It is happening too quickly, and most of us
are not aware. But Monsanto, Syngenta et al
have introduced legislation to prevent
local govts banning genetically altered crops;
and check Order 81 and Iraq farmers saving
their seeds.

Have you heard about this yet??

NEW “MONSANTO LAWS” AIM
TO MUTE COMMUNITY RIGHTS

Responding to the growing number of
localities whose citizens
are voting to regulate or even
ban genetically engineered crops,
the biotech industry, led by Monsanto and Syngenta, has brought new legislation
to ten states in the U.S. that
would remove the
rights of communities to have
any control of agricultural
regulations in their area.
On one side of the issue,
citizens and farmers in
counties that have
banned GE crops, like Mendocino,
Calif., say they have a right to
protect their predominantly
organic county
from contamination by GE
pollen from neighboring crops.

On the other side of the issue, the biotech industry is investing tens of millions
of dollars to remove these local rights,
saying anti-GE citizens and farmers
“lack the education to make these
kinds of decisions.”

http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/laws052005.cfm

[See the article on the above,
provided for you at end
of this posting you are now reading]

Takes a lot of audacity! But, leave that to Monsanto.
Do they care about their customers
and whatever they do to them,
the environment, anything really??

Answer:

A Monsanto official told the New York Times
that the corporation should not have to take
responsibility for the safety of its food products.
“Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the
safety of biotech food,” said Phil Angell, Monsanto’s
director of corporate communications.
“Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible.
Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”

[http://www.organicconsumers.org/monlink.html ]

Imagine if a drug company, or a less
enriched
company, or farmer behaved in
such a fashion……But then:

Monsanto Hid PCB Pollution for Decades

ANNISTON, Ala. — On the west side of Anniston,
the poor side of Anniston, the people grew
berries in their gardens, raised hogs in their
back yards, caught bass in the murky streams
where their children swam and played and
were baptized. They didn’t know their dirt
and yards and bass and kids — along with
the acrid air they breathed — were all
contaminated with toxic chemicals.
They didn’t know they lived in one
of the most polluted patches of America.

Now they know. They also know that for
nearly 40 years, while producing the
now-banned industrial coolants known
as PCBs at a local factory, Monsanto Co.
routinely discharged toxic waste into a
west Anniston creek and dumped millions
of pounds of PCBs into oozing open-pit
landfills. And thousands of pages of Monsanto
documents — many emblazoned with warnings
such as “CONFIDENTIAL: Read and Destroy” ñ
show that for decades, the corporate-giant
concealed what it did and what it knew…

[Read more at
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/pcbs010702.cfm ]

But right now, actually yesterday, as I
write this for you, Ronnie Cummins,
who heads up the Organic Consumers Association
in Little Marais, Minnesota
(street address is 6101 Cliff Estate Rd,
Little Marais, MN, 55614)
put out this press release, taken from his organizationís website:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT:
Ronnie Cummins 218-349-3836
Adam Eidinger 202-744-2671

Monsanto to Public: Ignore the Rats and Eat the GMO Corn
OCA Reacts to Monsanto’s Latest GMO Deception

May 24. 2005

LITTLE MARAIS, MN – Consumers have another
reason to avoid genetically modified foods (GMO).
Yesterday, European news outlets reported
harmful health impacts on lab rats that were
fed Monsanto’s root worm resistant corn (Mon 863).
Monsanto, the world largest maker of genetically
modified corn, soybeans, canola and cotton
appears to have disregarded their own
research on the harmful impacts of
their GMO corn on rats. According to
the London based Independent which
broke the story, “Ösecret research
carried out by Monsanto shows that rats fed
the modified corn had smaller kidneys
and variations in the composition of their blood.”

“This news couldn’t have come at worse time
for Monsanto which is already facing consumer
mistrust of their products due to concerns
over how GMO’s impact the immune system,
interfere with non-GMO crops and affect
long term human health,” says Ronnie Cummins,
Executive Director of the Organic Consumer’s
Association. “European labeling laws require
GMO ingredients to be listed making it easy to
avoid them, but Americans and consumers are
sitting ducks since no such labeling is required.
The only way to be sure you are not eating
GMO ingredients is to buy certified organic products.”

Monsanto’s latest deception stems from
submitting only a summary of a 1,139
page report on Mon 863 corn to the
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
The summary left out the abnormalities
in rats that were fed the GMO corn versus
those who ate a different diet.
“We demand Monsanto release
the full report on the rat study
which is being withheld from the science
and medical community because it
could be used by competitors for
commercial purposes,” says Cummins.
Monsanto should put research
on human health effects before corporate profits.”

