14-year old teen GMO activist schools TV Host

[fearthereaperx]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUf3FcAOf3Y

Her name is Rachel Parent, and she's suddenly an internet sensation for her cool-headed debate about GMOs on a popular Canadian TV show. (She's also the founder of the Kids Right to Know GMO Walk.) As you'll see in the video below, Rachel calmly argues for the basic human right to know what's in our food, even as the condescending bully of a host named Kevin O'Leary verbally assaults the girl and practically accuses her of murdering children.


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/041481_Rachel_Parent_GMO_labeling_activist.html#ix zz2b2HdfRgY

[ObiRandKenobi]

i don't care how smart she is i would never let a woman, let alone a teenage one, beat me in a debate.

[FrankRep]

Here's the best solution. No Big Government intervention nor mandatory labeling needed.


http://i41.tinypic.com/rsdf8w.jpg (http://www.nongmoproject.org/)
http://www.nongmoproject.org/


Yes, products are allowed to label themselves as Non-GMO, voluntarily.

[silverhandorder]

Pro labeling people are wrong. Start a company that tests the food for being GMO modified and only buy food with certificates from that company.

[TaftFan]

My man Kevin is right. GMO's are helping to end world hunger.

If a state wants to label them, I'm fine with that though. And there shouldn't be government-endorsed monopolies over food, I don't support that either.

[brushfire]

LOL Kevin calls [her] a shill, while he maintains a circular argument, repeatedly putting words in her mouth, that she's "against science". What a fkbag...

Kevin should volunteer to be part of a study - show us all how you support science. You can start with testing chemotherapy drugs - show us how you support science, Kevin - for the benefit of man kind. You f'n shill.

[green73]

My man Kevin is right. GMO's are helping to end world hunger.

If a state wants to label them, I'm fine with that though. And there shouldn't be government-endorsed monopolies over food, I don't support that either.

I'm not sure human physiology is designed to deal with the consumption of food that is the product of alien DNA.

[FrankRep]

I'm not sure human physiology is designed to deal with the consumption of food that is the product of alien DNA.
You should be allowed to eat GMO food if you want. The Non-GMO Project (http://www.nongmoproject.org/) makes it easy to tell what foods are Non-GMO or not.

[TaftFan]

I'm not sure human physiology is designed to deal with the consumption of food that is the product of alien DNA.

Alien as in foreign object I assume.

[muh_roads]

I take it this shows advertisers are connected to Monsanto in some way.

[mad cow]

I'm not sure human physiology is designed to deal with the consumption of food that is the product of alien DNA.

That is why,as much as I love em,I avoid Mars Bars,Milky Ways and Moon Pies.

[green73]

Alien as in foreign object I assume.

Not of this world.

eta

not contained in or deriving from the essential nature of something (https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/alien)

[better-dead-than-fed]

So she wants government mandates with respect to GMO-labeling. No wonder she asked for the word "fascist" not to be used. What a mean bully, this girl, with her verbal assaults against liberty.


Here's the best solution. No Big Government intervention nor mandatory labeling needed.

http://i41.tinypic.com/rsdf8w.jpg (http://www.nongmoproject.org/)
http://www.nongmoproject.org/


Yes, products are allowed to label themselves as Non-GMO, voluntarily.

Good deal.

[Anti-Neocon]

Pro labeling people are wrong. Start a company that tests the food for being GMO modified and only buy food with certificates from that company.
This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

[bolil]

I hate to be that guy, but have become accustomed to it. GMO, and the real danger posed by them, is the same as any other genetic bottle neck. That, to me, is the true source of concern. People don't seem to have any appreciation for genitic diversity... though if I were starving I wouldnt either. My real beef with these GMO cocksuckers is that they feel entitled to EXTORT trait fees and really, sorry mate, but natural selection should never be subject to IP. Nor anything else, as far as I am concerned. Natural selection is the wrong term, natural process perhaps is more accurate.

[Feeding the Abscess]

This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

Companies would pay them to test their product and have the label applied to their product.

[mad cow]

This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

By charging food companies that desire this certificate in order to sell this product to consumers who might want it,who would in turn charge their customers for getting this certification in the first place.

If there is no market for non-GMO food,there will be no market for an entity that certifies food as GMO-free.

[better-dead-than-fed]

This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

What "Feeding the Abscess" and "mad cow" say above; or food-consumers could buy information from the hypothetical lab, in the same way as consumers buy information from http://web.consumerreports.org/. Competing private labs would have financial incentive to minimize the price of their information while maximizing its quality. FDA labs have no such incentive, so they are more prone to inefficiency and corruption.

[better-dead-than-fed]

I'm not sure human physiology is designed to deal with the consumption of food that is the product of alien DNA.



Not of this world.

eta

not contained in or deriving from the essential nature of something (https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/alien)

Humans for a long time have been eating DNA that could be considered "alien":


The orange is a hybrid, possibly between pomelo (Citrus maxima) and mandarin (Citrus reticulata), cultivated since ancient times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_(fruit)

[The Free Hornet]

Claims she's not a lobbyist (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lobbyist), then argues for mandatory labeling. Kevin 1, shrill little girl 0. But that's when I stopped watching...

[Weston White]

Yes, products are allowed to label themselves as Non-GMO, voluntarily.

And then what is the recourse to be though, when Monsanto and others begin placing such labels upon their products, meanwhile knowing full well they are as GMO as they get? What I am suppose to do, take them and their 1,000 manned legal staff to small claims court and sue them for damages that are technologically unattainable or scientifically unprovable by the average person?

