READ THIS: Hawaiian Civic Clubs Resolution…The Hawaiian’s Have Spoken!!!!

RESOLUTION NO. 13 – 41 3
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs at its 103 54TH annual convention at Kalapaki Beach, Kaua‘i, Hawai‘i this 16th day of November 2013, that 104 it urges the State of Hawaiʻi in collaboration with all County Councils to complete an 105 Environmental Impact Statement and Cultural Impact Statement in order to determine and 106 evaluate significant effects of the production, propagation, or development of genetically 107 modified organisms within each county, and the use of all pesticides (restricted use, general use, 108 and experimental) associated with the production, propagation, or development of genetically 109 modified organisms; and 110
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in addition to requirements of the provisions contained 112 within Hawai‘i Revised Statutes Chapter 343 and the associated Hawai‘i Administrative Rules, 113 there shall be included in the Environmental Impact Statement provisions for the testing of soil, 114 dust, water, air, and human resident volunteers as may be appropriate, measuring the presence of 115 any pesticide or other related chemicals in order to further identify any potential health and 116 environmental concerns, and to establish a baseline for future testing and studies; and 117
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be a temporary moratorium on the 119 experimental use and commercial production of genetically modified organism until such time as 120 an Environmental Impact Statement and Cultural Impact Statement be conducted to determine 121 the significant effects on the environment including cultural sites and practices of the community 122 and State, including the traditional and customary rights of Native Hawaiians protected pursuant 123 to Article XII, section 7, of the Hawaiʻi State Constitution; and 124
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pesticide buffer zones be established and that it shall be 126 mandatory for all commercial agricultural entities that annually purchase or use in excess of five 127 (5) pounds or fifteen (15) gallons of restricted use pesticides, any amount of any experimental 128 pesticides, or both, during any calendar year to restrict the application of all pesticides (restricted 129 use, general use, and experimental) in the following areas: (1) No pesticide of any kind 130 (restricted use, general use, or experimental) may be used within 500 feet of any school, hospital, 131 residential area, or public roadway. (2) No pesticide of any kind (restricted use, general use, or 132 experimental) may be used within 500 feed of any stream, river, or shoreline. (3) No pesticide of 133 any kind (restricted use, general use, and experimental) may be used within 1000 feet of any 134
culturally significant area, especially those registered on the Hawaiʻi and/or National Register of 135 Historic Places such as the Hanapēpē Salt Ponds; and 136
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it shall be mandatory for all commercial agricultural 138 entities that annually purchase or use in excess of five (5) pounds or fifteen (15) gallons of 139 restricted use pesticides, any amount of any experimental pesticides, or both, during any calendar 140 year to disclose the use of all pesticides (restricted use, general use, and experimental) during 141 that same calendar year. Disclosure requirements include but are not limited to: public posting of 142 signs, disclosure information must be provided to any requesting property owner, lessee, culutral 143 practitioner, or person otherwise occupying any property adjacent to the property where the 144 pesticide was applied, or anticipated to be applied; and 145
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it shall be mandatory for all commercial agricultural 147 entities that intentionally or knowingly possess any genetically modified organism to disclose the 148 presence of said genetically modified organisms, or organisms and disclosure shall include a 149 general description of each genetically modified organism, a general description of the 150 geographical location including at minimum the Tax Map Key and ahupuaʻa where each 151 genetically modified organism is being grown or developed, and dates that each genetically 152 modified organism was initially introduced to the land in question; and 153
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be given to the Governor 155 of Hawaii, State Senate President, State Speaker of the House, State Senate Committee on 156 Hawaiian Affairs, State House Committee on Hawaiian Affairs, Office of Hawaiian Affairs 157 Chair of the Board of Trustees, All County Mayors, and All County Council Chairpersons. 158
INTRODUCED BY: Waikīkī Hawaiian Civic Club 160



Afghan Opium Record, GCHQ spoofs LinkedIn, GMO Apples – New World Next Week ~ Corbett Report

Welcome to — the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

Story #1: Afghan Opium Output Soars To Record Level…Again
An Introduction To Gladio B — James Corbett On Breaking The Set
NWNW Flashback: UK & Canadian Troops Investigated Over Heroin Trafficking Claims
Video Flashback: Geraldo Interviews Soldiers “Guarding” Opium
US, Israel Lose UNESCO Voting Rights Over Palestine

Story #2: British Spy Agency GCHQ Set Up Fake LinkedIn, Slashdot Pages To Plant Malware
British Spies Hacked Telecom Network By Luring Engineers To Fake LinkedIn Pages
Oil Espionage: How The NSA And GCHQ Spied On OPEC
In Lavabit Appeal, U.S. Doubles Down on Access to Web Crypto Keys
Poll Finds American Writers “Self-Censoring” In Wake Of NSA Scandal

Story #3: McDonald’s And Gerber Have Not ‘Rejected’ Arctic Apples
Industry’s Secret Plan To Get The Feds To Kill GMO Labeling In Every State
Factory Forests? USDA Considers Approval Of Genetically Engineered Trees

Visit to get previous episodes in various formats to download, burn and share. And as always, stay up-to-date by subscribing to the feeds from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy. Thank you.

Previous Episode: Arafat Poisoned, India To Mars, Fukushima Cleanup


Ban GMO on Hawai’i Island

This petition is awaiting approval by the Avaaz Community
Ban GMO on Hawai'i Island

708 signers. Let’s reach 750




Why this is important?

Dear Council member Ilagan,

As you are likely aware, many residents in Puna are disappointed with your opposition to Bill 113, which would ban further entry of open-air GMO food crops on Hawai’i island. We voted you into office to represent our needs. The overwhelming consensus in Puna is in favor of Bill 113, so we wonder: why have you opposed it?

Tourists from all over the world are also are in favor of this ban, as we will discover from this petition. All who sign stand in solidarity with the main points of this letter. Unfortunately, the hyperlinks to the embedded text do not show up on this petition, so please refer to the copy I sent to you via email (readers can also email me for this).


We request a friendly sit-down, talk-story with you so that we can understand one another and find a way forward. Below is a letter outlining the significance and context of the GMO issue; several council members have already read it. The facts of the issue cut beyond political lines; they involve our very survival as a species. I request a response from you so we can arrange a time to talk. Thank you for your attention.



Dear Mr. Ilagan, October 10, 2013

As you might imagine, quite a few of us in Puna, which district you represent, are showing disappointment in you for not supporting Bill 113, which would prohibit further entrance of GMO crops to the island. In good spirit, we wonder: why are you not supporting Bill 113? If it is for GMO Papaya growers, they are largely exempt from the bill and the small registration fee they are subject to is not justification for not passing the crucial important heart of the bill for keeping out further intrusion of GMO to the island.

If you need a synopsis of this letter, view all the links embedded.

I understand it is not your job, per se, to be highly informed about GMOs. As a physician, and one specializing in digestive and immune health, it is, however, one of my jobs. It took me many months of diligent research to understand the GMO industry, and a couple years to deeply understand its science and collateral implications.

Therefore, as an educated GMO “expert” of sorts, I invite you to sit down with me, and anyone else you wish to invite, to discuss this issue with aloha and genuine good faith to learn from one another. I make myself available to you to discuss any questions or concerns you have, and for what I, and others in Puna who oppose GMOs, can learn from you. Here is an excellent video by Dr. Thieery Vrain, who used to be a GMO lab scientist and was so appalled by the truth, he set out to tell the truth about it.

I have researched the science and social issue of GMO for years. I have written dozens of articles on GMO. I have debated extensively with pro-GMO scientists. I have a Master’s in Science degree and a proclivity for critical, reasonable thinking. I am also outraged and sad about GMOs devastating track record around the world. It is altogether reasonable to be emotional as well as intelligent about the GMO issue, contrary to what one pro-GMO testifier claimed: that anti-GMO sentiment is just emotional. This is a red herring argument, mischaracterizing those who are rightfully disturbed about GMO damage. In fact, the more intelligently and reasonably one pursues earnest inquiry into the GMO industry, the more upset one becomes. Personally I have reviewed the actual studies many cite in their arguments for and against the industry.

For your initial consideration, I provide for you here several crucial GMO topics and links so you can review the good science behind the serious threats posed by GMO in context of the even greater issue of climate change (please watch this interview with expert scientist Dr. Michael Mann), which is fueled by large, unsustainable industries such GMO farming and distribution of GMO products—all heavy on petroleum-based products and fossil fuel burning. Please review the links provided in this letter; they are all scientifically reputable sources. I think they cut through any political posturing and paint a real and dire situation for which we need to stop futzing around and get serious. If you have anything, any science or statistics for me to read on the subject of GMO which support your view, please do share so I can see where you are coming from and so we can discuss it.

With our world on a fast-track path to climate collapse, in truth we should not even be having the debate over whether to allow GMO farming on Hawai’i, or fracking, or geothermal, or any other unsustainable practice. The times of economic advantage at the expense of environmental degradation are over; they must be over for our world to pull itself out of the deep mire it is in. We should not be burning more fossil fuels driving to Hilo and to Kona to testify on issues that we need to put quickly behind us so that we can focus on the real issues at hand: reducing our toxification of the environment with chemicals of all kinds, and in particular, the addition of more CO2 into the atmosphere. Unless we act fast to address the bigger picture of climate change, we are being foolhardy. Many leading scientists say we have a couple years only to change our patterns to offset runaway climate change (the point after which we cannot reverse environmental collapse); others say it might already be too late.

Indeed, every economic decision and policy we make at any level of government and personal choice should be made in light of climate change—evaluated as part of the solution or as part of the problem. This is because climate change is the single largest and most critical issue to ever face humanity. According to some, if we do not severely curtail our CO2 emissions by 2015, life as we know it will perish in the next 15 to 30 or so years. This not a joke or conspiracy theory. It is proposed by leading scientists.

I have testified numerous times previously and cited examples from my medical practice. Placing patients on strict non-GMO diets has resulted in cessation of chronic and insidious medical conditions. My own view, therefore, and that of growing millions in Hawaii and around the world, is that GMO food-stuffs and the glyphosate-based RoundUp and other pesticides used on GMO crops, are unsafe. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine “AAEM”) advises against GMO consumption, saying, “GM foods pose a serious health risk” and calls for a moratorium on GM foods. Citing several animal studies, the AAEM concludes “there is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects” and that “GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health.” Kaiser Permanente advises against GMO foods. It states:

In a recent Fall 2012 newsletter edition, Kaiser suggested membership limit exposure to genetically modified organisms.
“GMOs have been added to our food supply since 1994, but most people don’t know it because the United States does not require labeling of GMOs,” according to the newsletter.
Sounding more like an organic health proponent, the corporate giant continued, “Despite what the biotech industry might say, there is little research on the long-term effects of GMOs on human health.”