This isn’t the first time GMO foods have
been shown to impact the health of rats.
A study on rats fed GMO potatoes
in 1998 showed similar harmful impacts
on their health. At the moment
Mon 863 corn is not approved for
importation to Europe, but is under
consideration by EFSA for approval.
Two GMO ingredients have been approved
by the EFSA in the past year, while
over ten proposed GMO foods have
been not approved for importation
during the same period.

“Since the Europeans lifted import bans
on all GMO’s, there has been increased
scrutiny of commonly used GMO crops
in the U.S. which is revealing new
information about the safety of GMO’s,”
says Cummins. “Most Americans don’t
know the foods they eat are considered
unsafe in Europe.”

###

TAKE ACTION: Sign petition protesting Monsanto

Contact Monsanto:
Monsanto Company
800 North Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, MO-63167
(314) 694-1000

We know about other research, where
the lab rats that would not eat those
Flavr Savr tomatrs – – the first
commercially-released genetically
altered vegetable eventually – – were forced to.
Via tubes, passed into their stomachs.
And then, of the 40 poor critters, seven
of them died in two weeks. Not too good.
Lesions were found in their stomachs,
but no word on the rest of the digestive tract.
Normal lifespan for these rats: 4 weeks.
Still, would you like to die at 38, instead of 76,
as would be expected??

Flavr Savr did not make it. The product was
supposed to have prolonged shelf life, but the
food-unsavvy corporation forgot that people
want a tomato that tastes good, and is not all
squashed and rotten when it presents itself
in front of their eyeballs. Our now
ex-Secretary of Agriculture, Ann Veneman,
was on the board of Calgene at the time.
Calgene was the great company that
produced the Flavr Savr.
Calgene was bought up by: Monsanto.

Ms. Veneman, one of the soothsayers of
biotech hath saide:
“We simply will not be able to
feed the world without biotechnology.”

She was the Agriculture Secretary
for George W. Bush, term I.

Point is, there is lots of info coming out
Oh So Slowly, that many biotech syntheses
that are supposed to be our “food,” are
damaging to our innards, and that
their DNA gets into our organs,
contrary to biotech business propaganda.

Did you know?….. that Great Britainís Ministry of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF)
officially warned our own FDA:

1. Transgenic DNA can spread to farm workers and food
processors via dust and pollen.

2. Antibiotic resistance marker genes may
spread to bacteria in the environment, which
then can serve as a reservoir
for antibiotic resistance genes.

3. DNA is not readily degraded during
food processing nor in silage, so
transgenic DNA can spread to animals in
animal feed.

4. Foreign DNA can be delivered into
cells of mammals {like us humans},
by bacteria that can enter into the cells.

5. The ampicillin resistant gene in
transgenic maize undergoing ëfarm-scaleí
field trials in the United Kingdom
and elsewhere is very mutatable,
and may compromise treatment for
meningitis and other bacterial infections,
should the gene be transferred horizontally
into the bacteria. The potential hazards of
horizontal gene transfer are
unlike those we have ever experienced.

ëHorizontal gene transferí here means
going sideways across species lines, like
fish to people, or virus to plant, as compared
to vertical transfer
down from father to son, for example,
in the same species (e.g., man).

Viruses and bacteria are always changing
and multiplying anyway, developing
resistance to things that could kill or
impair their life functionings.
But by breeding and implanting
antibiotic resistance genes into life forms,
things really could go haywire. Cross
pollination out there in the fields, of crops
with this bred-in characteristic, could lead
to resistance to the antibiotic, and what
if YOU or your daughter, or other
family member, or person you love, or hate,
is ALLERGIC TO PENICILLIN?????
Why, thank you for their possible death!
But you know now what Monsanto says.
Our responsibility? HA! What NERVE
you irreverent citizens have!

Yes, Ampicillin is a type of penicillin. If you
are allergic to one form, expect that you are
allergic to all forms of penicillin. Even if
they are in your cabbage leaves or carrots, being
brewed out there under the pesticide rainbows……

One more thing here. I imagine you might
have wondered about this problem with
these sneaky Iraqi farmers who think they
have a right to share their seeds, as 97%
of them have been doing for centuries and millennia.

