Owen Myles, Contributing Writer

Also involved in the study were rodents — clearly a dietary staple of the French, and biologically (or psychologically?) identical to certain English academics. 

The “evidence” cited in the study shows that — at least to monocled marsupials — GM plants are “nutritionally equivalent to their non-GM counterparts and can be safely used in food and feed.” Of course “food and feed” are not exclusive aspects of GM agriculture — or even agriculture — but corporate-sponsored research has its own perspective . . . Never mind the trace minerals and everything else!

As usual, the slashdot comments were many, and the views varied; organic versus conventional, ridicule and support of both, with lots between — all shedding light on people’s views of the subject. Admittedly, geeks may not be the best authority on such topics — often compiled of pizza and soft-drinks — but I fear they do provide an example of popular opinion regardless. Many see GM as a noble science, helping to feed the world’s growing population. Some see “organic” anthropocentrically, reducing it to a matter of pesticides, nutrition, and prices. Few seem to have a balanced perspective though.

Conventional versus organic agriculture – or where to begin:

Crop rotation gets little attention, probably due to most consumers having no familiarity with processes behind the supermarkets. Most GM crops are mono-cultures, and are rarely if ever rotated. Mono-cultures reduce biodiversity, having effects far beyond the farm, and unrotated crops stress and deplete the soil. While the terribly important subject of biodiversity is generally ignored in conventional agriculture, soil quality is maintained artificially through mined fertilizers and industrial chemicals. There are quite a few implications for this; the dust-bowl of the US, and creeping deserts of China are but a few. Artificial fertilization requires strip mining, particularly for phosphates, and the effects are harsh. Pollution of watersheds, eutrophication, devastation, and even radiation are effects of phosphate mining.

In 2003, Piney Point phosphate mine threatened to leak a hundred-plus million gallons of contaminated water into Tampa Bay. Instead of allowing it to leak, Jeb Bush authorized it to be dumped into the Gulf of Mexico. I clearly remember suffering perennial red-tide for more than a year after the first incident. In June of 2011, Piney Point threatened to leak again.

Piney Point was officially an “accident”; possibly one less expensive to pay the fines for, than to build a more secure infrastructure. But conventional agriculture is not an accident, and a look at the Mississippi Delta dead-zone is an example some of the consequences involved in run-off from fertilization.

We’ve all heard horror stories of cattle threatening to fart our beloved planet into a toxic stink-osphere. …Sure, but what they leave out is that it is not just farts, but mismanagement of the manure which produces much of this dangerous surplus of methane. Instead of properly redistributing the manure to be returned to the soil, it is often stuffed in squalid vats to putrefy without benefit — emitting methane. Could such manure not substitute these mined phosphates to some extent?

The argument that to feed the growing population we must genetically modify our crops and practice industrial agriculture is worth some attention, as it is perhaps the most popular argument supporting the industry. This argument confuses many, and irritates some like myself. One must at a minimum, consider the waste of conventional agriculture, where rather than composting and returning detritus to the soil, it is either burned, trashed, or used for other industrial purposes. Organic agriculture it is not entirely self-sufficient, but it is far more so than its contestant. Between hydroponics and more – but smaller – farms, organic (and perhaps eco-farming) could indeed maintain pace with the demands of our growing population — all while remaining far more symbiotic with ecosystems.

The French study also neglects aspects of what they claim to understand of feed. Bees are critical to agriculture, and certainly are not well hosted by conventional farms. Some studies have suggested that GM corn pollen may weaken the intestinal walls of bees, thus reducing resistance to parasites and other infections.

We know that feeding corn — as opposed to grass — to cattle increases putrefaction due to excessive starches (sugars), further leading farmers to grotesque measures; boring permanent holes into the stomachs of cows to monitor the bacterial cultures that arise from corn diets of GMO-powered starchiness, and the excessive antibiotics which become necessary as result of the intestinal imbalances caused by such diets. In humans, GM soy has been proposed to threaten intestinal flora as well, by transferring corrupted DNA into beneficial flora.

Patent-wars are another issue, and could alone make a strong case against GMOs. Whether through cross-pollination (contamination) or terminator seeds, the patent has been used to harm many farmers and sustain what would otherwise fail under fair and wholesome circumstances. Organic farming claims no ownership of nature; it seeks to work in relative harmony, and cares not to bully fellow farmers. The notorious Monsanto has been a true tyrant in this regard, litigating farmers into bankruptcy, and playing dice with biology. It is no secret that the FDA and Monsanto are close, and that neither exhibit any sincere concern for the health of the masses. They present GM science as the road to a thriving humanity, but their real motives are clearly profit — without regard to humanity’s common interests.

