes up the authorship.  By that time we had left the institute, but the group of our students from UC and Antioch College (SF) who lived there during construction and other friends continued on the board: David Katz and Sheila Daar were board members when we left.  We, like fools, turned over the proceeds to the Farallones Institute to run the urban house project.  The Institute later sold the house.  So we lost authorship and royalties, and the house was converted to an office.  Royalties would have been helpful as we were starting another project: The Urban Integrated Pest Management project then at UC and later spun off as its own non-profit.  Well, in retrospect, we did not do it for the money but just to influence the world.  And the project did that which still makes me feel proud.  It was considered one of the most important houses of the 20th century by Architectural Digest a few years ago, see the video on our website: the O’s.


Many people contributed time to this project which inspired us to work as we did.  We all saw the future as an opportunity to address the gross inefficiencies in the urban lifestyle which is at the core of massive environmental exploitation of the Earth.  One group designed and built the passive solar hot water system, another the rabbit and chicken system, Abby Rockafeller gave us the Clivis Multrum (a water less toilet), one of our students designed the crayfish rearing unit on urine, and others.  Sim’s students were hired to do much of the construction.


How Did the Project Start


I got a request just recently to clarify some aspects of the project so that is how this particular blurb arose.  The project started for us when our friend Sterling Bunnell (see the book Mind in the Waters for his chapter on Cetacean Intelligence) came by our Acton St. house as he was wont to do at times and wanted us to meet up with this UC architect professor, i.e. Sim.  We did and then each week thereafter we continued to meet with him and Sterling and more and more people were invited to also come and share ideas.  Sterling was a faculty member at the College of Arts and Crafts in Oakland who was also teaching with us at the innovative college, Antioch West which we help start.  So different faculty from that institution also showed up.


We had a floating group of about 8-10 that met each week at different restaurants, usually Chinese, in Oakland and Berkeley.  We all got to make points about the sorry state of affairs of the planet, etc.  Then I pushed for a practical project where we could put together various solutions, but it was a retrofit right from the beginning.  I wrote up a plan for an “Integral Urban House” project with the components which turned up in the book, including a passive hot water system and food producing systems.  We had been working on food gardens for 5-6 years around our house and at a student garden on University of California land in the middle of Berkeley (Rose and Walnut Streets) (see the book City Peoples Book of Raising Food).  This garden and our house garden had attained a small degree of local attention, but we needed builders and construction people to work on other components and we needed a place where the public could come through and learn about the methods of raising food and using solar hot water, for example.


Public tours at our Acton St. house got so bad that foot traffic was damaging the food producing beds.  A publically accessible food garden was clearly needed. The plant and animals systems included in the eventual IUH project were based on our explorations and those of our students: composting, chickens and rabbit structures, an innovative pond with wind activated aeration producing crayfish on human urine, and bee keeping for honey, pollen and pollination services.  We had started a class at UC, Berkeley within the first Conservation and Natural Resource Management Program, a large scale educational responses to Earth Day.


Students were working on these components and we were teaching how to kill a chicken, for example.  This was a great experience as we had shocked vegetarians and all sorts of urban folk who had never really understood where their meat came from.  Being the radical I am and my feeling about food and animals as food I was really too much.  I used to go through the steps of first holding the chicken, then breaking its neck, then bleeding it by cutting its throat right there in the classroom.  Then it was really an anatomy lesson, which itself was an eye opener because most students at the college level never see anything real and learn such skills, nor do they ever fully appreciate how the vertebrate body is constructed.


But if push comes to shove, knowing how to kill and dress an animal like a chicken or rabbit could be important for survival.  I felt this way then and still do.  If our food supply takes a dive, a lot of people are going to starve.  Rabbits are the best survival system as they could eat almost anything growing in the urban area.  Chickens need protein to make their eggs and getting that from food wastes is usually not enough to make the system efficient.  Rabbits could be raised on alfalfa which could be grown in the garden.  In WWII rabbit growing was big in the San Francisco Bay area as the climate is amenable to alfalfa as I saw reports of over 10 cuttings per year on earlier alfalfa farms.  They are all gone now, however.