[Petar]

GMO's are too dangerous to be let into the wild.

Should be federally banned, just like releasing radiation into the air or something like that.

[FrankRep]

And then what is the recourse to be though, when Monsanto and others begin placing such labels upon their products, meanwhile knowing full well they are as GMO as they get? What I am suppose to do, take them and their 1,000 manned legal staff to small claims court and sue them for damages that are technologically unattainable or scientifically unprovable by the average person?

You can check this website and see it the product is on the list.

http://i41.tinypic.com/rsdf8w.jpg (http://www.nongmoproject.org/)
http://www.nongmoproject.org/

[mad cow]

And then what is the recourse to be though, when Monsanto and others begin placing such labels upon their products, meanwhile knowing full well they are as GMO as they get? What I am suppose to do, take them and their 1,000 manned legal staff to small claims court and sue them for damages that are technologically unattainable or scientifically unprovable by the average person?

They will either be certified GMO-free by XYZ corp. or they will not.If they are,XYZ corp. goes bankrupt for being worthless and ABC corp. gets all their business because they are perceived as honest.

As better-dead-than-fed pointed out,the FDA doesn't have to please any consumers in a free market as a private lab would have to do to stay in business.
So who are you going to trust?What if the FDA certified Monsanto corn as GMO-Free,hey,it's right there on the label,are you going to sue the U.S. Government?

[better-dead-than-fed]

And then what is the recourse to be though, when Monsanto and others begin placing such labels upon their products, meanwhile knowing full well they are as GMO as they get? What I am suppose to do, take them and their 1,000 manned legal staff to small claims court and sue them for damages that are technologically unattainable or scientifically unprovable by the average person?

If GMO-labeling were mandated by the government, what would the recourse be?

[better-dead-than-fed]

GMO's are too dangerous to be let into the wild.

Should be federally banned, just like releasing radiation into the air or something like that.

Evidence that GMO's are dangerous? If it's evident, I might adopt your opinion, but I have not seen that evidence. How are they more dangerous than other cases of genetic tinkering, like oranges (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158748&viewfull=1#post5158748)? And Pugs?

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/---pugs-239485_1024_768.jpg

[mad cow]

If GMO-labeling were mandated by the government, what would the recourse be?

Yeah,you said it much more clearly and concisely than I did using way fewer words,but I said it first. :p

[Weston White]

They will either be certified GMO-free by XYZ corp. or they will not.If they are,XYZ corp. goes bankrupt for being worthless and ABC corp. gets all their business because they are perceived as honest.

As better-dead-than-fed pointed out,the FDA doesn't have to please any consumers in a free market as a private lab would have to do to stay in business.
So who are you going to trust?What if the FDA certified Monsanto corn as GMO-Free,hey,it's right there on the label,are you going to sue the U.S. Government?


You mean sort of like how the BBB functions, because that whole idea has worked out so well, right?

Regardless, XYZ Corp. will be funded by Monsanto of course, that will provide them with all of the profit they need.

It is not an issue of trust so much as it is an issue of law. More recourses are available to the public when the government is involved than with a private company.

[FrankRep]

You mean sort of like how the BBB functions, because that whole idea has worked out so well, right?

Regardless, XYZ Corp. will be funded by Monsanto of course, that will provide them with all of the profit they need.

It is not an issue of trust so much as it is an issue of law. More recourses are available to the public when the government is involved than with a private company.

So Monsanto controls everyone right -- the FDA, USDA, private consumer groups, labs, scientists, etc?

[mad cow]

You mean sort of like how the BBB functions, because that whole idea has worked out so well, right?

Regardless, XYZ Corp. will be funded by Monsanto of course, that will provide them with all of the profit they need.

It is not an issue of trust so much as it is an issue of law. More recourses are available to the public when the government is involved than with a private company.

Yeah,like the public can easily prove that pot is less harmful than booze and thus get pot legalized.

You can stop using the products or services of any private company in America tomorrow,try that with the FDA or ANY government 'service'.

[better-dead-than-fed]

More recourses are available to the public when the government is involved...

What additional recourses are available?

[FrankRep]

More recourses are available to the public when the government is involved...

You don't know the government very well. Plus, I keep hearing leftist propaganda that Monsanto runs the FDA and USDA.

[Weston White]

If GMO-labeling were mandated by the government, what would the recourse be?

Here are a few quick examples:

Set forth legally binding terms and conditions; effecting social uniformity.
Fine the business.
Force the business into statutory compliance.
Restrict, suspend, or shutdown the business or its licenses.
Criminally charge the agents of the business.
If the government itself failed to serve the public’s needs they could protest, redress, mandamus, or call upon their representatives to act in good faith.
In addition there could be civil statutes established which provide for aiding civil actions, monetary or otherwise.

[Weston White]

You don't know the government very well. Plus, I keep hearing leftist propaganda that Monsanto runs the FDA and USDA.

That is a side issue which exists as the result of corruption, tyranny, and corporatism though. You could just as easily have the same result in under anarchism.

The dirty truth is that most likely that Monsanto is secret black-budget business started and funded by the government, just as MySpace, Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc.

[FrankRep]

That is a side issue which exists as the result of corruption, tyranny, and corporatism though. You could just as easily have the same result in under anarchism.

The dirty truth is that most likely that Monsanto is secret black-budget business started and funded by the government, just as MySpace, Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc.
Now you're saying that the government "likely" runs Monsanto, yet you want the government to regulate and force companies to GMO label their products? You're joking, right?

