• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

More GM crop destruction

If you reject the evidence supplied by George Monbiot as not being fact, there is nothing more that I can offer. I have shown you the zebra, I have shown you its stripes, and you still insisit that it's a donkey.
Well, at least I'm not the ass...
 
Kimpatsu, there has to be a middle ground between simply posting a link to the home page of George's web site, and copying the article and pasting it into your reply. Instead, please tell us what your argument is, and then back it up with a link to a specific web page.

The only evidence that I can find to back up your assertion that people are being forced to plant GM is the case of the Roushes. Even that is pretty indirect - if the Roushes are convinced that they did nothing wrong, then they should have a pretty easy time taking on Monsanto. But if it's more like the case of Percy Schmeiser, they're out of luck. Despite what's printed in the Guardian, judges have reviewed the evidence in that case and found Mr. Schmeiser to be lying. That's why they assessed punitive damages against him.

And you haven't posted anything I could find that would hint that the US or a corporation is forcing farmers in other countries to plant GM. Padlock on the food chain my ass - they're just trying to sell seed, and the US is trying to remove unfair trade restrictions that would keep that from happening.
 
CurtC said:
Kimpatsu, there has to be a middle ground between simply posting a link to the home page of George's web site, and copying the article and pasting it into your reply. Instead, please tell us what your argument is, and then back it up with a link to a specific web page.

The only evidence that I can find to back up your assertion that people are being forced to plant GM is the case of the Roushes. Even that is pretty indirect - if the Roushes are convinced that they did nothing wrong, then they should have a pretty easy time taking on Monsanto. But if it's more like the case of Percy Schmeiser, they're out of luck. Despite what's printed in the Guardian, judges have reviewed the evidence in that case and found Mr. Schmeiser to be lying. That's why they assessed punitive damages against him.

And you haven't posted anything I could find that would hint that the US or a corporation is forcing farmers in other countries to plant GM. Padlock on the food chain my ass - they're just trying to sell seed, and the US is trying to remove unfair trade restrictions that would keep that from happening.
Click to expand...
No, the US si trying to create a series of turnstyles; they can sell, but punitive tarriffs against third world countries trying to import.
If you didn't read all the articles, you should take the time to do so. George Monbiot is the premier human rights campaigner in Europe.
Of course, if you see nothing wrong with the hegemony of unelected corporations, I can't help you. People are dying. Actively fight to prevent it, or be part of the problem. But when the battle lines are drawn, I for one would like to know on which side you stand.
 
Kimpatsu wrote:
No, the US si trying to create a series of turnstyles; they can sell, but punitive tarriffs against third world countries trying to import.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to tell me here.

People are dying. Actively fight to prevent it, or be part of the problem. But when the battle lines are drawn, I for one would like to know on which side you stand.
Click to expand...
I trust that given the freedom to choose, people will act in their own best interests. Therefore I'm for removing restrictions on growing, importing, or selling GM food. The way it looks to me, people are dying and you're denying them the tools to help themselves.
 
CurtC said:
I trust that given the freedom to choose, people will act in their own best interests. Therefore I'm for removing restrictions on growing, importing, or selling GM food. The way it looks to me, people are dying and you're denying them the tools to help themselves.
Click to expand...
You remove ALL restrictions, fine. But at the moment, the West expects to enter Third World markets while subsidising their own farmers unfairly, so that third world agrarian economies can't compete. Make sure when you remove the restrictions, it's ALL of them.
 
Kimpatsu said:
If you reject the evidence supplied by George Monbiot as not being fact, there is nothing more that I can offer. I have shown you the zebra, I have shown you its stripes, and you still insisit that it's a donkey.
Well, at least I'm not the ass...
Click to expand...
Kimpatsu:

I have to agree with Drooper. You need to provide a link to some specific piece of evidence that supports your claim, with preferably a short quote that directly supports your claim. Cut and paste of long pieces of screed such as this does not really do it.
 
The real problem with engineered crops, as this column has been pointing out for several years, is that they permit the big biotech companies to place a padlock on the foodchain. By patenting the genes and all the technologies associated with them, the corporations are manoeuvring themselves into a position in which they can exercise complete control over what we eat. This has devastating implications for food security in poorer countries.
Click to expand...
Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi, all of which are suffering from the current famine, have been told by the US international development agency, USAID, that there is no option but to make use of GM crops from the United States.
Click to expand...
Six months ago, this column revealed that a fake citizen called "Mary Murphy" had been bombarding internet listservers with messages denouncing the scientists and environmentalists who were critical of GM crops. The computer from which some of these messages were sent belongs to a public relations company called Bivings, which works for Monsanto. The boss of Bivings wrote to the Guardian, fiercely denying that his company had been running covert campaigns. His head of online PR, however, admitted to Newsnight that one of the messages came from someone "working for Bivings" or "clients using our services". But Bivings denies any knowledge of the use of its computer for such a campaign
Click to expand...
Is this enough, or do you want more?
 
The real problem with engineered crops, as this column has been pointing out for several years, is that they permit the big biotech companies to place a padlock on the foodchain. By patenting the genes and all the technologies associated with them, the corporations are manoeuvring themselves into a position in which they can exercise complete control over what we eat. This has devastating implications for food security in poorer countries.