No matter what, knowing how to produce your own food is a revolutionary activity.


Hopes are Not Agreements nor Final Designs


We could see the needs to integrate the urban house and food garden while innovating and applying various solutions to building problems associated with waterless toilets, solar hot water systems, composting, animal shelters, etc.  We welcomed cooperation from builders and it seemed a great integration.  As I was into Integrated Pest Management I was nuts about the idea of Integration, hence the Integral Urban House.


Then Sim found a student who was willing to donate a sizeable amount of money and a house to the group (Sim suggested a non-profit he had somehow been associated with or started?)  This is the instructive part of this message, and one which I should have known without having this experience.  This great learning can be capsulated into: those who control the money control the project.  I assumed this would be a cooperative effort but when I saw how things were unfolding I became concerned about cooperative ventures, but that is a tangent.


So we started looking for a place to do this project.  Helga and I are rather outspoken people and we were pushing the group to consider an existing house that could be renovated.  This was because we estimated that given 80 million of so existing houses/residential structures in the US at that time, we needed something relevant to most people.  Sim and others wanted to build anew.  Later I learned to appreciate why the architects prefer to build NEW rather than retrofitting.  It’s ironic that those who initially opposed the concept eventually profited most from its actuation.  But all that is water under the bridge, but it should be remembered by other innovators.


Architects do not like to fix other peoples mistakes and prefer to create new designs upon which they can build their careers.  So this was a barrier to real complete integration of builders and practical ecologist.  I thought the conflict was resolved by having another project start within the institute with a focus on building new at another location.  But I still believe that retrofitting was virgin architectural ground.  There were no manuals for redesign, for example.  It still is a frontier as far as I can see.


Andy Finds a House for Sale


Back in those days, about 1974 or so Andy Pollack was a student at Antioch College West in San Francisco where we taught in addition in the Man and Environment Program at UC, Berkeley.  He was living at our house at that time and found what later became the Integral Urban House by riding his bicycle around Berkeley searching for a place.  He found a house for sale in the industrial sector within a zone where one could hear constantly hear the low steady rumble of the freeway in the background.  It was being put up for sale (actually a bidding process) for back taxes.  The Institute (FI) paid $11,000 to own this fifth street house.  Sim sold the another house given to the Institute and the money was used to purchase this fifth street house, building materials and to pay his students.  Our students were volunteers, some of whom lived in the house for some time, as indicated above.  (The Integral Urban House was eventually sold with the funds incorporated into the FI, after we were gone.)


Then the design work started, i.e., regular meetings orchestrated by Sim.  We had a floor plan and Sim would record our ideas onto a transparent sheet of paper placed over the floor plan.  This was the fun part of the project as various ideas could be examined on paper and then we all could think about them until our next meeting.


What We Learned


This volunteer project was a great learning experience for us which we have built upon over the following decades.  We are still using the IUH project to understand how to innovate and institutionalize, along with other projects we have created, but that’s another tangent.  The IUH was among one of our first efforts at innovation in a field we had no credentials in (another was recycling centers).  So, we gradually came to know we had to create our own non-profit within which we could do what we did best, i.e., create IPM programs to reduce pesticide use.  All our projects have public educational components and we have always taught people about food production and we have also created educational systems in various combinations and permutations.  Our attitude was public education was most important.  This was clear given our experiences at the UC, where many professors (at that time) seemed to hate the intrusion of the public.


Our work in reducing pesticide use was paramount as we believed urban pesticide use was creating massive public health problems (and we still do).  And urban areas were of particular concern as pesticides were (and still are) being used in close proximity to people.  This use pattern changes the exposure equation to predominantly respiratory and skin exposures compared to the small amounts of pesticides on foods via large scale agriculture.  Respiratory exposures are the worst as they mean lung tissues are certainly affected as well as having the pesticide more quickly distributed around the body compared to stomach exposures of much lower concentration.  And that was our focus for a few decades after IUH, except for developing a teaching farm in the Sacramento Valley, again another tangent.


