Europe rejects GMO crops; kinder gentler America seeks labeling

Europe rejects GMO crops; kinder gentler America seeks labeling

by Jon Rappoport

June 3, 2013

www.nomorefakenews.com

It’s a scandal.

Monsanto has just announced it’s giving up on most of Europe: people there don’t want GMO food. In America, the struggle is for labeling GMOs.

This is some kind of “fairness doctrine.” Let the US consumer decide what kind of food to buy. Choice. It’s the American way, right?

No, actually it isn’t. The evidence gathered over the last 10 years is staggering. GMO food and the herbicides sprayed on them constitute a major health hazard, to say the least.

And this doesn’t begin to cover the lying business practices of Monsanto, who promised farmers that Roundup would kill weeds in the fields. Instead, the weeds have proliferated to the point where the farmers have to kill everything growing with stronger, more dangerous herbicides, like Paraquat.

In the US, laws exist to prosecute crimes involving endangerment of health and crimes related to false marketing practices. These laws are on the books. When it comes to Monsanto, they’re gathering dust on the shelves.

Choice and fairness apply to competitive products that are safe. The consumer picks one type of tomato over another. The consumer buys walnuts rather than pecans. The consumer chooses black olives over green olives.

Choosing non-GMO corn instead of GMO corn still leaves dangerous GMO corn in produce bins.

Should a bottle of cyanide sit on a store shelf next to a bottle of salt, just to be fair to the consumer? To give him a choice?

Three or four federal law-enforcement agencies would arrest and prosecute the store owners who sell cyanide, as well as the distributors, and the packagers.

But in the case of GMO food, the FDA and USDA, the relevant agencies, do nothing. Neither does the Dept. of Justice.

Aside from several counties in America that have banned the growing of GMO crops, the big push is for labeling of GMO food in stores. That’s it.

The theory is, when consumers have a choice, they’ll overwhelmingly reject GMOs and put a serious crimp in Monsanto’s business. That may or may not happen (if labeling is widespread), but the theory doesn’t directly address Monsanto’s crimes.

The “kinder, gentler” approach is based on two assumptions. One, American consumers need soft activism. They won’t demand legal rejection of GMO food. They will, however, choose the right food.

And two, Monsanto has made such a powerful inroad on food-crop farming, it’s too late to take it back. It’s too late to declare all the GMO crops illegal.

You see, so many people are taking Vioxx, we can’t go to court over it. It’s a done deal, even though patients are dropping like flies.”

It wasn’t a done deal.

Neither are GMOs.


The Matrix Revealed


In a previous article, “Meet Monsanto’s number-one lobbyist: Barack Obama,” I detailed Obama’s horrendous record when it comes to allowing new GMO crops to enter the food chain, and his outrageous appointments of ex-Monsanto stalwarts to important and key positions in his administration.

But Obama is “a good man.” He must be doing the right thing. He’s popular, so it wouldn’t be wise to attack him on the issue. Better to lay back, paste a smile on our faces, and try to secure labeling for GMOs.

Of course, that’s exactly the wrong strategy. But as in all campaigns, the longer people wait and do nothing and remain timid, the less likely it is they can succeed, if and when they decide to move.

That’s why Monsanto now has so many acres of GMO food growing in the United States. That’s why Monsanto has been able to push its unconscionable propaganda down the throat of the American consumer.

That’s why Whole Foods and other major health-food companies decided to surrender the real battles and opt for co-existence with Monsanto.

When there is continuing crime in a community, the people, the citizens have to go after and expose the public officials who are doing nothing about it, who are indeed profiting from it. In the case of Monsanto, the officials are, among others, President Barack Obama, Tom Vilsack, head of the USDA, and Michael Taylor, food czar at the FDA.

But health-food companies, who should be leading the battle, are either friendly or neutral toward these bad actors. They’re hedging their bets. They’re saying, “We’ll inform consumers so they can make good choices, we’ll do labeling, but don’t expect us to be more aggressive than that. Don’t expect us to get mad.”