[Petar]

Evidence that GMO's are dangerous? If it's evident, I might adopt your opinion, but I have not seen that evidence. How are they more dangerous than other cases of genetic tinkering, like oranges (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158748&viewfull=1#post5158748)? And Pugs?

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/---pugs-239485_1024_768.jpg

It's one thing to selectively breed plants and animals, even across species, but when you are talking about mixing things like corn with fish, then you really are crossing the rubicon.

It would be one thing if it was just contained in a lab, but it is another thing altogether when a completely unpredictable result gets released into the wild and changes the genetic makeup of our food forever.

Nature has basic firewalls in place that prevent this kind of thing (a fish will never sexually reproduce with corn) and we circumvent this at our own peril.

In short, it's a completely unpredictable Pandora's box that we really do not need to be opening.

[mad cow]

That is a side issue which exists as the result of corruption, tyranny, and corporatism though. You could just as easily have the same result in under anarchism.

The dirty truth is that most likely that Monsanto is secret black-budget business started and funded by the government, just as MySpace, Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc.

Whoa,I didn't know this.Obviously the government needs to start many,many more black-budget businesses.What is the market cap of the five you reference?
Got any cites for this dirty truth?

[Weston White]

Whoa,I didn't know this.Obviously the government needs to start many,many more black-budget businesses.What is the market cap of the five you reference?
Got any cites for this dirty truth?

You really believe such social networking Websites gained instantaneous international popularity, literally having sprung up overnight? That Facebook is simply another Bill Gates success story that is worth $1-billion? That Google was able to map the entire world, including large portions of it now available in both “street” and 3-D views, meanwhile requiring enough electrical power to support a small city; and funding this all through embedded mouse-click ads?

[Weston White]

Now you're saying that the government "likely" runs Monsanto, yet you want the government to regulate and force companies to GMO label their products? You're joking, right?

No, as to me stating any of that not really.

[FrankRep]

You really believe such social networking Websites gained instantaneous international popularity, literally having sprung up overnight? That Facebook is simply another Bill Gates success story that is worth $1-billion? That Google was able to map the entire world, including large portions of it now available in both “street” and 3-D views, meanwhile requiring enough electrical power to support a small city; and funding this all through embedded mouse-click ads?

Welcome to the Internet. Information spreads quickly.

[better-dead-than-fed]

Here are a few quick examples:

Set forth legally binding terms and conditions; effecting social uniformity.
Fine the business.
Force the business into statutory compliance.
Restrict, suspend, or shutdown the business or its licenses.
Criminally charge the agents of the business.
If the government itself failed to serve the public’s needs they could protest, redress, mandamus, or call upon their representatives to act in good faith.
In addition there could be civil statutes established which provide for aiding civil actions, monetary or otherwise.

Hold on a second. There is this company in Tucson called New Beginnings Treatment Center, Inc -- a halfway house under contract with the DOJ, where I used to be a prisoner. They run this scam where they pretend they are providing a service ("counseling" prisoners). They type up records to the effect, "we counselled prisoner #77 at this date and time in the counseling room"; but the records are false. Then they bill the DOJ, and in turn the IRS bills you for it. I have proof. I have the records claiming I was counseled at certain times and places. But I was wearing an ankle monitor with a GPS transmitter, showing I wasn't actually at those places at those times. This was in 2010. I reported the crime to every agency you can imagine, and some newspapers. Now it's 2013, and nothing has changed, and you're still be billed fraudulently for services this government-contractor isn't really performing. You want to start small and show me how to stop this relatively small case of fraud, not in theory, but in practice? (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mEn8dB6jzUZjMPOAdiEjKrXcbAe6thQXr2swP6dKkmE/pub)


... mandamus....

This is how mandamus actions end, in the real world: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5ZYXb_HdIQhbERXZ0lNcFRuYXc/edit?usp=sharing

[Cutlerzzz]

I know this is kind of out there, but I wish my parents had me cross breed so that I could shoot spider webs from my wrists and had the strength of a bear. Am I alone with this?

[mad cow]

Westin White:

You really believe such social networking Websites gained instantaneous international popularity, literally having sprung up overnight? That Facebook is simply another Bill Gates success story that is worth $1-billion? That Google was able to map the entire world, including large portions of it now available in both “street” and 3-D views, meanwhile requiring enough electrical power to support a small city; and funding this all through embedded mouse-click ads?If the government caused all of that,especially as a black-budget operation and in secrecy,I'm going to stop being so hard on them.

Just how many hundreds of thousands of private sector jobs are we talking about here?

I know they're private sector because I don't use Myspace,Facebook,Google or Twitter and only use Monsanto because I have no problem with GMO food.

Five more Black-Budget companies like that formed by the government and we can kiss recession goodbye!

[better-dead-than-fed]

It's one thing to selectively breed plants and animals, even across species, but when you are talking about mixing things like corn with fish, then you really are crossing the rubicon.

It would be one thing if it was just contained in a lab, but it is another thing altogether when a completely unpredictable result gets released into the wild and changes the genetic makeup of our food forever.

Nature has basic firewalls in place that prevent this kind of thing (a fish will never sexually reproduce with corn) and we circumvent this at our own peril.

In short, it's a completely unpredictable Pandora's box...

I had to look up "rubicon". I am pretty open to your concern here, and I think companies should be fully accountable for any pollution they cause, let alone ecological Armageddon. GMO doesn't alarm me based on what you've said so far, but if I learn more, I could change my mind.


... that we really do not need to be opening.

What we really don't need are social policies to drive the human population up without limit. That's going to make things ugly one way or another. Even if the franken-crops don't kill us, we still need to transport food on an unnaturally massive scale, as long as the left continues its bizarre campaign to eliminate death. Transporting the food is going to require a lot of gas, and the people with the gas are not going to be happy when we try to rob it from them. So there are a lot of Pandora's boxes that we don't need to be opening.

[Cutlerzzz]

I had to look up "rubicon". I am pretty open to your concern here, and I think companies should be fully accountable for any pollution they cause, let alone ecological Armageddon. GMO doesn't alarm me based on what you've said so far, but if I learn more, I could change my mind.


What we really don't need are social policies to drive the human population up without limit. That's going to make things ugly one way or another. Even if the franken-crops don't kill us, we still need to transport food on an unnaturally massive scale, as long as the left continues its bizarre campaign to eliminate death. Transporting the food is going to require a lot of gas, and the people with the gas are not going to be happy when we try to rob it from them. So there are a lot of Pandora's boxes that we don't need to be opening.

Are you advocating the starvation of millions of people to control global populations, or am I misreading your post?

[kcchiefs6465]

...social policies to drive the human population up without limit...
What exactly are you referring to?

[eric_cartman]

in case anyone was curious... this was broadcast on CBC, a Canadian television station run by the government. It would be equivilant to the BBC in England.

[better-dead-than-fed]

Are you advocating the starvation of millions of people to control global populations, or am I misreading your post?

I am advocating not robbing gas from people; and I am advocating not attempting to drive the population up without limit. Are you advocating that we should do those things?

[Peace Piper]

You really believe such social networking Websites gained instantaneous international popularity, literally having sprung up overnight? That Facebook is simply another Bill Gates success story that is worth $1-billion? That Google was able to map the entire world, including large portions of it now available in both “street” and 3-D views, meanwhile requiring enough electrical power to support a small city; and funding this all through embedded mouse-click ads?

You're spot on about Farcebook and Google. We used to have Anti Trust in this country. Google should never have been allowed to buy Youtube or do lots of other anti competitive things. And Farcebook? One day everyone says everyone else just has to join to "keep in touch"? LOL and that little creep Suckerberg? He's a real brain surgeon all right. Yikes.

"I don't think ever in history have people been as gullible as Americans- they'll believe the most preposterous hoax by their government"
-----Paul Craig Roberts @25:14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk2QiLiwMR0

Gullible Gullible Gullible...Paul Nails it down HARD

[Cutlerzzz]

I am advocating not robbing gas from people; and I am advocating not attempting to drive the population up without limit. Are you advocating that we should do those things?

Nobody is advocating robbing gas from people.

You're advocating the killing of millions of people every year because of a long refuted economic theory. Malthusian over population theories were refuted LONG ago.

http://mises.org/daily/1675

[better-dead-than-fed]

I am advocating not robbing gas from people; and I am advocating not attempting to drive the population up without limit. Are you advocating that we should do those things?

You're advocating the killing of millions of people every year

That is a colorful misrepresentation of my "not attempting to drive the population up without limit".

Is your goal anything short of a total infirmary-state (liberal utopia)? (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?419406-Greenwald-s-Views-(-quot-Decide-for-yourself-if-the-libertarian-label-applies-quot-)&p=5095728&viewfull=1#post5095728)

If so, how many millions of people are you advocating killing?

[mad cow]

Peace Piper:

You're spot on about Farcebook and Google. We used to have Anti Trust in this country. Google should never have been allowed to buy Youtube or do lots of other anti competitive things. And Farcebook? One day everyone says everyone else just has to join to "keep in touch"? LOL and that little creep Suckerberg? He's a real brain surgeon all right. Yikes.

"I don't think ever in history have people been as gullible as Americans- they'll believe the most preposterous hoax by their government"
-----Paul Craig Roberts @25:14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk2QiLiwMR0

Gullible Gullible Gullible...Paul Nails it down HARDDo you use 'Farcebook'?do you use Google?You don't have to and if you don't want to and still use them I would have to say that you are Gullible,Gullible Gullible.

However I know,I don't even have to ask,that you use and pay for a whole pile of government entities,even if you hate the very thought of them.

Google should be 'allowed' to buy whatever Google feels like buying just as you should be 'allowed' to buy whatever you want.
And that little creep Suckerberg?Don't like Facebook,don't use Facebook and don't attempt to use the force of government guns to tell Google or Facebook what they can or can't do or buy.

[Cutlerzzz]

What exactly are you referring to?

I don't think he even knows.

[Peace Piper]

Peace Piper:
Do you use 'Farcebook'?do you use Google?You don't have to and if you don't want to and still use them I would have to say that you are Gullible,Gullible Gullible.

However I know,I don't even have to ask,that you use and pay for a whole pile of government entities,even if you hate the very thought of them.

Google should be 'allowed' to buy whatever Google feels like buying just as you should be 'allowed' to buy whatever you want.
And that little creep Suckerberg?Don't like Facebook,don't use Facebook and don't attempt to use the force of government guns to tell Google or Facebook what they can or can't do or buy.

Never signed up for Zuckerbergs Big Scam, and no I usually don't use google.

As for the rest, anti trust laws used to exist for a reason. Google shouldn't be able to control most of the internet (built with tax dollars) and record it's users every click. Hopefully it's glory days are over. One day everyone will learn the truth of how it managed to grow the way it did. It wasn't because people were buying golf clubs or a super size bag of dog food with click through links .

What data does Farcbook and Suckerberg actually collect? Find out here:
http://europe-v-facebook.org/EN/Data_Pool/data_pool.html

I'd bet very few people even know what info they are volunteering. Maybe they don't even care.