Final Comments


One of the cutting edges for this project was sociological.  People need to learn how to cooperate.  They are commonly taught to compete, so cooperation is usually neglected as a focus.  We recognized that all public projects which may be significant have limitations.  The people who show up to volunteer all bring their own ideas, some of which are good and some not so good.  So how to bring them in without alienating them is the trick.  When we started FI meetings we decided to have consensus as our group decision making process.  This means that one person can hold up decision making.  I didn’t realize this limitation at the time.


The rules for democratic group decision making called Roberts Rules of Order is actually a better way for groups to use in making decisions, especially when the people are particularly diverse.  We saw the difference this approach created when we were part of the design team for creating the National Center for Appropriate Technology (NCAT) based in Butt, Montana (at first, then later moved to Washington DC).  Helga served on the board for 6 years as vice president.  Roberts Rules of Order refers to a group decision making process, which is really at the base of democratic organization.  Get the manual which is widely available and you can see for yourself.


After we had participated in the creation of the FI, it was a great learning experience to see just how a democratic group could run when the first group of about 60 people were assembled to create NCAT.  Much later we were introduced to ideas created by “Skinnarians” at a college in Lawrence Kansas where such psychologists were banished by the main line psychology professionals who thought Skinner’s ideas were bad.  We thought their experiments in using reward systems were of potential use in community organizing, much needed by groups like those who showed up for volunteer work at the Integral Urban House.  But such ideas were and are still foreign to most people, even though of great potential importance.  Maybe a good part of the world is changing.  It is certainly true that another good part is still back a century or two.  Such divisions are certainly clearer now, but the oligarchs have always been retards, with some few exceptions.


Recently a reader mentioned that the IUH project was covered briefly on Wikipedia and upon checking it out I saw that the interview we did with Mother Earth News back then had a complete copy available at:  I recommend this article because it was the most complete detailed interview we ever conducted during those early years.  My copy was destroyed, unfortunately so it never made it to our website.

Dear family and friends,
We have decided to list our house in Facebook for an impeachment party because we can no longer tolerate what looks like impending doom.  I’d rather escape but before we do we will make every effort to fight this nonsense.  This is only a start, because Trump is supported by a gaggle of republican money grubbers who have sold their souls to keep their salaries and pensions.  Prison is what they should get.
Regards, Bill and Shavda


If there’s one constant we’ve heard throughout our campaign to impeach President Trump — besides widespread agreement on the absolute need for Trump to be impeached — it’s that the political establishment is not doing enough to defend the rights and values of American voters. Over four million Americans have signed our petition so far, with thousands more joining us every single day. Yet, even as this unhinged president leads us into a disastrous shutdown, lawmakers from both parties continue to brush off their constituents’ calls for impeachment.

So here’s your chance to form your own party — one that won’t hesitate to send a strong message that President Trump needs to be immediately impeached.

This February 17th, we’re organizing impeachment parties across the country. Sign up today and ring in President’s Day by hosting one of your own.

We want President’s Day weekend to be more than an extra day off from work. We want it to be a day of action — a time to remind our elected officials how a president is expected to behave. And we’ll make it easy for you: Sign up to host your friends and neighbors, and we’ll make sure you have all the information you need to make the party a HUGE success!

Are you ready to throw a party to impeach?

If you’re interested in hosting a party, sign up and we’ll send you all the details you need to make it a success.


The Need to Impeach Team

Host a Party


Book review and author interview by Dr Mercola. Big time public exposure. Mercola is a hero and has been attacked as a fraud, which is par for the course. Trump’s key defense is fake news, calling actual truth statements lies, to confuse and discredit the messenger, a common defense used by demigods and lawyers the world over. It’s a strategy for use by those unwilling to examine the evidence or the message.

This author has laid out a great case against Monsanto, the most evil of the pesticide companies.  Glyphosate or Roundup (trade name for actual product) contaminates proteins and genetic compounds like DNA, so its poisoning all food chains on the planet and is built into genetic compounds so pollutes all genes. Health claims made by Monsanto are based on old falsified studies and are public-ally presented as justified because their product can save millions from starvation, a falsehood beyond the pale.

