Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

WikiLeaks Cables Reveal U.S. Gov't Planned To “Retaliate and Cause Pain” On Countries Refusing GMOs


Robongo

Recommended Posts

http://www.naturalblaze.com/2014/07/wikileaks-cables-reveal-us-govt-planned.html

Studies that link Genetically Modified (GM) food to multiple human health ailments are not the only thing that has millions of people questioning the production of GM food. The fact that previously classified secret government documents show how the Bush administration developed ways to retaliate against countries that were refusing to use GM seeds is another. If documents regarding our food are required to be concealed from the public domain, something is not right, and it’s great to have an organization like WikiLeaks shed some light into the world that’s been hidden from us for so many years. -

Targeting Certain Countries

The cables reveal that the State Department was lobbying all over the world for Monsanto, and other major biotech corporations. They reveal that American diplomats requested funding to send lobbyists for the biotech industry to meet with politicians and agricultural officials in “target countries.” These included countries in Africa, Latin America and some European countries.

%7Boption%7Dh
A non-profit consumer protection group called Food & Water Watch published a report showing the details of the partnership between the federal government and a number of biotech companies who have pushed their GMO products on multiple countries for a number of years.

The United States has aggressively pursued foreign policies in food and agriculture that benefit the largest seed companies. The U.S. State department has launched a concerted strategy to promote agricultural biotechnology, often over the opposition of the public and government, to the near exclusion of other more sustainable, more appropriate agricultural policy alternatives. The U.S. State department has also lobbied foreign governments to adopt pro-agricultural biotechnology politics and laws, operated a rigorous public relations campaign to improve the image of biotechnology and challenged common sense biotechnology safeguards and rules – even including opposing laws requiring the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods.

(source)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quit bashing Monsanto, they're a legitimate biotech corporation that has the best interests of farmers in mind and...

Couldn't say that with a straight face.

Did a quick Google search and saw that a lot of this information was made available to the public several years ago. I would be surprised, except, of course, it's Monsanto we're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't Monsanto one of the corporations that was involved in designing Agent Orange? I could be wrong but I thought I read that somewhere...

Sure was and now they're using a new version of it on their gmo crops called glyphosate.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/is-monsantos-glyphosate-roundup-the-new-agent-orange/5359401

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monsanto and their practices are pretty terrible/questionable. I don't have anything against GMO foods per se, but the way they do business is giving the whole idea a bad name,

http://youtu.be/1ecT2CaL7NA

I agree. The way Monsanto conducts business is likely why most other businesses don't like them. Hence why they need gubment's help. Has nothing to do with the safety of GM foods, logic which will undoubtedly be lost on the anti-GM / anti-corporate movement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't Monsanto one of the corporations that was involved in designing Agent Orange? I could be wrong but I thought I read that somewhere...

They have literally had their hand in everything since the the early 1900's. From indirectly helping create the atomic bomb to completely manufacturing everything we eat. Scary as hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monsanto and their practices are pretty terrible/questionable. I don't have anything against GMO foods per se, but the way they do business is giving the whole idea a bad name,

On your video..There's a pretty big difference between cross-breeding and genetically modifying something to produce its own pesticide. Not to mention all of the glyphosate and other crap they douse crops with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might be the smartest girl in Canada...taking on the sleezebag Kevin O'Leary on the GMO debate and owning his sorry @$$...

LOL "we don't have any agendas we're just the youth".

If that is what is considered the smartest girl in Canada.. we're fucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. The way Monsanto conducts business is likely why most other businesses don't like them. Hence why they need gubment's help. Has nothing to do with the safety of GM foods, logic which will undoubtedly be lost on the anti-GM / anti-corporate movement.

Now why do they need "intellectual property" laws and patent protection, sanctioned by government and enforced by its goons armed with guns?

And why are corporate shareholders given "limited liability" protection, sanctioned by government to limit personal responsibility while socializing risks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously people, go to youtube and type in "Seeds of Death,GMO foods movie". You will be shocked and angry with what is happening at a corporational and governmental level concerning the food we eat and what it is doing to us. This is none other than a global attempt to de-populate the earth of humans, to literally shorten our life spans, spread new diseases, and render both males and females sterile so as not to reproduce. When government forces GMO foods on the public, this is a problem we should all worry about. There is a sinister movement going on behind closed doors in government and the U.S. government is at the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now why do they need "intellectual property" laws and patent protection, sanctioned by government and enforced by its goons armed with guns?

And why are corporate shareholders given "limited liability" protection, sanctioned by government to limit personal responsibility while socializing risks?

Intellectual property laws are there in their current form and enforced as such to bully others who would compete with X company. This isn't exclusive to Monsanto whatsoever.

The government thing has to do with the close ties between business and government, also called corporatism. Both of these are serious issues that work against the consumer.

Due to the relationship Monsanto has with the government, and government interference in the economy preventing other GM technology from supplanting Monsanto's, crops and other resources aren't as enriched and consumer friendly as they should be. It also doesn't help that there are so many batcrap leftist groups trying their best to throw a wrench in GM technology advancement, or scare starving third world countries with nonsense conspiracy theories and scare tactics (while they enjoy all the food they can imagine) from adopting more GM crops.

It seems people have settled on the notion that government should really control our lives. As such, they don't consider the consequences of allowing this. Without ridiculous copyright/patent laws, and government dictating winners in this industry, Monsanto can whine about the wind blowing seeds elsewhere all it likes, can try and control the industry all it likes to no avail. They can't do frack all without the help of government. Why people then turn around and wish for more government involvement on the matter is beyond me, the solution is getting government away, especially the US government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...