GMOs have indeed been proven toxic, per the peer-reviewed literature—not unlike DDT, PCBs, aspartame, and dioxins (all manufactured by Monsanto and some by other biotech companies). Future pesticide use on GMO crops will be increasing, and is already increasing, not only in quantity, but in type, as the toxic treadmill of continued stacked trait GMO varieties must be engineered to deal with the constant resistance formed by superweeds and superbugs. These weeds and bugs mutate according to the same principles as resistant bacterial strains do against antibiotics. All are serious health threats, as evidenced, for example, by MRSA and penicillin-resistant bacteria.

One of the assertions made by pro-GMO testifiers at the hearing yesterday (10/ 15/13) is that RoundUp replaces many more dangerous pesticides. This is a highly suspect assertion because it seems each month a new discovery is made about RoundUp. Here is a link (scroll down to see studies listed) to the clinical research on RoundUp; you can just read the titles of the studies to get an idea of the danger. Another crucial point is that RoundUp is actually, ironically, leading to the spraying of more toxic pesticides it was supposed to replace. It is discussed in this article, which I quote here:

“In order to deal with rapidly spreading resistant weeds, farmers are being forced to expand use of older, higher-risk herbicides. To stop corn and cotton insects from developing resistance to Bt, farmers planting Bt crops are being asked to spray the insecticides that Bt-corn and cotton were designed to displace.”

The existing evidence, as exemplified by the Cytochrome P-450 study cited by the doctor from Waimea during the first round of expert testimony, in addition to the certain near-future more toxic and uncertain pesticide applications (no testing has been done for multiple pesticides such as RoundUp and 2,4-D on one plant type, such as corn, per my research) are linked to severe illness, the killing of bees and monarch butterflies, small farmer suicides on a massive scale in India, poisoning of waterways, residential air, and generalized degradation of the natural environment. We cannot risk such injury to the ‘aina (land) here on Hawaii Island, the last bastion for a life largely free of the menace and chaos currently being experienced on the other islands by GMO industry, most notably on Kauai, which several testifies mentioned.

The organic papaya market is expanding and in great demand, while that of the GMO Papaya industry is shrinking, especially as a massive movement around the world awakens to the grim realities of GMOs. Given that now you have gone on record as supporting the GMO industry in Hawaii, I encourage you to learn about organic papaya farming and educate farmers on future transitions to organic. Local sustainable agriculture is the way of the future; as this article in The Atlantic spells out, if we are lucky enough to have one as a human species.

Even though Monsanto and other companies are spending millions to maintain their present control and influence in the marketplace as well as in government, the rest of the world is refusing to import US GMO products, as are more and more local communities in the US. Mexico just announced a ban on GMO corn, with the presiding judge citing the Precautionary Principle, on which our Bill 113 is predicated. From the article:

“According to Environmental Food and Justice, Judge Jaime Eduardo Verdugo J. of the Twelfth Federal District Court for Civil Matters of Mexico City wrote that the genetically engineered corn posed ”the risk of imminent harm to the environment.”

This ban was bolstered in part due to a petition I created last year that has garnered over 46,000 signatures, was delivered in-person by affiliates in Mexico, and which helped to postpone massive plantings of GMO corn on Mexico soil. I created it single-handedly, wrote about it, publicized it, had articles published about it, and it grew almost effortlessly. Imagine the attention and renown we could garner on Hawai’i Island by becoming a non-GMO paradise! This would far outweigh any pro-GMO presence and incentive at the risk of our health.

Hawai’i island could well be in the forefront of a transition that would be not only economically viable, but also create a more robust and sustainable environment. And as a bonus, confer the honor of doing what is right. With millions all over the world waking up to the insanity of GMOs, places where GMOs are banned are becoming a haven for people who want to live without being poisoned. Hawai’i Island stands to gain economically, morally, and most importantly, healthfully, from being a GMO-free zone. Becoming another GMO wasteland does not confer such benefits.

Regardless, no amount financial benefit justifies knowingly poisoning the populace and environment. GMO farmers can find another way and we can help them. I will personally donate my time and money to doing so, and I bet I can gather a coalition of organic farmers willing to educate and instruct and help conventional and GMO farmers.

After researching the points of this letter, I hope you have a better understanding of the gravity of the GMO issue and the passing of this bill to bring Hawai’i island one step closer to becoming a shining example of intelligence and moral and environmental sustainability, not just another part of the problem outlined in this letter. I encourage you to take heartfelt concern in weighing the short-term economic viability of our community versus the longer-term welfare for all. Nowadays we all have to be part of the solution to reduce carbon emissions and fossil fuel burning, which GMO farming and commerce exacerbates as compared to local, organic farming.

In one sense, to discuss the issue of GMO in this context is almost absurd, given that the newly-released IPCC Report (International Panel on Climate Control) clearly says that our entire planet, including the survival of the human species, is on a fast track to climate change collapse. GMO farming—with its heavy petroleum-based, non-local import-export model, and chemical reliance—make it a part of the problem, not the solution. GMO farming makes no sense in the small or the bigger picture. I encourage you to act and to vote wisely and to continue to educate yourself on the seriousness of the issues at hand, to represent the needs and wishes of the majority of the people you represent, not only with regard GMO policy, but with climate change generally.

In sum, we desperately need a local-based, organic food system that does not significantly contribute to global warming and climate change. Small, organic farms have actually been shown to answer our most pressing needs, such as climate change, and provide increased economic return. Here is a description of one study of many, and another is here. This is our best bet for future security, not the myth and damages created by the GMO industry and their pesticides. Human beings can actually create more biomass and more carbon-sequestering using organic and permaculture designs. This is our hope for real security and tempering the already occurring chaos from global warming.

Thank you for your attention and continued efforts to act for the long-term of our health. Please check out the links provided throughout this letter. I am curious what your thoughts are after studying this information. I look forward to hearing back from you and for a time when we can sit down and discuss this matter in earnest and with genuine aloha, and learn more from one another.


Jack Adam Weber, L.Ac., Dipl. C.H.


Ed. Note: Your participation in signing this petition is greatly appreciated because we’re having one helluva battle here against the horrendous assault from GMO’s and pesticides. If most people had any idea how bad it is, they would avoid visiting “paradise” on family vacations. Fortunately Kerri Peterson and many other community members are doing a great job raising awareness here on the Big Island, we’re up against BIG MONEY ad campaigns on TV/Radio by pro-GMO advocates so your participation is greatly appreciated in helping us win this battle. Kauai is finally making tremendous headway against GMO’s, but only after being drenched in pesticides to the point of public outrage due to health problems in certain areas. Here’s a link to more info on the fight for “paradise returned” 🙂
Much love and gratitude, Namaste {bow} Annette




Mikael Thalen by Mikael Thalen
October 17th, 2013
Updated 10/17/2013 at 11:55 pm

Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed suit against the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) Wednesday, following earlier reports that revealed the group was laundering donation money to oppose I-522, Washington’s GMO-labeling initiative.

GMA members including PepsiCo, Kraft, and Coca-Cola experienced massive public backlash for donating millions against California’s labeling proposition, the GMA created the “Defense of Brands Strategic Account” for Washington state, an avenue to funnel and conceal its members’ donations.

“Truly fair elections demand all sides follow the rules by disclosing who their donors are and how much they are spending to advocate their views,” Ferguson said in a press release. “The GMA explicitly attempted in their own words, to shield members from criticism for opposing Initiative 522.”

Unknown GMA members have so far donated a total of $7.2 million, becoming 522′s largest opposition group, surpassing Monsanto, Dow, Bayer and Dupont. Given the large donation amount, the GMA is now responsible for the largest campaign disclosure violation in Washington state history.

“$7.2 million is awful lot of money to conceal from the public where they are making a decision about an initiative. The people of the state of Washington feel strongly about disclosure through our campaigns,” Ferguson said. “That’s why we’re bringing this action, and that’s why we want to send a message of deterrence as well for future violators.”

Under state law, the GMA is required to form a registered political committee with the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC), disclosing how much each individual company contributes. So far, the GMA’s cash has been used to fund a No on 522 TV ad, which GMO labeling supporters want taken down.

“I think that the GMA and the No on 522 campaign is anti-transparency,” Yes on 522 spokeswoman Elizabeth Larter told Q13 Fox. “They just don’t want people to know who’s funding their campaign, just like they don’t want us to know what’s in our food.”

The GMA released a public statement Wednesday, claiming they were unaware of their illegal campaign donation activity.

“GMA…is surprised to learn that the Washington state authorities viewed the association’s actions as improper. GMA will review its actions in Washington state and relevant statutes and continue to cooperate with state authorities to fully resolve the issue as promptly as possible.”

The attorney general is not the first in Washington to file suit against the GMA. Just last month, the group “Moms for Labeling” filed a similar lawsuit in Thurston County Superior Court, pointing to the GMA donation laundering as well.

Despite No on 522′s seemingly endless cash supply, now passing $17 million, a poll conducted last September revealed that 66 percent of Washington voters approved of the labeling initiative. Although the opposition has brought in much more than Yes on 522′s $5.5 million, grassroots labeling supporters have donated over $145,000. Astonishingly, only $60 in small contributions have gone to oppose GMO labeling.

At this moment it is unclear whether the GMA will comply by disclosing its donating members, or face “substantial” fines by ignoring state law.


Hawaii set to ban GMO crops 0


oahu hawaii


Two major victories against genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are about to be achieved in Hawaii, where citizens and city council members have stepped up their game in opposition to open-air cultivations of GMO crops. According to The New York Times (NYT), the legislative committees of the “Big Island,” known as Hawaii, and Kauai recently approved their own respective ordinances, one of which could soon bar predatory seed companies like Pioneer DuPont and Monsanto from planting corn, soybeans and other GMOs anywhere on the island.


Since GMOs were first introduced back in the 1990s, the transgenic seed industry has maintained a formidable presence on the Hawaiian islands, where warm and balmy weather facilitates year-round plantings of GMO crops like Bt corn that only grow during one season in the Midwest. Because they are able to grow and harvest more crops in Hawaii during a given season than pretty much anywhere else in the U.S., seed companies have long utilized Hawaiian soils as breeding grounds for the latest GMO technologies.


But this agricultural takeover of sorts by the biotechnology industry, which has all but completely supplanted the sugar cane and pineapple industries that used to dominate the Hawaiian landscape, has generated considerable controversy among native Hawaiians and many others who see the widespread damage being caused by GMOs. Pesticide pollution, soil destruction, crop contamination and ecological devastation are among the many harrowing consequences of loose policies regarding GMO plantings in Hawaii.


“It’s a paradise over here that is being ruined by this,” says Michiyo Altomare, a local resident of Waimea, a small town in Kauai that is surrounded by GMO crop fields.


Altomare and her husband purchased their dream home about 30 years ago near a pristine river in the town, which is located across the river from a beautiful bluff where gentle breezes flow down and through the area. But in recent years, the bluff, which used to sustain fields of natural sugar cane, is now blanketed with GMO corn, the chemicals of which now waft through the Altomares’ property.


Kaneohe Hawaii


“[W]hen sugar cane gave way to corn… those winds began carrying fine red soil that coated [Michiyo’s] counters, forcing the family to shut their windows and install central air-conditioning,” writes Andrew Pollack for the NYT. “On some occasions, Ms. Altomare smelled pesticides and called the police. Mr. Altomare suffers from high platelet levels that his doctor said could have resulted from chemicals exposure. The couple’s grown children… ‘don’t want to live here.’”


Similar situations are present in other areas too, including around Waimea Canyon Middle School. A GMO crop field operated by Switzerland-based Syngenta, which is located right next to the school, resulted in its closure on several occasions. Several students became ill because of pesticide fumes, according to reports, and others living in the area reported similar symptoms.


Residents take matters into their own hands following inaction by state


Since the state has done basically nothing to address the problem, residents of Kauai are pushing the Kauai City Council to pass Bill 2491, which would increase oversight of biotech chemical use on the island. Likewise, residents of Hawaii have been successful in getting Bill 113 passed out of committee, where it will soon be heard by the full City Council on October 16 for a final vote. Bill 113 has the potential to rid the island of Hawaii of all GMOs, with the exception of GMO papaya, which has reportedly been exempted.


“We need to do something,” says Kauai County Councilman Gary Hoosier, who co-sponsored Kauai’s Bill 2491 with Councilman Tim Bynum. “We can’t count on the state. In our particular situation, I believe there is urgency. The doctors we talked to in those committee hearings believe there is an urgency and we can’t sit around and wait for the state to get its act together.”


Global March Against Monsanto, Oct. 12, 2013

The World Is Awakening! No To Genetically Modified Organisms! Millions marched across the world on this historical day, Oct 12th, 2013 to protest GMOs.

*All photos were obtained from public social media outlets documenting the world-wide protests.
*Photo Credit: NYC Light Brigade of Brooklyn Grange Photography, Joshua Cruse – ‘Monsanto Lights’
*Music credit: ‘Notre Honneur’ by DASREICH

What is Monsanto and GMOs?
Check out the Official March Against Monsanto Facebook Page:…

Why do we march?

-Research studies have shown that Monsanto’s genetically-modified foods can lead to serious health conditions such as the development of cancer tumors, infertility and birth defects.

-In the United States, the FDA, the agency tasked with ensuring food safety for the population, is steered by ex-Monsanto executives, and we feel that’s a questionable conflict of interests and explains the lack of government-lead research on the long-term effects of GMO products.

-Recently, the U.S. Congress and president collectively passed the nicknamed “Monsanto Protection Act” that, among other things, bans courts from halting the sale of Monsanto’s genetically-modified seeds.

-For too long, Monsanto has been the benefactor of corporate subsidies and political favoritism. Organic and small farmers suffer losses while Monsanto continues to forge its monopoly over the world’s food supply, including exclusive patenting rights over seeds and genetic makeup.

-Monsanto’s GMO seeds are harmful to the environment; for example, scientists have indicated they have caused colony collapse among the world’s bee population.

What are solutions we advocate?

-Voting with your dollar by buying organic and boycotting Monsanto-owned companies that use GMOs in their products.

-Labeling of GMOs so that consumers can make those informed decisions easier.

-Repealing relevant provisions of the US’s “Monsanto Protection Act.”

-Calling for further scientific research on the health effects of GMOs.

-Holding Monsanto executives and Monsanto-supporting politicians accountable through direct communication, grassroots journalism, social media, etc.

-Continuing to inform the public about Monsanto’s secrets.

-Taking to the streets to show the world and Monsanto that we won’t take these injustices quietly.

Senate to Kill Monsanto Protection Act Amid Outrage

No more kicking the can down the road, this is a MAJOR victory!! We’re making an impact, gaining momentum with each win. When we unite with ONE VOICE, nothing they do can stand in our way! Much love, {~A~}

by Anthony Gucciardi
September 25th, 2013
Updated 09/25/2013 at 2:59 am

In a major victory brought upon by serious activism and public outrage, new legislation changes will shut down the Monsanto Protection Act rider that granted Monsanto protection from legal action and was set to renew on September 30th.

monsanto protection act stopped 263×164 Victory: Senate to Kill Monsanto Protection Act Amid OutrageThis unprecedented move shows the true power of the anti-GMO, anti-Monsanto movement, and how elected officials are now being forced to side with the concerned population over the money-spewing Monsanto. After all, it was Monsanto who purchased its way into the initial Senate spending bill legislation via a rider dubbed the ‘Monsanto Protection Act’  through Senator Roy Blunt.

Officially labeled the Farmer Assurance Provision under Sec. 735 of the Senate Continuing Resolution spending bill, Senator Blunt was conveniently given over $64,000 by Monsanto before he handed the biotech corporation the ability to write its own legislation for the Monsanto Protection Act. And as I told you back in March here on the frontlines of anti-GMO activism, the financial payload dished out by Monsanto was enough to secure a major victory for corporations over both the public and even the federal government.

It was last March that Obama signed the initial Senate spending bill into law, subsequently bringing the Monsanto Protection Act rider into legal validity as well. But the rider only extended until September 30th of this year, and it was up to Monsanto to pull another slippery legislative trick out of their sleeves in order to pass a Monsanto Protection Act 2.0 renewal. Once again, however, Monsanto executives underestimated the power of the alternative news community and the intelligence of those who do not want to eat contaminated food.

And as a result, Senators are being forced to respond in a big way. As one Senator put it:

“That provision will be gone,” said Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) told Politico.

There is even discussion of how the Monsanto Protection Act came to exist in the first place, and more importantly how we can hold the politicians responsible.

“Short-term appropriations bills are not an excuse for Congress to grandfather in bad policy,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs for the Center for Food Safety.

Once again, we have achieved a major victory in the fight against Monsanto and GMOs at large. As information on the subject continues to spread like intellectual wildfire, Monsanto’s days as a food supply hog consistently dwindle.

Read more:

TAKE ACTION NOW: End the Monsanto Protection Act

Congress needs to know we’re paying attention and this time, their job is on the line. Please take a moment to join me in signing ANOTHER petition aimed at preventing the Monsanto Protection Act from passing…we have to hit THEM with a BIG “HELL NO, OR ELSE” from all sides.
Can you believe what Congress is up to? We’ve never seen budget negotiations this awful before… and every time I think Congress has hit rock bottom, they surprise me by digging even deeper.

But that means it’s time for us to step up even more, to get rid of the Monsanto Protection Act and other terrible rules in the budget extension. Tell your Senators not to sacrifice the safety of our food.

When you hear about Congress’s budget negotiations on the news, you’re probably hearing mostly about Obamacare. But no one’s talking about the other rotten things in the House bill. Remember the Monsanto Protection Act? That’s the rule that lets companies like Monsanto keep planting a genetically engineered crop even when a court has ruled that its approval was illegal — and, yup, it’s in the House budget extension. That’s a big favor that Monsanto doesn’t deserve. Demand that your Senators end the Monsanto Protection Act and other rules that hurt our food and farmers.

On top of that, the House gutted a set of rules that protect small farmers from abusive contracts. Without those rules, it’ll be even easier for Big Agriculture to treat small farmers unfairly.

Congress hopes you won’t notice these threats to our food, because they’re tangled up in the mess that is the budget process. Let your Senators know that you’re paying attention, and that you’re holding them accountable if the budget extension hurts our food and farmers.

Hold your Senators accountable:

Thanks for all you do,

Jo Miles
Online Organizer
Food & Water Watch

Insiders and Hedge Funds Dumping Monsanto Stock

Woot, Woot!!






Monsanto Company has seen zero unique insiders purchasing, and 10 insider sales. —Insider Monkey

Company insiders and institutional investors alike have been dumping shares of the Monsanto Company in recent months.

While consumers have concerns with Monsanto’s business due to its genetically modified organism (GMO) products, investors are worried about its business practices and stock performance.

“People increasingly don’t like Monsanto, and that’s a direct result of all the growing realizations about the dangers of GMOs, [and] Monsanto’s predatory business practices,” said Mike Adams, editor of Natural News.

Quarterly Earnings
For its 2013 fiscal third quarter the St. Louis-based Monsanto reported better than expected earnings due to Latin American corn business and seeds business in the United States.

Net sales were at $4.3 billion, up by 1 percent from the 2012 third quarter. Net income for the quarter decreased by 3 percent and operating expenses increased because of a 5 percent increase in research and development Costs.

On the positive side, Monsanto reports that the demand for the company’s products has increased, but it is lacking acreage to meet that demand.

Insiders Dumping Shares
The company’s stock was somehow volatile during the year, trading both above and below $100 per share in 2013. However, over the last three months it has gained 2.5 percent, trailing the benchmark S&P 500 Index which had increased 7.7 percent during the same period.

A significant number of Monsanto shares, including insider shares, were traded, with 198,550 shares being traded over the last three months and 1.3 million during the past year. However, only 22,023 shares were bought while 176,527 were sold during the past three months. Over the past year, 1.1 million shares were sold, while only 207,305 shares were bought.

Nasdaq disclosed that 19 officers sold the company’s shares during the past three months and 59 company insiders disposed of 128 shares over the past year.

All insider trading were from execution of options. The officers held shares at a fixed price and sold the shares at the market price, making substantial profits.

In the stock market, the holder of an option may sell a certain amount of securities at a given price and at a given time. The stock transaction happens on completion and not when the option is distributed.

“Over the last half-year time period, Monsanto Company has seen zero unique insiders purchasing, and 10 insider sales,” according to Insider Monkey, a website which tracks insider activity.

One of the major Monsanto insider sellers was Hugh Grant, Chairman and CEO. He sold a total of 487,420 shares between January 2012 and July 2013, profiting greatly by exercising his options.

