BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.

Subject: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: gnu
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:58 PM

The GMO Monsanto thread has dived into a pit of shit.

This is far too important to every human to have it lost in the stench. The following link leads to a 1:25h documentary on GMOs and any human that doesn't watch it and decide to do something about it condems themselves and their children and future generations to suffering and early death.

Yes, I am serious. I am also serious when I ask the moderators to delete any posts that do not discuss or address the intentions of this thread... awareness and discussion of the TOPIC. This is serious shit and deserves the attention and respect due it. PLEASE - for just one time, could we silence the attention seekers and trolls that deter Mudcatters and guests from dissemination of and debate about matters that are important?... pretty please?... with sugar on it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taLw2LhPoTU&feature=youtu.be

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:34 PM

I believe PBS is also running show called, "Seeds of Destruction", and is currently in rotation. You might want to check it out.

gnu, on the piece you posted from YouTube, one of their tenets, is that this is a 'project' being used by the NWO, to depopulate the earth, yet Obama slipped the 'Monsanto Rider' into his Democratic budget, which exempts Monsanto from any liabilities from this product.
Care to comment about that?
Why would a President, who is being portrayed as a 'liberal' promote something like that?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:46 PM

Whew, gn-ze... An hour and a half video??? Isn't here a condense version that highlights the main talking points...

I mean, yeah... Americans ain't too healthy but is it all GMO's??? I don't think so... It's too much bad food in general... Too much fat... Too much sodium... Too much sugar... Too much "processed foods"... Too many empty calories... Bad diets = sick...

My beef with GMOs is more about how it is being used to bust mom 'n pop farmers... Who benefits??? Agri-business farmers who sit in high rise buildings behind desks making millions while controlling our food... That needs to busted along with the way they farm... They are not environmentally sensitive... They pollute our water...

And their food sucks...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 06:16 PM

I have the most serious doubts about GM, to the point that I wrote a song about it 14 years ago, called Monsanto's Promise.

I believe that it is impossible to put the genie back in this particular bottle.

You cannot test GM safely on crops or animals, and you cannot predict the effects of letting it into the food chain.

Attempts were made in the UK to isolate fields of genetically modified crops, such that cross contamination couldn't occur.

Patent bullshit, given the range of movement of birds, foxes, badgers, bees, rabbits etc. etc.

There's plenty of reason to ban it, but a conspiracy theory about the so-called "New World Order" using it to cull the human population?

Come on lads for Christ's sake! All that does is turn your genuine doubts about the safety of GM into the ravings of an imbecile conspiracy theorist, which can, and will be ignored.

Let's stick within the boundaries of reality, eh?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 06:23 PM

Don T: "There's plenty of reason to ban it, but a conspiracy theory about the so-called "New World Order" using it to cull the human population?"

It's well known, and the video re-iterates it....SO, ...".......yet Obama slipped the 'Monsanto Rider' into his Democratic budget, which exempts Monsanto from any liabilities from this product.

Why would a President, who is being portrayed as a 'liberal' promote something like that?
Care to comment about that?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 06:42 PM

Supporters of biotechnology claim that the rider doesn't give the USDA any powers that it doesn't already have, to which Michael Hansen, senior scientist at Consumers Union, emphatically responds, "No it does not!"

Currently, he says, if a court finds that the USDA hasn't conducted a proper environmental impact assessment, or has somehow approved a new GMO without following proper procedures, their decision to halt planting stands. "But this rider allows farmer to continue planting the crops while the USDA's decisions are being challenged," says Hansen.

Which seems to be akin to an extension of the "Innocent till proven guilty" idea. Not one I agree with, but hardly a conspiracy.

As for it being an Obama inspired rider, that would be surprising if Obama's 52 Democrats managed to swing the required majority in both houses, even if the independents came on board.

Don T.

52 Democrat......46 Republican......2 Independent in the senate

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 07:31 PM

You need an intervention, GfinS... You are mentally ill with blaming everything wrong on the planet on Obama... You are psychotically obsessed... You can't post one fucking thing without making it about Obama...

Must really suck to be you...

Find the Obama hate thread and pitch your tent there... This thread ain't an Obama hate thread so don't trash it with your mental problems...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 07:31 PM

Oh shit, there goes the neighbourhood. Fuck off, FFS and leave the discussion to grown-ups.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 07:41 PM

Two questions if I may Gnu!