Neutrality is apparently the American way. First and foremost, the business of America is business. And the idea of consumers staging a full-bore boycott against Whole Foods? Out of the question. No, consumers are too busy loading up bags with groceries.

Monsanto relies on that. Monsanto knows Americans are tuned up to buy, buy, and consume, and then buy more. Americans consider it their right not to be distracted from that obsession.

Obama, like Bush and Clinton before him, are silent on the GMO issue. They all pretend it doesn’t exist. They sell out the people at the drop of a hat, and they don’t lose any sleep over it. Conscience? Never heard of it.

Ditto for major mainstream news outlets. “We don’t cover the Monsanto story in depth because it’s a he-said he-said thing. The scientific issues are complex. People on both sides make interesting points. But there’s no traction…”

That’s a bunch of crap. Make me the managing editor of the Washington Post for a year and I’ll send sales of the paper through the roof. I’ll let the hounds loose on Monsanto 24/7 and pound on the story day after day. The bottom line of the Post will look healthier than it has since Watergate, a minor topic compared to GMOs.


Exit From the Matrix


But the Post doesn’t really care about their bottom line. They would go bankrupt before they’d venture into these waters. They’re sold out from the top down. They’re part of the cover-up.

I’ve written about this before, but here it is again. In the early 1990s, when the US health freedom movement was at a fever pitch, when people were going after the FDA for raiding natural practitioners’ offices and trying to limit access to nutritional supplements in stores, I sat in on several significant meetings of activists.

People who controlled those meetings, who were connected to supplement companies, wanted a bill in Congress to protect the consumer. To give the consumer choice and access to supplements. That’s all they wanted.

I told them, in no uncertain terms, that this wouldn’t work over the long term. We had to go after the FDA. We had to attack.

I had a dossier on the FDA. I, like others, knew a lot about their crimes going back a long way.

I was told this was the wrong strategy. “First,” they said, “let’s get a good bill passed in Congress. Then we can attack the FDA.”

They had no such intention, and I told them so. They were never going to support going after the FDA and exposing it down to the ground as a criminal agency.

They had no stomach for it, and they were sold out themselves. They had a confined agenda, which had to do with helping to guard supplement companies’ profits.

They were slick operators. They knew how to present themselves as neutral and rational. They could spout New Age garble at appropriate moments. “Anger can be self-defeating.” “You achieve your aims when you come from a place of doing service.”

The same thing is happening now. “Give people the right to know, the right to choose what’s in their food.” It plays well, because it caters to the wholly absorbed self-interest of the health-food consumer with discretionary income.

It doesn’t work in the long run. It papers over the fact that corporate criminals, in partnership with the highest government officials, are committing RICO crimes against the health of the American people.

The appropriate emotion is outrage.

In case you hadn’t noticed, for the past 40 years there has been a major psyop in progress against righteous outrage and on behalf of Nice. Be nice. Be friendly. Be happy. Be self-contained. Don’t make waves. Anger is a sign of a mental disorder. Outrage isn’t Spiritual. You’ll injure your Karma.

Karma was invented to prop up a caste system. It was used to promote passivity.

Silence is not golden. Profits are.

Labeling food that isn’t poisonous, while permitting the sale of poison, is let’s-pretend virtual reality.

I’ve met so-called health entrepreneurs who’ve adopted squeaky clean New Age cover-personalities to obscure their sleazebag cynical motives. They’re very slippery characters. They do their real work in conference rooms where they look at spread sheets.

The chance of them going after GMO criminals is zero.

Once in a while, if you wait for it, or if you push them a little, you’ll see something come into their eyes. A dead cold nothing. It’s a sign of the personal Arctic region where they really live.

They don’t till, they don’t plant, they don’t harvest. They sell. They’re very much like the Sunday television preachers who are there to hustle dollars.

Only they take a kinder, gentler approach. They’re all about “consciousness” and saving the planet.

