Monsanto in US Foreign Policy

[Natural Citizen]

Biotech Ambassadors: How the U.S. State Department Promotes the Seed Industry’s Global Agenda

Agricultural development is essential for the developing world to foster sustainable economies, enhance food security to combat global hunger and increase resiliency to climate change. Addressing these challenges will require diverse strategies that emphasize sustainable, productive approaches that are directed by countries in the developing world.

But in the past decade, the United States has aggressively pursued foreign policies in food and agriculture that benefit the largest seed companies. The U.S. State Department has launched a concerted strategy to promote agricultural biotechnology, often over the opposition of the public and governments, to the near exclusion of other more sustainable, more appropriate agricultural policy alternatives.

The U.S. State Department has also lobbied foreign governments to adopt pro-agricultural biotechnology policies and laws, operated a rigorous public relations campaign to improve the image of biotechnology and challenged commonsense biotechnology safeguards and rules — even including opposing laws requiring the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods.

Food & Water Watch closely examined five years of State Department diplomatic cables from 2005 to 2009 to provide the first comprehensive analysis of the strategy, tactics and U.S. foreign policy objectives to foist pro-agricultural biotechnology policies worldwide. Read the full report to learn more.

The report raises some real concerns about the intersection of U.S. foreign policy and U.S. commercial interests. While the two have always been closely related, there seems to be an increasing amount of overlap.

Read the Full Report (http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/Biotech_Report_US.pdf)

Interestingly, the State Department’s initiative went beyond the usual “charm offensive” to promote agricultural biotechnology in general. It also included specific efforts to promote commercial interests.

After US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks showed that the State Department was lobbying worldwide for Monsanto and other similar corporations, a new report based on the cables shows Washington's shilling for the biotech industry in distinct detail.

The August 2011 WikiLeaks revelations showed that American diplomats had requested funding to send lobbyists for the biotech industry to hold talks with politicians and agricultural officials in "target countries" in areas like Africa and Latin America, where genetically-modified crops were not yet a mainstay, as well as some European countries that have resisted the controversial agricultural practice.

After a concerted effort to "closely examine five years of State Department diplomatic cables from 2005 to 2009 to provide the first comprehensive analysis of the strategy, tactics and U.S. foreign policy objectives to foist pro-agricultural biotechnology policies worldwide," nonprofit consumer protection group Food& Water Watch published on Tuesday a report showing in plain detail the depth of the partnership between the federal government and a number of controversial biotech companies that have slowly but surely pushed their GMO products on a number of new countries in recent years.

At center stage in the report is Monsanto, the St. Louis, Missouri-based makers of genetically-modified crops and genetically-engineered seeds that has continuously generatedcriticism (http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-march-protests-world-069/) as of late over its practices both on the growing field and in a court of law.

Monsanto is among the most valuable corporations in the US, yet has relentlessly sued small-time farmers across the world over alleged patent violations, often forcing independent agriculturists to go out of business. Legislation signed into law last month provided litigation immunity to GMO companies including Monsanto, and on Monday the Supreme Court sided (http://rt.com/usa/patented-monsanto-court-patent-210/) with the corporation when ruling on a landmark patent infringement case.

“The US Department of State is selling seeds instead of democracy,” Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter told reporters. “This report provides a chilling snapshot of how a handful of giant biotechnology companies are unduly influencing US foreign policy and undermining our diplomatic efforts to promote security, international development and transparency worldwide.

This report is a call to action for Americans because public policy should not be for sale to the highest bidder.”

Food & Water Watch published their findings this week after combing through the roughly 260,000 State Department cables that the whistleblower website first began publishing in 2010, but notes that their statistics specifically come from memos not classified as 'secret' or higher.

For the most part, wrote the nonprofit, “The State Department strategy sought to foist pro-biotech policies on foreign governments” using a four-prong approach: promote biotech business interests; lobby foreign governments to weaken biotech rules; protect US biotech exports and press developing world to adopt biotech crops.

As the cables are analyzed, though, the efforts the State Department undertook to advocate for Monsanto demonstrate a willingness to put a US-based company’s profits about the interests and health of those residing in foreign nations.

In a cable sent from the Slovakian consulate in 2005, the State Department is told that the local post “will continue its efforts to dispel myths about GMOs and advocate on behalf of Monsanto.” In 2009, a cable out of Madrid, Spain announced that Monsanto had made “urgent requests” to fight off an anti-GMO opposition campaign that posed problems to the biotech industry. Other revelations show pro-GMO efforts waged by the US on behalf of the biotech industry in Hong Kong, the European Union, Egypt and elsewhere.

However, activists in the areas in question and elsewhere are taking note of Monsanto's dangerous and growing influence, withanti-Monsanto demonstrations planned in 36 cities on six continents (http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-march-protests-world-069/) for spring and summer 2013.

“The State Department’s efforts impose the policy objectives of the largest biotech seed companies on often skeptical or resistant governments and public, and exemplifies thinly veiled corporate diplomacy,” alleged Food & Water Watch.

When Food & Water Watch scoured those cables, they concluded that the State Department was conducting off-the-radar negotiations that didn’t seem to advance democracy or American ideals — instead, rather, it found evidence of lobbying used to advance the agenda of thriving US companies that have already purchased the approval of much of Washington.

“It’s not surprising that Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer and Dow want to maintain and expand their control of the $15 billion global biotech seed market, but it’s appalling that the State Department is complicit in supporting their goals despite public and government opposition in several countries,” Ronnie Cummins, executive director of Organic Consumers Association, said in the press release accompanying the report. “American taxpayer’s money should not be spent advancing the goals of a few giant biotech companies.”

Of the 926 State Department cables analyzed by Food & Water Watch, the group found Monsanto appeared in more than 6 percent of the memos, shining light on how a federal agency “worked especially hard to promote the interests” of an outside company.

When reached for comment by Reuters, Monsanto spokesman Tom Helscher said, "We remain committed to sharing information so that individuals can better understand our business and our commitments to support farmers throughout the world as they work to meet the agriculture demands of our world's growing population.” The State Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

As RT reported previously, that so-called “Monsanto Protection Act” signed into law last month was co-authored by a senator that has received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions (http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-bill-blunt-agriculture-006/) from the company — a revelation that didn’t surprise many given that another important figure in Washington, Justice Clarence Thomas, served as an attorney for the corporation before he was nominated to the high court only to eventually preside over a case involving his former employer. But according to Food & Water Watch, the relationship between Monsanto and the government extends beyond Congress and the Supreme Court.

In a statement published on Tuesday to accompany their report, Food & Water Watch wrote that the cables detail “how the US State Department lobbies foreign governments to adopt pro-agricultural biotechnology policies and laws, operates a rigorous public relations campaign to improve the image of biotechnology and challenges commonsense biotechnology safeguards and rules — including opposing genetically engineered (GE) food labeling laws.”

This week’s report comes just one day after Justice Thomas and the Supreme Court sided with Monsanto in reaching a decision in alandmark patent suit (http://rt.com/usa/patented-monsanto-court-patent-210/). In the case, the high court said that an Indiana farmer infringed on Monsanto’s patent rights by using specially-made seeds he obtained second-hand without signing a contract with the company. That ruling, however, came just days after the company was hit with comparably bad news: on Friday, the US Department of Agriculture ordered an extra round of tests for new GMO breeds being developed by Monsanto and Dow, putting on hold plans to release to the public laboratory-made crops that can withstand heavy dousing of dangerous pesticides. Both companies want to make available crops that are resistant to the chemicals 2,4-D and dicamba, a move that environmentalists fear will prompt farmers to use more of these toxins.

"The danger that 2,4-D and dicamba pose is a real threat to crops…nearly every food crop," Steve Smith, director of agriculture at Red Gold, told Reuters last year.

[kcchiefs6465]

http://i.imgur.com/xBMr67A.jpg?1

[kcchiefs6465]

^ Colombia ^

[Debbie Downer]

^ Colombia ^

Funny you should post that, I just applied to two jobs at Monsanto in Colombia :)

[kcchiefs6465]

Funny you should post that, I just applied to two jobs at Monsanto in Colombia :)
That plane is spraying herbicides to kill off coca plants. The locals get sprayed with it and it poisons their water. Probably not so much Monsanto's fault as much as our government's policies but Monsanto is who produces the herbicide.

I never knew Monsanto had any offices in Colombia.

[Debbie Downer]

That plane is spraying herbicides to kill off coca plants. The locals get sprayed with it and it poisons their water. Probably not so much Monsanto's fault as much as our government's policies but Monsanto is who produces the herbicide.

I never knew Monsanto had any offices in Colombia.

The locals should get a water filter. You can get them really cheap on amazon.

And yes, Monsanto has offices in Colombia. They sell quite a bit of Round Up and seeds there and are aggressively expanding across Latin America.

[kcchiefs6465]

The locals should get a water filter. You can get them really cheap on amazon.

And yes, Monsanto has offices in Colombia. They sell quite a bit of Round Up and seeds there and are aggressively expanding across Latin America.
Perhaps they should get umbrellas too.

Some of the birth defects are pretty bad. The insulting thing about your post is that I am sure you are aware of how poor the farmers I'm referring to truly are. Poverty in America doesn't mean shit compared to that. 'Water filters from Amazon'..... that's good.

With regards to "aggressively expanding" I'd imagine some of the billions in aid given to Colombia got funnelled back through Monsanto. The however many hundreds of thousands of gallons of Round Up sprayed probably cost US taxpayers a pretty penny. Indeed, I imagine 'business' is good.

[Natural Citizen]

This is an interesting paper.

Danger of Biological Warfare Made Worse by Genetically Modified Foods

In December of 2011, Hillary Clinton delivered a policy statement at a UN Biological Weapons Convention, stating that biological warfare not only remains a significant threat in the world today, but that the danger from terrorists obtaining and abusing the technology is a growing threat that shouldn’t be ignored. Clinton made it clear that the U.S. was aware of activities on the part of terrorist organizations to actively obtain and utilize biological warfare technologies against Western countries and citizens.

She reported intelligence that showed Al Qaeda leadership wanted, “brothers with degrees in microbiology or chemistry…to develop a weapon of mass destruction.”

The irony of the statement was especially poignant when Clinton stated, “…the emerging gene synthesis industry is making genetic material more widely available. This obviously has benefits for research but could also potentially be used to assemble the components of a deadly organism.”

The irony comes from the fact that U.S. producers of genetically modified foods are already creating an environmental scenario where the interactions between GM plants and nature itself may produce such deadly organisms – without the need for terrorist instigators.


Creating an Accidental Biological Weapon

While Clinton reported that the ease with which genetic modification is becoming possible, creating the potential for terrorists to obtain the technology more easily, an even greater danger comes from the use of the technology from major corporations.

A paper titled, "Analysis of the Threat of Genetically Modified Organism for Biological Warfare" published by National Defense University researchers in May of 2011 reveals just how unpredictable the technology can be, even in a well-funded laboratory.


"From the point of view of the potential perpetrator, the challenge is to reliably predict the overall effects of the changes. For example, the intent of the Australian researchers in modifying mouse pox was to produce a contraceptive effect, and the subsequent lethality of the modified virus was an unintended side effect. Conversely, a sequence of genetic material that codes for expression of a particular toxic protein may inadvertently suppress other functions essential to the reproduction or survivability of the microorganisms."



What this statement reveals is that even in the hands of well-trained scientists employed by the producers of genetically modified foods, the intended effects of those genetic modifications could potentially have very serious and negative adverse, albeit unintended, side-effects.

And if those side effects involve the accidental modification of pathogens that naturally occur in the environment around those plants, the results could be a pathogen far worse than anything that a biological terrorist could conjure up.

The authors conclude that due to the ease with which this biotechnology can negatively affect animals, plants and the entire ecosphere itself, the technology represents a serious threat.

We conclude that, broadly state, peaceful scientific advances, global statistics and demographics of GMOs suggest that the potential for corruption of biotechnology to catastrophic malevolent use is considerable."



A paper published by The Ecologist agrees with this assessment, and applied it to the food industry and the pharmaceutical industry, stating that there is a significant danger posed by the cross-use of the biotechnology.

In one case, a U.S. firm accidentally contaminated food intended for human consumption with a genetically engineered variety intended to create a vaccine.


Last year in Texas 500,000 bushels of soya destined for human consumption were contaminated with genes from maize genetically modified by the US firm Prodigene so as to create a vaccine for a stomach disease afflicting pigs. A major concern is that GM firms are using commodity food crops for pharmaceutical production."



Producing Virus Tolerant Crops May Alter Viruses Themselves

One of the "intended" effects of much of the genetic engineering of food crops is to make the plant resistant to disease, pests and viruses that typically cause crop losses.

While the intent seems innocent enough on the surface, the unintended ecological ramifications of tampering with nature could lead to disaster.

An article published by the Union of Concerned Scientists titled "Risks of Genetic Engineering" covers these dangers in great detail, including how introducing a genetic tolerance to certain viruses could produce a more virulent strain of that virus.



One of the most common applications of genetic engineering is the production of virus-tolerant crops. Such crops are produced by engineering components of viruses into the plant genomes. For reasons not well understood, plants producing viral components on their own are resistant to subsequent infection by those viruses. Such plants, however, pose other risks of creating new or worse viruses through two mechanisms: recombination and transcapsidation.



The writers explain that either the recombination of plant produced viral genes with the genes of incoming viruses, or the encapsulation of genetic material of the virus by the plant's viral proteins, can ultimately produce viruses that are far more dangerous than the parent virus was - hybrid viruses that never would have existed if there had been no genetically altered plant.

Some researchers actually question whether the "unintended" side-effects - stronger diseases or weeds that require ever-changing genetic modifications in the plants, or stronger herbicides to kill the hybrid weeds - might actually be an intended side-effect by profit-hungry GM industrial giants like Monsanto, the producer of both genetically modified plants as well as weed-killer products.



Likewise, if spraying of herbicides becomes more regular due to cultivars, surrounding weeds could develop a resistance to the herbicide tolerant by the crop. This would cause an increase in herbicide dose or change in herbicide, as well as an increase in the amount and types of herbicides on crop plants. Ironically, chemical companies that sell weed killers are a driving force behind this research.



Effect on Human Health Still Unknown

Last but most importantly, science still has not proven conclusively whether or not genetically modified foods have negative side-effects on the human body.

As with many scientific unknowns, there is evidence on both sides to suggest in some cases that the foods are safe, while there is evidence on the other side that shows the foods are harmful. Both sides attack studies conducted by the other.

For example, a 2010 study published by the researchers at the University of Athens showed clear animal toxicity with certain modified foods.



The results of most studies with GM foods indicate that they may cause some common toxic effects such as hepatic, pancreatic, renal, or reproductive effects and may alter the hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters. However, many years of research with animals and clinical trials are required for this assessment. The use of recombinant GH or its expression in animals should be re-examined since it has been shown that it increases IGF-1 which may promote cancer.



The researchers that published this paper acknowledged that more research is required, but say there is clear evidence that GM foods may have an affect on animal biology, and therefore just as likely human biology. Yet, GM industries are free to infiltrate the U.S. food supply with modified foods, and are not required to label those foods as such.

This, combined with Prince Charles stating quite publicly that multi-national companies were "were conducting an experiment with nature which had gone seriously wrong", might explain why many citizens and local leaders in the UK reject GM foods.

In one case, a 2009 study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences reported that rats fed GM corn developed kidney and liver problems. Monsanto countered the study, claiming that there were methodological flaws with the study.

However, despite the fact that science has yet to conclude one way or the other on the safety of GM foods, those foods are being approved and stocked in U.S. supermarkets - again, without any labels revealing that they are GM foods.



"Today the vast majority of foods in supermarkets contain genetically modified substances whose effects on our health are unknown. As a medical doctor, I can assure you that no one in the medical profession would attempt to perform experiments on human subjects without their consent. Such conduct is illegal and unethical. Yet manufacturers of genetically altered foods are exposing us to one of the largest uncontrolled experiments in modern history."--Dr. Martha R. Herbert, pediatric neurologist



No matter your position on the safety of genetically modified foods, there are two core principles that for some reason those in charge of protecting U.S. consumers from harm seem to ignore. The first is that the FDA appears to be siding with the GM food companies rather than using caution for the sake of consumer safety.

The second is that companies like Monsanto appear to have free reign to introduce dangerous lab-produced creations into nature with no consideration given to the impact that careless activity will have on future generations.


National Post - Hillary Clinton Speech (http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/07/biological-weapons-threat-growing-clinton-says/)
CBS News - Hillary Clinton Speech (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57338301/clinton-gene-synthesis-raises-bioweapon-threat/)
National Defense University Paper (http://www.ndu.edu/inss/docuploaded/CTNSP-DTP%2082.pdf) on Threat of GMO for Bio Warfare
SFSU.edu (http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/GMfree5.htm) - 5 Reasons to Keep Britain [and the rest of the world] GM-free
UCSUSA.org (http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/science_and_impacts/impacts_genetic_engineering/risks-of-genetic-engineering.html#Creation_of_New_or_Worse_Viruses)
NYU.edu (http://www.nyu.edu/classes/jaeger/genetically_modified_foods.htm)
PubMed.gov (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18989835)
Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3349308/Prince-Charles-warns-GM-crops-risk-causing-the-biggest-ever-environmental-disaster.html) Herbert, Martha. "Genetically Altered Foods: We Are Being Exposed To One Of The Largest Uncontrolled Experiments In History," Chicago Tribune, Sept 3, 2000.
Cornell Daily Sun (http://cornellsun.com/node/45837)

Ryan Dube is editor-in-chief of TSW and an electrical engineer in the automation industry

[Natural Citizen]

Control over food is at stake with Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) (http://www.opednews.com/articles/Control-over-food-is-at-st-by-Mark-Dunlea-130623-63.html)


Like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which displaced millions of Mexican corn farmers, the TPP is expected to flood markets with cheap products, increasing pressures on small farmers to grow cash crops, rather than traditional food crops. And, like NAFTA, TPP will force small farmers off the land forcing them to migrate to cities, and cross borders hoping to survive. FTAs have undercut the right of local producers to receive a fair, locally determined price for their products by forcing farmers to compete in the global food market.

As a result of FTAs, agricultural production has increased the use of fossil fuels for production and transportation, thereby increasing pollution; increased the use of chemical inputs; expanded the health and environmental risks associated with genetically modified material; and reduced biodiversity by favoring mono-cropping.
Many environmental, farm and fair trade groups are concerned about the negative impact the TPP could have on where and how dairy products are produced and processed. The U.S. dairy industry generates $140 billion in economic activity and employs an estimated 900,000 workers, while providing nourishment to millions more. The nation cannot afford to compete with dairy imports produced under unfair conditions.

[Natural Citizen]

I'm bumping this thread because it's an important aspect of future discussion.

[FrankRep]

EU-U.S. Transatlantic Trade Partnership Will Force GMO Products into Europe


2015 target date for EU-US trade deal (TTIP)
http://euobserver.com/economic/119066
===



The EU-U.S. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (http://www.cfr.org/eu/eu-ustransatlantic-trade-investment-partnership/p30766)



Speaker: Karel De Gucht, European Commissioner for Trade
Presider: William Drozdiak, President, American Council on Germany


Council on Foreign Relations
May 21, 2013


...
DROZDIAK: Well, the fact that there is such strong political will on both sides to conclude this agreement is one of the biggest factors it has going for it. Certainly Europe needs a new impulse for growth, and I think many governments in the European Union are looking for it.

But nonetheless, you're negotiating on behalf of 27 governments. Countries like France and even Germany have expressed concerns about certain aspects -- agriculture trade, for example, GMOs, hormone-treated beef. American farmers say -- or American senators who represent the farming constituency say they will not accept any kind of agreement unless this is accepted. And then you have the very -- unless it is accepted, that you allow your markets to open up to GMO products.
...



====



http://www.jbs.org/images/action_projects/CF-STFTA.jpg (http://www.jbs.org/issues-pages/stop-the-free-trade-agenda)


Stop the Free Trade Agenda (http://www.jbs.org/issues-pages/stop-the-free-trade-agenda)

STOP FREE TRADE AGENDA is a major new action project of The John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/) with the purpose of preserving our personal freedoms and national independence by stopping congressional approval of any new multilateral free trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). A vote to approve the TPP agreement is expected in late 2013; a vote on the TTIP agreement is expected in 2015. The global power elites view multilateral free trade agreements as one of their main vehicles for establishing, step by step, socialistic regional governments controlled by themselves as steppingstones toward a socialistic global government under the United Nations.


https://sphotos-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/1184784_237861829698629_502246097_n.jpg (http://www.thenewamerican.com/freedomindex/pdf/FreeTradeAgendaSpecialReport.pdf)

How the Free Trade Agenda Is Knocking Down America -- The New American (PDF) Special Report
http://www.thenewamerican.com/freedomindex/pdf/FreeTradeAgendaSpecialReport.pdf


September 2, 2013


The Special Report includes the following articles:

- The "Free Trade" Agenda Threatens Our Rights
- Global Merger: Piece by Piece (http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/16342-global-merger-piece-by-piece)
- The EU: Regionalization Trumps Sovereignty (http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/16343-the-eu-regionalization-trumps-sovereignty)
- Trade Promises... and Trade Reality
- North American Union: From NAFTA to the NAU (http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/16345-north-american-union-from-nafta-to-the-nau)
- Fast-track: Enabler of the "Free Trade" Agenda
- Regional Scheme for the Pacific Rim (http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/16347-regional-scheme-for-the-pacific-rim)
- EU/U.S. — Transatlantic Convergence (http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/16348-eu-u-s-transatlantic-convergence)
- Preserve Your Rights: Stop the "Free Trade" Agenda


Tools to STOP the "Free Trade" Agenda - Pamphlet, Reprints, CDs, TNA Special Issues
https://www.jbs.org/shop-jbs/stop-the-free-trade-agenda


Facebook:

Choose Freedom - STOP the Free Trade Agenda (https://www.facebook.com/StopTheFreeTradeAgenda)

[Natural Citizen]

Leading EU agricultural nations remain steadfast in their battle against GM crops. Dozen national European ministers warn against approving GM maize and forebode protest voting during the next EU parliamentary elections in May.