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

We also need to bring agriculture closer to home, whereever possible. By this I imply less dependence on centralized farming, and more local cooperation. The supermarket shelves can be emptied, but our yards are alive, and our greenhouses belong to us. We should be teaching ourselves the basics of growing what we can in our climates, and becoming less reliant on those who care neither about their own produce, animals, or us. Where this cannot be done, one may try to act supportively instead, whether in words or coins.

What seems objectively obvious to me is that GMOs are understudied, abused, resented by many, and will have to wait in a very long line for any truly conclusive research. Organic agriculture, however, is tried and proven — and no one resents its products. I know from experience the differences of that grown on the local farm here in Sarasota, compared to that bought in any grocery store — and they are quite apparent; from the way I feel after enjoying them, to the politics — or lack thereof — that are involved. I know of no organic farm sporting prison labor, but I can surely name a few conventional farms that do. I don’t want an institution supper, nor do I want corporate mutations in my mouth. The differences are clear, and it’s a shame that they even need be argued — but ’tis our times and tyrants.

There is much, much more to cover on this subject, though I wanted to get this out in time to wish the Activist Post readership (and syndicates) a Merry Christmas for all those who celebrate it, and the kindness of the holiday spirit to everyone, which will hopefully some day no longer be once per year.

Map of Florida’s Bone Valley: www.baysoundings.com/sum05/BoneValley.pdf

Owen Myles writes and edits the Eccentric Intelligence Agency: Helping the Ouroboros finish itself.

Non GMO Heirloom Seedbank

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

The United States is threatening nations who oppose Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) crops with military-style trade wars, according to information obtained and released by the organization WikiLeaks.

Nations like France, which have moved to ban one of Monsanto’s GM corn varieties, were requested to be ‘penalized’ by the United States for opposing Monsanto and genetically modified foods.

The information reveals just how deep Monsanto’s roots have penetrated key positions within the United States government, with the cables reporting that many U.S. diplomats work directly for Monsanto.

The WikiLeaks cable reveals that in late 2007, the United States ambassador to France and business partner to George W. Bush, Craig Stapleton, requested that the European Union along with particular nations that did not support GMO crops be penalized. Stapleton, who co-owned the Dallas/Fort Worth-based Texas Rangers baseball bats team with Bush in the 1990s, stated:

Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory. Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices.

The Leaked Political Agenda Behind Monsanto’s GMO Crops

The ambassador plainly calls for ‘target retaliation’ against nations who are against using Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, admittedly linked to organ damage and environmental devastation.

Amazingly, this is not an isolated case. In similar newly released cables, United States diplomats are found to have pushed GMO crops as a strategic government and commercial imperative.

Furthermore, the U.S. specifically targeted advisers to the Pope, due to the fact that many Catholic bishops and figureheads have openly denounced GMO crops. In fact, the Vatican has openly declared Monsanto’s GMO crops as a ‘new form of slavery’.

‘A Martino deputy told us recently that the cardinal had co-operated with embassy Vatican on biotech over the past two years in part to compensate for his vocal disapproval of the Iraq war and its aftermath – to keep relations with the USG [US government] smooth. According to our source, Martino no longer feels the need to take this approach,’ says the cable.

Perhaps the most shocking piece of information exposed by the cables is the fact that these U.S. diplomats are actually working directly for biotech corporations like Monsanto. The cables also highlight the relationship between the U.S. and Spain in their conquest to persuade other nations to allow for the expansion of GMO crops. Not only did the Spanish government secretly correspond with the U.S. government on the subject, but the U.S. government actually knew beforehand how Spain would vote before the Spanish biotech commission reported their decision regarding GMO crops. The cable states:

‘In response to recent urgent requests by [Spanish rural affairs ministry] state secretary Josep Puxeu and Monsanto, post requests renewed US government support of Spain’s science-based agricultural biotechnology position through high-level US government intervention.’

Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy

Monsanto has undoubtedly infiltrated the United States government in order to push their health-endangering agenda, and this has been known long before the release of these WikiLeaks cables. The U.S. is the only place where Monsanto’s synthetic hormone Posilac is still used in roughly 1/3 of all cows, with 27 nations banning the substance over legitimate health concerns. Despite Monsanto’s best attempts at incognito political corruption, nothing can stop the grassroots anti-Monsanto movement that is taking over cities and nations alike.