Well, there amongst the 100 orders our
wonderful nation liberating Iraq has
bequeathed upon that country: is
Order Number 81. All 100 were imposed by
that occupational Coalition Provisional
Authority (CPA) under administrator
L. Paul Bremer III. Each of these orders
has a story. A few of which you may
read more about on this website in the future.
For now:

Order 81 relates to “Patent, Industrial Design,
Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits
and Plant Variety.” [1] ” This order amends
Iraq’s original patent law of 1970 and unless
and until it is revised or repealed by a new
Iraqi government, it now has the status and
force of a binding law. [2] With important
implications for farmers and the future of
agriculture in Iraq, this order is yet another
important component in the United States’
attempts to radically transform Iraq’s economy.”

This is from an article at

http://www.grain.org/articles/?id=6

In their clarification of what
this means, grain.org writes

“The law does not prohibit Iraqi
farmers from using or saving
“traditional” seeds. It prohibits
them from reusing seeds of “new”
plant varieties registered under the
law – in practical terms, this means
they cannot save those seeds for re-use.”

“Iraqis may continue to use and save
from their traditional seed stocks or
whatís left of them after the years of
war and drought, but that is the not
the agenda for reconstruction embedded
in the ruling. The purpose of the law
is to facilitate the establishment of
a new seed market in Iraq, where
transnational corporations can
sell their seeds ñ genetically modified
or not, which farmers would have
to purchase afresh
EVERY SINGLE CROPPING SEASON.

While historically the Iraqi constitution
prohibited private ownership of biological
resources, the new US-imposed patent law
introduces a system of monopoly rights
over seeds. Inserted into Iraq’s previous
patent law is a whole new chapter on
Plant Variety Protection (PVP) that
provides for the “protection of new
varieties of plants.” PVP is an
intellectual property right (IPR) or
a kind of patent for plant varieties
which gives an exclusive monopoly
right on planting material to a plant
breeder who claims to have discovered
or developed a new variety. So the
“protection” in PVP has nothing to
do with conservation, but refers to
safeguarding of the commercial
interests of private breeders
(usually large corporations) claiming
to have created the new plants.”

A World Trade Organization kinda thing,
in other words. Watch your
“Intellectual Property Rights” please.
Seeds and now life-forms shalt be
included amongst rights for movies,
books, music, and sutch.

Here is another, and very important
facet of the problem:

“To qualify for “PVP,” plant varieties
must comply with the standards of
the UPOV [3 ] Convention, which
requires them be new, distinct, uniform
and stable. Farmers’ seeds cannot meet
these criteria, making PVP-protected
seeds the exclusive domain of corporations.”

So, wonderful. Now in that land that
we are helping, Monsanto, Syngenta, et al
can take over the seed industry. After we
have sown all those tons of depleted uranium
on their soil, and across their deserts. Think
anybody is mad at us in Iraq? That they
might want us out of there ASAP!???!

And what is worse is that “the rights granted
to plant breeders in this scheme include
the exclusive right to produce, reproduce,
sell, export, import and store the protected
varieties. These rights extend to harvested
material, including whole plants and parts
of plants obtained from the use of a protected
variety. This kind of PVP system is often the
first step towards allowing the full-fledged
patenting of life forms. Indeed, in this case
the rest of the law does not rule out the
patenting of plants or animals.”

What kind of world are we arranging
under corporate auspices?? Think
about what is happening in Iraq – – sort
of a blank tablet that corporations can
impose their most grandiose bloodsucking
dreams upon – – and what is happening
elsewhere, including right here in the ole US of A.

References quoted in the paragraph above:

[1] Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information,
Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety Law of 2004,
CPA Order No. 81, 26 April 2004,
http://www.iraqcoalition.org/
regulations/20040426_CPAORD_81 _Patents_Law.pdf

[2] The PVP provisions will be put
into effect as soon as the Iraqi Minister
of Agriculture passes the necessary
executive orders of implementation
in accordance with this law.

[3] UPOV stands for International
Union for the Protection of New
Plant Varieties. Headquartered in
Geneva, Switzerland it is an
intergovernmental organisation
with 53 members, mostly
industrialised countries. The
UPOV Convention is a set of
standards for the protection
of plant varieties, mainly
geared toward industrial
agriculture and corporate interests.

See http://www.upov.org.