Once Brussels announced (http://rt.com/news/eu-approve-gm-crop-608/) it would approve the cultivation of US-developed genetically modified maize in Europe despite opposition of the majority of the EU member states, 12 ministers of national governments wrote a letter to European Health Commissioner Tonio Borg, demanding that approval be blocked of GM maize grown for human consumption in Europe.

At a meeting in Brussels earlier this week, 19 out of 28 EU member states refused to give a green light to the insect-resistant Pioneer 1507 corn developed by DuPon and Dow Chemical. Four countries, including agricultural giant Germany, abstained in the voting.
But under EU rules, the Commission is empowered to approve GM for cultivation.

The letter, signed by foreign and European affairs ministers from Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland and Slovenia, is dated February 12.

The ministers gave Brussels a warning that citizens of EU member states are likely to express their generally negative attitude towards GM crops at the European Parliament elections in May.

“Those who believe in the value of the EU to its citizens are rightly concerned how this will play out in the upcoming European elections,” the letter says.
The stand-off may eventually lead to a situation when GM crops would be allowed in the EU in general, with all countries reserving the right to ban GM nationwide, Reuters reported.

Five EU countries, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, and in particular Spain and UK, are advocating GM crops, pointing out it would be tough for their farmers to compete with rivals from those nations where growing GM crops is legal.
European agricultural producers generally do not approve of genetically modified crops, which are widely cultivated in both Americas and Asia, due to health and ecological concerns. Yet one GM modification of maize, MON 810 made by US-based biotechnology giant Monsanto, is grown in the EU. According to the European Commission, MON 810 maize occupies only 1.35 percent of the EU's total maize-growing area, mostly in Spain, with 116,306 hectares.


http://rt.com/news/eu-rethinks-gm-maize-875/



Aside... EU to approve new GM crop, ignoring majority members’ opposition (http://rt.com/news/eu-approve-gm-crop-608/)


The European Commission is set to authorize the growing of genetically modified maize on European soil, despite 19 member states voting against the move, highlighting the “absurd” rules of weighted votes in the EU.

In a debate on Tuesday, 19 EU member states indicated that they would vote against the authorization of genetically modified maize because of health and environmental concerns and opposition in the European Parliament.

But because of the so-called comitology rules of the EU, their votes will be insufficient to overturn the decision of bigger member states that support the introduction of insect resistant Pioneer 1507.

The UK and Spain are both in favor of GM crops, while Germany abstained and France is staunchly against their introduction.

European health Commissioner Tonio Borg said on Tuesday that the commission is now legally bound to approve the crop. Borg insisted that extensive research since 2001 had shown the crop was safe.

Britain has argued that without GM crops, Europe risks becoming “the museum of world farming,” and that there is a clear scientific case for GM, while Spain has said that its farmers need to be able to compete with non-EU nations that can grow GM produce.

DuPont, which jointly developed Pioneer 1507 with Dow Chemical, said in statement that the EU has a “legal obligation to itself, to its farmers and scientists and to its trade partners” to support the approval of new agricultural advances.

[angelatc]

Hurrah for science, rolling over Luddites one nation at a time.

Dow and Dupont are far bigger chemical companies, but I guess they must donate to liberal causes.

[libertyjam]

THis seems like a good place to leave this:

Monsanto’s Roundup & Glyphosate Poisoning Continues

http://covvha.net/monsantos-roundup-glyphosate-poisoning-continues/

As if we need more evidence that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s flagship weed-killer, is dangerous to both people and the environment, a new study suggests it could be at least partially to blame for the declining coral reefs around the world. According to GreenMedInfo, the Great Barrier Reef is “the world’s biggest single structure made by living organisms. It can even be seen from space. But, since 1985, the reef has lost more than half its coral cover—more than half! Scientists blame the degradation of the Great Barrier Reef and other coral reefs on a variety of causes including climate change, increased predator species, and pollution. But a new study published in Marine Pollution Bulletin indicates glyphosate may need to be added to the list.” Glyphosate persistence in seawater” looks at the impact of the agro-chemical on sea life. The researchers found that glyphosate is particularly persistent and dangerous in sea water. It’s half-life, or the rate at which it breaks down, is dramatically longer in the ocean.
The study says, “the half-life for glyphosate at 25°C in low-light was 47 days, extending to 267 days in the dark at 25°C and 315 days in the dark at 31°C, which is the longest persistence reported for this herbicide.” But, in the soil, the chemical’s half-life is as quick as 5 days; in bog or fresh water, it’s 49 days.
View The Study: Glyphosate Persistence in Seawater (http://www.scribd.com/doc/206711392/Glyphosate-Persistence-in-Seawater)

[Natural Citizen]

This is rather lengthy so I'll add a snippet while it's on my mind. Now, you're going to have to put yer thinking cap on here. Especially considering the fact that some of our elected ones are running with the mainstream narrative and countering the ruse regarding Ukraine with language that actually supports such things as the Trans Pacific Partnership (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?433167-WikiLeaks-releases-draft-of-highly-secretive-multi-national-trade-deal&highlight=Trans+pacific)agreement and the looting happening there and whatnot. I don't know why they think we're stupid and they actively participate in the malfeasance of it all. If not then they are incompetent to discuss such things as foreign policy. But I think they fully know and demonstrate who they are running interference for by going along with romper room.




According to a report in Kommersant-Ukraine, the finance ministry of Washington’s stooges in Kiev who are pretending to be a government has prepared an economic austerity plan that will cut Ukrainian pensions from $160 to $80 so that Western bankers who lent money to Ukraine can be repaid at the expense of Ukraine’s poor. http://www.kommersant.ua/doc/2424454 (http://www.kommersant.ua/doc/2424454)It is Greece all over again.

Before anything approaching stability and legitimacy has been obtained for the puppet government put in power by the Washington orchestrated coup against the legitimate, elected Ukraine government, the Western looters are already at work. Naive protesters who believed the propaganda that EU membership offered a better life are due to lose half of their pension by April. But this is only the beginning.
The corrupt Western media describes loans as “aid.” However, the 11 billion euros that the EU is offering Kiev is not aid. It is a loan. Moreover, it comes with many strings, including Kiev’s acceptance of an IMF austerity plan.

Remember now, gullible Ukrainians participated in the protests that were used to overthrow their elected government, because they believed the lies told to them by Washington-financed NGOs that once they joined the EU they would have streets paved with gold. Instead they are getting cuts in their pensions and an IMF austerity plan.

The austerity plan will cut social services, funds for education, layoff government workers, devalue the currency, thus raising the prices of imports which include Russian gas, thus electricity, and open Ukrainian assets to takeover by Western corporations.

Ukraine’s agriculture lands will pass into the hands of American agribusiness.



http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/03/06/looting-ukraine-begun/

Also...while we have our thinking caps on... Putin ‘wants to rebuild USSR with Ukraine’ – Brzezinski (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/2014/03/07/putin-wants-to-rebuild-ussr-with-ukraine-brzezinski/)

And... Did Ukraine Just Airlift Its Entire Gold Hoard To The U.S. Fed? (http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2014/3/10_Did_Ukraine_Just_Airlift_Its_Entire_Gold_Hoard_ To_The_U.S._Fed.html)

Remember that Germany asked for their gold to be repatriated. This is an important tid bit if it turns out to be true and I think that it is. Perhaps someone needs to replenish the Federal Reserve in order to keep a good standing with Germany? Maybe Putin knows this? Of course he does.

Anyhow...back to agribusiness, TPP and silver tongued politicians...

China seems to be aligning with Russia's RT in exposing westerm corporate media's spin on what is happening and as this continues expect BRICSA nations such as India and others who are becomingactive competitors in world agriculture markets by challenging American agribusiness and their GMOs with the sale of non GMO seeds and crops. Place that into perspective with the issue of human rights and these nations would have contrbute to what is already a very powerful propaganda tool on the stage of world opinion that we are seeing from China, Russia and others.

There are some other things that could be discussed but I suppose this is quite a bit to unravel itself.

The whole discussion about Foreign Policy over in the Rand Paul thread really kind of aggravated me because these folks just don't touch Foreign Policy in it's truest and most relevant form with a ten foot pole. They know whjat's going on. And so do a growing majority of Americans and foreign nations.



Relevant reading - TPP Uncovered: WikiLeaks releases draft of highly-secretive multi-national trade deal....

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?433167-WikiLeaks-releases-draft-of-highly-secretive-multi-national-trade-deal/page2&highlight=Trans+pacific

[Natural Citizen]

This is why US farmers are closely monitoring Ukrainian conflict (http://rt.com/usa/us-farmer-monitor-conflict-ukraine-240/)




Ukraine’s rise in corn and wheat production – as well as Brazil’s – has coincided with a decline in growth in the United States, leading many to think it would become one of the US’ chief competitors. Previously, analysts predicted corn acreage in the US would continue to fall, but Ukraine’s recent instability may cause farmers to rethink that outcome and plant more corn.

If the ongoing conflict continues or escalates, it could result in higher grain and corn prices across the globe. As noted by the Wall Street Journal earlier this week, wheat prices rose three percent to their highest level in two weeks on Monday, and have risen 12 percent since the start of 2014.



It seems to me that either someone is purposefully dumbing this down or just doesn't understand or perhaps cannot see the issue through the more relevant lens.

The paper doesn't specify any company by name but anyone who is even remotely informed on the subsject should be able to see who they are referencing in regard to corn and wheat when they talk about western agriculture in particular.

And the thing with the ruble is a bit of very shallow insight as we consider Russia, China and a growing list of BRICSA nations Competitive non-GMO nations, btw) who seem to be performing a reconfig on their in house finance clearing and moving toward an international model for finance clearing. One that is independent of western economic infrastructure. Or the dollar, to be clear.

Very shallow, even misleading, article here but one that contains just a bit of very, very important insight. And so then we almost want to backtrack a bit to remind ourselves that agribusiness was at the very heart of the initial conflict over there in Ukraine. And there was a thread on that specifically around here that is dated around that time but I just can't find it. Search is almost useless when you really need to fill in the dots on these timelines and information that is relevant to a great deal of things just happens to be fragmented when such things come up.

I think we're starting to see a (GM industry driven) push for growing, not more, but only GM products here in the states, and even abroad, by the industries, lobbies and some politicians. The thing with the legislation to void states and citizens rights to know what consumers are eating that is being introduced by Congressman Mike Pompeo on behalf of Koch network and Monsanto is a step in this direction to bring about the planting of only GM crops and a mercantilism model in order to shield themselves from the free market model. And, of course, the recent farm bill ensures that subsidies for GMO farmers. Remember also that the largest beneficiaries of that bill happened to be the very same representatives who are the owners of some of the largest farming companies and although some claim to oppose the nanny state, we see that they aren't very true to their so called position. I'd suspect that we'll see a lot of money funneled into the pockets of these representatives and their respective states as a result of that bill. Again, Congressman Mike Pompeo is a perfect example here and look at the treason he's committing by introducing that industry backed bill to void the citizens and states right to know what they are putting into their bodies in order to be able to make an educated/informed choice on whether they want to or not.

This is going to be a big deal down the short road. And there is a lot more to it but was just adding this here for the read. And this is just Ukraine that we're talking about here and the phenomenon extends far beyond them but it's just newsworthy now since western agribusiness wasn't able to sneak in there during the initial coup like they did with the other nations who had already suffered the same coups by the economic hitmen and then, of course, the sanctions on Russia by some knee jerk politicians elevated the matter that we have now ten fold. Although it's remains under the radar in the general political arena.

This is the part where we'll see some non-GMO BRICSA nations start to ride the coat tails/run abreast of the other aspect of this issue which is the oil/gas and that whole thing with Russia and China pipeline and reconfiguration of finance clearing so will see who can wear the big britches when it comes to foreign policy in relevance to these current events as far as political representatives go in the coming months. Should be able to tell who knows what and who is bullshitting whom just by what they say and the political narrative with which they choose to run. And the spying thing is very important here too. That's huge in all of this so remain mindful of mergers in space programs and, of course, our own rush to spend more on "cyber-security" just because of the international clearing thing with these nations that we are seeing happen. They're going to want to move away from western dependence and expect some folks to want to keep an eye on that upstairs (space...because accruing the most reserve currency is no longer premised upon who has the strongest naval fleet...those days are gone).

Should be interesting to watch and see if other nations start to be sanctioned and if they do then the gig is pretty much up and the rest of the gag is predictable. It's interesting that the paper specifically mentions Brazil because we had discussed this scenario elswhere here (although good luck finding it because everything is so scattered around) whereas they were one to watch to be included in future sanctions.

[Natural Citizen]

I linked to this thread from another thread.

Obama Issues Threats To Russia And NATO (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?448969-US-blasts-Europe’s-plan-for-anti-snooping-network-as-unfair-advantage&p=5497585&viewfull=1#post5497585)

Relevance... BRICSA natons initiate independent international financial clearing model.


“Over the last few decades, global interdependence has translated more into emerging economies being dependent on Western systems. It goes without say that an IMF bailout of an emerging economy will come with far more strict conditions than one that bails out a Western economy. The BRICS just do not have enough of a say in the way the Bretton Woods institutions function. It’s unfortunate that an idea like the BRICS bank, which should have come into fruition by now, is still stuck and is likely to become a reality only by 2019.

“A growing numbers of countries in Asia, Africa and South America are frustrated with the bullying that is a part and parcel of the Western-dominated institutions. The BRICS are seen as a counterweight and inspiration in the quest for a new world order. The upcoming summit of the grouping in Brazil should have a single-minded focus to set up the kind of infrastructure that creates a firewall against economic sanctions.”


“India’s interests lie in the strengthening of BRICS both as an economic and a political grouping. Russia could not get isolated internationally after the Crimean reunification largely because the BRICS rallied and came out in support of the country. Given the fact that the West has rarely been sympathetic or taken India’s side in any international dispute, the day may not be far when the country may face the wrath of sanctions on some flimsy grounds.”

These are the largest NON-GMO competitors to the western GM agribusiness oligarchy, for what it's worth, and they're also moving toward an independent form of currency/finance clearing similar to what we are seeing from Russia and China in the oil and gas department.

Getting jiggy now...

[Natural Citizen]

This is going to be a huge deal on the international level. HUGE...

Monsanto’s Love Affair with Synthetic Biology: A Match Made in Agricultural Hell (http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/blogs/monsantos-love-affair-with-synthetic-biology-a-match-made-in-agricultural-hell/)





“Synthetic Genomics Inc. specializes in an extreme form of genetic engineering called synthetic biology. Instead of transferring genetic material from one species to another, synthetic bioengineering places new, synthetically created genetic material into microorganisms. SGI plans on using its franken-microbes for all sorts of applications including biofuels, renewable chemicals, vaccines and coal bed methane recovery. This technology is even newer than traditional genetic engineering, so it is still unclear how it would be proven safe and regulated. Today’s transgenic crops are at least permitted and commercialized through a three-agency regulatory process, albeit flawed. But these organisms would be tossed into a quagmire of federal regulatory programs involving at least seven agencies including the USDA, FDA, EPA, DOT, NIH, CDC and even the FBI due to biosecurity risks; making it more likely to fall through the bureaucratic cracks.

“What could this mean for the future of agricultural biotechnology? R&D from this agreement will likely fall under Monsanto’s agricultural biological platform BioDirect (http://www.monsanto.com/products/Pages/biodirect-ag-biologicals.aspx), which means Monsanto could be developing new, microbial pesticides that could be approved and sprayed on crops to fight weeds, insects and viruses. With further investment in and research with SGI, Monsanto will soon have the means to incorporate synthetic biology into its microbial pesticides without a defined regulatory pathway to check its development along the way.

“The attempt to disguise the use of synthetic biology in agriculture as “sustainable” is an egregious abuse of the word. Releasing microbes with novel traits and functions into the wild and onto our food crops could have devastating effects on the safety of our food and the quality of our environment.”




Most American's may not understand or even care about this and I'd go so far as to say that you'd be lucky to find even a couple of elected ones who are anywhere near competent enough to comprehend the relevance/repercussion here. The rest of the world isn't going to accept this and it comes at a very delicate time when Non-GMO BRICSA nations are already maneuvering in the agricultural field as well as the economics of it (which, btw, may very well be ridding themselves of western dependence in the wonderful world of international finance clearing - Recall recent sanctions on Russia and what they are doing in that area). Monsanto is currently manipulating the American political system with the Koch network and Congressman Mike Pompeo to remove the right of the people to know what is in their food as well as any right to ever ask and now we're getting into synthetics. Given the relevance of the seldom discussed Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement in which American corporations like these position themselves to sue away the sovereignty of entire nations if they think that the laws of those countries have the potential of disrupting their profit, this strongarming of the American people is simply the first step in order for the industry to plant it's feet internationally. As it is, the U.S. is the only country in the world where these corporations possess the gift of constitution and enjoy the gift of representation above that of the people. Pompeo has so far been the recipient of more money from the Koch network than any other representative at around $190,000 or so. What we see here is not the free market in any way. It's mercantilism. What they are doing is protecting themselves from the free market while maneuvering into a position to dictate foreign policy in the field of agriculture. What this means is that we should expect a squabble at the international level regarding who gets to set the standard in the field of agriculture once the matter of synthetics becomes an issue (or noticed).

Remember this? http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/Nuclear-Test-Ban-Treaty.aspx

If so, then look for the same kind of thing to happen in the area of GMO's at the international level. Again, there's no way that the rest of the world are going to respond to the issue in the manner that boobus has here in the states. No way. Uh-uh. Ain't happening.

So while foreign policy in whole continues to be both minimized and sensationalized at the same time through mainstream media and our elected ones, do consider that there is far more to it than what we see or hear from them. And, unfortunately, we're the only ones who aren't paying attention, I think. Again, chalk it up to corporate media and political malfeasance on the part of our elected ones. We ask, you decide kind of thing...except they arent asking. Probably won't either.

[Natural Citizen]

Russian parliament: GMO producers should be punished as terrorists



A draft law submitted to the Russian parliament seeks to impose punishment up to criminal prosecution to producers of genetically-modified organisms harmful to health or the environment.

The draft legislation submitted on Wednesday amends Russia's law regulating GMOs and some other laws and provides for disciplinary action against individuals and firms, which produce or distribute harmful biotech products and government officials who fail to properly control them.

At worst, a criminal case may be launched against a company involved in introducing unsafe GMOs into Russia. Sponsors of the bill say that the punishment for such deeds should be comparable to the punishment allotted to terrorists, if the perpetrators act knowingly and hurt many people.
“When a terrorist act is committed, only several people are usually hurt. But GMOs may hurt dozens and hundreds. The consequences are much worse. And punishment should be proportionate to the crime,” co-author Kirill Cherkasov, member of the State Duma Agriculture Committee told RT.
Russian criminal code allows for a punishment starting with 15 years in jail and up to a life sentence for terrorism.

Less severe misdeeds related to GMOs would be punishable by fines. For instance the administrative code would provide for up to 20,000 rubles (US$560) in fines for failure to report an incident of environmental pollution, which would also cover harmful GMO contamination, if sponsors of the bill have their way.

Russia gave the green light to import of GMOs and planting of bioengineered seeds as part of its accession to the WTO, but the Russian government remains skeptical of GMOs. In April, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev announced (http://rt.com/news/154032-russia-gmo-food-ban/) that his cabinet will postpone the beginning of certification of GMO plants for growth in Russia due to lack of proper infrastructure needed to test their safety.

The government also opposes imports of GMO food, saying the country has enough farmlands to provide enough regular food to feed itself.



Continued - GMO producers should be punished as terrorists, Russian MPs say (http://rt.com/news/159188-russia-gmo-terrorist-bill/)

[Natural Citizen]

World needs UN GMO watchdog – Russia






http://rt.com/files/news/28/00/c0/00/matvienko.jpg
Valentina Matvienko (RIA Novosti / Maksim Blinov)

Russian lawmakers advocate creation of an international UN agency not only to strictly control the turnover of GMO products worldwide, but with a top priority mission to scrutinize how consuming GMO foods would affect human health in the long run.

Aggressive distribution of GMO worldwide is raising huge concerns for human health, said Russian Federation Council speaker Valentina Matvienko.
The speaker urged the executive branch to make a request to the UN General Assembly to initiate the creation of an international GMO watchdog.

“It’s absolutely clear that the GMO problem is a global issue,” Valentina Matvienko said.

Russian authorities are taking measures to contain uncontrollable spread of GMO foods against the background of regular worldwide mass rallies (http://rt.com/news/161356-anti-gmo-monsanto-protest/) over the distribution of GMO products created by transnational corporations, such as Monsanto.