Does this stop poor countries from using non GM crops? I don't see why.

Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi, all of which are suffering from the current famine, have been told by the US international development agency, USAID, that there is no option but to make use of GM crops from the United States.

Original source?

And what authority does USAID have to enforce this and prevent those countries from getting seed elsewhere?

Six months ago, this column revealed that a fake citizen called "Mary Murphy" had been bombarding internet listservers with messages denouncing the scientists and environmentalists who were critical of GM crops. The computer from which some of these messages were sent belongs to a public relations company called Bivings, which works for Monsanto. The boss of Bivings wrote to the Guardian, fiercely denying that his company had been running covert campaigns. His head of online PR, however, admitted to Newsnight that one of the messages came from someone "working for Bivings" or "clients using our services". But Bivings denies any knowledge of the use of its computer for such a campaign

So one company has been sending out misinformation. Hardly evidence that evidence that any farmer is being forced to use GM seed.

Kimpatsu, I don't know if farmers are being forced to use GM seed against their will, or if people are being forced to eat it against their will. It's not something I'd really looked into before now. I'm actually interested in knowing. You give the impression of someone who has read a lot from (mainly) this one source of yours, and have become convinced of the truth in what he is saying, but haven't really looked beyond his opinions to check the sources. I could be wrong, and I'm not trying to be argumentative, but that is the impression you give. I'm interested in knowing if you have you really viewed this information with a skeptical eye, and if you have original sources that support your claims. Thanks.
 
Kimpatsu said:



Is this enough, or do you want more?
Click to expand...


Paranoid Drivel. I've heard enough from my paranoid schizophrenic mom to last a life time-but at least she has an excuse. What is the author's problem?
 
Originally posted by Kimpatsu:
If you didn't read all the articles, you should take the time to do so. George Monbiot is the premier human rights campaigner in Europe.
Click to expand...

Premier human rights campaigner in Europe? Says who and why? BTW I took the time to read some of the Monbiot's articles, and I believe that he's selective in the facts he uses to support his case.

Of course, if you see nothing wrong with the hegemony of unelected corporations, I can't help you.
Click to expand...

What hegemony? The unelected corporations can't persuade the EU or Zambia to accept GM food. What kind of hegemony is that?
 
Of course, if you see nothing wrong with the hegemony of unelected corporations, I can't help you.
Click to expand...

You write this as if this means something...it is pure quasi-marxist drivel. For interest sake, what do you think this phrase you've written means?
 
But the label is becoming ever more germane. For not only are GM crops cobbled together out of bits of other organisms...
Click to expand...

This is a blatant lie; I doubt even Greenpeace would seriously believe that this is an accurate description of GM crops.
 
" forced through lack of choice to buy cars, shop at superstores "

Rubbish. Forced by our own laziness and convenience perhaps. I know very few people who actually need a car. I don't but I have one. I can walk to work if can be bothered. Even when I worked in the city centre instead of the outskirts where I live, I could walk to the village centre, get a bus or train, walk 5-10 minutes to work. I don't need to shop in the supermarket but it's simpler than finding the time to get to the local market. I know so many people like this writer and they have alienated me from their causes because of this attitude of "anything I do that's not totally green and in line with my espoused ethics is forced on me by the demands of modern life" when they are exposing themselves as posturing hypocrites.
I recall the clearest example was a mother on some egregious chat show who was proud of rejecting medical treatment for her kid's (forgotten but serious) condition as any form of treatment was against God's will. She wore glasses. When this was pointed out to her, she denied responsibility as she'd been prescribed the specs when she was younger. But every day since then she'd made the decision to keep using them because her convenience was more important to her than her kid's life. I'll stop now before I start swearing.
 
Zamzara said:
And so-called organic crops contaminate GM crops just as much.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that doesn't put the GM farmers out of business. A lop-sided effect you must agree.
 
RichardR:
A link for what? I followed your advice and googled exactly as you suggested. Nothing that said it was a problem for humans to eat – in fact one of the links stated that it is not harmful for humans.
Click to expand...
Let me ask you again: Is it now approved for human consumption?
So do you have a reference for your point?
Click to expand...
You say you googled the words "Starlink corn" and yet you still require a link? Half the links which appear on page 1 would have answered your question. Anyway, here's one of them.
 
Eos of the Eons:
Yeah, references to woo woos selling you 'natural food' and encouraging you to fight this unethical pushing of GMO food on 'innocent' and naive consumers. We're all victims don't ya know.:D
Click to expand...
Only an idiot wouldn't question the safety of what he ingests, when what he ingests is a new type of organism.
 
DanishDynamite, Richard R said that everything he saw by Googling indicated that Starlink is not harmful for humans and you disagreed. Yet even reading the link you just provided, it looks like Starlink is probably not allergenic, based on the tests that Aventis did. Do you have data indicating otherwise?

And we're not saying that you shouldn't question the safety of what you eat, but that the safety of GM is at least as good as crops modified by more old-fashioned means.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom