Company of the Year…Monsanto?

Maybe they could hire Charles Manson to be their spokesperson?

What a slap in the face. What an insult. What a display of ignorance. What little to no compassion, let alone admission of guilt to the war crimes this company was involved in. No, they were never convicted – because they settled out of court like Dow and the rest of the criminals who created, sold, and made hundreds of millions of dollars creating, selling and reaping the profits from Dioxin – yes, Agent Orange. (forbes.com/forbes/2010/0118/americas-best-company-10-gmos-dupont-planet-versus-monsanto.html)

This week, Forbes Magazine named Monsanto its company of the year. Can you believe it? Forbes – sure, a conservative, capitalist magazine – but nominating and approving Monsanto? A killer that was and continues to be, responsible for MILLIONS of deaths, MILLIONS of humans affected with disease as a result of being sprayed and exposed, MILLIONS of offspring whose health (and most of the time, untimely deaths), all caused by the evil poison known as Agent Orange.

They still produce Round-up, a watered down version of Agent Orange. However, the French Courts have found in favor of those who brought suit against them – Monsanto was accused and convicted in the French Courts about the make-up and what actually Round-up is and does – they were convicted of lying to the courts – perjury. Their sentence? A fine – a pittance compared with the BILLIONS of dollars in revenue they achieve each year. But that recent series of court cases in France is indeed significant – Round-up sales have dropped since the court’s decision, and this might just be a start – because Monsanto did in fact earn less than their forecasted revenues in 09 as a result in a drop in sales of Round-up. (news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8308903.stm)

Their CEO did in fact receive less in bonus compensation as a result of much of this being revealed – but he still earned millions of dollars! (stltoday.com/blogzone/mound-city-money/st-louis-companies/2009/12/monsanto-ceo-grant-sees-bonus-shrink-in-09/)

Today, Monsanto is viewed by many as a savior in terms of world hunger – because of its creation of genetically engineered seeds. Two very important facts:

1. GE seeds are in fact NOT better than natural seeds and are, some believe, even worse – in terms of the environment, human lives, spread of new diseases and humanity in general.

2. It has been revealed by the AP as well as other trusted sources, that Monsanto has and continues to use strong-arm tactics in forcing farmers to buy and use their seeds.

3. …and a third, contributed by my fellow writer, Vietnam Combat Vet, and Marine: Gordon D. (truthout.org/article/three-approved-gmos-linked-organ-damage)

This is a short video about the lie of what Monsanto and others preach about GE crops:techblogarchives.com/2010/01/06/genetic-engineering-the-worlds-greatest-scam/

The GE seed issue is certainly a serious one – but brothers and sisters, let us never forget Vietnam, Cambodia, Canada, Korea and other countries where Agent Orange was sprayed in both war and peacetime. Let us not forget all the human tolls it has taken – and continues to take. The lives that have been devastated, the lives removed. The products and GE seeds and eventual crops that wind up on your supermarket shelves have all been brought to you by the profits Monsanto received as a result of the US Government paying them hundreds of millions of dollars for the poison we all despise: Agent Orange.

More about Monsanto, the food industry in general, and the devastation and lies they and others like them are propagating, in this wonderful piece called “Food, Inc.” (theconsci​ous.com/?p=61)

This may or may not be available free of charge, depending on what country you reside in, but it IS available to all from http://www.thepiratebay.org. Remember, you will need a torrent program to download it. Email me if you need further instructions. (thepiratebay.org/torrent/5142533/Food__Inc__%282008%29)

I urge you all – please log in to Forbes, create an account, and comment about this truly wrong winner this year. Monsanto and its executives belong behind bars – not recipients of Forbes’ Company of the Year Award!

Not a single word about their involvement with the US Government during the Vietnam War. Not one mention of all the death and destruction they have caused and continue to be responsible for. This is the true corporate world – its finest for its shareholders and executives, but its worst for all of us who were exposed to, suffer from, and pass on the devastation we know as Agent Orange. Genetic alteration to seeds? What about the genetic alteration, eventual disease, disability and death from Agent Orange?

Chuck Palazzo is a Marine Corps Vietnam Veteran, the Interim Editor for Agent Orange, and a longtime Vietnam Veterans Against the War Member. Chuck Palazzo has spent years since the war studying the impacts and effects of Agent Orange, a defoliant chemical sprayed by the U.S. govt. on the jungles of Vietnam. He says Dioxins have been re-discovered to cause all sorts of damage to humans. These include Heart Disease, Parkinsonism, Diabetes et cetera. Dioxins are already known to produce serious birth defects and a variety of cancers. The chemical is still sold in Third World Countries and is causing the same problems.