If the planet were alive in the way they claim it is, the planet would have long ago consigned them to a desert island under a blazing sun.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

About these ads

23 comments on “Europe rejects GMO crops; kinder gentler America seeks labeling

  1. […] Europe rejects GMO crops; kinder gentler America seeks labeling […]

  2. m_astera says:

    Yeah, Bro. I like your approach and will adopt it from now on,
    Thanks
    Michael Astera

  3. Coach B says:

    Again Jon you nailed it. Please all read and ACT. In brotherhood Coach B

  4. Great observations, and I so agree on the New Age propaganda / misunderstandings. There’s so much of it around these days.

  5. EU slave says:

    To the story line: Europe is chemical giant Bayer’s home turf. They are not invested in GM technologies to the extent Monsanto is, though they will catch up in the future. Until then they lobby successfully to keep competition out. It is not, unfortunately, a public safety issue that caused the ban. Hence it will be lifted as soon as Bayer can play in the GM field successfully. :(

  6. Jeffrey Hardin says:

    Reblogged this on Jericho777's Blog.

  7. mark b says:

    I’ve got a new term for you Jon; BSness- the oh so common practice of pushing junk. aka Berneys Style

  8. stay GMO free says:

    Sorry, this is only a PR-gag that: Europe rejects GMO crops – not from Brussels side – there are waiting lots of GM-corn and soja to be set free (get approval from Brussels – they want to make decisions quick): […]http://www.testbiotech.de/sites/default/files/EFSA_opinions_cultivation_tabled_overview_.pdf[…]
    We continue the fight. Here is also a good study about 20 years of commercial cultivation of GMO in the US
    […]http://www.testbiotech.de/sites/default/files/TESTBIOTECH%20Cultivation_GE_%20plants_US.pdf[…]

  9. waldbaer says:

    @EU slave:
    It would be fortunate, if it would be as easy as you said.
    Just google these three words:
    roundup kills soil
    That stuff has the potential to turn everything into a desert.
    Just one quote from one of the first hits on that google search:
    “(..)Roundup also wipes out beneficial soil microorganisms in addition to promoting toxins that stave off plant prosperity(..)”
    And (a blind click) more:
    http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/15/dr-don-huber-interview-part-2.aspx

    Some people may have realized, it is not a good idea to kill off the population that pays the taxes.
    What do you think?

    Liebe Grüße aus Deutschland,
    waldbaer

  10. Ricky Allen says:

    It goes so much deeper than world-wide marches, labeling, and outright rejection of gmo’s by major countries. The globalist eugenics agenda is sooo in our face !

  11. jayjay says:

    I wish you were editor and chief of all global news. There would be no criminals. Love ya man … and thanks … please don’t stop.

  12. […] the other hand, as Jon Rappoport points out, Europe outright bans GMOs, whereas “kinder, gentler America” just seeks to label GMO foo…. Yep. As if, when given a choice, we’ll automatically do the right thing? As if, when given a […]

  13. Jon, I love your work – thanks for all you do. One thing I would add is that while politics is corrupt everywhere, it seems that the US takes the cake on that front in the western world – perhaps because of the amount of money in US politics. While major elections in Britain cost a few million pounds and last 6 weeks, we all know that Presidential elections in the US last years and cost billions.

    Americans don’t want GMOs. Rank and file FDA scientists didn’t want GMOs. They were forced through in a hack process by politically appointed utterly corrupt bureaucrats. While I agree with you that anger and outrage are a more appropriate response, I am not sure even that will change the fact that virtually our entire system is bought and paid for. Hundreds of thousands and even millions have spoken out about GMOs but leaders do nothing. They simply don’t care because they know who butters their bread.

    The US public is asleep at the wheel – fed, medicated, and educated into a hypnotic stupor. Thankfully, as dark as it seems right now on this and many fronts (like my focus: vaccines), I believe that the sleeping beast (the public) is beginning to stir and they will hear your call.

  14. beyond transparency says:

    Given the choice, “America” chose to compromise and those people sold themselves out big time and it will backfire.