[juleswin]

This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

Same way consumer reports makes money to stay in business.

[roho76]

WOW!! Lets play "Who's a corporate shill?" I cant believe he called her a "shill" when he is obviously arguing on the side of corporatism.

IMO, the fact that these companies that use GMO's and produce GMO products are heavily subsidized by the US.gov with there corn and general farm subsidies and they should label the food as "FrankenFood". These are not innocent little corporations, making food all on their own, in a free market, to feed the starving people of indigenous nations. These are well connected corporations who rely heavily on corporatism to even stay afloat. I agree with her. This video speaks volumes. Good for her. Fuck the current food suppliers and their cushy corporate environment.

[mad cow]

As long as Facebook and Google are private companies,who cares what data they collect.I don't use either one of them.I am a member of Amazon prime,a voluntary member,and I am sure that they collect and compile and collate a lot of data about me that I could avoid by simply quit being a member.

However,I have made a conscious decision to give up some of my privacy in order to reap the benefits that being a member of Amazon prime gives me.
Others have made that same decision about being a member of Facebook or using Google.

I have no problem with any of this as long as we are talking about private,voluntary agreements between two consenting parties.

The government or anybody else spying on you without your permission or a warrant is a whole different situation.

[mad cow]

WOW!! Lets play "Who's a corporate shill?" I cant believe he called her a "shill" when he is obviously arguing on the side of corporatism.

IMO, the fact that these companies that use GMO's and produce GMO products are heavily subsidized by the US.gov with there corn and general farm subsidies and they should label the food as "FrankenFood". These are not innocent little corporations, making food all on their own, in a free market, to feed the starving people of indigenous nations. These are well connected corporations who rely heavily on corporatism to even stay afloat. I agree with her. This video speaks volumes. Good for her. Fuck the current food suppliers and their cushy corporate environment.

How many years in prison are you going to sentence a farmer who doesn't want to label his corn,and 99% of his customers don't want him to label his corn and doesn't give a crap whether or not you buy any corn from him for the rest of your natural life?

[A. Havnes]

Evidence that GMO's are dangerous? If it's evident, I might adopt your opinion, but I have not seen that evidence. How are they more dangerous than other cases of genetic tinkering, like oranges (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158748&viewfull=1#post5158748)? And Pugs?

http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/---pugs-239485_1024_768.jpg

This isn't totally about GMO, but it has some interesting stuff to say about it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ds_gs0bwNPU)
And there's also this.
Monsanto: A Documentary on GMO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omtYlsG1P5U)

I like your open mindedness, though, and I agree with what you have to say.

BTW, I'm feeling lazy right now and was wondering how the FDA got started to begin with?

[Danan]

v
You're spot on about Farcebook and Google. We used to have Anti Trust in this country. Google should never have been allowed to buy Youtube or do lots of other anti competitive things. And Farcebook? One day everyone says everyone else just has to join to "keep in touch"? LOL and that little creep Suckerberg? He's a real brain surgeon all right. Yikes.

"I don't think ever in history have people been as gullible as Americans- they'll believe the most preposterous hoax by their government"
-----Paul Craig Roberts @25:14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk2QiLiwMR0

Gullible Gullible Gullible...Paul Nails it down HARD

In favor of mandatory labeling and anti-trust laws? Rofl. Are you sure you shouldn't be on some kind of Obama forum?

[mczerone]

This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

1) Charge manufacturers to use your certification label, make them share the cost of certification.

2) Promote your certification so that people like this girl won't buy anything that's not certified.

3) Offer competitors (other certificate companies) the open access to your methods. This will prove to consumers that you're on the up-and-up.

If people want to sell to the "non-GMO" crowd, they'll have to meet their demands for your certification, which includes kick-backs to you as the certificate company. Consumers that will demand this will pay the extra over non-certified products, and the retailer, the manufacturer, and the certificate company share in the profit.

[jbauer]

ManBearPig sighting!!!!

[fisharmor]

My man Kevin is right. GMO's are helping to end world hunger.

I'm going to cut the 14yo some slack, but I'm surprised as hell that nobody else brings up the most salient point here:
We don't have vitamin A problems in America.

The obvious and attainable solution?
Make sure that hungry children have access to a proper diet.

You don't just pitch them some genetically mutated rice and yell "good luck".
You push for the market to be able to operate as it will.
You point out to the starving children that the local warlord who makes it impossible to farm is the one making them go blind.

All hunger problems are political problems.
It doesn't matter if they invent quadro-triticale... it's not going to solve the political problem.

[fr33]

If only the anger directed at the GMO producer were aimed at the majority of Americans that are the customers. You know, those millions of people that choose to cram themselves into cities and depend on factory farming and GMO crops to sustain their irresponsible lifestyles.

[familydog]

I congratulate this you woman for standing up the Monsanto bullies. I'd like to know where this powerful anti-GMO lobby that is referred to is? All I see is corporate farms controlling government to regulate small organic producers out of the market.

The bully forgot to mention that GMO crops have destroyed small and local producers all over developing nations. GMO crops took control from the people to feed themselves and turned it to paternalistic and wealthy western nations.

So sad to see so many anti-human practices going on.

[FrankRep]

I congratulate this you woman for standing up the Monsanto bullies. I'd like to know where this powerful anti-GMO lobby that is referred to is? All I see is corporate farms controlling government to regulate small organic producers out of the market.

The bully forgot to mention that GMO crops have destroyed small and local producers all over developing nations. GMO crops took control from the people to feed themselves and turned it to paternalistic and wealthy western nations.