Explore More:

1. Monsanto’s GMO Crops Ravage US, USDA Ignores Dangers


2. Monsanto Declared Worst Company of 2011


3. USDA Steps Back and Gives Monsanto More Power Over GMO Seeds


4. Vatican Condemns Monsanto Genetically Modified Crops as “New Form of Slavery”


5. Monsanto Admittedly Influences Colorado GMO Ban, Launches Phony ‘GMO Co-Existence’ Protests


6. GMO Crops Continually Banned Around the World in Display of Health Freedom

Please visit Natural Society for more great health news and vaccine information.

Non GMO Hierloom Seed Bank

Mike Barrett
Activist Post

A recent study conducted by a German university found very high concentrations of glyphosate, a carcinogenic chemical found in herbicides like Monsanto’s Roundup, in all urine samples tested.

The amount of glyphosate found in the urine was staggering, with each sample containing concentrations at 5- to 20-fold the limit established for drinking water.

This is just one more piece of evidence that herbicides are, at the very least, being sprayed out of control. 

Glyphosate in Monsanto’s Roundup Impacting Global Health

This news comes only one month after it was found that glyphosate, contained in Monsanto’s Roundup, is contaminating the groundwater in the areas in which it is used. What does this mean?

It means that toxic glyphosate is now polluting the world’s drinking water through the widespread contamination of aquifers, wells and springs. The recent reports of glyphosate showing up in all urine samples only enhances these past findings.

Monsanto continues to make the claim that their Roundup products are completely safe for both animals and humans. However, many environmentalists, scientists , activists, and even doctors say otherwise.

Glyphosate radically affects the metabolism of plants in a negative way. It is a systemic poison preventing the formation of essential amino acids, leading to weakened plants which ultimately die from it.

A formula seems to have been made to not only ruin the agricultural system, but also compromise the health of millions of people worldwide. With the invention of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops, resistant superweeds are taking over farmland, and public health is being attacked.

As it turns out, glyphosate is also leaving behind its residue on Roundup Ready crops, causing further potential concern for public health. Glyphosate is even contributing to escalating rates of mental illness and obesity through the depletion of beneficial gut flora that directly regulates these functions.

But it certainly doesn’t stop there.

Researchers tested roundup on mature male rats at a concentration range between 1 and 10,000 parts per million (ppm), and found that within 1 to 48 hours of exposure, testicular cells of the mature rats were either damaged or killed. Even at a concentration of 1 ppm, the Roundup was able to affect the test subjects by decreasing their testosterone concentrations by as much as 35%.

Explore More:

1. Monsanto’s Best-Selling Herbicide Roundup Linked to Infertility


2. World’s Top Commercial Weed Killer Linked to Infertility: Scientist


3. Monsanto’s Carcinogenic Roundup Herbicide Contaminating Water Supply


4. Monsanto’s Roundup Ready Crops Leading to Mental Illness, Obesity


5. Monsanto’s Roundup Spawns Superweeds Consuming Over 120 Million Hectares


6. Exposure to this Chemical is Linked to Birth Defects

Please visit Natural Society for more great health news and vaccine information.

YouTube

RELATED ARTICLES: 
UN Ambush: India vs. Monsanto
India Slams Monsanto with Unprecedented ‘Biopiracy’ Charges

Dees Illustration

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

Farmers are taking a stand against Monsanto, launching a landmark lawsuit against the mega corporation for widespread genetic contamination.

The farmers are concerned that Monsanto’s aggressive agenda to genetically alter the planet will ultimately result in a severe threat to the organic integrity of farms worldwide. It is not hard to believe that many ‘organic’ farms have already been contaminated with GMO crops, as nearly 93% of soybeans are now admittedly genetically modified.

The Public Patent Foundation originally filed the lawsuit in March of 2011  in a case known as Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association (OSGATA) et al v. Monsanto.

The organization launched the suit in the name of the very individuals and organizations threatened by Monsanto’s widespread GMO crops: family farmers, farming organizations, and seed businesses.

The intent of the case is to dispute Monsanto’s patents on GMO seeds and ultimately safeguard farmers from Monsanto’s own vicious lawsuits.

In fact, between 1997 and 2010, Monsanto actually filed 144 lawsuits against American family farmers. In addition, another 700 were settled out of court for unknown amounts. Monsanto has an agenda to take out American family farms and dominate the agricultural industry with their own mutant seeds. This is the same kind of practice that Monsanto operates outside of the United States as well, driving thousands of poor farmers to suicide by ruining their family farming practices.

The first phase of the case began yesterday on January 31, 2012.  More than 50 farmers and plaintiffs have gone to Manhattan to listen to verbal debates surrounding Monsanto’s attempts to dismiss the lawsuit.