In the US, where agricultural producers are not obliged to mark their products if they contain GMO-originated ingredients, people stage large protests, claiming that from 80 to 95 percent of the American population would want to have GMO foods labeled (http://rt.com/usa/gmo-labeled-majority-americans-601/).

A draft law submitted to the Russian parliament seeks to impose punishment up to criminal prosecution (http://rt.com/news/159188-russia-gmo-terrorist-bill/) to producers of genetically-modified organisms harmful to health or the environment.

On Thursday, the Federal Service for Consumer Rights and Human Welfare Protection presented a draft bill that would fine producers and resellers of food products containing GMO if they fail to mark it properly with ‘GMO inside’ mark.

Russian citizens do no welcome the products containing GMO either.

According to the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center, a survey taken on May 24-25 in 42 regions of the Russian Federation found that 54 percent of respondents would not buy food marked with a “GMO inside” label.

A majority of Russian citizens would prefer organic food to its genetically modified counterpart, even if that one is considerably cheaper (74 percent), packed in a more attractive manner (76 percent) or has a longer expiry date (78 percent).

Russian citizens also distrust artificial additives to food, such as preservatives (50 percent), food coloring (40 percent), flavor enhancer (33 percent) and antioxidants (31 percent).




Continued - World needs UN GMO watchdog – Russia (http://rt.com/news/163852-russia-un-gmo-watchdog/)

[Natural Citizen]

US pressures El Salvador to buy Monsanto's GMO seeds...



As one of the preconditions to authorizing close to $300 million in aid, the United States is pressuring El Salvador to purchase genetically modified seeds from Monsanto instead of non-GM seeds from local farmers.

According to Sustainable Pulse, a website covering developments related to genetically modified organisms and sustainable agriculture, the US will reportedly withhold $277 million in aid through the Millennium Challenge Compact if El Salvador refuses to purchase GM seeds from the biotech company Monsanto.

The website states that the stalled aid package was originally put on hold in late 2013, when it was revealed that Millennium Challenge Corporation would not deliver funds to the country unless “specific” economic and environmental reforms were made. Apparently, one of those is related to the purchase of GMO seeds.

“I would like to tell the U.S. Ambassador to stop pressuring the Government (of El Salvador) to buy ‘improved’ GM seeds,”CESTA president Ricardo Navarro said, adding that the move would hurt the local economy and only benefit US companies.

Navarro specifically singled out Monsanto for criticism as well, saying, “There is a harmful corporation on the planet called Monsanto … it is truly disturbing that the U.S. is trying to promote them.”

In Europe, too, Monsanto’s GM seeds have garnered criticism. In March, France banned (http://rt.com/news/france-gm-maize-ban-134/) the growth and sale of the company’s insect-repelling maize seed MON 810, just a few days before it was revealed that insects in the US were developing resistance to the crop.

The comments from Navarro also arrive as Monsanto is under fire in several South American countries, including El Salvador and Brazil. As RT reported previously, El Salvador passed (http://rt.com/news/brazil-roundup-monsanto-ban-721/) legislation in September 2013 banning glyphosate, used in Monsanto’s Roundup pesticides, as well as dozens of other agricultural chemicals.

Similar proposals are being considered in Brazil, where the country’s prosecutor general recently urged the National Health Surveillance Agency to “reevaluate the toxicity of eight active ingredients suspected of causing damage to human health and the environment,” including glyphosate and seven other chemicals.

As for why glyphosate is coming under such heavy scrutiny, new research has indicated that while the chemical is not as dangerous on its own, it becomes extremely toxic to humans once it mixes with natural metals found in soil.

Meanwhile, other reports (http://rt.com/news/monsanto-roundup-kidney-disease-921/) have linked glyphosate to the outburst of a fatal kidney disease that has killed thousands of people in El Salvador and Sri Lanka, and could also help explain similar situations in Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and India.



Continued - US pressures El Salvador to buy Monsanto's GMO seeds (http://rt.com/usa/165128-us-pressures-salvador-monsanto-gmo/)


Relevant reading - WikiLeaks releases draft of highly-secretive multi-national trade deal (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?433167-WikiLeaks-releases-draft-of-highly-secretive-multi-national-trade-deal&p=5307335&viewfull=1#post5307335)

[Natural Citizen]

GM floodgate to open? EU ministers back deal to let nations decide fate of crops...

European Union governments have decided to let member states go their own way when it comes to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), allowing EU nations to either ban the crops or grow them as they see fit. The move ends years of legislative deadlock.

At a meeting in Luxembourg, EU environment ministers from 26 out of 28 member states put their weight behind a 2010 proposal to give national governments an opt out from rules, making the 28-member bloc a single market for GMOs. Only Belgium and Luxembourg voted against it, although the final decision rests with the European Parliament, which is expected to endorse the plan, Bloomberg Businessweek reports.

A political split in Europe between countries in favor of GMOs, such as Britain and Spain, and those firmly against them, including France, has delayed EU-wide permission to grow them.

This has prompted complaints from trading partners – such as the US, where GMOs are legal – which are seeking to expand the global bio seed market, which is valued at almost US$16 billion a year.

The law will accelerate EU level endorsements for requests from US companies like Monsanto to plant genetically altered crops, which have been cleared as safe by scientists working for the European Commission.

He also said that many Europeans are wary of American companies importing genetically modified food into Europe, which could potentially pass off GM foods without having let the Europeans know about it.



Continued - GM floodgate to open? EU ministers back deal to let nations decide fate of crops (http://rt.com/news/165608-gm-crops-eu-deal/)

[Natural Citizen]

China Rejecting U.S. Corn as First Shipment From Ukraine Arrives...



China continued to reject corn cargoes from the U.S. that contained an unapproved genetically modified variety while accepting a first bulk-carrier shipment of the grain from Ukraine.

Genetically modified corn and corn-derived products totaling 601,000 metric tons were rejected in 2013, the official Xinhua News Agency reported today, citing the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine. A Panamax-sized shipment of non-genetically modified corn from Ukraine entered the country on Dec. 6, according to a statement dated Dec. 25 on the website of state-owned China National Complete Engineering Corp.

The quarantine agency’s newest figure cited by Xinhua was 56,000 tons more than it announced on Dec. 19, showing the government’s continued screening of U.S. corn and and dried distillers’ grains, or DDGS, for the unapproved insect resistanr MIR 162 gene. Net corn sales to China from the U.S. in the seven days through Dec. 26 dropped by 116,000 tons from the previous week, according to a report on the website of U.S. Department of Agriculture.



Continued - http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-01-06/china-rejecting-u-dot-s-dot-corn-as-first-shipment-from-ukraine-arrives

[Natural Citizen]

Paraguay and the Trans-Pacific plot to split South America...




Paraguay experienced a radical pivot after the one-day constitutional coup of 2012 overthrew the left-leaning Fernando Lugo and replaced him with someone (http://rt.com/news/paraguay-president-impeachment-anonymous-546/) right-wing and pro-business. Pepe Escobar felt that this was directed from outside by a couple of actors. He wrote (http://rt.com/news/paraguay-coup-monsanto-oligarchs-078/) that Monsanto and the Brazilian landowners had a stake in regime change, as did the US, which was getting uncomfortable with Lugo’s leftwards tilt and suspiciousness of the US military. To put matters in context, the US had previously supported coup attempts (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/21/usa.venezuela) in Venezuela, Ecuador (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/%20http://www.globalresearch.ca/ecuador-coup-attempt-engineered-by-the-cia/21310), and Bolivia (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11816035). After the coup, Paraguay was suspended from both Unasur and Mercosur. It wasn’t invited back until it had presidential elections in 2013, during which Horacio Cartes, a pro-business tycoon representing the historic right-wing party, came to power. It was in this aftermath that Paraguay’s polices changed and it became the South American pivot.

If Paraguay entered the Pacific Alliance, it would have a backdoor to the TPP through its free trade agreement with Chile. It could use this to sell its soybeans further afield in East Asia, raising the profits of Monsanto, the large Brazilian landowners, and the political business elite. It may even make it easier for President Energy to import the necessary oil-extracting devices and related equipment into the country, among other things. Paraguay in the Pacific Alliance would also place Mercosur in a conundrum, since the country would literally be an economic island surrounded by the organization, but one must remember the setup that Bolivia got itself into, likely unwittingly. By being in both the Andean Community and Mercosur, it has free trade with Peru, which is negotiating with the TPP. This is the backdoor for TPP and Pacific Alliance goods to transit through Bolivia to Paraguay, creating a lifeline with its future partner.

The Pacific Alliance takes the opposite approach in most regards. It was formally created just a few years ago in 2011 and brings together Mexico, Colombia, Peru, and Chile, with Costa Rica having started the integration (http://www.ticotimes.net/2014/02/10/costa-rica-signs-agreement-to-become-full-member-of-the-pacific-alliance) process earlier this year. The Pacific Alliance is fiercely neo-liberal, with John Kerry even calling (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/06/228646.htm) it “the most open trading bloc in the hemisphere” during his visit to Panama on 1 July. Continuing to show that it is the mirror opposite of Mercosur, instead of looking towards the EU, most of the Pacific Alliance’s members are in negotiations to join the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP (http://www.ustr.gov/tpp)).



Continued - Paraguay and the Trans-Pacific plot to split South America (http://rt.com/op-edge/170176-split-of-south-america-paraguay/)

[HOLLYWOOD]

Corruption/Corporatism/FASCISM...

SO... The US government is using Americans tax dollars as Foreign Aid, forcing small and weak nations/governments into buying US Multinational Corporations products. Of course these are the same multinationals that that buy the US government politicians with huge campaign and party donations.


If these poor little countries don't buy, the US government will send in the "Jackals" to assassinate the government and install puppets. WASH-RINSE-REPEAT


No doubt, Sociopaths and Psychotics run the federal government

[Natural Citizen]

For some reason this other thread has been left to die in the General Politics section. It is in no way whatsoever general politics and is perhaps the most critical geo-political event that relates to U.S. foreign policy (in several areas) at the moment so I'm linking it here for later relevance.

Sanctions: Russia strikes back - bans all US food, EU fruit and veg (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?457376-Sanctions-Russia-strikes-back-bans-all-US-food-EU-fruit-and-veg&p=5610656)

[Natural Citizen]

A very good and detailed analysis of Russian agricultural sanctions...

You wanna be Uncle Sam's bitch? Pay the price! (http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com.br/2014/08/you-wanna-be-uncle-sams-bitch-pay-price.html)

[Natural Citizen]

Given the notion that Russia and China are using Western sanctions as somewhat of an opportunity to establish a BRICS agricultural trade zone and perhaps a means to establish an agricultural "standard" within BRIC nations one could flirt with the idea that a broader form of policy is in the works.

Anyhoo...there is this...

India: Selling Out To Monsanto. GMOs and the Bigger Picture (http://www.globalresearch.ca/independent-india-selling-out-to-monsanto-gmos-and-the-bigger-picture/5395187)


"In the meantime, Monsanto and the GM biotech sector forward the myth that GM food is necessary to feed the world’s burgeoning population. They are not. Aside from the review by GRAIN, the World Bank funded International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge and Science for Development Report stated that smallholder, traditional farming (not GMOs) can deliver food security in low-income countries through sustainable agri-ecological systems [5].

“The Standing Committee on Agriculture in Parliament unequivocally concluded that GM seeds and foods are dangerous to human, animal and environmental health and directed the former Government of Manmohan Singh to ban GMOs [6]. Despite such evidence and the recommendations to put a hold on open field GM trials by the Supreme Court-appointed Technical Expert Committee, the push is on within official circles to give such trials the green light.”

“In India, there is a drive to remove small/family farms, which are capable of ensuring the nation’s food security, and eventually replace them with larger biotech-controlled monoculture farms with GM crops for Western styled processed-food supermarkets and export [20]. It is no surprise that the likes of Syngenta, Monsanto and Walmart had a direct hand in drawing up the Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture, which was in turn linked to the US sanctioning the opening up of India’s nuclear power sector.

“Despite India not being a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, US corporations are now actively involved in helping India develop its civil nuclear capabilities. Payback appears to come in the form of handing over the control of India’s agricultural land and food system to the US via that country’s biotech companies.”




Relevant reading...

GMOs and environmental destruction – Pope Francis urges humanity to respect nature (http://www.naturalnews.com/046444_GMOs_environmental_destruction_Pope_Francis .html)


“Andrews said the U.S. has “repeatedly” pushed the Holy See to endorse GMO seeds “as a moral obligation,” but that the “policy of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has been to resist officially adopting GMOs.”

Essentially, the industry is looking for some sort of moral sanction here. (Could be said that western leaders and industry are fully aware of the geo-political course that BRICS nations are taking with regard to GMO and an agricultural standard and so this would be an expected move).

Of course, the Pope isn't having any of it as GMOs are not relative to any aspect of Roman Catholic doctrine.

[HOLLYWOOD]

http://thecampofthesaints.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/ge-logo3-250.jpghttp://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/20140708_exim.jpg?1404869123

[Natural Citizen]

Get ready, boys. Moving faster now. Given Russia's actions of late what we'd do well to recall would be scattered news and discussion relative to an agricultural test ban treaty that exists here on the forum. I made sure of it. This, of course, would set the international standard.

Someone is building a BRIC wall. And with the quickness...

Govt approves fines for improper GMO labeling...




The Russian cabinet has approved the bill introducing heavy fines for businessmen who violate the rules on obligatory marking of foodstuffs containing genetically-modified products.

The bill has been drafted by the state consumer rights agency Rospotrebnadzor and concerns all food and beverage products containing genetically-modified organisms or their parts, or which are made using such organisms. Entrepreneurs who fail to put markings on the products they sell or distort the information will be fined between 20,000 and 150,000 rubles (US$555 - $4150). Control bodies can also confiscate the improperly marked stock.

The current Russian law orders clearly visible indication on all goods that contain 0.9 percent of genetically-modified organisms by weight. There are no limitations on the turnover or production of GMO-containing foodstuffs.

Russian legislators and officials from the Agriculture Ministry have previously complained that the regulations concerning the turnover of GMO products lacked proper enforcement and suggested a temporary ban on all genetically-altered products in the country.

Other government agencies, including Rospotrebnadzor argued that since Russia joined the WTO in 2012, trade restrictions can be imposed only after the hazardous effects of the banned goods are scientifically proven. They also quoted the statistics reading that the share of GMO in Russian food industry had declined from 12 percent to just 0.01 percent over the past 10 years and currently there are just 57 registered food products containing GMO in the country.

Nevertheless, most of the Russian lawmakers are pushing for changing the existing law On Safety and Quality of Alimentary Products by introducing a norm set for the maximum allowed content of transgenic and genetically modified components. The motion’s initiators want to make this norm zero for all foodstuffs produced in Russia.

In February this year, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev held a government session dedicated to the problem in which he said that Russia will create its own research base for genetically-modified organisms that would provide the authorities with expert information and allow for further legislative movements and executive decisions.

Medvedev also warned against perceiving the GMO products as “absolute evil,” but noted that the government did not support their use in the food industry.



Govt approves fines for improper GMO labeling (http://rt.com/politics/181244-russian-gmo-food-fines/)



Relevant reading...

Nationalists seek import ban on ex-Soviet nations associating with EU... (http://rt.com/politics/180964-russia-food-imports-expand/)



A nationalist party MP is suggesting the Russian government introduce more restrictions on food imports, covering nations that have an association agreement with the EU, including Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia.

Roman Khudyakov of the Liberal Democratic Party caucus of the State Duma has said that, since the association agreement with the European Union prepares the conditions for a free trade zone with the bloc, countries that have signed the document would soon be flooded with European goods, including foodstuffs banned in Russia.

“We must completely ban imports from Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine. We have to protect our markets from cheap, low-quality European goods that are now massively entering these countries. They have made their choice and will have to solve the demand problems for their products by themselves as well,” Khudyakov said in an interview with popular Russian daily Izvestia.

He added that Russian state control agencies had repeatedly registered and rejected goods of unacceptable quality coming from the three countries.

Ukraine Moldova and Georgia signed association agreements with the EU in June this year at the union’s summit in Brussels. Russia has repeatedly warned that the move would lead to restrictions on trade with the former Soviet Republics, as markets there would soon be flooded with cheap European imports and local producers would attempt to on-sell their low quality goods to Russian consumers.

Last year’s warnings from Russia made then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich suspend the signing of the EU association agreement, which caused a surge in street protests in Kiev and eventually led to Yanukovich’s demise and the installation of the current EU-friendly regime in Ukraine.

The European Union, United States and several of their allies have imposed economic sanctions on senior Russian officials and some larger companies over Russia’s alleged role in the current crisis in the east and southeast of Ukraine. Last week Russia took some reciprocal steps, with Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev signing a one-year ban on imports of meat, fish, cheese, milk, vegetables and fruit from Australia, Canada, the EU, the US and Norway.

[Natural Citizen]

End of the line: GMO production in China halted...


In a surprise U-turn, China’s Ministry of Agriculture has decided not to continue with a program which developed genetically-modified rice and corn. Some environmentalists say public concerns about GM crops played a key role in the decision.

On August 17, when these permits were up for renewal, the Ministry of Agriculture decided not to extend them. In 2009, the ministry's Biosafety Committee issued approval certificates to develop the two crops, rice and corn.

Developed by the Huazhong Agricultural University, near Wuhan, it was hoped that the GMO strains would help to reduce pesticide use by 80 percent, while raising yields by as much as 8 percent, said Huang Jikun, the chief scientist with the Chinese Academy of Sciences, told Reuters in 2009. It is illegal to sell genetically-modified rice on the open market in China.

However in July, GM rice was found on sale in a large supermarket in Wuhan, which is just across the Yangtze River from the Huazhong Agricultural University, where the product was developed, which caused a public outcry.

"We believe that loopholes in assessing and monitoring [GMO] research, as well as the public concern around safety issues are the most important reasons that the certifications have not been renewed," Wang Jing, a Greenpeace official based in Beijing, wrote in an email to ScienceInsider.

According to the South China Morning Post, state television commissioned tests on five packets of rice, which were picked at random, and found three contained genetically-modified rice. It is illegal to sell or commercially grow GM rice in mainland China. The safety certificates issued in 2009 only allowed the rice to be planted for research purposes, but never for sale on the open market.

The strain, which was found, was one of two developed by Dr. Zhang Oifa, who is a professor at the Huazhong Agricultural University. He said, "it was not impossible" for the seeds to be put on to the open market.

"You can't say [the seeds] were leaked on purpose. It's possible the seed companies have taken away the seeds and reproduced them illegally," he said, as reported by the South China Morning Post.

However, Huang Jikun also believes that public opinion was not the only reason why the project was shelved. He stated that China is reaching self-sufficiency in terms of rice production, so therefore there was no point in producing genetically modified versions. China exports very little rice as almost all of it is consumed within its domestic market. Huang also admitted, "rising public concerns [about the] safety of GM rice" likely also played a role.

Cong Cao, who is an associate professor at the University of Nottingham in the UK, was scathing of the decision. Writing in ‘The Conversation’ journal, he said the move “signals a major blow to the fight to establish GM food in China.”

Cao believes there is no logic behind the judgment adding that “Anti-Western sentiment has been judged more convincing than a raft of studies endorsing the merits of agro-biotechnology. Government support for GM food is dwindling fast, and it seems safe to say that the opportunity to commercialize GM rice – and with it the chance to help address some of China’s most urgent problems – is all but gone.”

The production of GM corn has not received as much skepticism, as it is mainly fed to livestock, according to Huang Jikun. Nevertheless, like rice, it has also not had its license renewed.


End of the line: GMO production in China halted (http://rt.com/news/181860-gm-china-rice-stopped/)

Information presented on this website is considered public information (unless otherwise noted in material) and may be distributed or copied for non-commercial (personal, educational, research etc.) purposes.

The use of any material from this website and quoting in mass media requires appropriate credit and link to the web page where the information was taken from.

[Natural Citizen]

Some history relevant to much that has been shared here but more as a leadup to the last few postings...

Corporate Interests Behind Ukraine Putsch (http://consortiumnews.com/2014/03/16/corporate-interests-behind-ukraine-putsch/)


"On Dec. 13, Cargill announced the purchase of a stake in a Black Sea port (http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/cargill-buys-stake-in-novorossiysk-port-to-boost-black-sea-presence/491486.html). Cargill’s port at Novorossiysk — to the east of Russia’s strategically significant and historically important Crimean naval base — gives them a major entry-point to Russian markets and adds them to the list of Big Ag companies investing in ports around the Black Sea (http://www.agrimoney.com/news/cargill-extends-spree-of-black-sea-port-deals--6589.html), both in Russia and Ukraine."

[HOLLYWOOD]

Sybil Edmonds' team has a synopsis of coverage at Boiling Frogs Post site, from the beginning through today excellent details on the objectives. Great Piece

Here's a the beginning portion below: http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2014/08/20/bfp-exclusive-the-eu-and-imf-rape-of-ukraine-agriculture/


BFP Exclusive- “The EU and IMF Rape of Ukraine Agriculture”

William Engdahl (http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/author/william-engdahl/) | August 20, 2014
Ukraine’s rogue regime lifts the ban on sale of farm land and to open its rich agriculture to Monsanto, DuPont & the GMO agribusiness cartel.