Investors Unload Monsanto Stock
Besides officers of Monsanto, some funds have distanced themselves from the company ahead of the third quarter investor reporting, given the recent negative coverage of GMO foods and their health risks.

The number of hedge funds holding long positions decreased 6 percent during the second quarter, with 59 funds retaining their investments in Monsanto, according to Insider Monkey.

According to Natural News, Vinik Asset Management and Point State Capital reduced their positions in Monsanto by a combined total of about $156 million.

A few analysts recommend that investors, especially hedge funds, reduce their exposure to Monsanto, as well as to funds that hold a significant number of stocks in the company, such as Lone Pine Capital and Blue Ridge Capital.


Thousands Of Kauai Residents Take To The Streets


An estimated 4,000 people marched on Kauai, Hawai’i, on Sunday over concerns around the agrochemical/GMO industry’s impacts on the island, and in support of the “right to know” and the “right to protect.” Residents are particularly concerned about the impacts of very large amounts of Restricted-Use Pesticides (RUPs) on human health and the environment.

Marchers gathered at Vidinha Stadium, where they began with a pule (Hawaiian prayer) before proceeding down Rice Street to the County Council Building. On arrival, they circled the building and chanted “pass the bill.” The march is being called the largest in the island’s history.

Tomorrow the Kauai County Council reconvenes to discuss Bill 2491, which would require disclosure by the five agricultural companies that use 98% of Restricted-Use Pesticides on the island.

As the march proceeded down the mile-long path, marchers chanted “pass the bill,” “2491,” and “stop poisoning us, the garden island’s had enough.” As marchers approached the council building, loud cheers erupted as organizer Fern Rosenstiel repeated “we are united Kauai!”

Impacted community members, doctors, scientific experts, cultural practitioners, moms and teachers spoke at a public rally that also included music by Makana, Donavon Frankenreiter and other local musicians.

Three council members — co-introducers Gary Hooser and Tim Bynum, along with JoAnn Yukimura — came to voice their support for pesticide disclosure and greater protections from the impacts of the agrochemical/GMO industry. The bill requires 4 votes to pass.

The island’s mayor Bernard Carvalho was amongst the large crowd that stood in the relentless sun listening to hours of impassioned speaking.

Young people were some of the most visible at the march. Waimea valley resident and young father Nate Dickinson spoke of concern for the health of his family, who live surrounded by experimental GMO operations and have faced severe and unexplained health issues.

Bryce Boeder, another young westside resident, said it was “time for the island to shift from the chemical based monoculture to an organic permaculture.”

Another young local woman, Hoku Cabebe thanked marchers for coming out “not just for the bill but for our future; not just for Kauai but for a better world.”

Four of the world’s largest agrochemical/GMO corporations currently use some of Kauai’s best agricultural lands to test their new technologies. Because many of their operations are experimental, the agrochemical/GMO corporations often spray several Restricted-Use Pesticides simultaneously (called “stacking”), in combinations that are not regulated and have never been studied for their immediate and long-term dangers to human health.

Around 18-tons of Restricted-Use Pesticides (RUPs) are used on the island annually by these operations. RUPs are those deemed so toxic that the that EPA requires they be applied only by or under the direct supervision of trained and certified applicators. They are banned in many other countries.

Dr Lee Evslin said, “I am here to lend scientific credibility to the reasons for this march. The American Academy of Pediatrics came out 10 months ago with a strongly worded statement linking pesticide use to delays in neurological development, endocrine abnormalities, behavioral issues and an increase in childhood cancers such as leukemia. They recommend buffer zones and the right to know.”

Through “Right to Know” Bill 2491, residents are seeking basic disclosure of pesticide use by the five companies that use 98% of RUPs on the island. The bill sets up a buffer zone between where these dangerous pesticides are used and schools, hospitals, residential areas and waterways. The bill also mandates that a health and environmental study be conducted, and in the meantime, puts a temporary moratorium on new operations.

The industry has threatened that if Bill 2491 passes they will be forced to fire workers. But bill supporters point out that, financially, there is no reason that the bill should be a major cost to the companies, who already keep internal records on pesticide application activity. The moratorium is only on expansion of the industry, and does not shut-down any existing operations.

Addressing rumors that Bill 2491 will regulate local farmers, Kauai Kunana Dairy owner Louisa Wooton said, “I’m 100% behind Bill 2491. It does not affect small farmers whatsoever. I read it frontwards and backwards before I was ready to lend my support and it’s really really good for agriculture!”

In response to claims by the industry that Bill 2491 is unconstitutional, local attorney Elif Beall said: “Bill 2491 has been reviewed by some of the country’s top attorneys specializing in pesticide and GMO regulation. The consensus among Public Interest experts is that Bill 2491 is constitutional and well within the County’s powers to protect the health and welfare of its residents and natural resources. Several of the country’s top attorneys have offered to defend the bill pro bono if it is challenged in court.”

Supporters of the bill say that there has been a complete failure of state and federal agencies responsible for the regulation, monitoring and protection of people’s health in relation to pesticide use by the agrochemical/GMO operations on the island, so the county must act.

The “Mana March” was organized by a broad coalition of groups and individuals, reflecting the diversity of concern around what has been called “the biggest issue Kauai has ever faced.”

Photos from the Mana March:

New CSIRO GMO wheat can silence human genes, cause early death

field of wheat

© Unknown

Two Australian researchers have found that CSIRO-developed GMO wheat which was created to silence particular genes within the crop can also silence certain rNA and DNA sequences in the human body, causing fatality as early as age five or six. The researchers are calling the GMO wheat a ‘safety’ issue, which requires more profundity before the genetically modified crop is planted in more areas of Australia and offered in products in grocery stores.

Professor Jack Heinemann of the University of Canterbury, NZ, and Associate Professor Judy Carman, a biochemist at Flinders University, released their expert scientific opinions on the safety of CSIRO’s GM wheat at a press conference in Melbourne. The Safe Food Foundation & Institute has a video of their conference, here.

While studies on the wheat have been released by CSIRO, the scientists point out that there are some grave holes in the overall assessment of the crop that have serious repercussions for people who consume it.

According to the Heinemann and Carman, extended testing should be performed before the wheat is put on store shelves.

Read: Doctor says modern wheat a “perfect, chronic poison”

“We firmly believe that long term chronic toxicological feeding studies are required in addition to the detailed requests . . . for the DNA sequences used. . .The industry routinely does feeding studies anyway, so it should not be too much more difficult to do long term (lifetime) studies and include inhalation studies.”

“The technology is too new,” the scientists said in the press conference, “What we found is that the molecules created in this wheat intended to silence wheat genes can match human genes and through ingestion can possibly silence human genes. We found over 770 pages of potential matches between the genes in wheat and the human genome.” This is the cause for concern.

The issue may end up in Australian courts if the company does not respond to the scientist’s and publics concerns about the GM wheat.

US Military and Monsanto Now Actively Engaged In Tracking Anti-GMO Websites, Activists, Campaigners and Independent Scientists







The word is out and the scientific bodies of manipulation can no longer contain the growing resistance against GMO. The more corrupt studies that attempt to find no harm in the consumption of genetically modified foods, the more an increasingly aware public is growing skeptical. The largest German daily newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung recently published a shocking article that reveals how Monsanto, the US Military and the US government are tracking anti-GMO campaigners, websites, and independent scientists who study the dangers of GMOs.