You can take action now by voicing your opposition to Monsanto and their corrupt practices. Your submissions are reportedly to be shared with farmers around the globe who will ultimately play a vital role in the determination of whether or not Monsanto will be able to continue its mass manipulation of the food supply.

Explore More:

1. New Lawsuit Filed Over GMO Alfalfa


2. Monsanto Admittedly Influences Colorado GMO Ban, Launches Phony ‘GMO Co-Existence’ Protests


3. Monsanto Investor Bill Gates Says GMO Crops Needed to Fight Starvation


4. Busted: Monsanto Abusing Illegal Workers in ‘Slave-Like’ Conditions


5. GMO Giant Monsanto Will Soon Be Allowed To Police Itself


6. Monsanto Declared Worst Company of 2011

This article first appeared at NaturalSociety.com

Please visit Natural Society for more great health news and vaccine information.

Dees Illustration

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

In a major victory for public health, and what will hopefully lead to other nations taking action, a French court decided today that GMO crops monster Monsanto is guilty of chemically poisoning a French farmer.

The grain grower, Paul Francois, says he developed neurological problems such as memory loss and headaches after being exposed to Monsanto’s Lasso weedkiller back in 2004.

The monumental case paves the way for legal action against Monsanto’s Roundup and other harmful herbicides and pesticides made by other manufacturers.

In a ruling given by a court in Lyon (southeast France), Francois says that Monsanto failed to provide proper warnings on the product label. The court ordered an expert opinion to determine the sum of the damages, and to verify the link between Lasso and the reported illnesses. The case is extremely important, as previous legal action taken against Monsanto by farmers has failed due to the challenge of properly linking pesticide exposure with the experienced side effects.

When contacted by Reuters, Monsanto’s lawyers declined to comment. 

Monsanto’s Deadly Concoctions

Farmer Paul Francois was not alone in his quest to hold Monsanto accountable for their actions. He and other farmers affected by Monsanto’s deadly concoctions actually founded an association last year to make the case that their health problems were a result of Monsanto’s Lasso and other ‘crop protection’ products.

Their claims were also met by many other farmers. Since 1996, the agricultural branch of the French social security system has gathered about 200 alerts per year regarding sickness related to pesticides. However only 47 cases were even recognized in the past 10 years.

Francois, whose life was damaged by Monsanto’s products, has now set the powerful precedent in the defense of farmers.

‘I am alive today, but part of the farming population is going to be sacrificed and is going to die because of this,’ Francois, 47, told Reuters.

It is also important to note that Monsanto’s Lasso pesticide was actually banned in France back in 2007 following a European Union directive that came after the ban of the product in other nations.

Explore More:

• There are no related stories quite yet.

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

Sayer Ji, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

New research released ahead of print and published in the journal Archives of Toxicology indicates that Roundup, the most common formulation of the herbicide glyphosate, is not only more toxic than its constituent ingredients, but is capable of damaging DNA within a human cell line when diluted down to 450-fold lower concentrations than presently used in GMO agricultural applications. In the researchers’ own words, Roundup has “genotoxic effects after short exposure to concentrations that correspond to a 450-fold dilution of spraying used in agriculture.”

The chemical – glyphosate – is the highest-selling herbicide in the world and has been identified as having a wide range of potential adverse health effects — largely minimized and/or under-reported — which include over two dozen diseases. Glyphosate’s primary properties of concern are its carcinogenicity, genotoxicity and endocrine disruptive actions.

Roundup contains a surfactant known as polyoxyethyleneamine which functions to reduce the surface tension between Roundup and the cells exposed to it, making the cellular membranes more permeable to absorbing glyphosate and other chemicals within the formula.

The surfactant in Roundup may therefore be responsible for increasing the toxicity of glyphosate by several orders of magnitude higher than it exhibits by itself.

This new research sheds light on a fundamental problem associated with toxicological risk assessments of agrichemicals (and novel manmade chemicals in general).

Namely, these assessments do not take into account the reality of synergistic toxicologies, i.e. the amplification of harm associated with multiple chemical exposures occurring simultaneously.

Moreover, toxicological risk assessments on novel chemicals are based on the concept of determining “an acceptable level of harm,” instead of protecting those who would be exposed to a chemical by implementing the precautionary principle, i.e. if there is reason to believe that a chemical could cause harm (determined by animal and in vitro studies) then they should be regulated as if they do cause harm to humans. The precautionary principle would require that the manufacturers of these chemicals prove their product is safe to humans before being allowed to release it onto the market or into the environment, rather than putting the burden of proving it unsafe on the consumer and/or exposed populations, as is presently the case.