So sad to see so many anti-human practices going on.

Practically every leftist-progressive-socialist group out there is attacking Monsanto and attacking GMO science.

[roho76]

How many years in prison are you going to sentence a farmer who doesn't want to label his corn,and 99% of his customers don't want him to label his corn and doesn't give a crap whether or not you buy any corn from him for the rest of your natural life?

How about one year for every dollar in farm subsidies he steals from tax payers. Is that fair? You say farmers as if its some guy with a straw hat and a cow just trying to make a living. Is that your belief? That this would screw the small farmer? Nothing could be farther from the truth. And quite honestly, given the choice, most people would like to know that their food is bastard science. The fact is, most people are just ignorant. Heck, that's a reason this very forum exists in the first place. People are ignorant of real shit because they have been misled by the very government that makes the shitty food that they eat. The fact is that the small farmer is dead. We are talking about corporate farmers with machines that drive themselves, based GPS coordinates, that don't care about the quality of food they eat because they probably only eat organic food that's handed out presidential campaign stops so they can schmooze next years farm subsidy in trade for a $1,500 campaign donation and a vote. The advent of GMO is not a noble cause to feed the planet, its a way to corporatized the entire industry and get it under the influence of a handful of corporations so it can be corrupted. If farmers existed like they did a hundred years ago there would be any incentive for they to make this food. Lets face it, this is about nothing more than corporatism.

[angelatc]

This hypothetical company would make a profit how?

From licensing their brand to the labels that carry it.

[better-dead-than-fed]

How about one year for every dollar in farm subsidies he steals from tax payers. Is that fair? You say farmers as if its some guy with a straw hat and a cow just trying to make a living. Is that your belief? That this would screw the small farmer? Nothing could be farther from the truth. And quite honestly, given the choice, most people would like to know that their food is bastard science. The fact is, most people are just ignorant. Heck, that's a reason this very forum exists in the first place. People are ignorant of real shit because they have been misled by the very government that makes the shitty food that they eat. The fact is that the small farmer is dead. We are talking about corporate farmers with machines that drive themselves, based GPS coordinates, that don't care about the quality of food they eat because they probably only eat organic food that's handed out presidential campaign stops so they can schmooze next years farm subsidy in trade for a $1,500 campaign donation and a vote. The advent of GMO is not a noble cause to feed the planet, its a way to corporatized the entire industry and get it under the influence of a handful of corporations so it can be corrupted. If farmers existed like they did a hundred years ago there would be any incentive for they to make this food. Lets face it, this is about nothing more than corporatism.

When you condemn "corporatism", what do you mean by that? Does that include all the actions of every corporation? Does it include all the actions of every company, and of every sole-proprietorship? Sorry I am behind on the terminology. I see "corporatism" condemned continually in socialist propaganda and on Twitter, but when I ask people what it means, no one answers, they just tend to accuse me of working for Monsanto and block me.


What exactly are you referring to?

For one thing, I am referring to farm subsidies.


How about one year for every dollar in farm subsidies he steals from tax payers.

Let me introduce you to Cutlerzzz. He claims that if you want to reduce farm subsidies, then:


You're advocating the killing of millions of people every year


I'd like to know where this powerful anti-GMO lobby that is referred to is?

One less-powerful example is familydog's deranged bullying here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?422932-93-percent-support-mandatory-labeling-of-GMO-foods&p=5152657&viewfull=1#post5152657

[donnay]

So Monsanto controls everyone right -- the FDA, USDA, private consumer groups, labs, scientists, etc?

Yeah pretty much--especially the ones I highlighted.

[jbauer]

I'm going to cut the 14yo some slack, but I'm surprised as hell that nobody else brings up the most salient point here:
We don't have vitamin A problems in America.

The obvious and attainable solution?
Make sure that hungry children have access to a proper diet.

You don't just pitch them some genetically mutated rice and yell "good luck".
You push for the market to be able to operate as it will.
You point out to the starving children that the local warlord who makes it impossible to farm is the one making them go blind.

All hunger problems are political problems.
It doesn't matter if they invent quadro-triticale... it's not going to solve the political problem.

They pitched vitamin a enhanced rice because that's all "they" would eat. Seems pretty logical you'd start by trying to improve what the local people already consume as their staple diet

[roho76]

When you condemn "corporatism", what do you mean by that? Does that include all the actions of every corporation? Does it include all the actions of every company, and of every sole-proprietorship? Sorry I am behind on the terminology. I see "corporatism" condemned continually in socialist propaganda and on Twitter, but when I ask people what it means, no one answers, they just tend to accuse me of working for Monsanto and block me.



For one thing, I am referring to farm subsidies.



Let me introduce you to Cutlerzzz. He claims that if you want to reduce farm subsidies, then:





One less-powerful example is familydog's deranged bullying here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?422932-93-percent-support-mandatory-labeling-of-GMO-foods&p=5152657&viewfull=1#post5152657

By corporatism, I mean those businesses that can't stand on their own merit and deliver a desired good to the market at a competitive price but instead choose to live of the public dole and produce crap that no one would want given a choice.

Examples:
General Motors
Chrysler
Ford
Mansanto
Bank of America
Goldman Sachs
On and on and on and on........

[better-dead-than-fed]

corporatism ... businesses ... live off the public dole

This is bad, but I am more inclined to blame politicians and voters for it. As long as welfare is offered to corporations, corporations are going to accept it. Corporation-employees have First-Amendment rights, and they're going to use those rights to try to persuade politicians to give them more welfare. I still don't blame corporations, since selfish lobbying is something almost everyone does, corporate or not. Question is, how to stop welfare for corporations?