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/0819_WEPost.png

The Washington-orchestrated destruction of everything of possible value in Ukraine continues with a vengeance. On top of the deliberate ethnic cleansing of Russian-speaking citizens of the Donbass in eastern Ukraine by the psychopaths in Kiev, now the brutal dictates of the US-led International Monetary Fund (IMF) is forcing one of the world’s most precious agriculture regions into the hands of Monsanto and western agribusiness.

It is useful to recall that the ostensible trigger for the months’-long Maidan Square opposition protests against the Yanukovich government that began in November 2013 was the decision by Yanukovich to reject an EU Association Agreement. That EU agreement was tied to a $17 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Instead of the EU and IMF deal, Yanukovich choose a Russian aid package worth $15 billion plus a 33% discount on Russian natural gas and Ukrainian membership in the emerging Eurasian Economic Union with Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus.

The stakes for Ukraine were far more that an apparent couple of billion dollars difference, however. Here the details of the IMF loan “conditionalities” are vital to understand why Yanukovich rightly said no. When allegedly NATO-trained snipers opened fire on Maidan Square peaceful protesters as well as state police, killing many, the ensuing panic led to the flight of Yanukovich and installation of the exact government the US State Department Assistant Secretary for Eastern Europe, Victoria “Fuck the EU” Nuland told her Kiev US Ambassador she wanted. The key Prime Minister post, as she demanded, went to a former finance minister friendly to the US and the IMF, Arseny Yatsenyuk, whom she affectionately referred to as “Yats.”
Within a week after Yatsenyuk took over, the IMF sent a rush mission to Kiev to... continue at link

- See more at: http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2014/08/20/bfp-exclusive-the-eu-and-imf-rape-of-ukraine-agriculture/#sthash.Xu52Dd2f.dpuf
BFP Exclusive- “The EU and IMF Rape of Ukraine Agriculture”












;

[Working Poor]

Russia and China realize a healthy population is a good thing. They have better education system as well. Knowledge is power. I am glad for them that they are refusing GMOs.

[Natural Citizen]

Russia and China realize a healthy population is a good thing. They have better education system as well. Knowledge is power. I am glad for them that they are refusing GMOs.


There remain these kind of relevant outliers. Big old tall glass of water alright.

Peach Protest: Spanish farmers burn EU flag in revolt against sanctions...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDdTdgfcMM&list=UUpwvZwUam-URkxB7g4USKpg

I really wish that we could change the title of this thread because there is more to it with what we are seeing with sanctions and , of course, the new models of international finance clearing of various nations who are moving from the buck.

[Natural Citizen]

GM Food, Ukraine and the Return of Hill + Knowlton



Monsanto and Ukraine
by JOYCE NELSON

Finally, a little-known aspect of the crisis in Ukraine is receiving some international attention. On July 28, the California-based Oakland Institute released a report revealing that the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), under terms of their $17 billion loan to Ukraine, would open that country to genetically-modified (GM) crops and genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture. The report is entitled “Walking on the West Side: the World Bank and the IMF in the Ukraine Conflict.” [1]

In late 2013, the then president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, rejected a European Union association agreement tied to the $17 billion IMF loan, whose terms are only now being revealed. Instead, Yanukovych chose a Russian aid package worth $15 billion plus a discount on Russian natural gas. His decision was a major factor in the ensuing deadly protests that led to his ouster from office in February 2014 and the ongoing crisis.

According to the Oakland Institute, “Whereas Ukraine does not allow the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture, Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies. There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry. As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, ‘Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont’.” [2]

Ukrainian law bars farmers from growing GM crops. Long considered “the bread basket of Europe,” Ukraine’s rich black soil is ideal for growing grains, and in 2012 Ukrainian farmers harvested more than 20 million tonnes of corn.

Monsanto’s Investment

In May 2013, Monsanto announced plans to invest $140 million in a non-GMO corn seed plant in Ukraine, with Monsanto Ukraine spokesman Vitally Fechuk confirming that ‘We will be working with conventional seeds only” because “in Ukraine only conventional seeds are allowed for production and importation.” [3]

But by November 2013, six large Ukrainian agriculture associations had prepared draft amendments to the law, pushing for “creating, testing, transportation and use of GMOs regarding the legalization of GM seeds.” [4] The president of the Ukrainian Grain Association, Volodymyr Klymenko, told a Nov. 5 press conference in Kiev that “We could mull over this issue for a long time, but we, jointly with the [agricultural] associations, have signed two letters to change the law on biosecurity, in which we proposed the legalization of the use of GM seeds, which had been tested in the United States for a long time, for our producers.” (Actually, GM seeds and GMOs have never undergone independent, long-term testing in the U.S.)

The agricultural associations’ draft amendments coincided with the terms of the EU association agreement and IMF/World Bank loan.

The website sustainablepulse.com – which tracks GMO news worldwide – immediately slammed the agricultural associations’ proposal, with director Henry Rowlands stating: “Ukraine agriculture will be seriously damaged if the Ukrainian government legally allows GM seeds in the country. Their farmers will find their export markets reduced due to consumers’ anti-GMO sentiments both in Russia and the EU.” Rowlands said that Monsanto’s investment in Ukraine “could rise to $300 million within several years. Does Ukrainian agriculture want to totally rely on the success or failure of one U.S.-based company?” [5]

On December 13, 2013, Monsanto’s Jesus Madrazo, Vice President of Corporate Engagement, told the U.S.-Ukraine Conference in Washington, D.C. that the company sees “the importance of creating a favorable environment that encourages innovation and fosters the continued development of agriculture. Ukraine has the opportunity to further develop the potential of conventional crops, which is where we are currently concentrating our efforts. We also hope that at some point biotechnology is a tool that will be available to Ukrainian farmers in the future.” [6]

Just a few days before Madrazo’s remarks in Washington, Monsanto Ukraine had launched its “social development” program for the country, called “Grain Basket of the Future.” [7] It provides grants to rural villagers so they can (in Monsanto’s words) “start feeling that they can improve their situation themselves as opposed to waiting for a handout.”

Actually, the real “handout” is the one going to Big U.S. Agribusiness through the terms of the IMF/World Bank loan, which besides opening the country to GM crops, will also further lift the ban on the sale of Ukraine’s rich agricultural lands to the private sector. [8]

As Morgan Williams, president and CEO of the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council, told International Business Times in March, “Ukraine’s agriculture could be a real gold mine.” [9] But he added that there are “many aspects of the [Ukraine] business climate that need to be changed. The major item would center around getting the government out of business…”

The WikiLeaks Cables

In August 2011, WikiLeaks released U.S. diplomatic cables showing that the U.S. State Department has been lobbying worldwide for Monsanto and other biotechnology corporations like DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer and Dow. The U.S. non-profit Food & Water Watch, after combing through five years of these cables (2005-2009), released its report entitled “Biotech Ambassadors: How the U.S. State Department Promotes the Seed Industry’s Global Agenda” on May 14, 2013. [10] The report showed the U.S. State Department has “lobbied foreign governments to adopt pro-agricultural biotechnology policies and laws, operated a rigorous public relations campaign to improve the image of biotechnology, and challenged commonsense biotechnology safeguards and rules – even including opposing laws requiring the labeling of genetically-engineered (GE) foods.”

According to consortiumnews.com (March 16, 2014), Morgan Williams is at the nexus of Big Ag’s alliance with U.S. foreign policy.” [11] Besides being president and CEO of the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council, Williams is Director of Government Affairs at private equity firm SigmaBleyzer, which touts Williams’ work with “various agencies of the U.S. government, members of Congress, congressional committees, the Embassy of Ukraine to the U.S., international financial institutions, think tanks and other organizations on U.S.-Ukraine business, trade, investment and economic development issues.”

The U.S.-Ukraine Business Council’s 16-member Executive Committee is packed with U.S. agribusiness companies, including representatives from Monsanto, John Deere, DuPont Pioneer, Eli Lilly, and Cargill. [12] The Council’s twenty “senior Advisors” include James Greene (Former Head of NATO Liason Office Ukraine); Ariel Cohen (Senior Research Fellow for The Heritage Foundation); Leonid Kozachenko (President of the Ukrainian Agrarian Confederation); six former U.S. Ambassadors to Ukraine, and the former ambassador of Ukraine to the U.S., Oleh Shamshur.

Shamshur is now a senior advisor to PBN Hill + Knowlton Strategies – a unit of PR giant Hill + Knowlton Strategies (H+K). H + K is a subsidiary of the gargantuan London-based WPP Group, which owns some dozen big PR firms, including Burson-Marsteller (a long-time Monsanto advisor).

Hill + Knowlton Strategies

On April 15, 2014 Toronto’s The Globe & Mail newspaper published an op-ed piece by H+K assistant consultant Olga Radchenko, [13] The piece railed against Russian President Vladimir Putin and “Mr. Putin’s PR machine” and stated that “Last month [March 2014 - a month after the coup], a group of Kiev-based PR professionals formed the Ukraine Crisis Media Centre, a voluntary operation aimed at helping to communicate Ukraine’s image and manage its messaging on the global stage.”
The PBN Hill + Knowlton Strategies website states that the company’s CEO Myron Wasylyk is “a Board member of the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council,” and the company’s Managing Director/Ukraine, Oksana Monastyrska, “leads the firm’s work for Monsanto.” Monastyrska also formerly worked for the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation.

According to the Oakland Institute, the terms of the World Bank/IMF loan to Ukraine have already led to “an increase in foreign investment, which is likely to result in further expansion of large-scale acquisitions of agricultural land by foreign companies and further corporatization of agriculture in the country.” [14]
Meanwhile, Russia’s Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev stated in April: “We don’t have a goal of developing GM products here or to import them. We can feed ourselves with normal, common, not genetically modified products. If the Americans like to eat such products, let them eat them. We don’t need to do that; we have enough space and opportunities to produce organic food.” [15]

Hill + Knowlton, with its Kuwait “incubator babies atrocities” falsehood, was instrumental in getting the American public to back the first Gulf War on Iraq in the early 1990s. Now the company is involved in fomenting a Cold War 2 or worse, and on behalf of Monsanto – recently voted the “most evil” corporation on the planet. That’s something to recall in the midst of the extensive mainstream media demonizing of Putin.


[I]Joyce Nelson is an award-winning Canadian freelance writer/researcher and the author of five books, including Sultans of Sleaze: PR & the Media (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1567510027/counterpunchmaga).

Footnotes
[1] http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/press-release-world-bank-and-imf-open-ukraine-western-…
[2] Ibid.
[3] Reuters, “Monsanto plans $140 ml Ukraine non-GM corn seed plant,” May 24, 2013.
[4] http://en.interfac.com.ua/news/press-conference/173536.html
[5] http://sustainablepulse.com/2013/11/05/sustainable-pulse-slams-ukraine-agri-associations…
[6] http://monsantoblog.com2013/12/19/monsanto-and-its-commitment-to-ukraine/
[7] http://monsantoblog.com/2013/12/13/monsanto-ukraine-launching-social-development-pr…
[8] http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-secretive-neo-nazi-military-organization-involved-i…
[9] http://ibtimes.com/westerners-know-very-little-about-ukraine-qa-us-ukraine-business-co…
[10] http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/biotech-ambassadors/
[11] http://www.printfriendly.com/print/new?url-http%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%F (http://www.printfriendly.com/print/new?url-http%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%25F)…
[12] http://www.usubc.org/site/u-s-ukraine-business-council-usubc-executive-committee
[13] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/in-the-battle-of-hearts-and-minds-kiev-is…
[14] http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/press-release-world-bank-and-imf-open-ukraine-western…
[15] http://rt.com/news/154032-russia-gmo-food-ban/

[Natural Citizen]

Also, while I'm thinking of it, China has made an agriculture deal with Zimbabwe (another target of western sanctions, btw).




“China and Zimbabwe have inked several cooperation agreements on finance, agriculture and tourism during a state visit by Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe.

” In a snub to Western nations who have imposed sanctions on leaders in the country, including Mugabe himself, China said the world must respect Zimbabwe’s sovereignty.

“’We believe the Zimbabwean people have wisdom and capabilities to handle their affairs very well,’ Xi added.

“The 90-year old Mugabe has clashed with the West over his policies and accused the US and Britain in a speech to the United Nations last year of trying to control his nation and its resources.”...

...“China will continue to transfer agricultural technologies to Zimbabwe, once known as the “breadbasket” of the region and help the country to increase food production and agricultural income, he said.”



http://thebricspost.com/china-zimbabwe-ink-slew-of-cooperation-deals/#.VAD8umN2hn1

yada, yada, yada...

You folks geting this stuff yet?

[Natural Citizen]

China pulls plug on genetically modified rice and corn...




China’s Ministry of Agriculture has decided not to renew biosafety certificates that allowed research groups to grow genetically modified (GM) rice and corn. The permits, to grow two varieties of GM rice and one transgenic corn strain, expired on 17 August. The reasoning behind the move is not clear, and it has raised questions about the future of related research in China.

“Why the ministry allowed the certificates to lapse is in dispute. Some environmentalists say public worries about GM crops played a decisive role. “We believe that loopholes in assessing and monitoring [GM] research, as well as the public concern around safety issues are the most important reasons that the certifications have not been renewed,” writes Wang Jing, a Greenpeace official based in Beijing, in an e-mail to ScienceInsider.

“Others believe agricultural economics also influenced the decision. China has nearly reached self-sufficiency in producing rice using conventional varieties, so the ministry has decided there is no need to commercialize Bt rice in the near future, says Huang Jikun, director of the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy. He says that with commercialization off the table, there was no point in renewing the certifications. Huang says “rising public concerns [about the] safety of GM rice” likely also played a role.

“Whatever the reason, the decision marks an abrupt change in fortunes for transgenic rice in China. Five years ago, “China was widely expected to soon put GM rice on the country’s dining tables,” wrote (http://theconversation.com/chinas-fight-to-feed-itself-is-hindered-by-anti-gm-paranoia-30586) Cao Cong, a China policy expert at University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom, in a post on The Conversation, an Australian website. The Bt rice project “is now to all intents and purposes dead and buried,” he wrote, blaming an “anti-GM movement whose power and influence are more than matched by its fervour and sheer, undiluted paranoia.’”




Continued - China pulls plug on genetically modified rice and corn (http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2014/08/china-pulls-plug-genetically-modified-rice-and-corn)

Essentially, what we're seeing here is that China seems to be concluding what farmes and some universities have concluded some time ago and that is that the use of GMOs over time along with so called “monoculture” methods for planting actually results in falling crop yields. Not rising ones. So then we watch India now. Because...well..China.

As well, recall that for China food is to be considered an important national security issue since the country has the globe's largest population to feed.

From Wiki...


Monoculture is the agricultural (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/wiki/Agriculture) practice of producing or growing a single crop or plant species over a wide area and for a large number of consecutive years. It is widely used in modern industrial agriculture (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/wiki/Industrial_agriculture) and its implementation has allowed for large harvests from minimal labour.

[Natural Citizen]

I want to share this while I'm thinking of it. Really, it is just another indicator of the phenomenon we have seen as GMO continues to become a Geo-political issue. One deserving of attention in terms of "Foreign Policy".

I won't spend a whole lot of time or keystrokes giving it the old once over but these three papers might oughtta get the old brain warmed up.

Here we go...

China cites public opinion in GMO soybean approval delay -sources (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/26/china-grains-gmo-idUSL3N0RK1C420140926)



China has suspended the import approval process for a genetically modified soybean variety, citing "low public acceptance" of GMO food, according to two people familiar with the matter.

It is the first time that China's Ministry of Agriculture, has cited public opinion as a reason for delaying approval of a GMO crop, the sources said.

The decision could fuel wider agribusiness concerns over an increasingly tough environment for GMO crops in China.

"Previously if the MoA decided not to approve a new product, it would be because of not enough data," said an executive with an industry association, who did not want to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue.

"But this year, the reason is because they are considering social acceptance problems."



Emphasis mine...


Then we have this...

China launches media campaign to back genetically modified crops (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/30/china-gmo-idUSL3N0RU1PD20140930)


Relevant reading... Moscow fast-tracks law limiting foreign media ownership to 20% (http://rt.com/politics/191004-foreign-media-ownership-russia/)

So then we know what Russia is doing across the board as far as agriculture production as well as BRICS nations. Also consider what we've discussed with regard to financial mechanisms and whatnot.

Crossroads here. Getting jiggy now...

Should start to see agriculture and gas/oil trade infrastructure merge internationally by western competitors at a time when the dollar is frowned upon.

[Natural Citizen]

China rejects U.S. hay exports due to genetically modified alfalfa contamination...

http://hayandforage.com/hay/us-hay-exporters-await-gmo-clarification-china

Relevant reading - "US Government Is Funding The Hong Kong “Student Protests” (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/10/01/us-government-funding-hong-kong-student-protests/)

Aside - China's Military May Have Gone 'Rogue' After All (http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/chinas-military-may-have-gone-rogue-after-all/)

Of course, the logic behind sharing those last two pieces would be to stimulate the idea that the politically almighty coup d'état is not a game that only one may play.

[Natural Citizen]

Billion-dollar lawsuits claim GMO corn 'destroyed' US exports to China...




Three class-action lawsuits filed Friday claim that agribusiness power Syngenta is to blame for depressed corn exports to China since the seed company released a genetically-engineered variant of the crop before it was approved by Beijing.

The Iowa suit alleges that the release of Syngenta’s Viptera caused the US-to-China corn export market to fall by 85 percent...

In April, the NGFA, a trade organization for grain elevators, reported (http://rt.com/usa/china-gmo-corn-ban-120/) that China had barred nearly 1.45 million tons of corn shipments since 2013, resulting in about $427 million in lost sales. China first halted shipments of American corn in November...

Concern over the safety of genetically engineered food may have played a role in a recent decision by Chinese officials to move away from GE production of the nation’s own. In August (http://rt.com/news/181860-gm-china-rice-stopped/), China’s Ministry of Agriculture announced it would not continue with a program that developed genetically-modified rice and corn.



Continued - Billion-dollar lawsuits claim GMO corn 'destroyed' US exports to China (http://rt.com/usa/193612-china-lawsuits-gmo-corn/)


Relevant reading - China and Russia formally establish an independent system/model for international financial clearing. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?456224-72-points-of-BRICS-Summit-Declaration&p=5672285&viewfull=1#post5672285)

[Natural Citizen]

Gujarat says no to field trial of GM food crops (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Gujarat-says-no-to-field-trial-of-GM-food-crops/articleshow/44766420.cms)




NEW DELHI: Gujarat has joined 10 other states in saying no to field trials of genetically modified (GM) food crops.

In a major setback to the proponents of GM crops who generally used to cite Gujarat as an example for its liberal approach on transgenic crops, the state government has denied mandatory 'no objection certificate' (NOC) for field trials of food crops to multinational seed companies.

The Coalition for a GM Free India, meanwhile, welcomed the Gujarat government's decision of not giving NOC for field trials. "It is heartening that a leading agricultural state like Gujarat has recognized that field trials of GMOs are the first environmental release of untested, unknown new organisms in nature and has decided to take a precautionary approach towards it" said Rajesh Krishnan, convenor of the Coalition.

[donnay]

Syngenta faces billion-dollar lawsuits after ruining U.S. corn exports with GMO contamination


Wednesday, November 05, 2014
by: PF Louis

Just when one of the world's top agricultural chemical and GMO seed producers was getting of lightly with Cargill for destroying the US corn exporter's market to China, others piled on with three seperate class action lawsuits of $1 billion each.

China has recently been the focus of exporting lots of corn from the USA, especially since China had decided to accept even GM corn since 2010. But by 2013, China's mood had changed. They have officially mandated that no new strains of GM crops will be accepted or licensed in China.

Cargill filed a lawsuit against Syngenta for $90 million September 2014 for damages against export trade losses due to China's refusal of more than 1.4 million metric tons of corn after finding traces of GMO Agrisure Viptera (MIR162), designed to create its own insecticide.

It turned out that China had not approved this GM corn line by Syngenta. So they righteously refused to receive the shipments.

You may wonder how come such a low claim of $90 million was filed for so much corn denied from Cargill's shipments over several months. It's because Cargill managed to get many of those shipments dropped off elsewhere in that region. That's how Syngenta got off light with Cargill.

But the China GMO syndrome has been extended to refuse even more corn shipments, using the Syngenta experience as a basis of mistrust. Some insiders consider this an excuse to cover China's new cooling on the whole GMO idea and resurgence of their own corn crops.

Now, many American corn farmers are using the Cargill suit as legal precedent for piling on Syngenta (http://www.naturalnews.com/Syngenta.html), a Switzerland-based firm that isn't allowed to perform open-field GMO experiments in its own country. Instead, they've usurped lots within contamination distance of organic corn lots in the USA for open-air trials.

Continued... (http://www.naturalnews.com/047529_GMO_contamination_Syngenta_lawsuit.html)

[Natural Citizen]

I wasn't going to share this just because we see it happening so much around the world but given recent debate with regard to the Trans-Pacific Partnersheep Agreement, it may provide useful reading .


Biotech lobby defeat in Europe: MEPs strengthen govt GM opt-outs...


MEPs have defeated a European Commission proposal to prevent member states from banning genetically modified crops on health and/or environmental grounds.
Even if the EU approves genetically modified (GM) crops for cultivation, Tuesday’s vote now allows national bans for environmental or health reasons.

