Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Now I can only hope that enough Americans will ppick their butts up off the couch, switch off American Idol and burn down Monsanto here too!

A noble charge you're putting forth, but why such contempt for your fellow countrymen?

At present and as it stands, we Americans have a bad enough reputation with the rest of the world without the added self-hate we are told we should possess. Ohhh!..Yes, we're such tyrants. "You !@#$ Americans...This is all your fault!!", cries the rest of the planet. Their government's propaganda-storm fueling the firestorm. Their lack of readiness to accept a bit of blame themselves should be considered as well.

In reality it's none of our citizen's individual fault, but the result of our past leaders actions, if they can be called that...leaders, pft!!

Understand that in no way am I suggesting that we the nation get our slate wiped completely clean. Not one of us is that perfect citizen we should strive to be, but we shouldn't dwell on our problems and feel sorry for ourselves. Nor should we be critical of ourselves, like you are doing, but we should study the past and understand how this shizstorm has manifested itself. We should then do everything that we common people can do in making sure we never let it happen again.

Give Washington the evil eye...not your fellow man.

Peace.

I understand their sentiment and feel for them (They don't want tainted crops, not to mention I feel that Montesanto is an ethically underhanded and corrupt organization.), but these people need to be very careful. I'm pretty sure there's another post around here (ATS) somewhere and things in the news about Montesanto hiring or doing a lot of business with the goons at Xe lately. These protesters should be aware and watch their backs.

All Monsanto does is spread like 3 seeds on the side of the road and they can sue the farmers for their land.

They've been doing this for a long, long time now.

Related to the food issue is the cause of it - overpopulation. Perhaps if we ourselves did something about that at the same time then it might help to reduce the need for the huge amounts of food required. Maybe if people took the conscious decision to not have children, that would reduce the need for the amounts of food as the population would not be growing so fast.

The governments of the world already have their ways of reducing the population - by poisoning us in the food supply, vaccinations, media (brain poisoning), water supply - after all it is these people in power that own large shares of the huge multi-nationals that are doing it and giving us the one sided media that shows these things to be great, when in fact they are culling us by stealth.

If we can beat them at their own game but by a conscious and well thought method, then the demand will not be there for the supply and that would justify the destruction of the GM crops they are forcing upon us. Boycotting the creation of another human life to doom to this horrible world is one method of reducing demand, boycotting and destroying these horrendous so called "foods" is a way of reducing supply. Who's to say we can't do it?

this is indeed good news

it's one thing to be against monsanto, but being against GMOs in general is sort of retarded. millions of people are getting the nutrients to survive that they wouldn't normally consume. if people really want the world fed, GMOs of all stripes will continue to be vital.

Originally posted by obamuh
it's one thing to be against monsanto, but being against GMOs in general is sort of retarded. millions of people are getting the nutrients to survive that they wouldn't normally consume. if people really want the world fed, GMOs of all stripes will continue to be vital.

What makes it one thing to be against Monsanto, but not against other corporations doing the exact same thing with less notoriety. If somebody commits a crime, does the crime become a non-issue if it is committed by somebody else?

Perhaps I should ask this; would you eat genetically altered meat? Do you buy milk from cows that is treated with hormones because it increases milk production? Why or why not? With such logic it would stand to reason you should embrace Monsanto's and other genetic research facilities for their ability to simply create more food for a global population regardless of the cost down the road. A cost of which we, as of now, have no idea.

As an aside, I just wish to point out that there are lawsuits monthly about medication that has or is killing individuals on regular basis. These medications are thought to be a wonderful new weapon in the great fight of healthcare, yet they turn out deadly later on. Sometimes two years later; sometimes 20. Either way, are we willing to risk not knowing what is ahead on such a large and unstoppable scale?

What seems too good to be true usually is.

Originally posted by obamuh
it's one thing to be against monsanto, but being against GMOs in general is sort of retarded. millions of people are getting the nutrients to survive that they wouldn't normally consume. if people really want the world fed, GMOs of all stripes will continue to be vital.

What happens when the seeds run out and the poor and needy can't afford to buy more. Why let the food supply be controlled by a corporation?

Originally posted by Boomer1941
What happens when the seeds run out and the poor and needy can't afford to buy more.

why will the seeds run out? and why won't there be other seeds? and don't you want the most nutritious crop possible EXACTLY when people can't afford to buy more?

Originally posted by Boomer1941
Why let the food supply be controlled by a corporation?

because they're more efficient. all that obscene profit that is spent all over our economy or to buy more land for more crops and they could still under-bid the cost of government doing the same work.

Originally posted by obamuh

Originally posted by Boomer1941
What happens when the seeds run out and the poor and needy can't afford to buy more.

why will the seeds run out? and why won't there be other seeds? and don't you want the most nutritious crop possible EXACTLY when people can't afford to buy more?

current GMO doesn't provide qualitative seeds + it can make dead zones to animals/insects/...

Originally posted by rockn82
What makes it one thing to be against Monsanto, but not against other corporations doing the exact same thing with less notoriety. If somebody commits a crime, does the crime become a non-issue if it is committed by somebody else?

i'm not comparing monsanto with anyone else. i'm saying you can beef all you want with monsanto but that it's mentally unbalanced to categorically demonize GMOs.

Originally posted by rockn82
Perhaps I should ask this; would you eat genetically altered meat? Do you buy milk from cows that is treated with hormones because it increases milk production? Why or why not? With such logic it would stand to reason you should embrace Monsanto's and other genetic research facilities for their ability to simply create more food for a global population regardless of the cost down the road. A cost of which we, as of now, have no idea.

of course i would eat altered meat. and believe it or not, millions of hungry people would eat it too - IT'S BETTER THAN DYING! and i don't buy milk because i don't drink it.

Originally posted by SarK0Y
current GMO doesn't provide qualitative seeds + it can make dead zones to animals/insects/...

GMOs don't need to make qualitative seeds as long as seeds can be modified. and practically all industrial crops are dead zones for animals anyway, GMO or not.

Americans,

French, Spanish, and Indian citizens called to let you know they found your testicles that have been missing for many decades...

Originally posted by hawkiye
Americans,

French, Spanish, and Indian citizens called to let you know they found your testicles that have been missing for many decades...

edit on 5-11-2010 by hawkiye because: corrections

thanks,

we are still looking for your integrity and will keep you posted.