Does this mean your favortie anti-GMO websites are in danger? Absolutely not, but it does mean controlled opposition and fictitious medical specialists will be scouring the internet to plant fabricated statistics and data with the help of reputable medical journals to sway opinion. Many politicians and public health officials will then unknowingly use the fabricated information to validate the GMO mandate. For each new GMO, a study will be falsified to justify its effectiveness and requisite belief thereof. It’s one of the reasons prestigious science journals are rapidly declining in influence. This junk science has allowed government agencies to approve untold numbers of GMOs and drugs, or rubber stamp thousands of chemicals as safe.
Since the public is catching on, Universities and prestigious scientists are losing their credbility. The world is now savvy to the flawed process at the heart of science and it no amount of science coming from these fraudulent sources will satisfy the public. As for the independent scientists studying the dangers of GMO, they are being aggressively targeted.
Attacks on Anti-GMO Camps Everywhere
The largest German daily newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung has recently published a shocking article that reveals how Monsanto, the US Military and the US government track both anti-GMO campaigners, websites and independent scientists who study the dangers of GMOs.
The US do not only spy on governments, authorities and private individuals across the world with the help of their secret services; they also understand how to push forward the global interests of their companies with full force. A glimpse into the world of Monsanto shows that the company which delivered the pesticide ‘Agent Orange’ to the US military in the Vietnam war had close connections with the central power in Washington, with tough people from the field of the US secret services and with private insurance companies. If you really want to learn about the dark history of Monsanto, review this website. When you take a moment to reflect on the history of product development at Monsanto, what do you find? See if you can spot the pattern
 Monsanto is a giant in biotechnology: and number one in the controversial field of genetic engineering. For its opponents, many of whom live in Europe, Monsanto is a sinister enemy. Time and again mysterious things happen, which make the enemy seem yet more sinister.In the previous month, European environmental organization ‘Friends of the Earth’ and the German Environmental and Nature Protection Association (BUND) wanted to present a study on the pesticide glyphosate in the human body. Weed killers containing glyphosate are the big seller for Monsanto. The company aims for more than two billion dollars turnover for the Roundup product alone. ‘Roundup herbicide’ has a “long history of safe use in more than 100 countries”, Monsanto emphasizes.
Counter-Intuitive Findings Contradict Monsanto’s Claims
The promise by Monsanto and producers of genetically modified crops was that farmers could use less chemicals and produce a greater yield. That’s about as true as honesty in politics. A study published by Washington State University research professor Charles Benbrook finds that the use of herbicides in the production of three genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops — cotton, soybeans and corn — has actually increased.
This counterintuitive finding is based on an exhaustive analysis of publicly available data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Statistics Service. Benbrook’s analysis is the first peer-reviewed, published estimate of the impacts of genetically engineered (GE) herbicide-resistant (HT) crops on pesticide use.It is confirming earlier US government data showing that in the US, GM crops have produced an overall increase, not decrease, in pesticide use compared to conventional crops. Not only that promises of greater yields are also unfounded. A report that analyzed nearly two decades worth of peer reviewed research on the yield of the primary GM food/feed crops, soybeans and corn (maize), reveals that despite 20 years of research and 13 years of commercialization, genetic engineering has failed to significantly increase US crop yields. The author, former US EPA and US FDA biotech specialist Dr Gurian-Sherman, concludes that when it comes to yield, “Traditional breeding outperforms genetic engineering hands down.”
Virus Disabling The Computers of Activists
Two days before the BUND study was set to be published across 18 countries, a virus disabled the computer of the main organizer, Adrian Bepp. There was a threat that press conferences in Vienna, Brussels and Berlin would be cancelled. “We panicked”, remembers Heike Moldenhauer from BUND. The environmental activists were under extreme time pressure.
Moldenhauer and her colleagues have widely speculated about the motives and identity of the mysterious attacker. The genetic engineering expert at BUND believes the unknown virus suppliers wanted in particular to “generate confusion”. Nothing is worse for a study than a cancelled press conference: “we did ask ourselves at the time if we were seeing ghosts”, said Moldenhauer.There is no evidence that Monsanto was the ghost or had anything to do with the virus. The company does not do things like that. It takes pride in operating “responsibly”: “Today, it is very easy to make and spread all kinds of allegations,” Monsanto claims. They say that “over and over there are also dubious and popular allegations spread, which disparage our work and products and are in no way based on science.”
Critics of the group see things differently. This is due to the wide network Monsanto has developed across the world. There are ties with the US secret services, the US military, with very hard operating private security companies and of course, with the US government.
A conspicuously large number of Monsanto critics report regular attacks by professional hackers. The secret services and military also like to employ hackers and programmers. These specialize in developing Trojans and viruses in order to penetrate foreign computer networks. Whistle-blower Edward Snowden has indicated the connection between intelligence services actions and economic drive. However, this sinister connection has been overshadowed by other monstrosities.
Some powerful Monsanto supporters know a lot about how to carry out a cyber war. “Imagine the internet as a weapon, sitting on the table. Either you use it or your opponent does, but somebody’s going to get killed” said Jay Byrne, the former head of public relations at Monsanto, back in 2001.
Companies regularly fight with dubious methods to uphold what they see as their right: but friend or foe, him or me – that is fighting talk and in a war, you need allies. Preferably professionals. Such as those from the secret service milieu, for example.
Monsanto Closely Connected To Central Governments
Monsanto contacts are known to the notorious former secret service agent Joseph Cofer Black, who helped formulate the law of the jungle in the fight against terrorists and other enemies. He is a specialist on dirty work, a total hardliner. He worked for the CIA for almost three decades, among other things as the head of anti-terroism. He later became vice president of the private security company Blackwater, which sent tens of thousands of soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan under US government orders.
Investigations show how closely connected the management and the central government in Washington are, as well as with diplomatic representatives of the USA across the world. In many instances, Monsanto has operationally powerful assistants. Former Monsanto employees occupy high offices in the USA in government authorities and ministries, industrial associations and in universities; sometimes in almost symbiotic relationships. According to information from the American Anti-Lobby-Organisation, Open Secrets Org, in the past year, 16 Monsanto lobbyists have taken up sometimes high ranking posts in the US administration and even in regulatory authorities.
For the company, it is all about new markets and feeding a rapidly growing world population. Genetic engineering and patents on plants play a big role here. Over 90 % of corn and soya in the USA is genetically modified. In some parts of the rest of the world the percentage is also growing constantly.Monsanto led the fight to allow the famous genetically engineered corn plant MON810 in Europe with lots of lobbying – the group completely lost the fight. It was even beaten out of the prestigious French and German markets. An alliance of politicians, farmers and clergy rejected genetic engineering in the fields and the consumers do not want it on their plates. But the battle is not over. The USA is hoping that negotiations started this week for a free-trade agreement between the USA and the EU will also open the markets for genetic engineering.
 Lobbying for your own company is a civic duty in the USA. Even the important of the 16 US intelligence services have always understood their work as being a support for American economic interests on the world markets. They spy on not only governments, authorities and citizens in other countries under the name of the fight against terror, they also support American economic interests, in their own special way.
Independent Scientists Targeted
It is already obvious that somebody makes life difficult for Monsanto critics and an invisible hand ends careers. However, who is this somebody? The targets of these attacks are scientists, such as the Australian Judy Carman. Among other things, she has made a name for herself with studies of genetically modified plants. Her publications were questioned by the same professors which also attacked the the studies of other Monsanto critics.
It does not stop at skirmishes in the scientific community. Hackers regularly target various web pages where Carman publishes her studies and the sites are also systematically observed, at least that is the impression Carman has. Evaluations of IP log files show that not only Monsanto visits the pages regularly, but also various organizations of the U.S. government, including the military. These include the Navy Network Information Center, the Federal Aviation Administration and the United States Army Intelligence Center, an institution of the US Army, which trains soldiers with information gathering. Monsanto’s interest in the studies is understandable, even for Carman. “But I do not understand why the U.S. government and the military are having me observed,” she says.

Ever wonder why those same obnoxious, arrogant and infrequent users just happen to appear on the heels of very controversial posts like clock-work? They monitor, wait and then pounce of the same topics to emotionalize and antagonize legitimate users on social networking and thousands of other websites. Surging disinformation analysts are commenting on controversial topics such as GMO on your favorite websites to emotionalize and antagonize.

The organization GM Watch, known to be critical of gene technology, also experiences strange events. Editor Claire Robinson reports continued hacker attacks on the homepage since 2007. “Every time we increase the page security just a bit, the opposite side increases their tenacity and following are new, worse attacks”, she says. She also cannot believe the coincidences that occur. When the French scientist Gilles Eric Seralini published a controversial study on the health risks of genetically modified maize and glyphosate in 2012, the web site of GM Watch was hacked and blocked. The same repeats when the opinion of the European food inspectorate (EFSA) is added to the site. The timing was skilfully selected in both cases. The attacks took place exactly when the editors wanted to publish their opinion.



Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.


GMO Labeling Laws in Each Country Breakdown, PDF

August 2, 2013 ·

by Mike Barrett Natural Society


Are you aware of the GMO labeling laws implemented around the world? While the United States and Canada have virtually no GE food labeling laws, countries like Russia, Australia, Italy, and more have mandatory labeling of nearly all GE foods. Just below you can view a global map of all the countries and their current status with GE labeling laws.


Breakdown of GMO Labeling Laws in Each Country Global Map.

DOJ Mysteriously Quits Monsanto Antitrust Investigation



There’s an age-old tradition in Washington of making unpopular announcements when no one’s listening—like, you know, the days leading up to Thanksgiving. That’s when the Obama administration sneaked a tasty dish to the genetically modified seed/pesticide industry.


This treat involves the unceremonious end of the Department of Justice’s antitrust investigation into possible anticompetitive practices in the US seed market, which it had begun in January 2010. It’s not hard to see why DOJ would take a look. For the the crops that cover the bulk of US farmland like corn, soy, and cotton, the seed trade is essentially dominated by five companies: Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer, and Dow. And a single company, Monsanto, supplies nearly all genetically modified traits now so commonly used in those crops, which it licenses to its rivals for sale in their own seeds.


What’s harder to figure out is why the DOJ ended the investigation without taking any action—and did so with a near-complete lack of public information. The DOJ didn’t even see fit to mark the investigation’s end with a press release. News of it emerged from a brief item Monsanto itself issued the Friday before Thanksgiving, declaring it had “received written notification” from the DOJ antitrust division that it had ended its investigation “without taking any enforcement action.”



Diana Moss, vice president and senior research fellow of the American Antitrust Institute, told me that the DOJ’s information blackout on the case is unusual—and frustrating. “To have a two-year investigation and close it without a peep in our view does a disservice.” Moss is the author of a 2009 paper concluding that the GM seed market “requires antitrust enforcement and/or legislative relief.”

To get an idea of how far this market has come under the control of just a handful of companies, think of genetically modified seeds as computers—hardware and software. In this rather common but apt analogy, the actual seed is the hardware and the genetically modified traits they carry—like the ability to withstand herbicides, as in Monsanto’s Roundup Ready traits—are the software.

According to Monsanto’s rival, DuPont, Monsanto owns 98 percent of the US market in GM soybean traits and 79 percent of the corn traits.

Getting market share data for an industry like seeds is a maddening task. No government agency, including the US Department of Agriculture, tracks it. But it’s not hard to establish that a few companies dominate it, with Monsanto at the top. Indeed, Monsanto alone essentially controls the software-like part of the market, traits: According to Monsanto’s rival, DuPont, Monsanto traits end up in 98 percent of the GM soybeans grown in the US and 79 percent of the corn—a claim Monsanto doesn’t dispute. In a 2009 paper, Iowa State University economist GianCarlo Moschini reported that Monsanto traits are in 78.9 percent of the GM cotton grown here.

What about the hardware side, the seeds themselves? Below is a chart from the agribiz-trade web site AgWeb, showing market-share trends in corn and soy seeds from 2004 to 2011. In corn, we can see that DuPont, Monsanto, Syngenta, and Dow together own more than 80 percent of the market, and the share owned by “local and regional companies” fell by approximately half over the period, and now stands at less than 15 percent. In soy, the same four large companies now together control more than 70 percent of the market, with both “local and regional companies” and “publics/saved seeds” showing sharp declines over the period.

Big fish, little fish. Source:

The USDA does keep market share numbers for the cottonseed market (pdf here), and in the 2012 growing season, Monsanto (through its cottonseed line Delta & Pine), Bayer, and Dow (through its Phytogen subsidiary) owned 80 percent of the market among the three of them.

Of course, the fact that a market is dominated by a handful of giant companies doesn’t automatically mean that they have what economists call “market power”—that is, the might to manipulate markets to their own advantage, to the detriment of their customers, in this instance, farmers. It’s only in cases of market power that the DOJ would take action.

So did DOJ make a reasonable decision in dropping its investigation of Monsanto and the broader seed market? It’s impossible to say, given that it refuses to release any details.

In one county, 46.6 percent of farmers reporting having no access to high-quality non-Bt seed.

But there is evidence of potential market power in the industry. For example, one sign of an uncompetitive industry is the ability to raise prices at will, unimpeded by price pressure from rivals. It’s impossible to say, without more information, if the GMO giants have done that—but prices have risen briskly over the past decade. In her above-mentioned 2009 paper, the American Antitrust Institute’s Moss points out that in truly competitive markets, “technologies that enjoy widespread and rapid adoption”—like GM seeds—”typically experience precipitous declines” in price. But between 2000 and 2008, Moss writes, “real seed costs [for farmers] increased by an average annual rate of five percent for corn, almost 11 percent for cotton, and seven percent for soybeans.” And for most of those years, she adds, growth in the price farmers were receiving for their crops didn’t match growth in the price they were paying for their seeds—suggesting a possible squeeze on farmers by the seed industry. Figures supplied me by the Center for Food Safety’s Bill Freese (from USDA data) show that price increases have continued in the years since Moss’ study.