The European Food and Safety Authority approved GM for use in the EU, but a number of states opposed to GM, such as France, wanted rights to block crops under the principle of ‘subsidiarity’, or devolution to individual states.

Under previous rules, the European Commission had proposed in 2010 to let member states ban GM crops on their territory for national planning or socio- economic reasons.
But this slightly messy compromise would have allowed biotech corporations to ride roughshod over any country in the EU that didn’t want GM.

Any governments wanting to ban GM would first have been obliged to try and strike a deal with the biotech companies, in order to exclude their territory from GM cultivation. This would have allowed biotech companies to put heavy pressure on certain governments and put them at risk of costly law suits.

The compromised agreement, which was voted through by Europe’s Council of Ministers in June, was branded as a “third rate agreement” by the French parliamentarian, Corine Lepage.

“The Council's text does not give a solid judicial basis to realistically ban GMOs. It gives biotechnology companies a tremendous influence in the decision-making process,” she said in a statement at the time.

But the original proposal has now been amended on the grounds of environmental and health concerns after securing the support of the European Conservatives and Reformists bloc in the European Parliament.

The new amended proposal “will leave GM cultivation firmly in the hands of national governments, who can decide for themselves, as long as the right protections are in place, whether they want to grow GM or not,” said Paul Brennan MEP, the UK Labour Party’s European spokesperson on agriculture, as quoted by the Guardian.

The new amendments will make the decisions’ of member states clearer and harder for biotech companies to challenge.

“We want to keep this issue out of the courts as companies are much more likely to challenge a member states’ decision that is unclear,” said Catherine Bearder, a Liberal Democrat MEP.

The UK Conservative Party supported the changes within the subsidiarity principle, despite the fact that the UK is a supporter of GM crops.

Julie Girling, the Conservative Party’s environment spokeswoman, said that the commission’s opt-out idea would ensure a quick, simple and legally sound solution to approving GM.

Separately, a new report published on Friday by Test Biotech, a platform of ecological scientists, said the MON810 genetically modified maize strain (the only one approved for growth in Europe), had negative health impacts on the kidneys, livers and pancreases of rats. This will provide further ammunition to the European anti-GM lobby.



Using our material

Information presented on this website is considered public information (unless otherwise noted in material) and may be distributed or copied for non-commercial (personal, educational, research etc.) purposes.

The use of any material from this website and quoting in mass media requires appropriate credit and link to the web page where the information was taken from.


Continued - Biotech lobby defeat in Europe: MEPs strengthen govt GM opt-outs (http://rt.com/news/204491-eu-gm-opt-out/)

[Natural Citizen]

Duma approves tougher GMO labeling rules...



The Russian Lower House has passed the first reading of a bill that introduces fines for businesses which sell products containing genetically modified organisms (GMO) without warning customers on the packaging.

The bill was passed in the first reading on Wednesday and contains a set of amendments to the Administrative Code introducing responsibility for lack of proper labeling on alimentary products containing genetically modified material or made with the use of genetically modified organisms.

Once the bill is signed into law, producers who fail to label correctly or provide incorrect information will be fined between 20,000 and 150,000 rubles ($444 - $3,333). Regulators can also confiscate improperly marked stock. The bill also gives the state consumer rights agency Rospotrebnadzor the responsibility to monitor the situation and punish the violators.

The current Russian law has been in force since 2007, and requires a clearly visible indication on all goods that contain 0.9 percent of genetically-modified organisms by weight, but says nothing about the punishment for those who fail to observe the rules. There are no limitations on the turnover or production of GMO-containing foodstuffs.

According to official statistics the share of GMO in the Russian food industry has declined from 12 percent to just 0.01 percent over the past 10 years, and currently there are just 57 registered food products containing GMO in the country.

In comments on the bill the deputy head of the Lower House Agrarian Committee MP Nadezhda Shkolkina (United Russia) said a total ban on genetically modified products in Russia was impossible, because it would contradict the rules of the World Trade Organization.

In February this year, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev held a government session dedicated to the problem in which he said that Russia will create its own research base for genetically modified organisms that would provide the authorities with expert information and allow for further legislative movements and executive decisions.





Continued - Duma approves tougher GMO labeling rules (http://rt.com/politics/204851-russia-duma-gmo-fines/)

[Natural Citizen]

I had shared this news in another thread where we had been discussing the specific litigation but will add it here for relevance to what is quickly evolving toward an international standard.

Monsanto to pay $2.4mn to farmers over 2013 GMO-wheat scare (http://rt.com/usa/205079-monsanto-pays-wheat-farmers/)




Alarms were raised in 2013 when an Oregon farmer noticed that wheat plants on his property were still growing after the field had been doused with pesticide. He promptly alerted the USDA, which got involved.

The ensuing federal investigation spanned several states in the Pacific Northwest. The incident put the entire American wheat export industry at risk.

The discovery quickly prompted Japan and South Korea to pause imports, causing disruption in the market. It was feared that the imports were contaminated with wheat capable of withstanding herbicides – an identical strain to one that led to the original ban 10 years ago.

At that time, the European Union also called for more thorough testing of US imports.

Several EU countries ended up banning GMO crops entirely.

All of this was accompanied by millions of people worldwide voicing their protest over Monsanto’s questionable practices.

[Natural Citizen]

New law lets EU states ban GM crops...



The European Union has approved a law that will enable the bloc’s 28 member states to restrict the cultivation of genetically modified crops, even if the EU has declared them as safe. The law comes despite furious lobbying from multinationals.

Previously, countries that opposed the cultivation of crops approved by Brussels potentially faced legal challenges. Now, any country may unilaterally ban a particular genetically modified variety of seed – or even “groups of GMOs defined by crop or trait” – and additionally demand that their neighbors do not contaminate their fields.

The EU legislation will come into force in spring next year, pending a formal agreement from the individual states. Among the states likely to find use for the statute are France, Germany, Austria and Poland, which have consistently opposed gene-splicing technologies.

Meanwhile, market leader Monsanto, which last year said it would not try to get any more GM crops approved in Europe, remained unperturbed, insisting its business does not rely on favors from the EU.



Continued - Monsanto-killer or ‘Trojan Horse’? New law lets EU states ban GM crops (http://rt.com/news/211811-eu-gm-monsanto-trojan/)

[Natural Citizen]

This is a big deal. The depth simply cannot be stressed enough but will drop it here and one may take from it what one wishes. Of course, If anyone has been following what has been happening with competitive Non-GMO BRICS nations and the evolving geo-political relevance of agriculture then we'd place into perspective the impact of an international agricultural standard. Or an agricultural test ban treaty of sorts.

To be clear, NGO is short speak for “non-government organization”

Largest international study into safety of GM food launched by Russian NGO...




“According to the Nags, the experiment will try to establish whether the GM maize and its associated herbicide cause cancers, reduce fertility or cause birth defects. The scientists also want to know whether the mixture of chemicals present in Roundup (Monsanto’s tradename for its glyphosate herbicide) are more or less toxic than its active ingredient glyphosate.

“Farmers, governments, scientists and consumers around the world have been involved in an intense debate since GM foods were introduced in 1994. But while there have been many thousands of studies conducted, mostly by GM companies, which show that there is no health risk, government regulators have not required evidence of long-term safety and deep mistrust has built between different “sides”.

“Oxana Sinitsyna, deputy science director at the Sysin research institute of human ecology and environmental health which is part of the Russian ministry of health, one of the three scientists on the Factor GMO study’s review board, said: “The scale and format of this research project will allow us to create a really objective and comprehensive data set on the mechanics of the impacts of a GM diet on the health of living organisms over the long term.

“From a scientific point of view the ‘Factor GMO’ project is highly ambitious, which makes it very interesting, for both the public and for the scientists involved.”

Bruce Blumberg (http://www.faculty.uci.edu/profile.cfm?faculty_id=4539), another board member, who is a biology professor at the University of California, Irvine, said: “The cultivation of herbicide resistant crops is widespread in the US, and the use of the herbicides to which these crops are resistant has increased many-fold in the decades since they were introduced. There is a notable lack of published, peer-reviewed data on their safety, as well as data on the safety of the increased use of herbicides with which they are grown.”

The planned study will have no input from the biotech industry or the anti-GM movement, said Sharoykina.“Comprehensive scientific safety studies on GMOs and their related pesticides are long overdue. All previous studies caused controversy for various reasons: choice of animal, insufficient statistics, duration of tests, research parameters, and researchers’ connections to the anti-GMO movement or the biotech industry.

“This study is intended to remedy the situation. The project organisers have considered all of the points of disagreement and distrust surrounding this subject.” She added that Nags would not have any involvement in the scientific process.”




Continued - Largest international study into safety of GM food launched by Russian NGO (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/11/largest-international-study-into-safety-of-gm-food-launched-by-russian-ngo)

[Natural Citizen]

Ongoing. European farmers against the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and whatnot...

TAFTA protesters mass outside EU Council in Brussels (PHOTOS, VIDEO)




http://cdn.rt.com/files/news/34/b9/70/00/46.si.jpg
A demonstrator climbs a pole to place a banner during a protest by European farmers against the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) close to European Commission headquarters in Brussels December 19, 2014.(Reuters / Pascal Rossignol)

Hundreds of protesters have gathered outside the European Council building in Brussels on Friday to voice growing disapproval of TAFTA, a proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area between the EU and the US, and to demand changes at the EU institutions.

The rainy streets of Brussels have been filled with hundreds of protesters, with security in the city stepped up since morning and police officers in helmets and shields ready to respond in case violence breaks out. The action was expected to draw protesters from France and Germany.

http://rt.com/files/news/34/b9/70/00/45.jpg
European farmers and pro-democracy activists demonstrate against the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) near the European Commission headquarters in Brussels December 19, 2014. REUTERS/Pascal Rossignol

Those protesting against TAFTA, also known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), worry that the new treaty will bring a large influx of GMO products, such as hormone-treated beef and genetically-modified corn, from the US to Europe.
A public campaign against the upcoming TAFTA deal between the US and Europe has been launched earlier this year.

The petition dubbed ‘Everyone against TAFTA’ started in June collecting thousands of signatures. Promoted by well-known artists, writers and politicians in France, the petition announced that “the citizens of Europe are against the transatlantic treaty.”


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22ex4UDYr6A

“These opaque negotiations are happening behind our back and the backs of Europeans and North Americans,” the petition says, “under the cover of a hypothetical relaunch of economic growth, and these negotiations are likely to lower our social, economic, health, cultural and environmental standards.”

In 2013 France said (http://rt.com/business/206455-france-will-not-sign-ttip/) it wouldn’t sign the TTIP as long as the US continued spying on EU allies.

In November this year, a report stated that France, UK and Germany will block the trade deal all together if the mechanism of investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is included. Protesters have demonstrated against TAFTA across Europe.


Source note...


Information presented on this website is considered public information (unless otherwise noted in material) and may be distributed or copied for non-commercial (personal, educational, research etc.) purposes.

The use of any material from this website and quoting in mass media requires appropriate credit and link to the web page where the information was taken from.





Continued - TAFTA protesters mass outside EU Council in Brussels (PHOTOS, VIDEO) (http://rt.com/news/215959-protest-tafta-ttip-brussels/)

[Natural Citizen]

France will not sign multibillion transatlantic trade deal with US in 2015 (http://rt.com/business/206455-france-will-not-sign-ttip/)




The French government will not support the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and US as long as a controversial stipulation is included.

France, like the UK and Germany, will block the trade deal all together if the mechanism of investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is included; EurActiv France reported (http://www.euractiv.com/sections/trade-society/french-government-will-not-sign-ttip-agreement-2015-310037).

The clause appears in most free trade agreements, and would leave France defenseless against foreign companies taking legal action against it if laws and legislation stunt profits.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the US and Europe would create the world's largest free trade zone, but some worry it could balloon into an "economic NATO (http://rt.com/business/trade-agreement-eu-us-820/)" and many say it elevates corporate interest above national interest. Trade unionists have demonstrated in the UK fearing the mega trade deal will lead to a massive sale of state assets to the private sector.

Demonstrators have also taken place in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Scandinavia.



Aside - Mass protests slam US-EU trade deal as 'corporate power grab' (http://rt.com/news/195144-europe-protests-stop-ttip/)



Tens of thousands of people are flooding the streets of cities all over Europe on Saturday in mass rallies against a controversial trade agreement between the US and the EU.

Talks on the pact, called the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), started last February and, having been mostly held behind closed doors, have raised widespread concerns in the European Union and beyond.

Social networks have been mobilized for a mass campaign that has been calling on Europeans and Americans to take action against “the biggest corporate power grab in a decade.”

One of the organizers of Berlin’s demonstration, Michael Efler, told RT’s Peter Oliver: “We are protesting here against the free trade deal completely negotiated in secret, because they give corporations more rights they’ve ever had in history.”

Protests were planned in 22 countries across Europe – marches, rallies and other public events – in over 1,000 locations in UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Poland, the Czech Republic and Scandinavian countries.

The main aim of the wave of protests is “to reclaim democracy,” which in this case stands for putting an end to the negotiations on three major trade agreements: the EU-US deal (TTIP), the EU-Canada deal (CETA) and the trade in services deal (TiSA).

[Natural Citizen]

Well. Hm. Here we go with the TPPish trashing of the sovereignty of nations abroad if their laws and culture contradict American Industry's growth models. Was perhaps predictable for Africa to be a primary target for a trial run.

New ‘Monsanto Law’ in Africa Would Force GMOs on Farmers (http://naturalsociety.com/new-monsanto-law-africa-force-gmos-farmers/)




The front lines of the food sovereignty war in Ghana are swelling as the national parliament gives support to the Plant Breeders Bill (http://newint.org/blog/2014/10/20/plant-breeders-bill-ghana/#sthash.RCRTmcol.dpuf). This proposed legislation contains rules that would restrict farmers from ancient practices: freely saving, swapping, and breeding seeds. Under new laws protecting the intellectual property rights of biotech, farmers would be subject to hefty fines for growing anything that has been ‘patented,’ even if their crops were cross-pollinated.

The obviously biotech-infiltrated Ghanaian government states that the new laws would “incentivize the development of new seed varieties to ensure the marketability of crops,” but farmers argue it gives rights straight to corporations like Monsanto, and not farmers who have been growing food in Ghana for centuries.

It is nothing short of a corporate take-over of the food system – and in Ghana, where 70 percent of food is currently grown by small farms – it would turn an ages-old system of sustainable food supply into a tremendously large economy for biotech.

The Ghana National Association of Farmers and Fishermen states: “This system aims to compel farmers to purchase seeds for every planting season.”


Duke Tagoe of Food Sovereignty Ghana is well aware of the tremendous debt that farmers in other parts of the world have been subjected to via Monsanto’s seed monopolies: "The economic impact on the lives of farmers will be disastrous. . .The origin of food is seed. Whoever controls the seed control the entire food chain.”

This is no different than the “Monsanto Protection Act (http://naturalsociety.com/new-monsanto-protection-act-gives-monsanto-power-over-us-government/)” (H.R. 933 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.933:)) that President Obama signed into law not long ago in the US, even as hordes of Americans urged him not to do so. This is also linked to the UK support of the biotech take-over planned in Africa (http://www.wdm.org.uk/blog/2014/nov/6/fight-seed-sovereignty-ghana).





Aside - No land no food no life (http://rt.com/shows/documentary/192796-africa-asia-farmers-violence/) (Documentary) The plight of small-scale farmers in Africa and Asia forced off their land by an unprecedented corporate land grab. Exploring the stories of those affected, this documentary gives a voice to threatened farmers throughout the developing world.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdQkKcvOQEQ

The plight of small-scale farmers in Africa and Asia forced off their land by an unprecedented corporate land grab. If they refuse they are subject to horrific violence, which has led to women miscarrying and deaths. Exploring the personal stories of those affected, this documentary gives a voice to threatened subsistence farmers throughout the developing world. If your livelihood was ripped away from you, how would you cope?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4kf4GjPASw

[Natural Citizen]

This is a big deal...

Food Supply Listed as Reason for EU to Dump U.S. and Join Russia (http://www.naturalblaze.com/2015/01/american-food-supply-listed-as-reason.html)




Russia is making no bones about an open proposal to the EU (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-04/russias-startling-proposal-europe-dump-us-join-eurasian-economic-union). Essentially, dump the U.S. – don’t join the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), but join the Eurasian Economic Union, which went into effect January 1st. It’s a call to join other members at the “cool table” – a promise of a better trading table.”


A free trade report in yesterday's Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten (http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/01/03/schachzug-gegen-die-usa-russland-raet-eu-zum-ausstieg-aus-dem-ttip/)(reported by Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-04/russias-startling-proposal-europe-dump-us-join-eurasian-economic-union)) states: Russia has presented a startling proposal to overcome the tensions with the EU: The EU should renounce the free trade agreement with the United States TTIP and enter into a partnership with the newly established Eurasian Economic Union instead. A free trade zone with the neighbors would make more sense than a deal with the US.

“The Russian Ambassador to the EU, Vladimir Chizhov, said to the EU Observer (http://euobserver.com/economic/127081) :

“‘Do you think it is really wise to put so much political energy into a free trade zone with the United States, while much more natural partner had at his side, in the immediate neighborhood?We do not treat our chickens in any case with chlorine.’



“Furthermore, Germany’s Minister of Agriculture, Christian Schmidt, didn’t make an EU/American trade deal sound appealing when he said, “we can’t protect every sausage (http://www.dw.de/we-cant-protect-every-sausage-says-german-agriculture-minister-over-ttip-deal/a-18169728).” GMOs were a part of that conversation, too; and, lo and behold, during negotiations U.S. officials considered for the first time – GMO labeling! This shows that the U.S. government will not pay heed to its own consumers’ desire for transparency and safety, but will if there is geopolitical benefit.

“Unfortunately, other countries have ample reasons to be leery of entering or staying in trade deals with the U.S. Aside from food contamination scares (both GMO and non-GMO (http://www.naturalblaze.com/2014/07/mcdonalds-stands-by-meat-supplier-amid.html)), the U.S. has burned some countries with unreasonable demands that protect corporate interests while threatening that country’s residents. Guatemala discovered a hidden agenda that read (http://www.naturalblaze.com/2014/09/guatemala-rejects-us-trade-law.html) like the Monsanto Protection Act. Brazil didn’t want to act as a personal fine enforcer and medium for both the U.S. and Monsanto (http://www.naturalblaze.com/2014/07/brazils-gm-soy-tied-up-over-trade.html). China has had to reject major shipments of unapproved genetically engineered corn (http://www.naturalblaze.com/2014/09/cargill-sues-syngenta-after-china.html)“





Relevant goings on... 72 points of BRICS Summit Declaration (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?456224-72-points-of-BRICS-Summit-Declaration&highlight=brics)

I'd watch Argentina and Brazil to see if they begin to Echo Russia here. They likely will.

[donnay]

This is a big deal...

Food Supply Listed as Reason for EU to Dump U.S. and Join Russia (http://www.naturalblaze.com/2015/01/american-food-supply-listed-as-reason.html)




Relevant goings on... 72 points of BRICS Summit Declaration (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?456224-72-points-of-BRICS-Summit-Declaration&highlight=brics)

I'd watch Argentina and Brazil to see if they begin to Echo Russia here. They likely will.

This is a big deal...

I wonder if the US will go to war with people who will not accept GMO's?

[Natural Citizen]

This is a big deal...

I wonder if the US will go to war with people who will not accept GMO's?

All they have at the moment is the secretive TPP. But, as we've mentioned, people are taking to the streets abroad as they learn about that screed.

[Natural Citizen]

Russian President Putin Signs GMO Labeling Liability Law (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/01/03/russian-president-putin-signs-gmo-labeling-liability-law/#.VK7fsXuGOJ2)





Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed the Russian Federation Code of Administrative Offences (http://kremlin.ru/acts/47418) into law, including a new article establishing liability for the violation of mandatory requirements for the labeling of food products that contain GMOs.

President Putin said in 2014 that Russia must protect its citizens (http://sustainablepulse.com/2014/03/28/vladimir-putin-russia-must-protect-citizens-gmos/) from overconsumption of products containing genetically modified organisms. Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev followed this with a statement that Russia has no intention to import GMOs, however there are still large quantities of GMO foods being imported in to Russia.

Russian Minister of Agriculture Nikolai Fyodorov believes that Russia must remain a GMO-free country. At a meeting of deputies representing rural areas organized by United Russia, he said that the government will not “poison their citizens.”

In February, a group of senators from Russia’s Federation Council introduced a bill (http://sustainablepulse.com/2014/05/15/russian-lawmakers-want-impose-criminal-liability-gmo-related-activities/) seeking to prohibit the distribution and import of products containing GMOs in Russia.

[Natural Citizen]

I'm adding this just because of the info war that I think that we'll see with regard to gmos at the international level. As has been mentioned, gmos are, no doubt, a geo-political issue and the Ukraine is sitting right in the middle of that.

Anyhoo...

What They’re Not Telling You About Monsanto’s Role in Ukraine...




Monsanto has an office in Ukraine. (http://www.monsanto.com/whoweare/pages/ukraine.aspx) While this does not shout ‘culpability’ from every corner, it is no different than the US military’s habit to place bases in places that they want to gain political control. The opening of this office coincided with land grabs with loans from the IMF and World Bank to one of the world’s most hated corporations – all in support of their biotech takeover.