We at Salem-News.com welcome Chuck aboard and look forward to sharing more of his stories with our readers in the future.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/january092010/monsanto_cp.php

Pioneer calls rival Monsanto ‘monopoly’

*Hopefully, Monsanto is doomed. I hope it isnt too late, that their damage can be undone.*

Pioneer Hi-Bred on Friday called rival seed company Monsanto an “overwhelming monopoly” and said it had “encouraged the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Justice to examine the current state of ag biotech competition and take appropriate action to restore a competitive environment.”

In comments to the two Cabinet departments, Pioneer said Monsanto uses its shares of the soybean and corn biotech trait markets – 98 percent and 78 percent shares, respectively – to act as a “bottleneck” to competition and innovation.

Monsanto, in its own filings with the government, said that farmers can purchase seed from more than 20 companies, and it noted that “traits are only a part of the total value of the seed, which is why there is substantial competition and variation in price even among seeds that contain the same trait combination.”

The two companies’ filings are in preparation for a March 12 hearing in Ankeny sponsored by the USDA and the Justice Department on competition in the seed industry.

Monsanto has achieved its market share through its ownership of DeKalb, Asgrow and other seed companies and use of genetic traits that enable seeds to resist Monsanto’s popular Roundup glyphosate herbicide.

Pioneer, like other seed companies, has licensed the Roundup Ready technology in its own seeds. It has committed to pay $725 million in licensing fees to Monsanto from 2007 to 2015 for Roundup Ready, which goes off patent in 2014.

But last year, Monsanto sued Pioneer over Pioneer’s stated plans to combine Roundup Ready with its own traits in Pioneer’s planned Optimum soybean series to be introduced sometime after 2012.

“Monsanto’s license agreements prevent seed companies from combining different characteristics in a single seed (often referred to as ‘stacking’), including both Monsanto and non-Monsanto technology,” Pioneer’s comments assert.

“These restrictions deny farmers the choice of the best seeds to suit their needs and force Monsanto customers to rely solely on Monsanto technology,” Pioneer said.

Monsanto’s filings paint itself as the early adapter to biotech while unnamed competitors stood still.

“Between 1980 and 1996, Monsanto invested approximately $1.5 billion in biotech research and development to improve weed and insect control. During the same period, our competitors invested $15 billion in the development of pesticide chemistry – they largely ignored biotech,” Monsanto said.

While Monsanto is alleged to have overwhelming shares of the seed biotech markets, its share of the actual seed sales market is narrower. Widely used figures for 2009 show that it was the top seller of corn seeds, with a 36 percent margin to Pioneer’s 32 percent.

In soybeans, Monsanto has acknowledged that Pioneer has a larger market share, with each company having less than 30 percent of the North American market.

Said Monsanto: “No single company has a dominant share of seed sales in corn, soybean or cotton. Independent seed companies, numbering in the hundreds, have held their own and have significant share in corn, soybeans and cotton.”

Pioneer says “consumers pay more when a single company controls access to innovation,” and quotes a recent study by the American Antitrust Association that it said “demonstrated that price increases (for seeds) in this decade for Monsanto’s traits have exceeded the additional benefits they convey.”

Pioneer has filed its own antitrust lawsuit against Monsanto and its attorneys, led by the same man, David Boies, who led the U.S. Justice Department’s antitrust prosecution of Microsoft a decade ago.

Pioneer claims that Monsanto is using Roundup Ready biotech traits in a manner similar to the way Microsoft was alleged to have used its Windows operating system to squelch competition on computer desktops.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100109/BUSINESS01/1090330/-1/SPORTS12/Pioneer-calls-rival-Monsanto-monopoly-

Judge Rules GMOs Violate Environmental Law

For those of us wondering how bad the untested genetically modified food experiment is going to get before it gets any better, a ray of hope was just offered. A San Francisco judge, the very honorable, Judge Jeffrey White just ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture`s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service violated environmental law because of inadequate environmental testing of genetically modified sugar beets. He ruled that the agency failed to see if the genetically altered beets would eventually share their funky pesticide proof genes with other crops. Judge White noted that pollen from sugar beets can be blown long distances and pollinate other crops, including table beets and chard.

White wrote, “The potential elimination of farmers` choice to grow nongenetically engineered crops, or consumers` choice to eat nongenetically engineered food … has a significant effect on the human environment.”

The judge ordered the federal agency to produce an environmental impact statement after taking a hard look at the issue. A lesser look by the agency found that the sharing of genetically altered pollen was no cause for concern.

This is the second blow for Monsanto and according the Associated Press, a “similar ruling in 2007 forced a ban on planting Roundup Ready alfalfa until a re-examination was done.” That environmental impact statement has yet to be completed, so it effectively halted the growth and sale of GMO alfalfa.

About half of the sugar beets used in the United States are currently Monsanto`s genetically modified variety and the judge didn`t rule about the harvest of the current crop.