Pesticide pollution is the most severe pollution because it requires special knowledge of chemistry and toxicology few make the effort to learn. Its much more than just another pollution but is already doing tremendous damage. Why are so many friends dying of cancer?

Dr. William Olkowski

Monsanto’s Round Up And The Environment


Note: Small studies show how psilocybin can be used to reduce depression. Imagine that! Maybe someday, the benefits of using cannabis will be recognized and the war on drugs will be exposed for what it is: A colossal error costing destruction of millions of lives and the rise of our police state and another more lethally entrenched criminal class much worse than the mafia of years past. A good intro to how the mafia operated see the series, The Godfather.

Benefits Of Using Psilocybin


Study Confirms We Are Being Poisoned

Monsanto Is Poisoning the Whole Population

According to a just released study published in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers at the University of California, San Diego, confirmed that the amount of glyphosate in our bodies is 13 X more than it was before GMOs were introduced in the mid-90s. That is no surprise because most GMOs are engineered to be sprayed with Roundup.  (Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup.)  Use of glyphosate has risen 15 X since the introduction of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops.  Even tiny amounts are linked to serious disease and chronic health conditions in other research.

Read more about the study HERE

Monsanto Caught Red-Handed

This is one of the best summary articles of how Monsanto was caught red-handed.  Published Oct 24th in Der Spiegel, the widely read German news publication, the story adds explosive details of Monsanto’s deceit and deception just as the European Commission must decide about re-licensing of glyphosate.  Permission to sell the chemical in the European Union expires on December 15th.

Monsanto’s lies began to unravel with the court-ordered release of internal emails and documents as part of an on-going class-action suit in California.  The plaintiffs in that suit claim Monsanto’s Roundup has caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a form of lymph node cancer, in them or members of their family.

“The Monsanto Papers tell an alarming story of ghostwriting, scientific manipulation and the withholding of information,” says Michael Baum, a partner in the law firm of Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, which is bringing one of the US class actions. According to Baum, Monsanto used the same strategies as the tobacco industry: “creating doubt, attacking people, doing ghostwriting.”


Europe Is Rejecting Monsanto’s Roundup

In Europe, Monsanto is being hammered as negative public opinion swells. On Monday, Oct 23rd, glyphosate critics (led by Greenpeace), handed the EU a petition signed by more than 1.3 million people calling for an outright ban. After the company shunned a parliamentary hearing into allegations that it unduly influenced studies into the safety of glyphosate, Monsanto lobbyists were completely banned from entering the European Parliament to meet with Members of Parliament (MEPs) or attend committee meetings. This was the first time MEPs used new rules to withdraw parliamentary access. MEPs subsequently voted on Tuesday, Oct 24th,  in a non-binding resolution, to ban glyphosate (Roundup) starting with a complete ban on household use, a ban in use for farming when biological alternatives work well, and a full ban in five years. Although member states must vote, this was a huge blow that may threaten Monsanto’s pending merger with Bayer.  On Wednesday, Oct 25th, the proposed 10-year re-license for glyphosate by EU member states failed to reach a majority and now forces the European Commission to consider a phase out or a shorter license.


Good news from India

Requests to commercially release a locally developed genetically modified mustard have been frozen amid stiff opposition from domestic activists and politicians.

The mustard variety would have been the first transgenic food crop allowed for commercial cultivation. But the environment ministry’s Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) has shelved approval despite a panel the ministry supervises giving the genetically modified mustard technical clearance last year.


This has been a banner week of news. And we are heartened by progress in Europe and India. But make no mistake. We are in a fight for the future of food and the health of people everywhere. Please share this newsletter, and if you have any questions, please contact us at


Safe Eating,

Team IRT

You are receiving this newsletter because of your interest in the health risks of genetically modified food.  If you have additional questions or wish to comment, please send email to, or call 641-209-1765.  

Educating consumers about the health risks of GMOs is an ongoing challenge.  IRT counts on individual donations to continue critical outreach and educational services. 

Please consider donating today:


Connect with Us


Institute for Responsible Technology
PO Box 469 – Fairfield IA 52556