Glyphosate exposure is now ubiquitous due to the fact that 88,000 tons of it were used in US in 2007 alone, and likely billions of additional pounds globally. Accumulating evidence indicates it is resistant to biodegradation and now contaminates the air, rain and groundwater throughout the areas where it has been applied.

Read More:
Roundup Weedkiller: Is This Monsanto’s New ‘Agent Orange’?
Is Monsanto’s Herbicide Harming Male Fertility?
Toxicology Research on Roundup

This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo.  Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.

Madison Ruppert, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

The Obama administration is now blocking a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by an environmental group, Public Employees for Environment Responsibility (PEER), which is attempting to uncover Obama’s connections to Monsanto-linked lobbyists.

Keep in mind, Monsanto’s products have been linked to some horrific effects on biological systems like the human body, not the least of which is creating necrosis and significant mutations in critical cell types.

Also quite noteworthy is the fact that Monsanto was actually recently found guilty of chemical poisoning in the case of a French farmer.

The group suspects the Obama White House of working with these lobbyists to defend genetically engineered (GE) crops and the attempts to get these GE crops planted in wildlife refuges across the United States.

Part of the information which is currently being withheld by the Obama administration is part of an email from January 2011 from a lobbyist to a top White House policy analyst.

This lobbyist was with the Biotechnology Industry Organization, or BIO, which regularly represents the interests of companies specializing in GE seeds like Syngenta and the infamous multinational giant Monsanto.

The White House claims that they had to block portions of the email because it contained information on BIO’s lobbying strategy.

They claimed that if this strategy was released, it could cause damage to the group’s competitiveness and those of the companies it represents.

“We suspect the reason an industry lobbyist so cavalierly shared strategy is that the White House is part of that strategy,” said Kathryn Douglass, the staff counsel for PEER.

Douglass is arguing that the email should be public record, adding, “The White House’s legal posture is as credible as claiming Coca Cola’s secret formula was ‘inadvertently’ left in a duffel bag at the bus station.”

PEER has been doing phenomenal work exposing the connections between our government and BIO lobbyists, including the release of internal emails last July.

The email release revealed that Peter Schmeissner, a senior science policy analyst and member of the biotechnology working group at the White House, actually had been corresponding with a BIO lobbyist about one of PEER’s legal challenges.

The lawsuit, filed by PEER and their allied groups, was quite successful in that it halted the planting of GE crops within the wildlife refuges across northeastern states.

PEER has obviously not given up and they continue to fight the planned plantings of GE crops across the nation.

In some of the emails obtained by PEER from 2010, it was found that Adrianne Massey, a biotechnology lobbyist for quite a while, asked Schmeissner if the “interagency working group” is addressing the legal challenges put forth by PEER.

In addition, Massey forwarded some of the environmental assessments of the proposed GE crop plots at other wildlife refuges across the United States. These assessments could supposedly protect GE crop plots in wildlife refuges from further legal challenges in the future.

The emails obtained by PEER spurred them to seek out information on the “interagency working group” referred to by Massey which is known as the White House Agricultural and Biotechnology Working Group via FOIA request.

The group boasts high-level officials from most of the Obama administration’s agencies that deal with agriculture and trade, even the State Department, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), according to PEER.

These discoveries have led PEER to file a lawsuit against the White House in an attempt to get the information which was withheld from their FOIA requests.

This would include not only the Massey email in question but the White House Agricultural and Biotechnology Working Group’s schedule, the items on their agenda and their work related to GE crops in general.

An attorney for BIO filed an affidavit which claims that the withheld portions of Massey’s email contain “mistakenly” forwarded trade secrets.

“BIO operates in an advocacy environment in which there are many organizations that oppose the use of biotechnology, particularly in the agricultural arena, and that seek to persuade federal, state and local agencies to restrict the technology’s use. If this information were released, competitors could imitate or seek to counteract BIO’s strategy and further their own contrary agendas at the expense of BIO and its members,” the attorney wrote.

The White House is also claiming that they withheld the information according to current disclosure law, but PEER isn’t buying it, and likely rightly so.

Jeff Ruch, PEER’s Director told Truth-Out that he believes that the withheld Massey email actually has the details of a concerted effort being made by BIO lobbyists to have the White House help make sure that the environmental assessments of the GE crops on wildlife refuges are so strong that they cannot be challenged on a legal basis in the future.