Here is the rest of that
article teased above
at the top of this posting:

“Monsanto Laws” Sweeping the Nation
Take Away Community/County Rights to Ban GMOs

From: The News & Observer (Raleigh, North Carolina)
story/2420322p-8797890c.html

May 19, 2005

A growing stake in the biotech crops debate

By HOPE SHAND, CARRBORO ñ

Goodness grows in North Carolina?
Not if the General Assembly approves
bills that would pre-empt local regulations
on genetically modified crops and trees.

House Bill 671 and Senate Bill 631 aim to prevent
towns, counties or cities from passing any
ordinance, regulation or resolution to
control any kind of plant or plant pest
(including invasive plant species). The
bills would usurp local control by
making the state Department of Agriculture
the only body in North Carolina with
the authority to regulate plants.

These bills are not a homegrown
initiative, but part of a nationwide
biotech industry campaign. Similar
bills, containing identical language,
have cropped up in at least nine
other states as part of a campaign
by industry to prevent citizen
initiatives like those passed in
three California counties last year
that prohibited cultivation of
genetically modified crops.

Proponents of the seed pre-emption bills,
including the Agriculture Department,
are championing the interests of
corporate “gene giants” such as
Monsanto and Syngenta — not citizens.
Whether you’re for or against
genetically modified seeds, the
pre-emption bills represent an
anti-democratic measure to take
control away from communities.
Just as the corporate hog industry
won legislation to prohibit local
jurisdictions from keeping out
supersize hog farms in North Carolina,
now the gene giants are trying to
muzzle debate by eliminating
options for local regulation of
genetically modified crops.

The issue has immediate relevance
in Eastern North Carolina, where
Ventria Bioscience has a permit
to grow an open-air, experimental
plot of rice engineered with
synthetic human genes (to produce
artificial human milk proteins)
near the state Agriculture Department’s
Tidewater Research Station in
Plymouth, in Washington County.
Two earlier attempts by Ventria
to grow its genetically modified
“pharma rice” — a crop that
yields drugs for use in human
and veterinary medicines — were
opposed by farmers, food companies
and environmentalists in California
and Missouri because of concerns
that the genetically altered pharma
rice could cross-pollinate with
conventional rice, thus contaminating
the food supply.

Last month, California-based
Ventria Bioscience requested
a permit from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture to grow up to 70
acres of pharma rice on two
additional plots in Eastern
North Carolina. If the pre-emption
bills pass, communities would
no authority to regulate genetically
modified crops. Everyone agrees
that unintended gene flow from
genetically modified plants is
unavoidable. The organic
food market is the fastest-growing
segment of the farm economy, but
organic farmers risk losing organic
certification, and markets, if
genetically modified DNA
contaminates their fields.
Local governments should
have the ability to protect
growers who worry about
contamination.

The biotech industry and federal
regulators have repeatedly failed
to contain and control genetically
modified organisms. The science
journal Nature revealed in March
that Syngenta had inadvertently
sold an unapproved strain of
genetically modified corn to
farmers for four years. During
that period, 146,000 tons of the
corn were marketed as animal
feed and corn flour in the U.S.,
in Europe and in Asia. Syngenta
informed federal authorities
about the illegal corn in late 2004,
but the public and unsuspecting
farmers were in the dark until
four months later. To keep out
the unlicensed strain, the
European Union threatened to
boycott U.S. corn imports valued
at $347 million. As usual, farmers
were left holding the bag.
Syngenta was let off with a fine.

This was not the first time
genetically modified corn
has entered the food supply.
In 2000, Starlink corn, approved
only for use as animal feed, was
found in taco shells, causing a
nationwide recall of food
products containing yellow corn.

Eliminating options for local
authority over plants/seeds is
risky business. The farm
biotech business is controlled
by five multinationals, the
world’s largest seed and
agrochemical companies:
Monsanto, Dupont, Syngenta,
Bayer and Dow. Monsanto’s
genetically modified seed
technology accounted for
about 90 percent of the
total worldwide area devoted
to such crops last year.
Seed industry concentration
means fewer choices for
farmers and consumers
and unacceptable levels
of control over the seed supply.

For all these reasons,
North Carolina towns
and communities must
preserve options for
local regulation of
plants, and for public
debate of genetically
modified crops and trees.
(Hope Shand is research
director of the ETC Group
North Carolina, a non-profit
focusing on socioeconomic
impacts of new agricultural
technologies.)

© Copyright 2005,
The News & Observer
Publishing Company,
a subsidiary of The
McClatchy Company