Previously, there was a ban on private sector land ownership in the country – but it was lifted ‘just in time’ for Monsanto to have its way with the Ukraine.

In fact, a bit of political maneuvering by the IMF gave the Ukraine a $17 billion loan (http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2526593/ukraine_opens_up_for_monsanto_land_grabs_and_gmos. html) – but only if they would open up to biotech farming and the selling of Monsanto’s poison crops and chemicals – destroying a farmland that is one of the most pristine in all of Europe. Farm equipment dealer, Deere, along with seed producers Dupont and Monsanto, will have a heyday.

As reported by The Ecologist, according to the Oakland Institute:

“Whereas Ukraine does not allow the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture, Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies.

There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry. As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, ‘Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont’.”

The nation WAS Europe’s breadbasket – and now in an act of bio-warfare, it will become the wasteland that many US farmlands have become due to copious amounts of herbicide spraying, the depletion of soil, and the overall disruption of a perfect ecosystem.The aim of US government entities is to support the takeover of Ukraine for biotech interests (among other strategies involving the prop-up of a failing cabalistic banking system that Russia has also refused with its new alignment with BRICS and its own payment system called SWIFT). This is similar to biotech’s desired takeover of Hawaiian islands (http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-using-hawaiian-island-petri-dish/) and land in Africa.

The Ukraine war has many angles that haven’t been exposed to the general public – and you can bet that biotech has their hands in the proverbial corn pie.



Continued - What They’re Not Telling You About Monsanto’s Role in Ukraine (http://naturalsociety.com/theyre-not-telling-monsantos-role-ukraine/)

[Natural Citizen]

This first link basically indicates that Germany is flipping its nose to European Union law while simultaneously striving toward a model where nations in the EU can dictate national policy with regard to the issue.

Germany Pushes GMO Ban Before 2015 Harvest (http://naturalsociety.com/germany-pushes-gmo-ban-2015-harvest/)




"The German Farm Minister, Christian Schmidt, is getting pressure from German activists who state that ‘social-economic’ reasons should be taken into consideration to allow EU nations to ban GM crops outright. Schmidt told attendees (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/14/us-grain-germany-gmo-idUSKCN0IY1ML20141114) at a joint press conference held in Berlin, which he attended with the new EU agricultural commissioner, Phil Hogan, that large part of Germany’s population is opposed to GM foods.

"He supported an EU initiative this past summer which gave 12 member states the freedom to ban GM from being cultivated. Even if the EU-bloc approved GM, member states could still individually refuse to grow them."





Relevant reading - EU passes controversial GMO food law (http://www.dw.de/eu-passes-controversial-gmo-food-law/a-18188282)

[mosquitobite]

This first link basically indicates that Germany is flipping its nose to European Union law while simultaneously striving toward a model where nations in the EU can dictate national policy with regard to the issue.

Germany Pushes GMO Ban Before 2015 Harvest (http://naturalsociety.com/germany-pushes-gmo-ban-2015-harvest/)




Relevant reading - EU passes controversial GMO food law (http://www.dw.de/eu-passes-controversial-gmo-food-law/a-18188282)

Interesting. If you follow the links to the 800 scientists - note their acronym.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/list.php

[Natural Citizen]

Hm. Have to kind of place the fact that China is the leading member economically of the BRICS bloc of Brazil, Russia, India. May as well throw Souh Africa in there too. Like Argentina, Brazil also got politically strong armed in the early part of that political/economic/mercantilist model. And so the article here is interesting based on a sort of restructuring that is evolving.

Expect the issue to continue to evolve into a geo-political battle as these nations who increasingly are turning their heads away from gm agricultural products look to set an agricultural standard. And this is what is happening.

Brazil to expand agriculture exports to China (http://thebricspost.com/brazil-to-expand-agriculture-exports-to-china/#.VNN1vy6GOJ1)

[Natural Citizen]

With a growing number of nations beginning to partiipate in NGO independent research of the safety of GMO in agriculture (some have been shared in this thread) these kinds of papers will start to become more mainstream as calls for a so called agricultural standard evolve geo-politically.


No scientific consensus on GMO safety...


Abstract (provisional)

A broad community of independent scientific researchers and scholars challenges recent claims of a consensus over the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In the following joint statement, the claimed consensus is shown to be an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated through diverse fora. Irrespective of contradictory evidence in the refereed literature, as documented below, the claim that there is now a consensus on the safety of GMOs continues to be widely and often uncritically aired. For decades, the safety of GMOs has been a hotly controversial topic that has been much debated around the world. Published results are contradictory, in part due to the range of different research methods employed, an inadequacy of available procedures, and differences in the analysis and interpretation of data. Such a lack of consensus on safety is also evidenced by the agreement of policymakers from over 160 countries - in the UN?s Cartagena Biosafety Protocol and the Guidelines of the Codex Alimentarius - to authorize careful case-by-case assessment of each GMO by national authorities to determine whether the particular construct satisfies the national criteria for `safe?. Rigorous assessment of GMO safety has been hampered by the lack of funding independent of proprietary interests. Research for the public good has been further constrained by property rights issues, and by denial of access to research material for researchers unwilling to sign contractual agreements with the developers, which confer unacceptable control over publication to the proprietary interests.The joint statement developed and signed by over 300 independent researchers, and reproduced and published below, does not assert that GMOs are unsafe or safe. Rather, the statement concludes that the scarcity and contradictory nature of the scientific evidence published to date prevents conclusive claims of safety, or of lack of safety, of GMOs. Claims of consensus on the safety of GMOs are not supported by an objective analysis of the refereed literature.



Full peer-reviewed article - http://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/s12302-014-0034-1.pdf

This peer-reviewed article can be downloaded, printed and distributed freely for any purposes (see copyright
notice below).


© 2015 Hilbeck et al.; licensee Springer. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.

[Natural Citizen]

I'm sharing this report, but, the fact of the matter is that the BRIC nations as well as some others will likely get in the way of this. The history itself is accurate, though. The future? Meh. Not sdo much. Especially once the Asian Infrastructurel Development Bank starts handing out loans for agricultural infrastructure.

Land grab in Ukraine is Monsanto’s backdoor to the EU...




Taking a backseat to the dramatic political developments there, this turn of events went almost unnoticed, although Monsanto has been lobbying within Ukraine’s agricultural market for quite a while.

Leaving aside (http://www.biosicherheit.de/pdf/aktuell/zentek_studie_2008.pdf) for the moment the controversy about the hazards of GMOs in general, let us merely consider how the seizure of the Ukrainian market by American multinational agribusinesses will affect the EU’s economy.
Since the mid-90s the Ukrainian-Americans at the helm of the US-Ukraine Business Council have been instrumental in encouraging the foreign control of the Ukrainian ag industry. Within two to three years, as the relevant provisions of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU (http://eeas.europa.eu/ukraine/assoagreement/assoagreement-2013_en.htm) go into effect, Monsanto’s lobbying efforts will transform the Ukrainian market into an oligopoly consisting of American corporations.

Although the media in Kiev is awash in patriotic rhetoric, it is unlikely that any heroic figures will emerge who will stand up for the right of new generations of Ukrainians to live and work on wholesome land. The intellectual standards of the work being done by the Ukrainian Grain Association, for example, the largest umbrella organization of Ukrainian farmers, are on eloquent display in its latest press release (http://uga-port.org.ua/en/press-releases/eng-press-reliz-2), which needs no further comment.

Within a few years ag producers will expand their use of biotechnology licensed from the US, which Article 404 of the Association Agreement with the EU somewhat ambiguously refers to as “best practices … for agricultural policies.” Making Ukrainian ag producers addicted to seeds that are only available from America is part of a relentless (http://www.europabio.org/press/licence-ban-safe-gm-crops-undermines-innovation-and-single-market) PR campaign promoting GMO technology throughout Europe that brandishes keywords like “innovation,” “biotechnology,” and “the common EU market.”

Within the next few years, as addendums to Ukraine’s Association Agreement with the EU go into effect, Monsanto is counting on a significant increase in the acreage of ​​GMO cropland in Ukraine. Afterward they will begin to act out their role as a colonial power, raking in profits from emerging markets, although India already knows that story does not have a happy ending. The company was booted out a few years ago, after a ghastly outbreak of mass suicides among the local farmers, according to the (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/93-farmers-committed-suicide-in-45-days-in-Marathwada-region/articleshow/46293718.cms)Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/93-farmers-committed-suicide-in-45-days-in-Marathwada-region/articleshow/46293718.cms).




Continued - Land grab in Ukraine is Monsanto’s backdoor to the EU (http://orientalreview.org/2015/04/06/land-grab-in-ukraine-is-monsantos-backdoor-to-the-eu/)

[Noob]

Tell Congress: Oppose the DARK Act!


http://signforgood.com/stopthedarkact/?code=JLI&redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fsalsa3.salsalabs.com%2Fo%2F 50202%2Fp%2Fsalsa%2Fdonation%2Fcommon%2Fpublic%2F% 3Fdonate_page_KEY%3D11843%26track%3D2015JointDARKA ctUpsell

[Christopher A. Brown]

I'm bumping this thread because it's an important aspect of future discussion.

Yes it is.

The thread highlights collusion between our federal government and corporations that are manipulating proven good crops in ways that are said to have short term benefits, misrepresenting those while completely omitting the long term dynamic damage that occurs or might occur because of the genetic manipulation.

Science has been hijacked by collusion between multinational corporations and our federal government. In order to stop
It Americans will have to abandon partisan politics and focus upon principles by public agreement upon definition of constitutional intent critical to proper and lawful amendment under Article V.

That agreement can compel demand for proper preparation for Article V. It is patently unconstitutional to suggest America enter into the most important political event of the people which has happened in 226 years, without preparation to assure constitutional intent.

After a lawful and peaceful revolution, free trade agreements can ALL be rescinded to end the spread of the product of highjacked science, as well as the adaptation of American industrialization to sustainable models securing a stable economy and GNP.

[Natural Citizen]

Pay attention to the "U.S." position here. As well, consider what is happening with that so called trade agreement and it's impact on national sovereignty given the position of the U.S. toward the EU here. What I'm going to bolden below is what we'll see narrate the terms of controversy in the future as western industry looks to invade the sovereignty of foreign nations abroad as well as here in the states.





The European Union has given the green light to start importing 10 new types of genetically modified crops for the first time since 2013. Two types of flowers have also been cleared, amid heated debates over amendments to the EU approval process.

The GM crops by Monsanto, BASF and Bayer CropScience will principally be used to feed cattle in Europe, according to Reuters.
The Commission also gave 10-year extensions to seven other crops produced by Bayer, Monsanto, Dupont's Pioneer and Dow AgroSciences, which had previously been approved. Two types of carnations, developed by Suntory Holdings, have also been cleared for import into the EU.

Earlier this week, the European Commission proposed a new law, which would allow individual member states to restrict or prohibit imported GM crops – even if they have been approved by the EU.

The US, which is pushing for Europe to fully accept its GM crops, slammed the initiative as “not constructive,” saying that it amounts to a trade restriction and therefore jeopardizes the planned EU-US free trade agreement.



Continued - EU allows more GM crops to be imported following 1.5-yr hiatus
(http://rt.com/news/252869-gm-eu-import-approval/)

Pay attention to what the BRIC nations are doing aside from this. It is expected that the EU would tend to run abreast with western interests at the expense of the sovereignty of their people but the large majority of the rest of the world are doing quite the opposite. As well, expect the Asian Infrastructure Development Bank to begin handing out loans for agricultural infrastructure of non-gmo nations.

Gettin' jiggy now, kiddies.

[Natural Citizen]

I'm going to share this piece here just because of the increasing market for non-GMO foods and crops in America...which the US now has to import, conforms to the global market and geo-political trends. And, of course, much has been shared here with regard to how all of that is evolving while recalling goings-on with regard to the TPP, Asian Infrastructure Development Bank and the Brics Development Bank.

Anyhoo...

Creditors Change Monsanto’s Investor Rating to “Negative” (http://naturalsociety.com/still-losing-creditors-change-monsantos-investor-rating-to-negative/)




"Approximately $8 billion in debt securities are affecting a popular investor’s service decision about one of biotech’s biggest. Investing credit rating company Moody’s has affirmed that Monsanto’s new rating is being downgraded from ‘neutral’ to ‘negative’ following Syngenta’s announcement that it has refused Monsanto’s unsolicited bid of CHF449 per Syngenta share in a combination of cash and stock.

"Monsanto’s offer would have valued another biotech bully at a mere US$20 billion paid in cash. For investors in Monsanto, Moody’s calls their (https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-changes-Monsantos-outlook-to-negative--PR_324931?amp;amp;WT.mc_id=AM%7EWWFob29fRmluYW5jZV 9TQl9SYXRpbmcgTmV3c19BbGxfRW5n%7E20150508_PR_32493 1) aggressive attempt at takeover a “heightened event risk” due to their more aggressive financial policy.

"Indeed – Monsanto’s financial policy seems to match their aggressive actions elsewhere – from bullying federal judges to trying to orchestrate a trade monopoly through the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) (http://naturalsociety.com/breaking-secret-agreement-to-make-corporations-unstoppable-moves-forward/)."

"However, Moody’s doesn’t seem to take into account the fact that consumers and farmers are more increasingly refusing GM products – whether it’s the glyphosate that Monsanto sells via Round Up or the Round Up Ready crops they push on farmers throughout the world.

"There have been increasing farmer uprisings against Monsanto, and the demand for organic is booming (http://naturalsociety.com/booming-organics-u-s-farmers-forced-to-import-organic-crops-to-meet-non-gmo-demand/) so much that the US is now importing more organic food than they are growing."


"It doesn’t mention that Monsanto’s research pipeline is all paid for and that the company has an entire department dedicated to discounting any scientific research (http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-employee-admits-an-entire-department-exists-to-discredit-scientists/) which paints them in an unfavorable light. This is obviously not a sustainable way to do business, since even the World Health Organization has called glyphosate ‘probably carcinogenic (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/widely-used-herbicide-linked-to-cancer/)’ and organizations everywhere are now demanding a ban on glyphosate.






Relevant reading - There is a need for a BRICS ratings agency (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?456224-72-points-of-BRICS-Summit-Declaration&p=5873459&viewfull=1#post5873459)

[Natural Citizen]

Colombia plans to eradicate Monsanto weed killer in drug war...




Colombia is planning to ban the use of a controversial herbicide supplied to the South American country by US agrochemical giant Monsanto to battle illegal coca fields, over fears of health hazards and collateral damage to legal farmlands.
For decades, Colombia used US contractors to spray a popular weed killer, known as RoundUp over more than four million acres of land to control the illegal growth of cocoa leaves used in the production of cocaine that ultimately hit US market. Aerial fumigations targeted illegal plantations that were often used by the rebels of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) to sponsor their fight against the central government in Bogota.

But with FARC’s influence and threat steadily diminishing in the country over the last few years, the government has now been weighing up the health and environmental hazards of continual use of Monsanto’s product.

“The recommendations and studies reviewed by the Ministry of Health show clearly that yes, this risk exists,” Santos said in regards to the WHO report.

“I am going to ask the government officials in the National Drug Council at their next meeting to suspend glyphosate spraying of illicit cultivations,” said Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos.

Santos’ concern follows a report released by the World Health Organization earlier this year which claimed that the active ingredient in the world’s most widely-used Roundup herbicide is “probably” carcinogenic to humans.




Continued - Colombia plans to eradicate Monsanto weed killer in drug war (http://rt.com/news/258069-colombia-coca-monsanto-ban/)

[Natural Citizen]

WHO cancer division to rule on widespread herbicide’s carcinogenic hazard (http://rt.com/news/263389-who-probes-herbicide-carcinogenic/)




The World Health Organization is set to deliver a verdict on the potential danger of 2,4-D herbicides widely used in the agribusiness, and which was one of the key components of Agent Orange used during US herbicidal warfare in Vietnam.

The move by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a research arm of WHO, to examine the chemical comes shortly after the agency classified glyphosate or Roundup herbicide, produced by Monsanto, as “probably” cancerogenic.

Now the stage is set to determine the possible health risk posed by the 2,4-D. Some 24 IARC scientists are due to deliver the verdict after examining pro and con studies on the issue. Their week-long meeting is scheduled to start on June 2 in Lyon, France.

Humans could be exposed to the chemical through the skin, mouth or airways, if one just forgets to wash their hands. If exposed for a prolonged period of time, the herbicide could cause cancer, a few scientific studies have suggested in the past.

Short term exposure symptoms of 2,4-D poisoning could include irritation and inflammation of eyes and skin, hives, nausea, and difficulty breathing. The herbicide can also be very toxic to fish and other aquatic life, once it enters a water stream.

“I do think they are going to upgrade 2,4-D” Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at Consumers Union and consultant to the WHO told Reuters. “There is just as strong, or even a stronger case [for links to cancer], on 2,4-D than there was for glyphosate.”

Many scientific studies over the years have come up with evidence showing cancer connections with 2,4-D, said IARC scientist Maria Leon. In particular environmental exposure to the herbicide on the farm has been hypothesized to contribute to the long-term increase in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). IARC working group is to determine the strength of the evidence offered by both critics and supporters of 2,4-D use, Leon said.

Denying any carcinogenic links of 2,4-D, Dow Chemical is ready to put out a fight to protects its business interests, and will send a scientific task team, armed with some 14 company funded studies that dismisses 2,4-D as cancer causing agent.

In an agribusiness chemical arms race, Dow’s development of 2,4-D-resistant crops came about once first-generation genetically-modified crops made by Monsanto evolved to resist the company’s Roundup herbicide. The flood of new GE crops increased the use of glyphosate, also linked to a host of other ill health effects, and the emergence of glyphosate-resistant superweeds.

The 2,4-D chemical, combined with glyphosate, makes up the herbicide Enlist Duo. The chemical also makes up half of the toxic mix in the now infamous Agent Orange, used by the United States during the Vietnam War, which is thought to have resulted in the deaths of an estimated 400,000 and birth defects in 500,000 people.

[Natural Citizen]

This is interesting because it opens up legal pressure toward the agribusiness industry and the government. Which is why I'm sharing it here in this particular thread. I'm only going to quote a couple of passages but the entitre thing is an interesting read for anyone who is genuinly paying attention to what is happening at the geo-political level with this issue.

Challenge to Monsanto
(http://3dd.816.myftpupload.com/monsanto_challenge/)
In this challenge, which was delivered to Monsanto’s headquarters on May 20, 2015, American public interest attorney Steven Druker calls on that corporation to find any inaccurate statements of fact in his new book, Altered Genes, Twisted Truth – How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public. This acclaimed book thoroughly exposes the substantial risks of genetically engineered foods (also called GM foods and GMOs) and the multiple misrepresentations that have enabled them to permeate world markets. Druker asserts that if Monsanto cannot prove that his book is essentially erroneous, the world will have a right to regard these controversial foods as unacceptably risky – and to promptly ban them.





4. Besides deceiving the public about the risks of GE foods, theFDA allowed them toenter the US market in blatant violation of federal food safety law–and they continue to be on the market illegally.



Even if GE crops didn’t entail excessive risks, they would still not be the solution for meeting the world’s prospective food needs, which is clear from a major study on the future of farming sponsored by four United Nations agencies and the World Bank that concluded they are not necessary – and also from numerous studies in a variety of African nations demonstrating that safe and sustainable agroecological methods can outperform industrialized approaches (even when GMOs are employed)



The other point that I'd quote here relative to studies that indicate not only is there no increased productivity over the long term of GMOs vs non-GMO crops, that the cost-to-benefit ratio for farmers planting GMOs declines over time.





"In that email, you stated: “I would be very pleased to provide you with any additional information.” The time has come to take you up on that offer. But I do not want to receive more of Monsanto’s misleading pronouncements that are passed off as genuine facts. Instead, I’m requesting some information that you had not planned to send.

I want you to inform me of any inaccuracies you can find in my book. I want you and your colleagues to attempt to refute Altered Genes, Twisted Truth in the same manner this letter has refuted two of the main assertions in the brochure you submitted. Moreover, I challenge you to do so. I challenge you to read the book and send me a specific list of any inaccurate statements of fact that you detect in it, accompanied by an explanation of why the statement is erroneous and a reference to the evidence that conclusively corroborates your claim.

To clarify, I am referring to simple assertions about concrete facts that can be decisively falsified by incontestable evidence, such as the erroneous statements in your brochure that “every respected organization that has examined the evidence” has concluded that GE foods are as safe as naturally produced ones and that “there have been no documented safety issues.” I am not referring to the broader conclusions the book draws from the primary facts, such as the conclusions (a) that the GE food venture has been chronically and crucially reliant on deception and (b) that its products are unacceptably risky and should be banned. I fully expect that you will disagree with these conclusions, but I am confident that the vast majority of fair-minded men and women who become aware of the basic facts will agree with them.

I also invite the other proponents of GE foods within industry and academia to assist Monsanto by scrutinizing the book and sending you their input. In that way, the response that Monsanto submits will represent the best collective effort of the biotech industry and its supporters.




Now...heh...the author makes it clear what does and does not constitute a refutation...





If by July 20th you and your allies have not been able to refute the essential factual accuracy of Altered Genes, Twisted Truth according to the terms set forth above, the world will have a right to assume that it is as sound as the experts who reviewed it have affirmed – and to conclude that GE foods are unacceptably risky and must be banned.