This is because groups like PEER regularly challenge the legally required environmental assessments in order to hold up projects like planting GE crops on wildlife refuges in court.

Deborah Rocque, an official with the United States Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS), claimed last year that the FWS had actually been allowing farming on refuges for years.

Rocque /1307539754″ rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”>claims this is part of habitat restoration efforts and that the planting of herbicide-resistant GE crops would actually allow conservationists to grow ground cover while still killing unwanted weeds with herbicidal products.

However, even classifying these types of crops as “herbicide-resistant” is misleading, because in the case of “Roundup Ready” crops produced by Monsanto the crops actually still absorb all of the incredibly harmful Roundup but instead of dying, these crops are genetically engineered to be able to survive the herbicide.

This means that if these products are moved into the food supply, there are trace amounts of Roundup which actually make it to the dinner table.

The mere presence of herbicides in the environment is something that any true conservationist would avoid like the plague, so Rocque’s statement is laughably nonsensical.

PEER seems to realize the ulterior motive behind the effort to plant GE crops on wildlife refuges, which they see as an attempt by the Obama administration to boost exports of the crops.

While European countries remain relatively skeptical about the safety of genetically modified (GM) foods and some other countries have actually banned certain seeds, the United States government shares none of these concerns.

PEER says that the White House and its working group is trying to give trade partners the impression that the United States government thinks GE crops are so environmentally safe that they can even be planted on wildlife reserves.

Such a vote of confidence could increase the willingness of trade partners to import the GE crops, which have quite a long list of potential hazards associated with their use.

Truth-Out has been doing one of the best jobs of keeping track of the United States’ efforts to pressure foreign nations into accepting exports and GE crops, including countries like France and Spain.

Through the release of some WikiLeaks cables, it was found that essentially United States diplomats were working for companies like Monsanto by going around the world promoting their GE products.

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

The first legal challenge relating to the planting of GE crops on wildlife reserves came after PEER was contacted by biologists with the FWS who were opposed to the planting of GE crops on said reserves.

Later, PEER actually received an internal email which they believe shows that Tom Vilsack, Secretary of the USDA, actually was pressuring FWS to support GE crops.

In the email, dated January 14, 2011, David Hayes, the Interior Department Deputy Secretary, relayed to some of the top Interior Department and FWS officials that, “Apparently Vilsack is somewhat exercised that the Administration is not being consistent in supporting genetically modified crops.”

Of course when asked about this high-level pressure, Rocque claimed that she was completely unaware of any internal pressure coming from the upper levels of the Obama administration.

This is just more of the “I do not recall” plausible deniability nonsense.

Hopefully PEER’s legal challenges will be treated in a just manner and we will be able to get an accurate glimpse in the world of corporatism which is so egregiously damaging our nation.

The case of Monsanto and the American diplomats promotion of their products is just about the most perfect example of how corrupt our so-called government has really become.

Have something to add? Want to tip me off to another story? Email me at [email protected] with the details!

This article first appeared at EndtheLie.com. Read other contributed articles by Madison Ruppert here.

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. Madison also now has his own radio show on Orion Talk Radio from 8 pm — 10 pm Pacific, which you can find HERE.  If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at [email protected]

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

Taking a stand against the agricultural takeover of the United States and worldwide, a group of Occupy DC members began to protest outside the offices of Monsanto. Taking part in an attempt to help raise awareness over the atrocities committed by mega corporations like Monsanto, Occupy members as far away as Portland helped to organize the national protest.

In the call to action statement provided by Occupy Portland, the movement stated that the protest was to highlight the fact that “corporations buy off legislators and craft legislation that serves the interests of corporations and not people.” According to Occupy DC, about 12 members were arrested.

Protesters were told by D.C. police officers to remove themselves from the Monsanto office, where they formed a line around the building.  One police officer, William Farr, said that around 50 protesters gathered around the building.

Police threatened protesters with arrest if they did not move away from the doors, and 12 were ultimately arrested.

According to the report, 10 were arrested for ‘blocking the entrance’ and 2 were arrested for crossing a police line. One of the individuals arrested was an American University student doing a report on police brutality.

During their protest at Monsanto corporation, protesters chanted things like ”Monsanto and ALEC, corporations are making us sick.”

Protesters were even quoted as saying that Monsanto ”is doing more to make a sustainable world impossible than almost any corporation on the planet.”

Monsanto was declared worst company of 2011 for their numerous acts against nature and public health.

In addition to running slave rings and controlling U.S. diplomats behind the scenes to push their agenda, Monsanto is also ensuring that you have no idea whether or not you are eating their genetically modified foods. Squashing labeling initiatives all over the nation through admitted influence, Monsanto wants to make sure you’re in the dark about their latest GMO creations.

Explore More:

1. CDC Director, Former Overseer of $1.5 Billion Terrorism Fund Arrested for Child Molestation and Bestiality


2. GMO Giant Monsanto Will Soon Be Allowed To Police Itself


3. Monsanto.com Targeted by Internet Hackers Known as ‘Anonymous’


4. Judge Throws out Organic Farmers’ Recent Case Against Monsanto


5. Monsanto Shareholder Meeting Infiltrated by Activist (Video)


6. Monsanto PR Firm Reportedly ‘Ended’ by Anonymous

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

Sayer Ji, Contributing Writer

The nation that destroys its soil, destroys itself. — Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Roundup (Glyphosate): The Science Vs. Marketing

Ever since Monsanto developed, marketed and patented the glyphosate molecule — Roundup (®) herbicide’s active ingredient — beginning in the early ’70s, a substantial and ever-growing portion of the earth’s arable surface has been transformed into an environmental and human health experiment, of unprecedented scale.

One thing is for sure: Roundup-ready plants are, through their inherent design, destroying the biodiversity upon which our existence depends. Monoculturing itself, as the name implies, involves selecting one plant, or a few chosen “ones,” out of the tens of thousands that once occupied a pre-agricultural habitat, and renaming all other non-target plants as “other” or “weeds,” requiring their destruction. Monoculturing and genetic engineering have transformed what were once unimaginably biodiverse and vast habitats, into agrichemical-saturated wastelands, with half-living, chemically-assaulated GM plants just holding on for dear life by a human-held string, until harvest time.

New Research: Roundup Destroying Beneficial Soil & Food Organisms

American Natural Superfood - Free Sample

Glyphosate has been shown in a wide range of other ecotoxicological studies to negatively impact the complex interactions of microbial groups, their biochemical activity and root growth, and subsequently having detrimental effects on plant growth and productivity. Glyphosate also alters microbial populations through changing the pH of the soil, and directly inhibits and/or kills certain soil organisms, while also encouraging the growth of other, potentially less beneficial organisms — again, not unlike the effect antibiotics have on the human gut flora microecology.

It is instructive to listen to those who have reflected deeply on the nature and significance of soil, in order to understand how the biotech/chemical corporation co-option of our global food production system has comprised the health and well being of all future human and non-human generations:

Essentially, all life depends upon the soil … There can be no life without soil and no soil without life; they have evolved together. ~ Charles E. Kellogg, USDA Yearbook of Agriculture, 1939

…the Latin name for man, homo, derived from humus, the stuff of life in the soil. ~ Dr. Daniel Hillel

We know more about the movement of celestial bodies than about the soil underfoot. ~ Leonardo DaVinci, circa 1500s

Probably more harm has been done to the science by the almost universal attempts to look upon the soil merely as a producer of crops than as a natural body worth in and for itself of all the study that can be devoted to it, than most men realize. ~ C.F. Marbut, 1920

Please Don’t Sit Idle; Act Now!

Given how the fate of the soil, is our own fate, we can no longer stand by as distant observers as the modern, biotech and chemical company-driven food system grinds onward towards inevitable ecological collapse. It is time we occupy our food system with our forks and pocketbooks. NOT buying GMO food is a first and necessary step. Get involved! Contact your congressmen and women. Join Food Activism and Awareness groups. Support your local growers, or become one yourself!

Spread information like this educate, enlighten and empower!

(1) Technical Announcement: Widely Used Herbicide Commonly Found in Rain and Streams in the Mississippi River Basin, USGS, 8.29.2011

(2) Effects of Roundup(®) and Glyphosate on Three Food Microorganisms: Geotrichum candidum, Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus. Curr Microbiol. 2012 Feb 24.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo.  Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

It is well known that Monsanto’s GMO crops provide a very real threat to both public health and the environment as a whole, but the depth of Monsanto’s corruption is often a less covered topic. It has been revealed by WikiLeaks that Monsanto not only has key figureheads stationed in powerful government positions inside the United States, but also has many — if not all — U.S. diplomats on their payroll.

In the bombshell report, the leaked cables reveal that many U.S. diplomats work directly for Monsanto. Furthermore, Monsanto also has international titans pushing their agenda to maximize profits and increase the spread of genetically modified food.

The same WikiLeaks cable exposes how in late 2007, the United States ambassador to France and business partner to George W. Bush, Craig Stapleton, urged a ‘target retaliation’ against the European Union and certain nations that did not support Monsanto’s GMO crops. Stapleton, a close business partner of George W. Bush, actually co-owned the Dallas/Fort Worth-based Texas Rangers baseball team with the former president in the 1990s. The ambassador stated:

Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory. Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices.

In addition to threatening trade wars and using political corruption as a business model, Monsanto has also been busted for forcing workers into ‘slave-like’ conditions. Forcing slave workers to work the cornfields for 14 hours per day and buy their food at highly-inflated prices from the company store, Monsanto has been running these slave rings for an unknown number of years. It wasn’t until Argentina’s tax agency, known as AFIP, raided the Monsanto corn field did the operation become unveiled.

Monsanto’s corruption has never been more obvious, with many political figureheads in the U.S. government spearheading the initiative to spread Monsanto’s GMO crops far and wide. Even billionaire celebrities like Monsanto shareholder, Bill Gates, have been pushing GMOs as the answer to everything from starvation to sustainable agriculture. Of course, despite this, it has been proven by a team of 900 scientists that GMO crops are not an effective way to fight starvation.

In addition, scientists have shown that GMOs are damaging to your health. A prominent review of 19 studies examining the safety of these crops found that consumption of GMO corn or soybeans can lead to significant organ disruptions in rats and mice – particularly in the liver and kidneys.

Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy

Disregarding this information, the USDA is now preparing to give Monsanto’s new GMO crops even speedier regulatory review in order to secure their financial success.

Explore More:

1. GMO Crops Continually Banned Around the World in Display of Health Freedom


2. 4 Proofs the USDA Doesn’t Care About Your Health


3. Monsanto Shareholder Meeting Infiltrated by Activist (Video)


4. Breaking: Monsanto Forced Out of UK by Activists


5. Leaked: US to Start ‘Trade Wars’ with Nations Opposed to Monsanto, GMO Crops


6. USDA to Give Monsanto’s New GMO Crops Special ‘Speed Approval’

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.

Non GMO Heirloom Seed Bank

Anthony Gucciardi
Activist Post

While proposed government regulation, previous legal action, and the threat of agricultural collapse does not seem to affect Monsanto’s daily operations, it appears protesters can and do.

Dozens of protesters disrupted Monsanto’s California office in Davis, an area close to Sacramento, through vocal activism and calls to shut down the biotech giant with deep known ties into the United States government. Braving the rain, the dozens of protesters — not thousands — were successful in shutting down the entire office for the day.

The response to the activism presented by the protesters highlights just how powerful the voices of even just a few individuals have. If even a small group of anti-Monsanto grassroots activists can pause the entire business operations of a Monsanto corporation hub for the day, imagine what thousands or millions of concerned citizens could do.

Monsanto is afraid of public outrage, which is why they are continually trying to squash labeling initiatives that would visually demonstrate to consumers just how ubiquitous their genetically modified ingredients are throughout the food supply. Many consumers now know and understand the negative effects of Monsanto’s creations, and oftentimes are consuming them unknowingly thanks to a lack of proper labeling guidelines.

“We were successful today in shutting down Monsanto,” said Steve Payan, the event organizer.

These developments have hit the news following two vital stories revealing the true nature of both Monsanto’s GMO crops and best-selling herbicide Roundup. Monsanto’s Roundup and a modified ‘biopesticide’ known as Bt were found to be killing human kidney cells by scientists, actually exhibiting direct toxicity to human biology.

In the same vein, a group of 22 expert agricultural scientists warned the EPA that Monsanto’s GMO corn was extremely ineffective despite being toted as a method of increasing crop yields and reducing pesticide usage. Beyond the ineffective nature of the crops, the scientists warned that the GMO crops are developing mutated rootworms. The ‘super’ worms actually threaten the future of corn production as a whole, and could be a wrench in the agricultural wheel of progress.

It’s time for more than just a few dozen to stand up to Monsanto. If a small group can take down their office for a day from some mild protests, a few hundred thousand can take down the entire company — permanently.

Explore More:

1. Protesters Occupying Monsanto Corp. Arrested


2. Monsanto Admittedly Influences Colorado GMO Ban, Launches Phony ‘GMO Co-Existence’ Protests


3. Anti-Monsanto Articles Surpasses 80,000 Facebook Shares, Among Most Shared in 2011


4. Monsanto Declared Worst Company of 2011


5. Busted: Monsanto Abusing Illegal Workers in ‘Slave-Like’ Conditions


6. India Slams Monsanto with Unprecedented ‘Biopiracy’ Charges

This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information.