If you haven`t been already, it`s wise to avoid sugar for a while to make sure you`re not consuming genetically modified sugar beets.

Genetically modified foods have been linked to smaller, less developed brains, livers and testicles. GMOs have been found to enlarge other tissues, including the pancreas and intestines. They`ve been known to atrophy the liver, while causing structural changes in the stomach and intestines. GMOs have additionally been linked to infertility and allergies. Here`s more: http://www.saynotogmos.org/paper.pdf.

All of the health problems associated with consuming genetically modified foods made the news in Europe years ago, when genetically modified crops were new. The citizens of Europe rebelled, which is why genetically altered foods are currently banned, or mostly labeled, in Europe.

In the U.S., the news wasn`t covered by mainstream outlets. As a consequence genetically modified foods are not labeled and consumers remain largely unaware. Genetically modified ingredients are available in the large majority of processed foods, and in the U.S. it`s actually illegal for manufacturers to label GMO products, as GMO products.

U.S. officials have been cited as saying that such labeling would “confuse consumers,” and it`s widely known that the large majority of consumers don`t want to eat genetically modified foods. Their logic has been: if consumers knew which foods were genetically modified, they would avoid them and thereby make the wrong choice. The official said to have explained the government’s logic at an international Codex meeting later denied doing so.

Organic farmers, food safety advocates and conservation groups brought the lawsuit. According to Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff, on Oct. 30 they will ask the judge for an injunction to ban new plantings until the environmental impact statement is complete.

An American Sugar Beet Growers Association spokesman said the association is going to fight for the right to grow genetically modified sugar beets. It wasn`t disclosed if, or how much, funding the association receives from Monsanto.

Genetically modified sugar beets are currently grown in eleven states and on 1.1 million acres.

http://www.naturalnews.com/027177_food_GMOs_GMO.html

Canada’s rejection of peanuts led to recall

*Nice inspection process. Sigh.*

The first sign of trouble for Peanut Corp. of America, the company blamed for a salmonella outbreak that has killed eight people in the United States and led to a massive product recall, was a tainted shipment of chopped peanuts that arrived in Canada last spring.

A customer in Canada rejected the peanuts, an act that may have saved lives here, and prompted officials with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to turn their attention to sanitary conditions in the Blakely, Ga., peanut plant at the centre of the outbreak.

It would seem to be a victory for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, proof that its system of inspection works. But the CFIA can’t explain why or how it succeeded.

The CFIA presumes the shipment was allowed across the Canadian border, because peanuts are not considered a high-risk product, and are not entered into the agency’s import control computer tracking system.

The CFIA could not say who received the shipment, because it doesn’t keep such records, but believes the buyer rejected the product after opening it and discovering it was unfit for consumption.

The purchaser likely sent the shipment back to the manufacturer, and the U.S. FDA inspected the shipment when it arrived last April at a border crossing at Alexandria Bay, N.Y., across from the Thousand Islands in Southeastern Ontario.

The FDA report said it found a “filthy, putrid or decomposed substance,” later identified as metal fragments.

But why did the FDA intercept the package? Was it warned by the CFIA? The agency can’t say. A spokeswoman said it is extremely rare for peanuts to go from Canada to the United States, and that may have prompted the inspection.

Canada’s rejection of the shipment has prompted criticism of the FDA from U.S. legislators, who wonder how it was that inspectors did not descend on the plant until months after Canada raised a red flag.

It was only in June that inspectors were sent to the plant, and then only to look for the source of the metal fragments, not salmonella.

Meanwhile, a private lab hired by the company to analyze the seized shipment deemed it fit for export. The FDA rejected those findings, and after months of back and forth, the shipment was destroyed.

Not long after, the first signs of a salmonella outbreak were spotted in the United States. Most of the more than 550 people affected fell ill after Oct. 1. Only one person in Canada, a man from New Brunswick, has reported illness related to the outbreak, and it’s believed he ate contaminated food in the United States.

On Monday, U.S. President Barack Obama said he is unhappy with the FDA’s response to the outbreak.

“I think that the FDA has not been able to catch some of these things as quickly as I expect them to,” Mr. Obama said.

More than 800 consumer products were recalled in the United States, making it one of the largest recalls in recent memory, and more are expected.

In Canada, the recall of various peanut products has now grown to 120 items. Another 19 products were added to the recall list late Tuesday. Among them is Kawartha Dairy Heavenly Hash Ice Cream in 1.5 and 11.4-litre sizes. Also included are another 17 American products under Cinch, Detour, Oh Yeah!, Disney, Sinbad Sweets and no-name brands.

Major peanut butter brands sold in Canada are still safe to eat, according to the CFIA.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090204.wsalmonella04/BNStory/International/home