I will send you (in a separate document) the address to which your response to this challenge should be submitted. That response will be posted on the book’s website and Facebook page and also on the website of the Alliance for Bio-Integrity.

www.alteredgenestwistedtruth.com (http://www.alteredgenestwistedtruth.com/)
www.facebook.com/alteredgenestwistedtruth (http://www.facebook.com/alteredgenestwistedtruth)
www.biointegrity.org (http://www.biointegrity.org/)


Further, I will readily acknowledge (on the above sites) any genuine errors you point out and will correct them in the next printing of the book. Concomitantly, I expect that, if Monsanto is as committed to the scientific spirit as it professes to be, there will be a prompt public acknowledgement and retraction of the erroneous assertions this document has pointed out along with an honest attempt to set the record straight. Please send me the evidence that this has occurred. Moreover, as you read the book, you will discern many other inaccuracies that Monsanto has propagated, and I request that you likewise publicly acknowledge and correct them.

It is well-recognized that although we’re all entitled to our own opinions, no one is entitled to his or her own set of facts. And it is obvious that Monsanto and its allies have been propagating a distinctly different set of facts than are delineated in Altered Genes, Twisted Truth. Both versions of reality cannot be correct, and people have a right to know which one is valid and which is fictitious. The purpose of this challenge is to clearly and conclusively provide the answer.

[Natural Citizen]

Sanctions and the Birth of the New Russia...oh noes....http://spiritcompanion.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/nailbiting.gif




"Today’s Russian leaders have realized that what was considered under the corrupt Yeltsin era to be a liability—Russia’s agriculture—is one of her greatest assets.

I had occasion in the context of this year’s St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, to speak with the Deputy Secretary of Agriculture who told me the government has made a strategic decision to use the sanctions and Russian “counter sanctions,” namely banning imports of major food products of the European Union, to build a Russian natural or organic food production.

Deputy Minister, Sergey Levin, told me that Russia already today has banned any commercial planting of GMO seeds. His comments were echoed at the Forum by Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich who announced that Russia will not use genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Russian Agriculture Minister, Nikolai Fyodorov has pledged to keep Russia a GMO-free country. At a meeting of deputies representing rural areas recently he declared in reference to GMOs, that the government will not “poison their citizens (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/06/21/russian-deputy-pm-confirms-clean-products-benefit-of-gmo-free-agriculture/#.VYj6qkaSyec).”

They have realized that the abundantly rich, fertile Russian soil, owing to the Cold War requirements of diverting most chemical production into the military defense sector, has largely avoided the heavy soil application of agrochemicals that have done severe damage to the farmlands of the United States and much of the European Union since 1945. American agribusiness methods have been marvelous for increasing harvest yields but not for maintaining nutritional quality of the food produced. Here is where Russia has realized it can become a major world producer of organic, non-GMO quality agriculture products. Fertile Russian agriculture lands become even more strategic to world food supplies as the similarly fertile black soils of Ukraine are being destroyed by war and chaos there



Okay. So this essentially explains that Russia knows that it is of the position to to exploit and fulfill the global demand for alternatives not only to GMOs, but to the corporate penned "science". Russia's position on the science has been shared here in this thread. As well as positions of other nations that will have say so in the Asian Infrastructure Development and BRICS Banks. And then we'll see some nations gain seats and voting rights on the U.N. Security Council. Now, that's a larger aspect to the issue but I just want to mention that because it'll be relevant later. The other point here is that statement from the Rusian agricultural minister that the Russian government will not poison its citizens. We've shared that previously in the thread, too. Look for it. There is a bit more to it. Now, this particular comment was not only directed toward the West but at its GMO corporations. So, expect that propaganda war to evolve, however, it will be a campaign that the west will not and can not win. Is what it is. Work with it.



Anyhow. Back to the op-ed. Specifically it's reference to Russia's energy deals and the fact tht the west's demand to keep them sanctioned simply isn't working. But we knew that they weren't working. Right? Of course, we knew, silly geese.




The diversity of such strategic trade deals that emerged from St. Petersburg is impressive. Andrew Korybko, journalist and analyst with Moscow’s Sputnik News detailed some of the most significant of the deals that emerged from the Russian forum. Korybko points out that far from being regarded internationally as a pariah state, as a “rule-breaker” of rules of the Washington game, today’s Russia is becoming a magnet of international interest unprecedented her history.

That was demonstrated in the attendance at the annual St. Petersburg forum. Despite strong efforts by the silly US State Department to discourage attendance in St. Petersburg, this year a record number of paid participants, some 10,000, joined in three days of intensive discussion and signed over 200 contracts worth $5.4 billion in new trade deals with Russia, with tens of billions in new deals in serious negotiation. Attendance was some 25% more than a year ago, and a record for the 19 year-old forum, despite the repeated Washington and Brussels efforts to demonize Russia (http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20150622/1023693742.html#ixzz3dx8PDU4a)and Putin.

Sending a clear signal to their NATO-tied governments that they do not regard Russian sanctions as a hindrance to further cooperation with Russia in development of Russia’s vast undeveloped hydrocarbon resources, Britain’s BP and the Anglo-Dutch Royal Dutch Shell, as well as Germany’s E.ON, made major new agreements with Russia in St. Petersburg.




Certainly, these sanctions have cost our friends in the European Union member states business, exports, contracts and so forth. Note Merkel's thoughts about "decarbonization" there at the G7 summit. Realistically speaking, economic sanctions are not in Europe's best interest and eventually they'll be forced to face the reaity of the issue. That'll be a hoot to watch. Likely down the road and after she is gone.


Back to the piece... Russia and Saudi Arabia...




One of the most geopolitically fascinating developments around the St. Petersburg forum was the appearance of Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Defense Minister and son of King Salman. Prince bin Salman, and Putin held a joint press conference during the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum where Putin announced he had invited Saudi Arabia’s King Salman to visit Russia, and had accepted an invitation to visit Saudi Arabia.

In addition, the two discussed Saudi purchase of Russian nuclear power technology. Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir told RT that Saudi Arabia plans to use Russia’s expertise to build up to 16 power-generating nuclear reactors. Russia and Saudi Arabia signed an intergovernmental agreement on cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy. According to Russia’s state-run atomic energy agency Rosatom, for the first time in the history of Russian-Saudi relations it creates a legal framework for bilateral cooperation in nuclear energy, and opens prospects for cooperation in construction and operation of reactors, nuclear fuel cycle services as well as education and training (http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150620/1023613773.html#ixzz3dyeheqHb).

Russian President Putin and the Saudi Prince discussed possible cooperation in the arms trade. Hmmmm. Until now Saudi Arabia has been a prime arms customer of the USA and of Great Britain. No doubt the May 9 Moscow parade of the most advanced Russian weapons systems caught the eye of Prince bin Salman. Referring to the talks between bin Salman and Putin on possible Russian weapons system purchases by Saudi Arabia, Foreign Minister al-Jubeir stated, “This issue [purchase of weapons] is being considered by the military experts from our countries. But I want to stress that nothing prevents us from buying Russian defense systems, just like nothing prevents Russia from selling them to Saudi Arabia (http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20150620/1023619862.html#ixzz3dydYZWva).”

We can imagine this statement raised more than a few eyebrows in Washington and London and Brussels NATO headquarters, where it’s been assumed ever since the 1945 meeting between US President Roosevelt and Saudi King Ibn Saud securing exclusive rights for American oil majors to develop the huge oil reserves of the Saudi Kingdom, that Riyadh would be a US vassal state.




Of course, what isn't mentioned here is Russia's involvement in the Iranian nuclear program as well as its role in stimulating discussion with the West with regard to that. Russia is opening doors to Saudi nuclear deals and arms trade, and, so, gain influence within both wings of the Islamic world. Of course, there is a bit more to it since they'll, then, not be so reliant upon western arms for its military. Right? Right. Perhaps, then, we'll see more trade in intelligence? Who knows. The point is that Russia is doing its own thing while/after being slapped around by the west and challenging them at the same time.

Continued - Sanctions and the Birth of the New Russia (http://journal-neo.org/2015/06/25/sanctions-and-the-birth-of-the-new-russia/)


Also - Since energy/trade and other things were referenced in that op-ed, please consider reading this thread for backdrop/relevance. Technically, the two threads could be merged but whatever.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?456224-72-points-of-BRICS-Summit-Declaration&p=5891286&viewfull=1#post5891286

[Natural Citizen]

Some updates on United Kingdom, Germany and France...


Recall that the BBC is the mouthpiece of the British government as well as oligarchy within.

UK GM wheat 'does not repel pests'
(http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33262885)

Aside - France bans the sale of glyphosate (http://www.naturalnews.com/050248_french_legislation_glyphosate_ban_Monsanto_ GMOs.html)



Relevant reading - German farm KTG plans China expansion after Fosun buys stake (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/29/germany-ktg-china-idUSL5N0ZF1L520150629)




KTG, one of the few listed farms in Europe, hopes to increase food sales to China to between 100 million and 200 million euros annually in the coming three years from 20 to 30 million euros expected in 2015, KTG CEO Siegfried Hofreiter told Reuters.

"China could become KTG's largest market," Hofreiter said.

Currently about 80 percent of KTG's sales are in Germany and 20 percent are exports.

Fosun International purchased a 9.03 percent shareholding in KTG via a Portuguese unit, KTG said on Monday.

Fosun has interests in a Chinese food retail chain with 8,000 shops and also in Internet commerce which should help the launch of KTG's food products in China, Hofreiter said.

"China's middle class is around 700 million people and I see strong demand there for organic German foods free of GMOs (genetically modified organisms)," Hofreiter said




This reinforces the notion that the market, and in particular, China's market , will ultimately determine the fate of the GMO debate. This will not be determined by mercantilist policy of western special interests. Asian Infrastructure Development Bank will be handing out loans to some interesting geo-political non-gmo competitors. Of course, relevance resides throughout this thread to indicate the reality of the revelation. Just have to take the time to read it. Do or do not.




I suppose It'd be relevant to share an update with regard to Argentina here, too. Some interesting things continue to evolve there.

Justice ordered the National Executive to suspend the sale of GMOs and associated pesticides (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=&tl=en&u=http://www.maximaonline.com.ar/2010/Nota-37366)

[Natural Citizen]

Germany Joins Scotland in Seeking Ban on Gene-Modified Seed (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-25/germany-joins-scotland-in-seeking-ban-on-gene-modified-seeds)



The Agriculture Ministry plans to officially request that producers of GMOs exclude Germany when applying to sell seeds in European Union, Christian Fronczak, a spokesman for the ministry, said Tuesday. Scotland took similar measures earlier this month.

“The German government is clear in that it seeks a nationwide cultivation ban,” Fronczak said by phone from Berlin. “There’s resistance from all sides, from the public to the farmers.”

Germany is taking advantage of new measures allowing countries to opt out of growing gene-modified crops. Switzerland’s Syngenta AG and U.S. rival Monsanto Co. have been among the strongest proponents of the seeds, which are mostly banned in the EU because of what some say are uncertain environmental and health effects. Monsanto maintains the products are safe.




Essentially, Germany is yet another country who is making this a Geo-political issue. And make no mistake, the GMO debate is absolutely a Geo-political issue. What we are seeing is both an economic and government opposition abroad. Once Europe breaks from them, agribusiness giants will no longer be able to monopolize the scientific debate, or close out public discussion with regard to studies that question the health or environmental risks of GMOs. But we predicted this move from a list of nations previously. We're just coming to that point is all where it is beginning to happen. While the industry continues to pressure American state and federal governments with pro-GMO legislation and seeks to close down any discussion on the issue, we continue to see other nations break away. Of course, if Europe braks away from GMOs, then, the discussion breaks out further into the open than it already is as well, and, as we've said, remains a growing international issue.


Aside - Monsanto drops Syngenta takeover bid (http://www.dw.com/en/monsanto-drops-syngenta-takeover-bid/a-18676414)




Monsanto shares have droped 13 percent between August 18 and 25 amid global market turmoil. With nearly half Monsanto's takeover offer based on a share swap, the merger would have entailed significant exposure to market volatility.

Monsanto had envisioned shifting the merged company's headquarters from Monsanto's current home base of St Louis, in the midwestern US state of Missouri, to Britain.

Syngenta said Monsanto had failed to provide "sufficient clarity" on a number of concerns, including regulatory risk, the tax consequences of shifting the company's registered headquarters from the US to Britain, and the estimated financial benefits of the proposed merger.

"We engaged with Monsanto in good faith and highlighted those key issues which required more concrete information in order to continue a dialogue. We take note of Monsanto's decision," Syngenta chairman Michel Demare said, adding that "our Board is confident Syngenta's long-term prospects remain very attractive."

The idea, according to Monsanto chief executive Hugh Grant in an April 18 letter to Syngenta executives, was that "our merger will create a new global enterprise focused on future growth across all geographies... The combination of our companies would redefine the future of agriculture."

The idea, according to Monsanto chief executive Hugh Grant in an April 18 letter to Syngenta executives, was that "our merger will create a new global enterprise focused on future growth across all geographies... The combination of our companies would redefine the future of agriculture."



Looks like Syngenta isn't comfortable with becoming part of what is essentially a cartel looking to create a kind of global, corporate, stronghold on the food supplies via patent law. Because that is exactly what this is. Monsanto was hoping to move its headquarters away from an increasingly aware American public through a merger as well. That's another discussion, though. Well...I guess. Depends on what part of the issue we're addressing, really. TPP, TTIP and whatnot...

End of the day, foreign policy is a bit more intricate than what we hear from the teevee and the politicians here in the states. Seems like Foreign Policy here is defined by promoting fear porn over them thar terrists all of the time followed immediately by the narrative for selling War Inc. And there is always more than one side from a Geo-political perspective as we continue to see from the growing list of nations who are taking this issue with agriculture/trade seriously and approaching it realistically. And, again, both economic and government opposition is growing abroad. They don't really discuss foreign policy correctly and in any relevant way at all here in the states, unfortunately. Seems like they're just reading their little pieces of paper and teleprompters and whatnot that the industry lobby scribbles up for them to repeat like good little minions. Three piece suits and Wall Street smiles for all. Heh. Of course, this, like other mercantilist ventures, including what we see in the Ukraine and the aftermath/repercussion of those very shortsighted/special interest driven Russian sanctions will backfire. Of course, those sanctions and what we saw in the Ukraine is driving a lot of what we are seeing from these nations now that they realize what a joke our foreign policy actually is. Is quite laughable, really. Especially when we are seeing our traditional allies jump ship and head on over to the Asian Infrastructure Development Bank. BRICS Bank, too.

[Natural Citizen]

I'm not going to share this report in the general forums since it directly relates to foreign policies of nations abroad with regard to the issue and the context of updates in this thread. Note that this report comes from RT. Russia Today. Right? And we certainly will not...not read or hear of this report from FOX, CNN, CBS, the New York Times and others here in the states.

Anyhow. Let's go....

Report - Long exposure to tiny amounts of Monsanto’s Roundup may damage liver, kidneys – study (http://www.rt.com/usa/313806-monsanto-roundup-kidney-damage/)

Study - http://www.ehjournal.net/content/14/1/70




The research, conducted by an international group of scientists from the UK, Italy and France, studied the effects of prolonged exposure to small amounts of the Roundup herbicide and one of its main components – glyphosate.

In their study, published (http://www.ehjournal.net/content/14/1/70) in Environmental Health on August 25, the scientists particularly focused on the influence of Monsanto’s Roundup on gene expression in the kidneys and liver.

In the new two-year study, which extended the findings from one conducted in 2012, the team added tiny amounts of Roundup to water that was given to rats in doses much smaller than allowed in US drinking water.

Scientists say that some of the rats experienced “25 percent body weight loss, presence of tumors over 25 percent bodyweight, hemorrhagic bleeding, or prostration.”

The study’s conclusions indicate that there is an association between wide-scale alterations in liver and kidney gene expression and the consumption of small quantities of Roundup, even at admissible glyphosate-equivalent concentrations. As the dose used is “environmentally relevant in terms of human, domesticated animals and wildlife levels of exposure,” the results potentially have significant health implications for animal and human populations, the study warned.




While the article also notes that beyond being done by an international group of scientists and researchers, Monsanto, of course, had no comment.

[donnay]

^^^Great find, JM.


While the article also notes that beyond being done by an international group of scientists and researchers, Monsanto, of course, had no comment.

They need a little bit of time to get damage control and paid scientists to try and debunk this study.

[angelatc]

^^^Great find, JM.



They need a little bit of time to get damage control and paid scientists to try and debunk this study.

It won't take long. If it was a real study, they wouldn't skip the peer review part of publishing.

Funny how you don't mind paid science when it's your beloved agenda-driven socialists paying for it. Facts be damned - there's a movement afoot.

You people are liars, you are hypocrites, and you disgust me.

[Dianne]

Of course they are. The entire Monsanto plan, with the world governments, is to soft kill as many as possible to reduce the population.

[angelatc]

Looks like Syngenta isn't comfortable with becoming part of what is essentially a cartel looking to create a kind of global, corporate, stronghold on the food supplies via patent law. Because that is exactly what this is. Monsanto was hoping to move its headquarters away from an increasingly aware American public through a merger as well. That's another discussion, though. \

It's a tax discussion, you idiot. America taxes corporations at almost 40%.

And not that you give a fuck about actual facts, but it was not Sygenta that walked away from the deal. The simple reality is that they were holding out for more money and Monsanto walked. These days, Sygenta is doing all the things that Monsanto said they wanted to do (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/business/dealbook/syngenta-to-sell-vegetable-seeds-business-and-buy-back-shares.html) post merger, like sell off Sygenta's seed business. But Sygenta has to do it in order to reassure their investors. ( Oh yeah - they're also now shoring up their own stock price by buying back their own shares.)

Apparently your understanding of business is just as deep as your understanding of science. WHich explains why nobody but you and DonnaY even reads this pile of rehashed RT compost that you so proudly turn over and over and over.

[Natural Citizen]

It's a tax discussion, you idiot. America taxes corporations at almost 40%.

And not that you give a fuck about actual facts, but it was not Sygenta that walked away from the deal. The simple reality is that they were holding out for more money and Monsanto walked. These days, Sygenta is doing all the things that Monsanto said they wanted to do (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/business/dealbook/syngenta-to-sell-vegetable-seeds-business-and-buy-back-shares.html) post merger, like sell off Sygenta's seed business. But Sygenta has to do it in order to reassure their investors. ( Oh yeah - they're also now shoring up their own stock price by buying back their own shares.)

Apparently your understanding of business is just as deep as your understanding of science. WHich explains why nobody but you and DonnaY even reads this pile of rehashed RT compost that you so proudly turn over and over and over.

Well. Respectfully, I'm afraid that your depth of understanding for why I specifically mentioned that this is being reported by RT as opposed to western media is very shallow. Although I do giggle with the irony of your "New York Times" piece. I was clear to mention their reporting in the post in which you quote here. Have you read this thread at all? This is a geo-political issue. As it will remain. Pay attention, now. You have to think a little bit with this stuff. You can't just go look for an article that supports your claim as far as you understand relevance to be. That won't work, dear.

Now. Heh. This is a "tax issue" to you because it is the depth of your scope of attention to what is happening. I get that. I've read your postings with regard to the issue as far as you understand it. We'll let you keep working with that. But, do pay attention to coming updates in this thread, however.

Mergers in the agrochemicals industry have led to a situation where only six companies dominate global agrochemicals sales. Syngenta, Bayer CropScience, BASF, Dow Agrosciences, Monsanto and DuPont. This equates to a cartel.

And, angela. You're insulting my understanding of the sciences. That isn't very nice. You're substituting Guerilla style dominance and personal attacks for understanding and civilized discussion. I have a degree in the natural and physical sciences. More than 1, actually. Do you? I will say, though, that I've lost interest in the "scientific" aspect of the dabate. All that really ever served was to be a mouthpiece distraction anyhow. The bottom lines are two fold 1 - profits and 2 - control of the human food supply via the application of patent law.That is what these margers are about and Sygenta didn't feel very easy with Monsanto establishing what amounts to a cartel among the 6 agribusiness giants. Monsanto is looking for a way out as the world is waking up to their mercantilist skullduggery.

With regard to my knowledge of business, I'd recommend that you perhaps browse through some of my more dedicated threads in terms of domestic and global economics as they relate to agricultural and banking infrastructure. I think that you'll find that I've not only been absolutely spot on but I've told you exactly how things were going to go down before they actually did. In fact, I've specifically linked to a couple of those threads here in this one since they are evolving congruently. And I really hate to sound like that with you. I try not to be that way. There simply isn't anything to be had in contributing to argumentative dialogue when each is of their own scope of understanding with regard to the issue. Or any issue, really.

[Natural Citizen]

You people are liars, you are hypocrites, and you disgust me.

Now, angela. That wasn't a very nice thing to say. Try to relax. Umkay? You can't let this stuff get to you. You know? Sure. Things don't always pan out the way that we'd like for the purpose of our individual cause or interests but we have to ask ourselves what we can do better when they don't. Eye of the tiger, angela. Eye of the tiger...