1. What is your take on GMO in general?
2. What is your take on the video and the way it is presented?

I ask out of genuine interest, and for no ulterior reason.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 08:41 PM

The portion I watched was about health effects on GMOs...

Yeah, I'm sure that there are health effects but I am less concerned about the GMO than the amount of sugar, salt and false calories being pushed on Americans than the raw material...

Maybe I am wrong...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 08:43 PM

BTW, I apologize to my good friend, gn-ze, for blasting GfinS... It wasn't meant to be a thread-creep... It was meant to keep the discussion on topic and away from other topics...

I am sorry, gn-ze... This is an important subject...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: gnu
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 09:28 PM

I read ONE post after mine... ONE POST! WTF is wrong with you people??? Would you PLEASE fuck off and allow people who actually care about this earth and their family's future to read the god damned thread and discuss the ISSUE instead of clouding it with your grandstanding LOOK AT ME MOMMY BULLSHIT?

ONE post? one?... sigh................

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 09:38 PM

GMOs bug me...

Like I have pointed out it is a way of busting the family farm much the way we have seen both our government and then corporations destroy the American labor movement...

It is theft of land...

That's the way I see it... More than the DNA... Follow the $$$...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 09:39 PM

OK Gnu!

Bye bye!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: gnu
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 09:49 PM

Ya know what? Fuck it. I don't care. Do what yas want. I wrote the OP and that's all that matters to me. The fact that I read the next post and realized the inmates were gonna take over the asylum yet again enraged me but my rage is futile. It is better vented on the real problem. To wit.... gnightgnu*.

* Apologies to anyone who actually wanted to have a real discussion. I sincerely would have welcomed hearing from you. If you do, there are far better forums to do it within. If you decide to continue discussing the topic herein, good luck with that.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 10:46 PM

Other than gnu's video, and the one I posted('Seeds of Destruction'), is anyone aware of any other study, or report from the FDA, or an environmental impact study, that may have more light, or possibly another conclusion? It would seem to have to, for the president to include it in his budget. Anyone?

GfS

P.S. My posts were straight forward...with NO commentary. ..just a fair question.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 10:48 PM

GMOs are insidious. As an organic gardener, I'm aware that the corn that was made into products (from which the corn gluten meal I use is a by-product) was probably GMO corn. So I can use corn instead of Roundup to kill weeds, or corn instead of Scott's turf builder as fertilizer (depends on when and how much you put down), but I also know that the corn itself isn't organic. It has some problems.

I'll watch the movie when I have time and get back to you on it.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jun 13 - 10:59 PM

SRS, From what I've heard, part of the GMO technology was to make the seeds, and plants impervious to 'Round Up' and other pesticides. In the course of that, it seems to have affected the food quality. You'd think there's be a study, other than one sponsored by Monsanto, (who actually wrote the rider).
Just wondering if there was something else out there...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:26 AM

A study should be conducted by the Department of Agriculture but of course then agri-business would buy off Congressmen who would then, in return, demand that the Department of Ag be shut down... Normal...

And, of course, the usual suspect here would trash any findings in such a study as being tainted by Obama meddling...

The bottom line here is that the things that agri-business is getting away with are hurting US all... If we go back to the idea that the planet is two inches of top soil away from starvation then we need to be looking at Earth-friendlier ways to produce food... That will mean returning to some basics... Soil conservation should be at the top of that list... Keeping livestock out of streams and rivers should be right up there, too... Community gardens are cropping (pun intended) everywhere and that is a very good start because people learn about growing the old fashioned way which enriches soil rather than deplete it...

The fact is that we need to quit looking at current resources as something that our generation owns and therefore can use up at an alarming rate because...

a. we can and...

...b. because it is more profitable...

We are killing our planet... GMO's is adding to that... It's allowing for more junk to be sprayed on our field which ends up running off them into our streams, bays, oceans and we are slowly killing our planet...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bettynh
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:40 AM

I think part of the issue here should be separating the idea of GMO from the business practices of Monsanto. Stewart Brand (of Whole Earth Catalog fame) has been discussing this for awhile now (he thinks atomic energy is the way to go, too). Here's one discussion link.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: sciencegeek
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:54 AM

genetically modified organisms - GMO - could be a great tool in the hands of sane, rational people whose goal is to "improve" the world... or least do minimal harm.

but instead it is in the hands of the bean counting a-holes whose obsession with profit leads them to kill the goose that lays the golden egg, destroy a century old salt mine despite warnings from the miners, cause oil rigs to explode & create a multi-million dollar cleanup bill...

"penny wise and pound foolish" doesn't even come close to characterizing the current products of a business school education.

as long as we elect politicians who pass laws protecting large corporations, we shouldn't be surprised about the ultimate outcome...

copyright and patent laws that were originally written to protect the rights of individuals have been subverted to promote the goals of essentially immortal, mutli-national megacorporations. Nice going.

I can only hope that more research into the various genomes will reveal the common shared metabolic pathways that are at risk by indescriminant manipulation. But to do that we need acknowledge common genetic ancestry... and that my friends means teaching evolution, not creationism.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Musket
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 02:35 PM

Ok, where are we?

Gnu throws his toys out of the pram if anybody question's his somewhat polarised stance.

Don is the voice of reason.

Goofus is, well, Goofus.

Bridge thinks Goofus understands insults.

Me? Issues with big money running such an important show as world food future, but also conceding that the world population is growing and expectation is far beyond a begging bowl in a dust bowl. If GM isn't the answer, and I am sure there are more reasons to doubt than to celebrate, what is the answer?

I just bought an additive to put in the dog's water bowl that stops his piss scorching the lawn. (He is a dog but pees like a bitch, sod my luck.) Does that mean I risk having a GM modified greyhound?

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: gnu
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM

Another PM... one part : "You read one post, and instead of venting your spleen on that poster, you administered a slap in the face to the whole bunch, without even knowing, or acknowledging whether they had something pertinent to impart."

Yup. I fucked up. I went Wildebeeste because I asked for a discussion and the very first post thereafter attempted to discredit Obama and asked me to entertain another discussion. I labelled everyone who posted before my second post as being in the same boat... even tho I clearly stated I only read one post I have to agree that it I should have seen that people might misconsture the meaning I attempted to convey.

Allow me to clarify... Fuck off GfS. I can't take this shit anymore. I couldn't even read another post due to my anger about your lack of manners and respect. And, re my third post... I won't be back to this thread because I know I will simply have to put up with similar shit. gnightgnu

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:14 PM

There is no additive that stops his urine from scorching the lawn. A scam. Teach him to use a non-turfed area.

See your vet if you don't believe this.

You are probably damaging your dog's health.

http://www.ext.colostate.edu/mg/Gardennotes/553.html

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 06:16 PM

Actually, my response was 'dead on' to your post. If GMO's were harmful, why was the rider slipped into Obama's budget? THAT is NOT an unreasonable question.
Maybe the answer, that you fear, upset you, and so you start blaming me for asking it...but nonetheless, it was and is a valid question. Even Bobert approached it...and whether or not I agree with all of it or not, it has valid points for discussion.
Speaking of discussion, what is it you wanted to discuss about it??...piss everybody off that GMO's suck?...I think most people agree with that...except Obama....so the next logical question is 'WHY?', isn't it??
Stop acting so fragile...and maybe even provide an answer to the discussion that you 're-started'!

GfS

P.S. Is that Unreasonable????????

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 07:51 PM

Actually, your OCD with Obama has become so...

...predictable and boring, GfinS...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 02:30 AM

Boring??...Oh, maybe you can explain why, if GMO's are unhealthy, which seems to be the consensus, and causes all sorts of new illnesses and sicknesses. the how can the same president, no matter who he is, slip a rider in his budget, to make them exempt from any liabilities, which would be in the BILLIONS of dollars.....after he just rammed through the 'Affordable' Health Care Bill.
Now don't go into a stupid rant about how everybody hates this guy for one stupid reason or another...just explain WHY that makes sense to you.

The only people I can see who come out, from the deal smiling, are TWO of the biggest corrupt monopolies in the business ...healthcare/insurance corporations, and a massive new monopoly on our 'food' source.