There’s also evidence that farmers lack access to lower-priced seeds. In 2010, University of Illinois researcher Michael Gray surveyed farmers in seven agriculture-intensive counties of Illinois. He asked them if they had access to high-quality corn seeds that weren’t genetically modified to contain Monsanto’s Bt insecticide trait. In all seven counties, at least 32 percent of farmers said “no.” In one county, 46.6 percent of farmers reporting having no access to high-quality non-Bt seed. For them, apparently, they had little choice but to pay Monsanto’s high prices for Bt seeds, whether they needed them or not.

Finally, a competitive market might be expected to be characterized by a high level of innovation—especially a market as high tech as GM seeds. But as the Center for Food Safety’s Freese pointed out to me, the main GM traits we see in the field today are the same as those we saw in the 1990s, when GMOs were rolled out: herbicide resistance and Bt. The industry’s much-heralded next big products—corn and soy engineered to withstand more toxic herbicides than Monsanto’s Roundup—is really just more of the same, intensified: herbicide resistance on steroids. Monsanto did roll out a “drought-resistant” corn variety last December—but the USDA itself, citing Monsanto’s own data, found it to be rather underwhelming.

A high degree of concentration, high and rising prices, limited choice, stagnant innovation—these are the hallmarks of an uncompetitive industry. Monsanto itself vigorously disputes claims of market power (see here and here). Perhaps the Department of Justice’s antitrust regulators considered all of this and had good reasons for ending its investigation with a thud and no action. We can’t know until they show us their work.


Tom Philpott is the food and ag blogger for Mother Jones, where this article first appeared. For more of his stories, click here. To follow him on Twitter, click here. RSS | Twitter


GMO Re-Education: Monsanto, Dow and Biotech Firms Unite to Launch Disinformation Site


If you had a question about how to protect yourself from a criminal known to break into houses in your neighborhood, would you ask him how to protect your home and then take his suggestions, or would you be suspicious he might be answering them in a way that would make your home even easier to encroach?

If you had a question about the honesty and integrity of a person in an authority position, would you ask that person to investigate himself and then accept his findings? (I mean, if you were a normal person, not if your name is Barack or Eric.)

If a company came out with a new medication that promised to cure your ills overnight, would you ask the company that produced it whether it was safe and trust them to be honest, or would you feel that their answer might be colored by their urge to make a buck?

So why on earth would anyone possibly believe that the likes of Monsanto, Dow, and Dupont would be spreading anything but sales-driven propaganda on their new website GMOAnswers?

Are they serious or is this some kind of big public relations joke being played out on a national platform?  Are we being punked?

What kind of person would look up their answers on a website SPONSORED by the very people who are putting out the toxic garbage they’d like us to believe is food?

Welcome to the compendium of disinformation!

In the most outrageous, blatant case of the foxes being put in charge of the henhouse that I have ever seen, the big biotech companies got together and launched their propaganda site GMOAnswers today. It is run by the Council for Biotechnology Information, whose members include Monsanto, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer CropScience and BASF. The site contains a heavily moderated question and answer forum and a complete compendium of disinformation in the section called “Explore GMOs”.

They purport that the website is an acknowledgement that they need to change:

Genetically modified organisms — GMOs — are a major topic of discussion today. Across our society, media and the Internet, a growing number of people have shared a wide range of questions and emotions on the topic – ranging from excitement and optimism to skepticism and even fear.

GMO Answers was created to do a better job answering your questions — no matter what they are — about GMOs. The biotech industry stands 100 percent behind the health and safety of the GM crops on the market today, but we acknowledge that we haven’t done the best job communicating about them – what they are, how they are made, what the safety data says.

This website is the beginning of a new conversation among everyone who cares about how our food is grown.

Join us. Ask tough questions. Be skeptical. Be open. We look forward to sharing answers. (source)

And they tout these 5 principals:

  1. Respecting people around the world and their right to choose healthy food products that are best for themselves and their families;
  2. Welcoming and answering questions on all GMO topics;
  3. Making GMO information, research and data easy to access and evaluate and supporting safety testing of GM products;  including allowing independent safety testing of our products through validated science-based methods;
  4. Supporting farmers as they work to grow crops using precious resources more efficiently, with less impact on the environment and producing safe, nutritious food and feed products;
  5. Respecting farmers’ rights to choose the seeds that are best for their farms, businesses and communities and providing seed choices that include non-GM seeds based on market demands.

The most notable things that I saw about the “discussions” there is that the “experts” are all pro-GMO.  There is a very subtle bias against those with concerns, despite the fact that many of them are quoting real statistics and genuine peer-reviewed studies. How many “experts” that are anti-GMO are being moderated right out of the discussion using the “House Rules“?

This website, sadly, is nothing more than an indoctrination vehicle for furthering the myths that Monsanto wants you to believe.

Biotech is on the defensive now – they have been backed into a corner  by activists who insist that the GMOs in our food supply, at the very least, be labeled, so that we can make an informed decision about what we feed our families. This false transparency is their last ditch effort to head off pro-labeling legislation and to keep their toxins hidden in our food supply.

What can we do?

I’ve created my own profile over there so that I can “join the discussion.” If you decide to join me, please follow the House Rules to the best of your ability and additionally, remember that you want to garner respect, not scorn, so:

  • Be courteous – we are in the right and we should take the high road in conversations
  • Don’t be threatening
  • Don’t use foul language
  • Don’t be abusive towards others, even when you disagree or when they are abusive towards you
  • Use facts and cite sources
  • If you are censored unfairly, take screen shots and let those tell your story

If other people who don’t know a lot about GMOs come to the forum and see anti-GMO activists scrapping it out in an uncivil fashion, it will close their eyes to the message we are trying to share. Don’t be afraid to be passionate, but please remember that you are representing all of us who say no to GMO.

Do you remember when Cheerios launched the Facebook App that allowed consumers to share what they really thought about the toxin-laden cereal?  That was a PR move that backfired dramatically when users bombarded the company’s page with anti-GMO messages.

Biotech must have missed that, because they’ve invited us to “Be skeptical. Be open. We want to hear from you.”

Let’s give them what they asked for, shall we?

Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor.  Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at

The Organic Review: Campbell’s Soup Being Sued for “Natural” Label, Uses GM Corn

(woot! woot!)


By on June 25, 2013





by Ali Papademetriou

Food labels are sometimes humorous to the health-conscious consumer but have ultimately shaped the way shoppers perceive various products, such as ‘diet soda’ for instance.

Many shoppers view ‘diet’ soft drinks as a healthier option than regular cola, but the potentially dangerous chemicals such as aspartame, caramel color and BPA that are present in nearly all diet sodas are far riskier than they will probably ever be advertised.

Another controversial ingredient that is mislabeled is the infamous genetically modified organism (GMO). Nearly all processed foods contain GMO – normally soy, corn, wheat, and canola ingredients. Regardless of the food company not blatantly displaying that their products contain GMOs, most products such as Goldfish crackers and Tostito’s chips actually advertise their foods as “all natural”, which is a lie.

Campbell’s Soup Company is one of those “all natural” fibbers and is now facing a lawsuit by Florida residents. Mark Krzykwa filed the suit last year, which claims that Campbell’s knowingly mislabeled its soups containing genetically modified corn as “all natural”.

With attempts of dismantling the case against them, Campbell’s argued that it’s the job of the Food and Drug Administration to approve their soups anyway; therefor it’s the agency’s wrongdoing. US District Court Judge William P. Dimitrouleas didn’t agree during his ruling on May 24. “We do not even know whether, when reviewing the label for whether it was ‘misleading,’ the USDA even knew that the soup contained GMO corn, particularly as there is nothing the soup label to so indicate,” he explained.

Dimitrouleas also detailed that the FDA “simply does not regulate those claims.”

In 2010, four women who argued that the “low sodium” tomato soup contained just as much sodium as the regular tomato soup sued Campbell’s. In September of 2011, the ladies were awarded $1.05 million in damages.

Image Reference



Revolt Against Mongressanto: GMO Crops Torched in America

Though a controlled media is suppressing the story, 40 tons of GMO crops were torched, prompting an FBI investigation. We The People do NOT WANT GMO, and if the Monsanto Congress does not watch their step, arson will become outright violence, and from there, even lead to revolution.

Why were sugar beets set on fire in Oregon?

by H. Michael Sweeney

copyright © 2013, all rights reserved. Permission to repost hereby granted provided entire post with all links in tact, including this paragraph, are included.

Who is Oregonians for Food and Shelter?

Update June 22, 2013: Additional research reveals some interesting things about the who and why behind the $10K reward offered for the beet burners… at document end.

Are Monsanto and Syngenta GMO criminals?

What you will learn reading this post…

  • People are taking the law into their own hands to kill GMO production[
  • There is an apparent media blackout, even on the Web;
  • The government is ramping up for what may end up being another WACO/Ruby Ridge standoff;
  • We may be looking at the Boston Tea Party of 2012 just before the next American Revolution.

Who is the earth liberation front?

Rebirth of the early Earth Liberation Front?

I Can’t Believe I’m the FIRST and ONLY one to report this on the Web.

Our new Boston Tea Party?

Our new Boston Tea Party?

NOT ONE MEDIA OUTLET outside of local circles has dared to mention it, perhaps because government fears that if the public learns that other people are getting fighting mad (literally), they might join in, and become an actual revolution. It was only reported locally live on KXL Radio and echoed by the Oregonian, where the ONLY Web mention exists, hard to find because the headline wording is carefully avoids the most likely keywords for a search — took me rather a while to find it. Here’s the scoop — PASS IT ON!

40 Tons of GMO Sugar Beets were set ablaze in Eastern Oregon, yesterday. FORTY TONS — the entire acreage of two full fields of crops IN THE GROUND were set ablaze over a THREE NIGHT PERIOD OF TIME. That means ARSON. And I have to say I am cheering! The only way could feel better about it is if I had dared to do it myself — which to be clear, I would not: I don’t look good in prison orange, and would be too worried about possible loss of life if things went terribly wrong.

Evidence is that 6,500 plants were destroyed BY HAND, ONE PLANT AT A TIME. That, in turn, implies A LOT OF PEOPLE were involved: would you want to stick around once a fire was going and wait to be discovered? No, someone (many someones) probably wanted to move as quickly as possible. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A MOVEMENT, a kind of ORGANIZED REVOLT — and this is exactly the kind of retribution I’ve warned was coming; when lawmakers and corporations refuse to honor the Constitution and instead engage in ‘legalized’ criminal acts such as enabled by theMonsanto Protection Act.’

