Groundbreaking Investigation Reveals Monsanto Teamed Up With US Military; Targets Scientists,

Originally posted by fnpmitchreturns
Today, corporations are state-less power brokers who are attacking every country's government to build a corporate hegemony .......

And in this case, corporate hedemony with freinds in high places in Government.
Doublement.

Obviously, Monsanto is a major member of the corporatist cartel.

Obama himself signed a law recently...

The Monsanto Protection Act, essentially both written by and benefiting Monsanto Corporation, has been signed into law by United States President Barack Obama. The infamous Monsanto Corporation will benefit greatly and directly from the bill, as it essentially gives companies that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds immunity to the federal courts, among other things.

The bill states that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales.

Monsanto Protection Act Signed By Obama, GMO Bill “Written By Monsanto” Signed Into Law

As the Daily News asks, “Who’s more powerful, the world’s largest producer of genetically modified crops or the U.S. government?”

Answer: both are equally powerful. But remember, the government is in deep debt. The big international corporations are making profits.

The international corporatist cartel is the most powerful organization in world history.

It won't be easy to take them down.

Originally posted by thebtheb
When you think about it, this isn't really a surprise. Look what they did years ago to those Fox news reporters who tried to do the article on bovine growth hormone.

That bovine growth hormone has caused stronger BeeEss too

reply to post by xuenchen

The bill states that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales.

The bill does not say that and it expires in 3 months.

Why is it the anti-GMO crowd has to lie?

reply to post by Phage


I don't fully understand your question.

Apparently there is an expiration on that section.

So I speculate that maybe some new cases are ready to be filed and Monsanto is hedging and maneuvering for a legal advantage.

Also, this is probably a 'test' for future, more permanent legislation.

reply to post by xuenchen

It is a lie that the bill says:

that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales.

Have you seen it? Maybe you can point that part of it out to me because I've seen it and I can't find that part.

reply to post by Phage


Snopes has what looks like an explanation...

Snopes

can't copy&paste please read and try to interpret.

reply to post by xuenchen

I've seen what Snopes says and I've seen the law.
It does not say

that even if future research shows that GMOs or GE seeds cause significant health problems, cancer, etc, anything, that the federal courts no longer have any power to stop their spread, use, or sales.

Section 735 refers to section 411 of The Plant Protection Act. The Plant Protection Act does not govern food safety. It governs "plant pests."
Here is section 735:

SEC. 735. In the event that a determination of non-regulated us made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary’s evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary’s
authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act.

thomas.loc.gov...:h.r.933:

Here is section 411

SEC. 411. REGULATION OF MOVEMENT OF PLANT PESTS.

What is a plant pest?

(14) PLANT PEST
.—The term ‘‘plant pest’’ means any living stage of any of the following that can directly or indirectly injure, cause damage to, or cause disease in any plant or plant product:
(A) A protozoan.
(B) A nonhuman animal.
(C) A parasitic plant.
(D) A bacterium.
(E) A fungus.
(F) A virus or viroid.
(G) An infectious agent or other pathogen.
(H) Any article similar to or allied with any of the
articles specified in the preceding subparagraphs.

www.aphis.usda.gov...

Nothing about health effects. The law does not affect the power of the courts in cases of food safety. The claim that it does, is a lie.

reply to post by Phage


Now I see. Thanks.

So maybe the issue is about pesticides and the effects (if any) on the crop and any health issues with the end products.

Monsanto makes pesticides that are 'controversial'.

reply to post by xuenchen

Monsanto makes pesticides that are 'controversial'.

So do a lot of companies.

I'll ask again. Rhetorically...
Why does the anti-GMO crowd have to lie in order to support their cause if it's all so terrible? Do you think it's a good thing to do?

Maybe because a lot of what Monsanto is doing threatens (or at least appears to threaten) the wheat market which is among our most valuable exports.

But that's big business for ya..Monsanto doesn't worry me much.

Now these cats...well.
Life Technologies Inc
These guys are on the Nasdex 100 and have all sorts of inventions and products dealing with the manipulation of genetics. And they don't play with plants, these guys work in health and diseases.

reply to post by Thorneblood

That particular lie came out long before that single field in Oregon was found to have GMO wheat in it.

BTW, did the wheat market crash as a result of that?

reply to post by Thorneblood

And they don't play with plants, these guys work in health and diseases.

So they must be bad?

Good way of looking at things. Tell me, how you feel about them newfangled horseless carriages? Ya ask me, I say humans was never meant to travel that fast.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Monsanto makes pesticides that are 'controversial'.

So do a lot of companies.

I'll ask again. Rhetorically...
Why does the anti-GMO crowd have to lie in order to support their cause if it's all so terrible? Do you think it's a good thing to do?

edit on 8/2/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Well I'm not entirely convinced it is all lies.

Whether it's 'a good thing to do' depends on the audience and who stands to gain the most.

If the 'anti-GMO' crowd is 'lying' it's been difficult to prove as a whole.

Their merits are convincing.

I don't know who is benefiting from the alleged lies.

reply to post by xuenchen

If the 'anti-GMO' crowd is 'lying' it's been difficult to prove as a whole.

Not really. All you have to do is track down what they are saying and check it out.

Their merits are convincing.

Not really. Not if you look at what they are saying with a critical eye and examine their claims.


There are a few legitimate concerns. I would put labeling at the top of that list. I'm not worried about eating GMOs, there are much worse thing that get into our food supply, but I think people should know what they are eating (no matter what it is). I also understand why labeling GMOs would be problematic.

reply to post by Phage


Like i said, Wheat is big business. Anything that threatens or appears to threaten the Wheat market is gonna get that treatment.

As for the other.
I tend to question the ethics of any corporation that sells genetic mutation kits over the internet.
Mutagenesis

But thats the dreamer in me.

reply to post by Phage


Labeling seems to be legitimate but as you said much worse things get in our food.

I still like hotdogs even with what I know. I just try not to think about it.