    Did you know a city in Oregon actually banned gmo’s and another in Northern California and Hawaii banned gmo’s and the SELLING of them? *

    A rightful and complete BAN doesn’t make the profit -so we don’t hear that not only is it POSSIBLE, but a ban is successful. Maybe they are trying to throw out a ‘bone’ before the BAN happens – to keep Monsanto in co-existence, in our neighborhood. But, the Ban must be inevitable. Because it’s time. Kick Monsanto out for good before they try to “modify” any other unthinkable – our trees in our own backyard, our water sources, our plant life and all of life, and more. You can’t ‘label’ that.

    Sure many of us have been sold out by the “labeling” groups and politicans – which will lead to unintended consequences.
    There are boundaries where the line must and will be drawn and having GMO’s in co-existance at all is that line.

    Once again, applaud to true, real journalistic integrity of Jon Rappport here.

  15. beyond transparency says:

    “Why is banning GMOs so important?”

    Monsanto is not content to merely take over the world’s food supply. In fact, according to Dr. Michelle Kmiec, Monsanto is on a mission to pharmaceutically enhance GMO foods using new RNA technology, which can effectively silence genes.

    Exposed: Monsanto’s Mission To Pharmaceutically “Enhance” GMO Foods

    Announced on August 28, 2012 Monsanto and Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. formed a “Strategic Alliance”. Why strategic? Together they intend to “… advance biological technologies in the field of agriculture…”

    “The new alliance brings Alnylam’s broad RNAi-based intellectual property (IP) and proprietary technologies to Monsanto’s new BioDirect™ technology, which aims to deliver innovative biological solutions for farmers.”

    So they are going to bring solutions for farmers? Well, that’s what they want you to believe…

    Let’s take a look at what “RNAi-based intellectual property” actually is. Better known as RNAi therapeutics – here is the explanation in the words of Alnylam:
    “RNAi (RNA interference) is a revolution in biology, representing a breakthrough in understanding how genes are turned on and off in cells, and a completely new approach to drug discovery and development.

    RNAi is a natural process of gene silencing that occurs in organisms ranging from plants to mammals. By harnessing the natural biological process of RNAi occurring in our cells, the creation of a major new class of medicines, known as RNAi therapeutics, is on the horizon.”

    Now based on everything so far, an obvious pattern emerges leading to an undeniable outcome:
    Synthetic Food + Pharmaceuticals + Genetically Modified Foods & Organisms + RNAi Therapeutics = Pharmaceutically Enhanced Food

    http://wakeup-world.com/2013/04/21/exposed-monsantos-mission-to-pharmaceutically-enhance-gmo-foods/

    How would you someday like to wake up to find that the dinner you ate the night before made you sterile, or dosed you with a medicine for a relatively unknown, rare disease, or caused a life-threatening reaction because of a drug that made its way across a field and into your organic corn? How would you like to find out that you have just been dosed with a drug because you merely handled an innocent looking plant?

    The new technology can silence or activate targeted genes in plants, and the genetically engineered RNA used in the process can conceivably horizontally transfer to people who eat the plants, or even handle them.
    http://farmwars.info/?p=10331

    Don’t think Monsanto would do this? The people of Anniston Alabama didn’t think they were targeted to be killed with PCBs either. Just look at the history of this company:

    Monsanto’s Dirty Dozen: The 12 Most Awful Products Made By Monsanto
    When you take a moment to reflect on the history of product development at Monsanto, what do you find? Here are twelve products that Monsanto has brought to market. See if you can spot the pattern…

    Read the dirty dozen here:
    http://fracturedparadigm.com/2013/04/15/monsantos-dirty-dozen-the-12-most-awful-products-made-by-monsanto/

    No coexistence is possible

    Coexistence with an invasive species that is set to take over life on earth through genetic engineering is not possible. Not by a long shot. So, if we do not want to live as a genetically engineered species on a genetically engineered planet, taking whatever garbage is in store for us without knowledge or consent, then we need to BAN GMOs. ALL OF THEM!

    Recently I was told: “You just want to change the world.” My reply to that is: The world is changing whether we like it or not. How it changes is up to us.”

    ©2013 Barbara H. Peterson

    (farmwars.info)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s