Perhaps our prospective electees will chime in on the issue during the next televised debate. It is, after all, a matter of critical foreign policy. Well...If we are to understand "business" in a Geo-political way. We've mentioned The Asian Infrastructure Development Bank and the BRICS Bank here in the thread. I suppose we all know how and why that evolved so swiftly. Practically overnight even. It was rather amateur to sanction Russia in such a knee jerk and undereducated way. And, of course, that stunt with the coup d'état in the Ukraine showed the rest of the world what our foreign policy was about. A joke, really. Economic thuggery. Western agribusiness was right there at the forefront in the Ukraine before the people over there stood up against the skullduggery from the west. None of those countries intend to be next, of course. Nor do they now. And, so, we see what we see evolving. Yep. That sure did set a course for all to watch very carefully. Of course, Biden did manage to get his boy, Hunter, in there with the gas conglomerates. That was convenient for a little while but then we saw how China, Russia and other nationes developed infrastructure for trade in that department. Hey, I see that our traditional allies are still flocking toward those banks as well. Why do think they are doing this angela? Is that another "tax" discussion?

[Weston White]

It won't take long. If it was a real study, they wouldn't skip the peer review part of publishing.

Funny how you don't mind paid science when it's your beloved agenda-driven socialists paying for it. Facts be damned - there's a movement afoot.

You people are liars, you are hypocrites, and you disgust me.


http://www.sharegif.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/3-the-big-lebowski-quotes.gif

[Natural Citizen]

Russia and China to Launch Huge $10 Billion Agribusiness Fund (http://russia-insider.com/en/business/russia-and-china-launch-huge-10-billion-agribusiness-fund/ri9636)

Aside from these two, expect Japan to become involved given that the country has become increasingly dependent on foreign sources for their food supply as a result of the Fukushima thing. Energy supply as well. Readers will get the idea, I suppose. Backdrop with regard to the development of competitive energy and agriculture infrastructure as well as alternative financial clearing models/infrastructure (domestic and international financial clearing models) as it relates to these nations is scattered about the board here. The far east is quickly becoming a major agricultural zone. As well, Japan is a key player for Russia in terms of slowing down China's influence in the area. Will likely be a deal that will stimulate a long-term reconfiguration of the Geo-political picture in a very fundamental way. Will see, I suppose. Japan would largely cut their shipping expenses by getting in the mix with these two. As it is, they are receiving their food supply from Canada, Australia, and The U.S.

Of course, Russia and China tend to hold slightly differing perspectives in terms of genetically modified food products. Russia tends to question the science and logic of the products while China has invested quite a bit in the products. Well...the technology, to be clear. Seems like Russia will have more say in it given that it is their land being used.


Aside... Significant developments between Saudi Arabia and Russia continue. This, of course, changes some diplomatic structure at the Geo-poliical level. Saudi Arabia may just be looking to get in on China's so called "Silk Road", and, so, they aren't going to be able to jumop into that mix if Russia and China perceive them to be a close ally of the west. Right? Heh. Of course, maybe Saudi Arabia feels threatened by some of these developments. Or maybe they have stabilized internally to the extent that they feel like drinking that tall glass of water. I don't know.



Now. This is Sputnik talking here. Which is important to grasp in itself. As well, Engdahl is a great source given his astute researching skills. He's pretty good. Anyhoo...

Russo-Saudi Oil Agreement May Leave US Hawks Out in the Cold (http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150916/1027098589.html)




"What if Russia joins OPEC and changes the established Anglo-American oil cartels' global economic order?" F. William Engdahl asks.

If Russia and OPEC countries enter an alliance, the oil producing powers of the Middle East would significantly bolster the development of the China-led new Silk Road Economic Belt project, American-German economic researcher and historian F. William Engdahl suggests.

"That project, to recall, is already well underway, and Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union states have recently agreed with China to integrate the rail route development of both. The development of huge new sea ports in Myanmar and other sites around Eurasia and the Indian Ocean will directly link the Gulf countries to that Eurasian booming new economic market and beyond," the author notes in his article for New Eastern Outlook.

Indeed, Engdahl's suggestion is not groundless. Citing CEO of Russia's state-owned oil company Rosneft Igor Sechin, the economic researcher called attention to the fact that Saudi Arabia is now seeking a "formal market-share agreement with Russia."

Riyadh even went so far as to offer Moscow membership in OPEC, Engdahl emphasized, adding that the move is aimed at stabilizing world oil markets. In response, Sechin hinted that OPEC's "golden age" in the oil market has been lost, referring to the recent sharp fall in oil prices.



Essentially, Russia is reminding Saudi Arabia that with the development of Russian energy reserves, their influence/stronghold on the global production of oil is deteriorating. Right? Right.





In response, Sechin hinted that OPEC's "golden age" in the oil market has been lost, referring to the recent sharp fall in oil prices.



This "sharp fall", if we recall, is something that Saudi Arabia was pressured into by the U.S. as a measure of economic warfare toward Russia in order to styrike the Russian oil industry. Of course, what it did was cripple the American shale oil industry as a result of the collapse of oil prices. You see?





According to Engdahl, Western media has already jumped to the conclusion that Sechin rejected the offer. However, quoting international affairs analyst Alexander Mercouris, the economic researcher suggested that "Sechin's statement… can be seen as an opening Russian negotiating position with the Saudi OPEC offer."

The potential agreement between Russia and the Saudi-led OPEC oil producers of the Middle East could reconfigure the established order of world energy suppliers. Furthermore, it would secure the world's largest pool of hydrocarbons by the nations of Russia, China, the Indian subcontinent, South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa.

Needless to say, Anglo-American hawks with their "endless war" strategy aimed at grabbing global natural resources would be left out in the cold.



So anyway. We have seen a few Russian Media platforms use F. William Engdahl's article. Rt and a couple of others. The point is that Russian media is following American media analysis of what is going on with those countries as far as deals and whatnot. While that in itself is significant, there are, as I've mentioned previously, long-term Geo-political implications of all of this (and this is really only one bit of news that I just felt like sharing. There is a bit more going on abroad if we can quit talking about what woman we want to but on a bill or whatever. Heh.) Russia has injected itself back into the syrian mess as well. And, so, they'll want to portay the U.S. as the more prominent, destabilizing, element in all of that as well as the main backer of Islamic regimes...getting back to Saudi Arabia there. Now, if we think about the last hundred years or so, western powers like the United Kingdom, France, and The U.S. have tended to back certain nationalistic groups in the Middle East. Right? Right. But they have kept the moderating groups within Islamic culture out of the picture while installing and creating a lot of the more repressive regimes in order to ensure a petroleum position in the Middle East. As far as Syria, I'd expect to see more foreign media focus on the history of that country in a way as to demonstrate that very phenomenon. Will see. Anyhow, the point there is that if we look ar how Russia is positioning itself. Obviously, they were intrumental in brokering the deal with Iran ( other outlying relevance to that was mentioned in this thread, I think).

For Saudi Arabia to turn to Russia about membership in OPEC and arms as well as other things is a huge freaking deal, people. Heh. As it is, they have historically been a major element within the American, French and British control of the region. Everyone knows that. Right? As well, Russia has been one of the primary supporters with Iran. Of course, that is a regime that Riyadh doesn't care for to put it lightly. So, yes. This is a rather huge deal for Saudi Arabia to turn to Russia about membership in OPEC and arms trade and the like. Saudi Arabia doesn't have the oil influence over Russia that it has over the west. Nope. None of that.

End of the Day, Russia will likely have to choose between Iran and Riyadh. Saudi Arabia may be looking to force Russia to choose in order to get them to back away from Iran. They'll likely not succeed. Which brings me back to why I posted this stuff in the first place. Which I've forgotten after all of that other stuff. Ah well. It'll come to me. All of what we are seeing is a direct result of a very laughable and failed foreign policy by way of our elected ones. Seems like that coup in the Ukraine was what got the ball rolling faster with all of these moves that we are seeing from nations abroad. Moves that will, again, fundamentally change the Geo-political/international structure in the long-term. Maybe ten years or so down the road. If that. I'd say that some of our prospective electees would do well to tighten up on some of these developments at the international level, demonstrate a knowledge of the goings-on and choose to talk about that and move away from the farce that we see narrated by cable news with regard to foreign policy. That's good advice. This stuff, these matters of foreign policy can't be handled in the same incompetent way that we have historically seen from our elected ones. Nope. That won't work. Because...well...that's what caused and continues to cause what we are seeing evolve. Freakin amateurs. Seems like it may be time to get real here and put on the big boy britches. Address foreign policy in a relevant and educated way. This is extremely critical now and the riff raff in cable media who are narrating the terms of controversy relative to foreign policy are the wrong people to let dictate the conversation. They don't have a clue. This, of course, is a choice. Do we want to actually fix our failed foreign policy and demonstrate that we have a firm grasp on the reality of what is evolving abroad as a direct result of those failed policies or do we just want to roll with the flow and talk about irrelevant nonsense that doesn't pertain to solving the failures in a relevant way but merely serves as the mouthpiece to promote the continuation of those failures?

I had, very briefly, shared my thought on that elsewhere. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?481579-What-is-the-best-strategy-for-Rand-(revised)&p=5987136&viewfull=1#post5987136

Anyway. I'm going to go watch some cartoons on Youtube.

[Natural Citizen]

European nations continue to join international efforts to ban genetically modified food products...


Lithuania Bans GM Crops as Biotech Industry Loses More Ground (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/09/21/lithuania-bans-gm-crops-as-green-wave-continues-to-sweep-across-europe/#.VgbyJCuOraw)




The Director of the Agricultural Production and Food Department at Lithuania’s Ministry of Agriculture, Rimantas Krasuckis, simply stated that GM crops are “not proven”.

On Monday, Northern Ireland (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/09/21/northern-ireland-bans-gm-crops-to-keep-clean-and-green-image/#.VgBH299Viko) also joined the massive wave of EU countries that have decided to ban the cultivation of GM crops under new EU regulations that were passed earlier in 2015.

Northern Ireland and Lithuania have followed France (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/09/17/france-joins-green-wave-of-gm-crop-bans-in-europe/#.VgAnQd9Viko), who announced their decision last week, and also Greece and Latvia (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/08/27/latvia-and-greece-start-green-wave-of-gm-crop-bans-across-europe/#.VfrduBHBzGc) in asking for an opt-out from growing GM crops. Germany and Scotland have also made it clear that they will follow the same path.

German Agriculture Minister Christian Schmidt informed German states in August of his intention to use a new EU law, passed in March, to ban the use of GM crops. This followed the Scottish Government’s announcement (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/08/09/scotland-announces-total-ban-on-gm-crops/) earlier in the same month that they will take similar action to protect Scotland’s clean, green status.

The German announcement also came as Professor Carlo Leifert, Professor of Ecological Agriculture at Newcastle University, said that he strongly believes the Scottish Government ban on GM crops is right and that “there are likely to be significant commercial benefits from Scotland being clearly recognized as a GM-free region”.






Aside from Scotland, Greece, Latvia, France, Germany, Lithuania, Europe's two largest economies have joined the ban. That's right. Add Austria and Italy, the third of Europe's four major economic and military powers to the GMO ban list...

Austria and Italy Celebrate Bans on GM Crops with EU Opt-Out (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/09/24/austria-and-italy-celebrate-bans-on-gm-crops-with-eu-opt-out/#.VgbyASuOraw)




Meanwhile, the Italian Minister of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policies, Maurizio Martina, alongside Environment Minister, Gian Luca Galletti and Minister of Health Beatrice Lorenzin announced (http://www.testmagazine.it/2015/09/18/no-a-8-prodotti-ogm-litalia-contro-lue/2714/)that they are preparing 8 letters (one for each GM maize variety) that will be received by the EU before October 3 with Italy’s demand for an opt-out from growing GM crops.




USA, Canada, and Australia continue mercantilist policies with regard to the products. As well, while leaders all over the world are speaking and acting on the issue, as this thread demonstrates, western leaders speak nothing of the issue. And it is a Geo-political issue. Again, a demonstration on their parts of a failure/refusal to assess foreign policy in a relevant way.




Aside - Govt decides to ban GMO food production in Russia – deputy PM (http://www.rt.com/politics/315844-government-decides-to-ban-gmo/)





A senior Russian government member told reporters the cabinet decided that any food production in the country will completely exclude any genetically-modified organisms or parts thereof.

“As far as genetically-modified organisms are concerned, we have made decision not to use any GMO in food productions,” Deputy PM Arkady Dvorkovich said at an international conference on biotechnology in the Russian city of Kirov.

At the same time the official emphasized that there was a very clear line between this decision and the development of science, medicine and some other branches.

[Natural Citizen]

Oh, one more thing while I'm thinking of it and since Japan has been mentioned here in relevant context. Japan just rearmed. Yep. They sure did, kiddies.

Assertive Japan poised to abandon 70 years of pacifism (http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/16/asia/japan-military-constitution/index.html)
Japan approved sending its military abroad for the first time since World War II (http://www.businessinsider.com/japan-just-approved-sending-their-military-abroad-for-the-first-time-since-world-war-ii-2015-9)

Of course, this is largely as a result of presure from America in order to combat what we are seeing with regard to these other nations who are influencing the area economically. China and Russia in particular. And to satisfy American demands and pressures to assume a greater role in America's so called "Pacific pivot" plans.

This, of course, comes with consequences. Right? In the eventuality that the American Empire might suddenly collapse from the insanity of its own policies...policies of which we see none of our representatives discuss with regard to what is happening economically abroad, Japan, without a strong military and navy, would be defenseless and unable to secure its energy and agriculture needs. Of course, as Japan's military power grows, something else will happen. Yep. You bet. Their government will increasingly dissent from American policies. And, like Germany has been doing, Japan will press for a permanent seat and veto power on the UN Security Council. And they'll get it. This, of course, will embolden the mostly cowardly European leaders to break away from western influence more openly and often.

So, yeah. Wait for it. Heh.

[Natural Citizen]

Some relevant reading for down the road...

Stratfor Chairman Straight-Talking: US Policy Is Driven by Imperative to Stop Coalition between Germany and Russia (http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/03/16/4571)

[Natural Citizen]

There seems to be quite a development coming out of Australia given the abuses of patent law by agribusiness. Of course, for anyone who has been following genetic engineering and patent law we've touched on looking for this to happen. There are some major implications that we'll see in the future here when it comes to litigating specific modifications. And on a nation by nation basis. Any court findings with regard to GMO patents will effectively invite a host of fees since places where GMO has been introduced will now involve debate over right to charge licensing fees. Those will have to be contested and won. This costs money. And we'll see it on a massive scale with implications toward bureaucratic and regulatory policies that surround GMOs and their assumption of the patentability. Certainly prices will go up while nature adapts to modification as well. And, so, anyhow. Here we go...


Gene patents probably dead worldwide following Australian court decision (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/gene-patents-probably-dead-worldwide-following-australian-court-decision/)




The court based its reasoning (http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2015/hca-35-2015-10-07.pdf) (PDF) on the fact that, although an isolated gene such as BRCA1 was "a product of human action, it was the existence of the information stored in the relevant sequences that was an essential element of the invention as claimed." Since the information stored in the DNA as a sequence of nucleotides (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleotide) was a product of nature, it did not require human action to bring it into existence, and therefore could not be patented.

Although that seems a sensible ruling, the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry has been fighting against this self-evident logic for years. The view that genes could be patented suffered a major defeat in 2013, when the US Supreme Court struck down (http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/01/patent-litigation-over-human-gene-breast-cancer-testing-is-ending/) Myriad Genetics' patents on the genes BRCA1 and the similar BRCA2. The industry was hoping that a win in Australia could keep alive the idea that genes could be owned by a company in the form of a patent monopoly. The victory by D'Arcy now makes it highly likely that other judges around the world will take the view that genes cannot be patented.

This is a result that will have major practical consequences, and is likely to save thousands of lives. In the past, holders of gene patents were able to stop other companies from offering tests based on them, for example to detect the presence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes that were linked with a greater risk of breast and ovarian cancers. This patent monopoly allowed companies like Myriad to charge $3,000 (£2,000) or more for their own tests, potentially placing them out of the reach of those unable to afford this cost, some of whom might then go on to develop cancer because they were not aware of their higher susceptibility, and thus unable to take action to minimise their risks.

[Natural Citizen]

Monsanto to Cut 2,600 Jobs as GMO Seed Sales Fall (http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-to-cut-2600-jobs-as-gmo-seed-sales-fall/#ixzz3o6XWYiGV)

[Working Poor]

Monsanto to Cut 2,600 Jobs as GMO Seed Sales Fall (http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-to-cut-2600-jobs-as-gmo-seed-sales-fall/#ixzz3o6XWYiGV)
Good maybe they will collapse entirely

[donnay]

There seems to be quite a development coming out of Australia given the abuses of patent law by agribusiness. Of course, for anyone who has been following genetic engineering and patent law we've touched on looking for this to happen. There are some major implications that we'll see in the future here when it comes to litigating specific modifications. And on a nation by nation basis. Any court findings with regard to GMO patents will effectively invite a host of fees since places where GMO has been introduced will now involve debate over right to charge licensing fees. Those will have to be contested and won. This costs money. And we'll see it on a massive scale with implications toward bureaucratic and regulatory policies that surround GMOs and their assumption of the patentability. Certainly prices will go up while nature adapts to modification as well. And, so, anyhow. Here we go...


Gene patents probably dead worldwide following Australian court decision (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/gene-patents-probably-dead-worldwide-following-australian-court-decision/)

This is good news.

[Natural Citizen]

This is good news.

Yep. As we had mentioned, this will be an issue that will be addressed at the Geo-political level because, quite frankly, it is a Geo-political issue. Of course, there is a flipside to this given that the model that Australia is forcing here has the capacity to redefine genetic medicine/therapy entirely. Profit motive for development of these things would certainly be undermined. This would essentially force development into the government/state sector further compounding socialized medicine/national healthcare. Is complex, for sure.

[Natural Citizen]

GM crop-growing banned in Northern Ireland...




Mr Durkan said the relatively small size of farms in Northern Ireland could create "potential difficulties if we were to seek to keep GM and non-GM crops separate".
He said the costs of maintaining separateness could be expensive and impractical.

"Further, we are rightly proud of our natural environment and rich biodiversity," he said.

"We are perceived internationally to have a clean and green image. I am concerned that the growing of GM crops, which I acknowledge is controversial, could potentially damage that image."

While no GM crops are being grown commercially in the UK, imported GM commodities, especially soya, are being used mainly for animal feed, and to a lesser extent in some food products.





Continued - GM crop-growing banned in Northern Ireland
(http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34316778)
Emphasis is added there in the latter part of the quote. We'll start seeing that come into question at the international level in the near future as long-term intergenerational scientific studies will continue to focus on the impact on management and care of farm animals by humans for profit. Consider that this is already happening in some countries, including the US, where organic meat and poultry products are entering the markets with the assurance that GMOs were not used in the feeding of livestock.

[Natural Citizen]

Scwewy....

China Does an About-Face on GMOs (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-21/china-does-an-about-face-on-gmos)
China banning anti-GMO websites as communist nation attempts to buy GM seed companies for domination of world food supply (http://www.naturalnews.com/052095_GMO_China_Syngenta_censored_websites.html)

Aaand Russia... Putin wants Russia to become world's biggest exporter of Non-GMO food (https://www.rt.com/business/324605-russia-putin-healthy-food/)


Russia could become the world's largest supplier of ecologically clean and high-quality organic food, said President Vladimir Putin on Thursday. He also called on the country to become completely self-sufficient in food production by 2020.

"We are not only able to feed ourselves taking into account our lands, water resources – Russia is able to become the largest world supplier of healthy, ecologically clean and high-quality food which the Western producers have long lost, especially given the fact that demand for such products in the world market is steadily growing,"said Putin, addressing the Russian Parliament on Thursday.

[Natural Citizen]

Russian State Duma Passes Total Ban on GMO Crops and Animals...





The Sate Duma has also given the Russian Government the right to prevent the import of products containing GMOs in to Russia, if it is revealed that a specific GMO has a negative impact on human health and/or the environment

Russia’s Agriculture Minister, Alexander Tkachev, stated Friday; ”The Ministry of Agriculture is strongly against GMOs, Russian products will remain clean.”

The Russian Government has stood strong in the face of increasing pressure from U.S. biotech companies (http://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/17/who-is-supporting-pro-gmo-forces-in-russia/#.V22wwvl97IU) and they have also managed to see through the Russian pro-GMO forces’ misleading claims and pseudoscience.

In December 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin told the Russian Parliament that Russia should become the world’s largest supplier of organic foods. (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/12/03/putin-russia-will-be-worlds-largest-supplier-of-healthy-organic-food/#.VsQD7_l97IU)

Also in 2015, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich stated that (http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/10/05/russian-deputy-pm-gmos-not-needed-to-feed-the-world/#.VsQDp_l97IU) it is not necessary to use genetic modification to feed the world, at the 12th International ‘Science and Technology in Society (STS) forum’ in Kyoto, Japan.

This strength shown by the Russian government was also shown early in 2016 when they dealt a huge blow to U.S. farmers (http://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/11/russia-bans-all-imports-of-us-soybeans-and-corn-over-microbial-and-gmo-contamination/#.VsQEDfl97IU), by banning all imports of U.S. soybeans and corn due to microbial and GMO contamination.




Continued - Russian State Duma Passes Total Ban on GMO Crops and Animals (http://sustainablepulse.com/2016/06/25/russian-parliament-passes-total-ban-on-gmo-crops-and-animals/#.V3FA5zVgHax)