This is all shades of… well, the BOSTON TEA PARTY. Instead of throwing tea into the harbor to protest taxes, someone was throwing flames onto crops in the ground to protest New World Order shenanigans. We are a long ways from Boston, but more recently we have the Earth Liberation Front, a group which also had its roots in Oregon (I love my State and our people; we have core beliefs and fight for them). The ELF, in 2000,  burned the offices of a GMO research project at the University of Michigan, a project funded by the Federal government and Monsanto at the time.

The ELF, or ‘Elves’ as they are sometimes called, is an ad-hoc group with its actual origins in the U.K. But forest mismanagement caused splinter cells to be established in Oregon, and subsequently, Michigan and elsewhere as new corporate wrongdoings became evident. Like the IRA, they have an official, public side, one not associated with criminal adventure, and instead focused on educating the public on the issues, such as the Gulf oil spill. They are a kind of militant Green Peace, perhaps.

But ELF cells normally come forward immediately to claim responsibility, because to them, its all about publicity to educate the public. Since there has been no statement, I’m deducing it is simply Oregon Farmers who have said, ‘Enough!’ Another clue that may be the case is that this comes on the heels (two weeks) of Japan’s rejection of the entire Oregon Wheat crop for the year (a tremendous financial blow because over 80% of Oregon Wheat is exported) because ONE report said ONE field was contaminated with at least ONE GMO plant.

The rightful fear is, because of pollination processes, once you introduce a GMO crop of a given variety ANYWHERE, the wind and insects will spread its genetic contamination to non GMO fields, and thereby ruin the ENTIRE INDUSTRY for a region. In fact, Oregon farmers have tendered a multi-billion dollar class action law suite against Monsanto, joining a long list of states doing so. Monsanto has experimented with GMO crops before they were approved in 16 states. They were supposedly all destroyed, but state after state is finding out the hard way, that Pandora’s box has been deliberately left open.

But while other governments in Europe and elsewhere are passing laws to ban GMO crops, and burning entire crops themselves, in America, our government is passing laws protecting Monsanto from legal repercussions, and therefore, it seems, farmers are forced to burn the crops, themselves. This means that where in other countries, citizens are being protected from corporate crimes, in America, citizens are forced to become ‘terrorists’ to survive. That’s how blatantly corrupt our corporate police state has become, I’m afraid.

Can GMO spark an armed revolution?

First Blow For the Revolution?

In this case, both fields belonged to the same Corporate Agricultural giant known for embracing GMO, though trying to do so quietly, another reason perhaps big media has kept the story from reaching the Internet. We are talking about Syngenta. Nowhere on their US Web site will you find mention of GMO, but that is exactly what the company is about. They have even lied publicly in writing on this issue with a public declaration. Yet their very corporate name shouts GMO.

But the FBI, and local media knows better (and now, you)… because apparently someone from the Syngenta operated farms mentioned the fact as a possible motive for the arson. This is a serious matter in many respects. It throws down the gauntlet and says, WE ARE MAD AS HELL AND ARE NOT GOING TO LET YOU GET AWAY WITH THIS BULLSHIT ANYMORE! But it also raises the stakes and put lives and property at risk, and if it goes wrong, could end up sparking an armed revolution.

Imagine the likely scenario: the FBI identifies a particular non GMO farmer as being participant and puts together a 100 man assault team to surround their homestead, land they’ve been farming for generations. What do you suppose would happen if they stood their ground? You would have another WACO standoff, another Ruby Ridge. Do you suppose that the other several dozen participants in the crop burning would stand by and let them pick them all off like that, one by one? I doubt it.

They would muster every rifle their families could carry, and call in farmers from adjacent counties, and likely be joined by some number of citizens from the local communities, and surround the FBI and other local authorities. They might even be joined by local Sheriffs, if not out of sympathetic understanding and general GMO angst, then in hopes of defusing the situation. I’m telling you, this can easily get out of hand.

And in a way, I’m hoping it does. Because I think WE NEED A DEFINITIVE EVENT to send a CLEAR MESSAGE and draw a line in the sand: NOT ONE INCH MORE — BACK OFF! It would rally the informed to action, stir the Sheeple to understanding, and FORCE THEM to take a side, lest they end up in a possible cross fire if shooting breaks out everywhere GMO crops and corporate properties exist, and their executives live.

Even though it could easily spark a full-scale revolution, I’m still for it. That threat is not lightweight, either — it is incredibly easy to start and carry out a successful revolution. I’d be tickled pink to live in America, once more, a country based on a social contract called the Constitution and Bill of Rights, where government was BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, of the people, and not a fascist police state in the making BY CORPORATIONS, FOR THE NEW WORLD ORDER.

GMO? Burn, baby, burn…

Mongressanto? You may just be next.

Who are Oregonians for Food and Shelter?

Update: The Who and Why of the $10,000 Reward

‘Oregonians’ for ‘Food and Shelter’ sounds like a charity that provides food and shelter, but that’s not right. Their Web site describes themselves in terms which, after thoughtful consideration, would leave you believing them a non profit NGO, a special interest group (SIG) of professionals seeking to educate their peers in the latest timber and agriculture technologies. Closer to the truth, is that they are a Political Action PAC, putting out their own Voter’s Guide, and involving themselves in political matters impacting timber and farming.

Their members are a who’s who of AG and Timber, but with a specific bent toward biotech… specific biotech. Their Boards and Chairs are well peppered with people from Monsanto, Syngenta, and other firms with a vested interest in GMO, and firms they do business with. In fact, there are even two firms represented who have had consensual dealings with Central Intelligence Agency fronts. One of these was harmless and related to fire-fighting, but the other (Portland General Electric) was tied to much darker matters, though I’m sure they were not quite aware of such details. But then, those same folks also went to bed with ENRON (also a CIA operation), didn’t they?

The OFS founder is one Terry L. Witt, who cites himself as a professional Manager of Non Profit Groups, as though you should go see him if you have one in need of management. Really? The Web site was founded in 1999. Within a few months, Terry was writing in support of Monsanto’s patent infringement suit against a farmer over GMO crop migration (contamination) such as faced by Oregon Wheat growers. It would not be the first time he would play hatchet man for GMO, additionally using op-ed in the Oregonian to disinform on behalf of (again) Monsanto.

Indeed, if you look at the one and only truly informational page at the Web site (despite the fact they list three topics to choose from – the other two have no links provided), the topic is… you guessed it; pro GMO. So what is the real agenda, again? But perhaps we should overlook this narrow view, because they do point out their Web site is still under construction. What?

Established in 1999, and still under construction? Could it be because the Web designer is (whois information) Troy, Terry’s son, operating out of their $700,000 home in Tigard? Hmmm. Troy has his own business (he is a photographer and ‘lead designer’ at a ‘design studio’), and his Web site is even more under construction: it consists ONLY of a logo (ergo, my use of quotes). There is not even a statement on being under construction since created in 2005.  ”Focused Marketing, Messaging, and Design,” the logo claims.

This could be the trait of (choose one):

a) someone not very good at what they do;
b) a CIA front;
c) a corporate front for money laundering (e.g., payments from Monsanto);
d) a front or over billing a client (e.g., Monsanto);
e) a clever ploy to distract conspiracy theorists and waste blog reader’s time;
f) all of the above.

I’m sorry, but I come away with the distance impression OFS is nothing but a surrogate for GMO interests, and thinly veneered, at that.

That’s the WHO and the WHY of the $10K reward.

Frankly, given these facts, I’d rather someone  offer a $100K reward if they would all simply go away.

Hard-Hitting Report: Pigs Fed GM Diet Experience Significant Health Problems

According to a new groundbreaking report analyzing the effects of GM feed on animals, scientists have found that pigs fed a diet of GM corn and soy experienced numerous adverse health effects, including sever stomach inflammation and an enlarged uterus. The results “are both biologically significant and statistically significant.”

June 12th, 2013

Published in the Organic Systems Journal, the peer-reviewed study analyzed 168 just-weaned commercial pigs for 22.7 weeks, or just over 5 months. Half of the pigs were fed popular GM corn and soy varieties, while the other half were fed the same foods, only not GM (though it must have been difficult to find non-GM corn and soy since the vast majority of these two crops are indeed GM).

What the researchers found was startling:
“We found that the level of severe inflammation in stomachs was markedly higher in pigs fed the GM diet. Pigs on the GM diet were 2.6 times more likely to get severe stomach inflammation than control pigs. Males were more strongly affected. While female pigs were 2.2 times more likely to get severe stomach inflammation when on the GM diet, males were 4 times more likely. These findings are both biologically significant and statistically significant.”

Lead researcher Dr. Judy Carman, adjunct associate professor at Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia, noted numerous reasons why this study and the findings are important.

  • 1. The results were found using real-life, on-farm condition, as opposed to in a laboratory. Plus, strict scientific controls were able to be used that aren’t on farms normally.
  • 2. Pigs are consumed by the mass population, so any issues in the pigs may affect the consumer.
  • 3. The digestive system of pigs are similar to a human’s digestive system, which causes even greater concern.
  • 4. The health complications were the result of crops containing multiple (3) GM genes and the GM proteins that are produced by the crops. Not one food regulator requires that these be tested for safety.

“Our results provide clear evidence that regulators need to safety assess GM crops containing mixtures of GM genes, regardless of whether those genes occur in the one GM plant or in a mixture of GM plants eaten in the same meal, even if regulators have already assessed GM plants containing single GM genes in the mixture…In my experience, farmers have found increased production costs and escalating antibiotic use when feeding GM crops. In some operations, the livestock death loss is high, and there are unexplained problems including spontaneous abortions, deformities of new-born animals, and an overall listlessness and lack of contentment in the animals,”  Dr. Carman said.

controlled pig stomach final 2 Hard Hitting Report: Pigs Fed GM Diet Experience Significant Health Problems (Photos)

Interestingly, and not surprisingly, this is not the first piece of research to find complications arising from GM food consumption. One French GMO study concluded that rats fed a lifelong diet consisting of genetically modified corn suffered serious consequences, including tumor development, heavy amounts of damage to multiple organs, and premature death. This isn’t surprising, seeing as one analysis found Monsanto’s GM corn to  be nutritionally dead and highly toxic.

Another study found that feeding hamsters GMO soy results in higher rates of infant mortality and causes fertility problems.