So, in good faith in 'liberal' causes, and everything Democrats stand for, surely YOU can explain this to me.
gnu, might not want to think about it..nor want anyone else to think about it either...so you can make your answer, 'gnu-ly politically correct'!...

...because maybe he had some study to show that GMO's are great!..or, he just took it from Monsanto, and signed it..for 'other' reasons.
What is it?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 02:45 AM

Correction: Original text: "...how can the same president, no matter who he is, slip a rider in his budget, to make them exempt from any liabilities, which would be in the BILLIONS of dollars....."

Corrected text: ".....how can the same president, no matter who he is, slip a rider in his budget, to make them exempt from any liabilities, which would be in the TRILLIONS of dollars....."

OK...now that that's fixed, I'm going to eagerly await your answer.

Don't chicken out, now there might not be enough room under the bed for you and gnu to hide under!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 11:24 AM

Now I understand what makes Gnu go off like a two bob rocket.

Why don't you guys get a room.

You add nothing to the topic, but simply hijack it to expand your own private argument.

Obama has nothing whatever to do with the topic, unless of course you are claiming that he is genetically modified, a claim that would fit right in with Goofus's continual existentialist lunacies.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 11:56 AM

Don T(The ill-informed): ""Obama has nothing whatever to do with the topic...."
Take your pick, dumb-fuck! Here, let me give you a preview of one of the links....:

"United States President Barack Obama has signed a bill into law that was written in part by the very billion-dollar corporation that will benefit directly from the legislation.

On Tuesday, Pres. Obama inked his name to H.R. 933, a continuing resolution spending bill approved in Congress days earlier. Buried 78 pages within the bill exists a provision that grossly protects biotech corporations such as the Missouri-based Monsanto Company from litigation.

With the president's signature, agriculture giants that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds are given the go-ahead to continue to plant and sell man-made crops, even as questions remain largely unanswered about the health risks these types of products pose to consumers.

In light of approval from the House and Senate, more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the president to veto the spending bill over the biotech rider tacked on, an item that has since been widely referred to as the "Monsanto Protection Act."

"But Obama ignored [the petition]," IB Times' Connor Sheets writes, "instead choosing to sign a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future."

James Brumley, a reporter for Investor Place, explains a little more thoroughly just how dangerous the rider is now that biotech companies are allowed to bypass judicial scrutiny. Up until it was signed, he writes, "the USDA [US Department of Agriculture] oversaw and approved (or denied) the testing of genetically modified seeds, while the federal courts retained the authority to halt the testing or sale of these plants if it felt that public health was being jeopardized. With HR 933 now a law, however, the court system no longer has the right to step in and protect the consumer."

If the president's signature isn't all that surprising, though, consider the genesis of the bill itself. According to an article published Monday in the New York Daily News, US Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) "worked with Monsanto to craft the language in the bill."

2013/03/29/obama-signs-monsanto-protection-act-written-by-monsanto-sponsored-senator"

Being as you're so smart, maybe YOU AND Bobert can explain it!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: sciencegeek
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 12:10 PM

as my mom used to say to my brother & me, It takes two to fight.... and we both got punished.

the only way to deal with this bothersome noise, is to ignore it... respond only to sensible comments... not always an easy thing to do... but if the serious discussion of an issue is worth enough to you, you do what you need to do.

like a spoiled child's screams, their reward is to get the focus upon themselves. deprive them of the reward and they'll go elsewhere for it. or else push too far & get censured.

so... for my hopefully useful input... genetic material is not all "switched on" continually... some genes are only active for a short time and then go dormant.

Without understanding what the results will be, much of the current techniques are akin to sending a group of kids through a building randomly flipping switches and then trying to determine what controls what. While not harmful as part of basic research... it is not acceptable to just release the end results into the environment on a vast scale. And that is what the mega corps are doing in their bid to scoop others and rake in the big bucks.   

The only way to control this is too put in regulations based on good science... not knee jerk reactions... but that never seems to be the way that politics works.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 12:13 PM

Was there a point, hidden in all that?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Larry The Radio Guy
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 12:23 PM

I'm actually interested in the answer to Guest From Sanity's question.....aside from whether or not there is some 'hidden agenda'.   What was the logic behind the signing of the Monsanto Protection Act?   How is it being justified?

I'm also interested in hearing 'pro-GMO' arguments, and their disputes.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 01:27 PM

Thank you, Larry The Radio Guy! As you can see, since I originally asked it, all I got was immature, silly partisan pouts, and thumb-sucking...but it IS a legitimate question.

..oh, and Larry, there is NO hidden agenda coming from me on this one.

With you, awaiting an answer.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: sciencegeek
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 01:27 PM

the only way to prevent bills that contain bad provisions ( meaning any provision that serves only a small group at the expense of the rest)... and that includes just about every one ever written by any legislative body... is to have an over riding rule that limits the damage that can be done.

of course, the chances of that are fat & slim... take your pick.

bad provisions have been slipped into bills at the wee hours of the morning after the discussions are over and right before the vote takes place... or the need for cetain parts of the bills is felt to be so great that you swallow the rest to get it done.

if there is a bad bill signed... it came from Congress, so maybe we should try to find a few honest politicians to vote for... anyone have a lantern?

so maybe instead of lawsuits that only seem to favor lawyers, the public should boycott products... assuming they care enough about the problem.

as long as only a small number of folks care... nothing will change. and the answer to that problem is educating the public about the issue.

if you want change you need to change public opinion... but do us all a favor and make sure you understand what you need to ask for... because today's problems are the direct result of yesterday's solutions.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 02:54 PM

Sciencegeek: "..if there is a bad bill signed... it came from Congress, so maybe we should try to find a few honest politicians to vote for... anyone have a lantern?"

If you read carefully, this 'bill' was signed by the President, and attached to his Democrat budget, to be submitted.

My question is that it didn't make sense, being as with the results NOT in, of any findings, from any studies, how could the president submit this rider in his budget, amidst petitions NOT to, which exempts Monsanto, in particular, from any liabilities, to health or the environment....after he just rammed through the 'Affordable Healthcare Act', commonly refereed to as Obamacare, supposedly looking out for our health. What is it that he is overlooking?..Our health??..The budget??..or the land use, which small farms are being squeezed out, by Monsanto, AND provisions under the 'Patriot Act'..written by Biden, in 1995???

Now somehow, gnu, who re-started this thread, apparently to get people concerned about GMOs, either wasn't aware of this..(though I posted a post about it weeks ago(before it was chic), or he thinks that GMOs and the President, willfully sidestepping anything to protect the public from them, and instead is seeking to protect Monsanto's financial concerns, and allow the Trillions of dollars in damages, is NOT relevant to his thread.
You'd THINK(rare commodity), that this doesn't make sense...though it does, but just not to the context of which he was intending.
So, let's just sit back, and see what the 'so-called liberal' Democrats have to say, to explain this away!!!
...and hopefully we won't have to wade through too many nasty spirited, diversionary posts to find out!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: sciencegeek
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 03:13 PM

here is a link to a discussion about the pro and cons of genetically modfied rice... and there is more than one type of modified strain with varying benefits.

http://voices.yahoo.com/advantages-disadvantages-genetically-modified-2064791.html?cat=22

but ir also leaves unanswered the problem of how the food supply can possibly keep up with the increase in population. Malthus should be required reading for every student.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 03:59 PM

Sec. 735

"In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, not withstanding any other provision of law,
upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary's evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers and other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the secretary's authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act."

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 04:12 PM

Finally!!..Some relevant posts!!
Q, so bottom line the 'double talk' in your selected post. I'm NOT faulting you, or seeking to fault you. The 'provision' doesn't really say much, exactly, other than a 'request' can be made..., and 'reviewed', as I read it. ..and it seems peculiar, to say the least, that both health and environmental impact studies would have been completed, BEFORE the rider was inserted into the Democrat budget proposal.
So, post your take on what you posted.
Fair enough?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 04:20 PM

I posted the exact section 735 as it appears in the bill.

It does seem to be spiced with double-talk.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 05:43 PM

Fact: GfinS has now posted 1,000,000 consecutive posts that blame Obama or Democrats for something that GfinS doesn't like...

Congratulations, GfinS... You are the world record holder and Guiness will be in touch with you soon...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 06:10 PM

Bobert, you're counting is way off..but while we're at it, could you at least post ONE, that has to do with the thread..and knock off your song and dance that everybody is picking on your little boy.
Nagging, is NOT contributing!....You'd think married life would have taught you that!...BUT, look I just post, "So, let's just sit back, and see what the 'so-called liberal' Democrats have to say, to explain this away!!!
...and hopefully we won't have to wade through too many nasty spirited, diversionary posts to find out!"

The thread is: 'RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.'

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 07:51 PM

I've already posted my observations on GMOs... Seems like nobody gets the implications that Monsanto is using their patents to shut down or try to shut down mom 'n pop farmers...

The big winner: Agri-business with farmers sitting in their high-rise office buildings with their Suzie Cream-cheeze secretaries and their Mercedes...

That's my main beef with GMOs but doesn't seem that anyone else here gives a flying fig about that aspect...

I do... Agri-business is causing a lot of problems with their poisons and their run off nitrogen which pollute our water and kill out fish and negatively impact everyone...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Larry The Radio Guy
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 09:18 PM

I share your concern, Bobert, and I frequently re-post on my facebook a lot of information that supports what you are saying.

Obviously, however, neither Monsanto nor those legislators who are allowing Monsanto to do this are going to say "yep, that's what we're doing.....let's get rid of those f***in' mom and pop businesses".   No, they will make other claims.

It's hard for me to find the time to do the extensive research I'd need to do in order to dispute those who are defending GMO's and Monsanto.

That's why I'm asking for others input.

Why would Obama approve a bill that was written in part by Monsanto, and protects them even if there products are shown to be harmful. Or am I wrong.....are what my fellow liberals and left-wingers telling me not true?

I was very relieved when Obama was elected president in the U.S.

But now I'm wondering if it really makes much difference who gets in?

I'm open to being educated. And I will look at the link that Sciencegeek posted.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Larry The Radio Guy
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 09:22 PM

http://voices.yahoo.com/advantages-disadvantages-genetically-modified-2064791.html?cat=22

Let's see if I can get science geek's link to show up as a link.

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 09:27 PM

Bobert: "That's my main beef with GMOs but doesn't seem that anyone else here gives a flying fig about that aspect..."

R-I-I-I-G-H-T-T!!!!!

And for all the right reasons you said right there, and more, health for one ....I agree!

Why did Obama ram through 'Affordable Health Care Act', and signed the rider, giving the very people you stated, immunity for any health damages health or otherwise, from their products and agenda?????

Does this look a just a teensie-weensie bit, inconsistent to you??

Who, in regards to all the big decisions, to come down have those decisions favored??

Scream therapy begins a 9;30 sharp!

GfS

P.S. As Michelle says, "Eat arugula, it's good for your health!"

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 09:32 PM

Larry the Radio Guy: "Or am I wrong.....are what my fellow liberals and left-wingers telling me not true?"

Hey!!...I've been called a lot of names on here, but.......

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Larry The Radio Guy
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 09:32 PM

OK, I read the link, and I can see why GMO's are so scary-----and seductive (which only makes them scarier).

So what do people who are aware of this information and are supporting GMO's saying?

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 09:43 PM

Let's get real here...

Obama ain't like Jesus, ya' all... He is a fucking president with 24/7 push me-pull me politics and the most obstructionist Congress since Lincoln...

That is reality...

Lot's of folks thing the president is like a dictator... It don't work that way... No matter what you get screwed by Congress... They give you a bill to sign that has taken a year to get passed and it contains some good stuff and some bad stuff...

That, my friends, is President 001 (remedial, non-credit)...

But some folks ain't got a clue so they dwell on the bad shit...

Get over it, ya'll.. All ya'll are doing is saying "I'm stupid and don't have a clue about American history or American politics"...

Get an education...

As for Monsanto... Yeah, it still sucks... I reckon if Obama were to get a "clean bill" he'd agree and veto it... There are no fucking clean bills...

Grow up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: GMOs... new thread. A must read.
From: Dorothy Parshall
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 10:07 PM

Good post, Bobert. As for Monsanto, I consider that corporation to be the worst criminal on earth. Other countries are refusing their garbage. Only the good folks of the USA are willing to put up with their poisons. The people are going to have to take this in hand or we will all suffer the consequences. Plant a garden with heritage seeds and put a protective cover over it.

And do NOT bother reading any posts by GfS. Time is too precious.