[jbauer]

Practically every leftist-progressive-socialist group out there is attacking Monsanto and attacking GMO science.

Yup, that's why its amazing that its part of the "indoctrination" of the liberty movement. Quick...another ManBearPig sighting!!!!

[jbauer]

By corporatism, I mean those businesses that can't stand on their own merit and deliver a desired good to the market at a competitive price but instead choose to live of the public dole and produce crap that no one would want given a choice.

Examples:
General Motors
Chrysler
Ford
Mansanto
Bank of America
Goldman Sachs
On and on and on and on........

That's so crap, each and everyone of those business can stand by themselves. The moral hazard created by the bailouts might have "saved" a few of them in 08 but another would have just took its place created by the void. The only thing the subsides due is create an appetite for additional risk, nothing more nothing less.

[Nirvikalpa]

i don't care how smart she is i would never let a woman, let alone a teenage one, beat me in a debate.

:rolleyes:

[mczerone]

That's so crap, each and everyone of those business can stand by themselves. The moral hazard created by the bailouts might have "saved" a few of them in 08 but another would have just took its place created by the void. The only thing the subsides due is create an appetite for additional risk, nothing more nothing less.

That's the issue: they would have FAILED, and another would have filled the (profitable) void. They couldn't stand on their own, and they took govt handouts.

I don't blame the Board of GM for approving the handouts and special treatment in Bankruptcy - they are doing what's best according to the rules of the game. That made them "corpratists" by the definition, but the outrage shouldn't be on them leveraging the law and the force of govt to their favor, it should be focused on the "corpatist-funding-govt" that sets the rules and hands out the favors.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

[jbauer]

That's the issue: they would have FAILED, and another would have filled the (profitable) void. They couldn't stand on their own, and they took govt handouts.

I don't blame the Board of GM for approving the handouts and special treatment in Bankruptcy - they are doing what's best according to the rules of the game. That made them "corpratists" by the definition, but the outrage shouldn't be on them leveraging the law and the force of govt to their favor, it should be focused on the "corpatist-funding-govt" that sets the rules and hands out the favors.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Completely understand the difference between the player and the game. Don't disagree that there isn't a problem but it seemed like you were suggesting that without subsides that major players in our economy would just dry up and that's simply not true. At best the players might change but I doubt that would happen either they'd just learn another game and figure out how to break the rules if the subsides went away.

[Neil Desmond]

Hold on a second. There is this company in Tucson called New Beginnings Treatment Center, Inc -- a halfway house under contract with the DOJ, where I used to be a prisoner. They run this scam where they pretend they are providing a service ("counseling" prisoners). They type up records to the effect, "we counselled prisoner #77 at this date and time in the counseling room"; but the records are false. Then they bill the DOJ, and in turn the IRS bills you for it. I have proof. I have the records claiming I was counseled at certain times and places. But I was wearing an ankle monitor with a GPS transmitter, showing I wasn't actually at those places at those times. This was in 2010. I reported the crime to every agency you can imagine, and some newspapers. Now it's 2013, and nothing has changed, and you're still be billed fraudulently for services this government-contractor isn't really performing. You want to start small and show me how to stop this relatively small case of fraud, not in theory, but in practice? (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mEn8dB6jzUZjMPOAdiEjKrXcbAe6thQXr2swP6dKkmE/pub)
Interesting, but how do you know that no action has been taken? Do you believe this is a trend with this company and a corrupt or negligent government? Or, is it possible that your situation was an isolated clerical error, the DOJ notified the company, and the company reimbursed the DOJ (meaning problem resolved)?

What's needed (and I'm not saying you don't know this or haven't done this on your own) is to talk to other former prisoners in the same situation, and find out from them if they've had the same happen to them. If we have a problem here, then we have 2 problems: not only are the taxpayers being defrauded, but prisoners aren't getting counseling that they perhaps need or that could be helpful for them. Have you tried contacting media other than mainstream outlets (i.e., "alternative" media)? I'm sure if you find the right person to contact, they'll look into this further.

There could very well be a problem here that needs to be fixed (and maybe it's a symptom of an even bigger problem), but I don't think your case is a significiant or strong enough case for argument you're trying to make. Personally, I don't like the idea of bigger government requiring mandated labeling of GMO, but I do think that people ought to be able to know what they're buying or getting. It's no different than a chemistry lab getting chemicals and needing to know exactly what they contain and how pure they are. In that case if the chemistry lab or even industrial facility that processes chemicals mixes chemicals together and they weren't informed by the manufacturer that the chemicals contained something in them it could be disastrous; it could cause poisonous gases that are dangerous to the workers to be created, it could start a fire, or it could even cause an explosion. GMO isn't going to necessarily cause poison, fires, or explosion, but we're still dealing with chemicals and they can still be biologically disastrous.

We're not only messing around with GMO too much and trying to put them on the market too quickly, but we haven't even mastered our ability to control nature to the point that we can cure all diseases or health problems. When we reach that point, then perhaps we'll be better suited to deal with GMO food.

[familydog]

Practically every leftist-progressive-socialist group out there is attacking Monsanto and attacking GMO science.

...and the only ones spending tens of millions of dollars are corporate farms running the government. The statement made was that anti-GMO groups are just as powerful a lobby as Monsanto. That's either an incredible lie or the person has no idea what they are talking about.

[better-dead-than-fed]

Interesting, but how do you know that no action has been taken?

I know it from the responses to my FOIA requests ("Please send me records of all actions taken....").


Do you believe this is a trend with this company and a corrupt or negligent government?

I know it's not limited to this company, because I have seen so much evidence not involving this particular company https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZlNtxnJPG2qjHjYoqnNclE4747P747hd0x79eNz5-SE/pub

There are various ways to account for the evidence. You could attribute it to a society willing to surrender their property to robbers without meaningful resistance.


Or, is it possible that your situation was an isolated clerical error, the DOJ notified the company, and the company reimbursed the DOJ (meaning problem resolved)?

There was nothing isolated about this case of theft and corruption. It is the norm, in my experience.


... talk to other former prisoners in the same situation, and find out from them if they've had the same happen to them.

Yes, they have had the same happen to them. The halfway-house ordered us all to sign attendance logs. We all signed the logs together, so I witnessed it personally. After we signed the logs, the halfway-house would say, okay we're done.


If we have a problem here, then we have 2 problems: not only are the taxpayers being defrauded, but prisoners aren't getting counseling that they perhaps need or that could be helpful for them. Have you tried contacting media other than mainstream outlets (i.e., "alternative" media)?

First I tried asking the counselor if she thought she was setting a good example. In response to my question, U.S. Marshals arrested me and the U.S. District Court gave me an additional two years in real prison. Not that I did anything wrong, but, this is how it works in the real world.

Then the government subjected me to a gag-order, threatening to give me additional prison time if I contacted the media. I contacted the media anyway, including posting about it on this forum, and people were like "I'm sure if you find the right person to contact, they'll look into this further," but I'm not sure why they believe that. Here is a list of people I contacted (including "alternate media") who turned out not to be "the right person":

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nM2pX8LnUntYJJpPzokxsZAs0gRXy9MGK3qPwZRySlI/pub


I'm sure if you find the right person to contact, they'll look into this further.

What makes you sure of that?


There could very well be a problem here that needs to be fixed (and maybe it's a symptom of an even bigger problem), but I don't think your case is a significiant or strong enough case for argument you're trying to make.

The argument I am trying to make is, if Weston White doubts it would be easy to sue Monsanto for mis-labeling, (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158855&viewfull=1#post5158855) where does he get the idea it would be any easier to sue the FDA for mis-labeling?

[Neil Desmond]

What makes you sure of that?
Because if they do look into this further, then they were the right person to contact.

EDIT: do you not want to try? Look into someone named Karen Hudes (she's not alternative media, she's someone who goes to it & talks about that).

[better-dead-than-fed]

Because if they do look into this further, then they were the right person to contact.

EDIT: do you not want to try?

I don't want to continue repeating my mistakes, or waste any more of my time. Like McVeigh, I was willing to play that game for some time, but not willing to keep repeating the same mistake forever:


I waited two years from "Waco" for non-violent "checks and balances" built into our system to correct the abuse of power we were seeing in federal actions against citizens. The Executive; Legislative; and Judicial branches not only concluded that the government did nothing wrong (leaving the door open for "Waco" to happen again), they actually gave awards and bonus pay to those agents involved, and conversely, jailed the survivors of the Waco inferno after the jury wanted them set free.

Other "checks and balances" likewise proved futile: media awareness and outcry (the major media failed in its role as overseer of government ally); protest marches; letter campaigns; even small-budget video production; etc. - all failed to correct the abuse

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2001/04/26/mcveigh-apr-26-letter-to-fox-news/


Look into someone named Karen Hudes (she's not alternative media, she's someone who goes to it & talks about that).

I'm done, but I posted my records in case anyone else wants to use them. It's your money too.

[Neil Desmond]

I don't want to continue repeating my mistakes, or waste any more of my time. Like McVeigh, I was willing to play that game for some time, but not willing to keep repeating the same mistake forever:



http://www.foxnews.com/story/2001/04/26/mcveigh-apr-26-letter-to-fox-news/



I'm done, but I posted my records in case anyone else wants to use them. It's your money too.
Ok, that's fine; but for the purpose of this thread, what choice is there other than to return back to "square one" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158909&viewfull=1#post5158909)?

[satchelmcqueen]

i didnt read any of the responses here cause i need to leave the house, but i did watch the video.

if they dont want to label THE gmo foods, why not just label the NON gmo foods. a reverse way of getting to the same point?? i suppose though the food companies would have to be on board for that to work, which they wont do it because it would cost them support from monsanto.

[better-dead-than-fed]

i didnt read any of the responses here cause i need to leave the house, but i did watch the video.

if they dont want to label THE gmo foods, why not just label the NON gmo foods. a reverse way of getting to the same point?? i suppose though the food companies would have to be on board for that to work, which they wont do it because it would cost them support from monsanto.

Food companies are on board. See here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158325&viewfull=1#post5158325

To your question "why not just label the NON gmo foods", there appears to be no sensible answer. The bully in the video never gave a reason why your proposal wouldn't work. I guess she just doesn't like liberty. She is Canadian, they are still ruled by a monarchy because they like to lick boots.

[better-dead-than-fed]

Ok, that's fine; but for the purpose of this thread, what choice is there other than to return back to "square one" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?423329-14-year-old-teen-GMO-activist-schools-TV-Host&p=5158909&viewfull=1#post5158909)?

I don't see promise in Weston White's plan to take the FDA to court, so I don't see Monsanto's cadre of lawyers as any justification for government labeling-mandates. Liberals (I am not accusing Weston White of this) tend to think that corporation-employees are more Montgomery-Burns'ish than government employees; but I don't agree.