“In some cases, animals eating GM crops are very aggressive. This is not surprising, given the scale of stomach irritation and inflammation now documented. I have seen no financial benefit to farmers who feed GM crops to their animals,” said Dr. Carmen.
Follow us: @naturalsociety on Twitter | NaturalSociety on Facebook


Monsanto Video Revolt Begins – Anthony Gucciardi

It is with great excitement that I am able to announce a massive new grassroots campaign against Monsanto that kicks the intellectual war against GMOs into warp speed. Following the great success of campaigns like March Against Monsanto, the new Monsanto Video Revolt brings the online revolution against Monsanto to life by enabling powerful activism on and before July 24th, 2013.

The Monsanto Video Revolt campaign acts as a proverbial stake into the barely-beating heart of Monsanto, and the premise is very simple: on July 24th, we will blast all of the major video hosting websites like Youtube, Vimeo, and (where your content won’t get censored) with videos spreading the word about Monsanto and GMOs at large. Whether it’s a smart phone video or camcorder recording, it doesn’t matter — simply tell Monsanto and the world why we are kicking Big Biotech out of the world’s food supply.

Anyone can participate in the Monsanto Video Revolt across the globe, and the mainstream media will be forced to cover the event whether they like it or not. I’m extremely happy to be teaming up with Mike Adams of NaturalNews and Dr. Edward F. Group III of Global Healing Center to be launching this campaign, and I can only imagine the success we will achieve with great people like Mike and Ed distributing the news to their millions of readers around the world.

Unlike a physical protest, where the media can choose to censor and ignore (which they certainly did choose to do, as I was the only one with a camera team at the march in Philadelphia), massive online activism will generate colossal amounts of media by driving trends and utilizing major sharing websites to send a virtual tidal wave of reality across the net.

Be A Part of the Real Food Revolution – Monsanto Video Revolt July 24th

On July 24th, we will be blasting out millions of videos on Monsanto and GMOs, but you don’t have to wait. You can start posting videos and other media right now, and you are encouraged to post them on our Facebook page, send them in to us, and just share them in general. Overall, the initiative is very simple, and it comes down to 3 simple steps:

  • Step 1: Create a video of any length exposing Monsanto and GMOs, whether it’s from a webcam, cellphone camera, or a studio quality camcorder. It can be anything from you telling Monsanto to leave the food supply alone to highlighting the numerous pieces of information regarding their destructive acts of corruption against humanity. Add ‘Monsanto Video Revolt’ to the title or description.
  • Step 2: Upload your video to the major video hosting website, like Youtube, Vimeo, Liveleak, Dailymotion,, and any others.
  • Step 3: Spread your video like wildfire on Facebook, Twitter, etc., and make sure that Monsanto knows we are exposing their entire agenda.

Here’s an image that clearly lists the steps of the Monsanto Video Revolt:


The Terrible Tragedy of the Healthy Eater



I know you. We have a lot in common. You have been doing some reading and now you are pretty sure everything in the grocery store and your kitchen cupboards is going to kill you.


Before Your Healthy Eating Internet Education:


I eat pretty healthy. Check it out: whole grain crackers, veggie patties, prawns, broccoli. I am actually pretty into clean eating.


After Your Healthy Eating Internet Education:


Those crackers – gluten, baby. Gluten is toxic to your intestinal health, I read it on a forum. They should call those crackers Leaky Gut Crisps, that would be more accurate. That veggie burger in the freezer? GMO soy. Basically that’s a Monsanto patty. Did you know soybean oil is an insecticide? And those prawns are fish farmed in Vietnamese sewage pools. I didn’t know about the sewage fish farming when I bought them, though, really I didn’t!

The broccoli, though..that’s ok. I can eat that. Eating that doesn’t make me a terrible person, unless….oh, shit! That broccoli isn’t organic. That means it’s covered with endocrine disrupting pesticides that will make my son sprout breasts. As if adolescence isn’t awkward enough.

And who pre-cut this broccoli like that? I bet it was some poor Mexican person not making a living wage and being treated as a cog in an industrial broccoli cutting warehouse. So I’m basically supporting slavery if I eat this pre-cut broccoli. Oh my God, it’s in a plastic bag too. Which means I am personally responsible for the death of countless endangered seabirds right now.

I hate myself.


Well, shit.


All you want to do is eat a little healthier. Really. Maybe get some of that Activa probiotic yogurt or something. So you look around and start researching what “healthier” means.


That really skinny old scientist dude says anything from an animal will give you cancer. But a super-ripped 60 year old with a best-selling diet book says eat more butter with your crispy T-Bone and you’ll be just fine as long as you stay away from grains. Great abs beat out the PhD so you end up hanging out on a forum where everyone eats green apples and red meat and talks about how functional and badass parkour is.


You learn that basically, if you ignore civilization and Mark Knopfler music, the last 10,000 years of human development has been one big societal and nutritional cock-up and wheat is entirely to blame. What we all need to do is eat like cave-people.


You’re hardcore now, so you go way past way cave-person. You go all the way to The Inuit Diet™.


Some people say it’s a little fringe, but you are committed to live a healthy lifestyle. “Okay,” you say, “let’s do this shit,” as you fry your caribou steak and seal liver in rendered whale blubber. You lose some weight which is good, but it costs $147.99 a pound for frozen seal liver out of the back of an unmarked van at the Canadian border.


Even though The Inuit Diet™ is high in Vitamin D, you learn that every disease anywhere can be traced to a lack of Vitamin D (you read that on a blog post) so you start to supplement. 5000 IU of Vitamin D before sitting in the tanning booth for an hour does wonders for your hair luster.


Maxing out your credit line on seal liver forces you to continue your internet education in healthy eating. As you read more you begin to understand that grains are fine but before you eat them you must prepare them in the traditional way: by long soaking in the light of a new moon with a mix of mineral water and the strained lacto-fermented tears of a virgin.


You discover that if the women in your family haven’t been eating a lot of mussels for at least the last four generations, you are pretty much guaranteed a $6000 orthodontia bill for your snaggle-tooth kid. That’s if you are able to conceive at all, which you probably won’t, because you ate margarine at least twice when you were 17.


Healthy eating is getting pretty complicated and conflicted at this point but at least everyone agrees you should eat a lot of raw vegetables.


Soon you learn that even vegetables are trying to kill you. Many are completely out unless they are pre-fermented with live cultures in a specialized $79 imported pickling crock. Legumes and nightshades absolutely cause problems. Even fermentation can’t make those healthy.


Goodbye, tomatoes. Goodbye green beans. Goodbye all that makes summer food good. Hey, it’s hard but you have to eliminate these toxins and anti-nutrients. You probably have a sensitivity. Actually, you almost positively have a sensitivity. Restaurants and friends who want to grab lunch with you will just have to deal.


Kale: it’s what’s for dinner. And lunch. And breakfast.


The only thing you are sure of is kale, until you learn that even when you buy organic, local kale from the store (organic, local kale is the only food you can eat now) it is probably GMO cross-contaminated. Besides, it usually comes rolled in corn starch and fried to make it crunchier.  Market research, dahling…sorry, people like crunchy cornstarch breaded Kale-Crispers™ more than actual bunny food.


And by now you’ve learned that the only thing worse than wheat is corn. Everyone can agree on that, too. Corn is making all of America fat. The whole harvest is turned into ethanol, high fructose corn syrup, chicken feed and corn starch and the only people who benefit from all those corn subsidies are evil companies like Cargill.


Also, people around the world are starving because the U.S. grows too much corn. It doesn’t actually make that much sense when you say it like that, but you read it on a blog. And anyway, everyone does agree that corn is Satan’s grain. Unless wheat is.


The only thing to do, really, when you think about it, is to grow all your own food. That’s the only way to get kale that isn’t cornstarch dipped. You’ve read a lot and it is obvious that you can’t trust anything, and you can’t trust anyone and everything is going to kill you and the only possible solution is to have complete and total control over your foodchain from seed to sandwich.


Not that you actually eat sandwiches.


You have a little panic attack at the idea of a sandwich on commercial bread: GMO wheat, HFCS and chemical additive dough conditioners. Some people see Jesus in their toast but you know the only faces in that mix of frankenfood grains and commercial preservatives are Insulin Sensitivity Man and his sidekick, Hormonal Disruption Boy.


It’s okay, though. You don’t need a deli sandwich or a po’boy. You have a saute of Russian Kale and Tuscan Kale and Scotch Kale (because you love international foods). It’s delicious. No, really. You cooked the kale in a half-pound of butter that had more raw culture than a black-tie soiree at Le Bernardin.


You round out your meal with a little piece of rabbit that you raised up and butchered out in the backyard. It’s dusted with all-natural pink Hawaiian high-mineral sea salt that you cashed-in your kid’s college fund to buy and topped with homemade lacto-fermented herb mayonnaise made with coconut oil and lemons from a tropical produce CSA share that helps disadvantaged youth earn money by gleaning urban citrus. The lemons were a bit over-ripe when they arrived to you, but since they were transported by mountain bike from LA to Seattle in order to keep them carbon neutral you can hardly complain.


The rabbit is ok. Maybe a bit bland. Right now you will eat meat, but only meat that you personally raise because you saw that PETA thing about industrial beef production and you can’t support that. Besides, those cows eat corn. Which is obscene because cows are supposed to eat grass. Ironically, everyone knows that a lawn is a complete waste in a neighborhood – that’s where urban gardens should go. In other words, the only good grass is grass that cows are eating. You wonder if your HOA will let you graze a cow in the common area.


In the meantime, you are looking for a farmer who raises beef in a way you can support and you have so far visited 14 ranches in the tri-state area. You have burned 476 gallons of gas driving your 17-mpg SUV around to interview farmers but, sadly, have yet to find a ranch where the cattle feed exclusively on organic homegrown kale.


Until you do, you allow yourself a small piece of rabbit once a month. You need to stretch your supply of ethical meat after that terrible incident with the mother rabbit who nursed her kibble and ate her kits. After that, deep down, you aren’t really sure you have the stomach for a lot more backyard meat-rabbit raising.


So you eat a lot of homegrown kale for awhile. Your seasoning is mostly self-satisfaction and your drink is mostly fear of all the other food lurking everywhere that is trying to kill you.


Eventually your doctor tells you that the incredible pain you’ve been experiencing is kidney stones caused by the high oxalic acid in the kale. You are instructed to cut out all dark leafy greens from your diet, including kale, beet greens, spinach, and swiss chard and eat a ton of low-fat dairy.


Your doctor recommends that new healthy yogurt with the probiotics. She thinks it’s called Activa.


%d bloggers like this: