Slashdot Mirror
Starving Nation Turns Down Bioengineered Corn
The Washington Post has a story about Zimbabwe turning down shipments of genetically engineered corn, even though the country is experiencing a severe drought and starvation. Zimbabwe is afraid some of the corn will end up planted instead of eaten -- and growing patented corn is a no-no, of course! If the corn is planted even once, it may contaminate all future crops grown in those fields or any fields nearby, leading to huge lawsuits - and then the fields are contaminated, exacerbating the food shortage. So, starve or be bankrupted, and Zimbabwe appears to be choosing, "starve". Tons of ethical issues here, which have hardly been touched upon in the U.S. press.
Simple carbs like corn turn straight into sugar! Just say no to these evil carbs! Lowcarb for life!
is it the patent they care about? or some sort of anti-gm food policy?
"Save me jebus!" - Homer Simpson (btw, I'm probably talkin out of me arse)
"This just in... citizens of Zimbabwe have eaten their own limbs in an attempt to save themselves from the ever dooming bankruptsy"
I really wish US multinationals would stop pushing GE onto other countries.
If they wanted to be nice they could have given normal corn.
You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
One other point regarding many patented "wheat products" - as a seed it is effectively infertile... any crop from it used as seed will never germinate, and if that cross-fertilises with an exising native strain, blammo!
This sig left unintentionally blank.
It's a concern, but not the reason. RTFA.
What the Zimbabwean government says they are afraid of is losing export business to Europe, which does not allow BE food. That, and the president is stupidly independant.
The fact that everyone involved on the USA side says the IP concerns are stupid doesn't stop Slashdot's journalism.
Some people have things against genetically altered food. For a lot of reasons other than the patents associated with them.
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
If it is possible to supply third-world countries with food, but only of the genetically-altered variety, then perhaps we should genetically engineer the plants such that they cannot reproduce. This way, there is no fear of the plant spreading uncontrolably. I have no idea how difficult this would be, but it is definitely not impossible. No need to mill the corn, or handle it any differently from 'normal' corn.
"What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
Why don't they send them birth control pill laden corn? That would surely accomplish more to end hunger there.
I don't like being the person who makes these trite complaints, but I also don't want to see Slashdot get into a habit of being days behind other sites.
Plastic had a nice article about this on July 28th.
Peace.
Is it just me, or is it a touch ironic that they won't accept this because of exportation problems?
:q!
As usual, slashdot editors fail to see the larger picture.
The problem here is not about patents - it's about
Europe's refusal to import genetically modified food. Europe is Zimbabwe's primary export market.
If Zimbabwe's crops were tainted, they could lose their primary source of revenue.
Furthermore, Zimbabwe is willing to accept the corn if the US will agree to mill it before shipping. The additional cost of milling is minimal, but is not covered by the aid package. Classic snafu.
I doubt many of them would care about either one and just take the food.
I can't believe why there is such a big fuss over genetically altered corn. It does not pose any more risk to the soil than normal corn. If farmers would practice simple crop rotation, they would not need to worry about this. Also with corn prices so low right now they could import natural or genetically engineered corn from the US and Russia, both of which could feed the rest of the world.
Is this an opportunity for the WTO or the G8 to do something good for once and "encourage" the patent holders to forgo thier patents so we can help the under nourished? I'd like to see that happen but thats about as likely as Bill gates buying the corn rights and giving it away to the 3rd world. Gee I love this wonderful new free market economy we have that supposed to make everything fair and help the impovourished!
If you believe Monsanto's claims that they'll "adapt" their patent enforcement policies to "local traditions", I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Concerns over bio-engineered corn may be the excuse he gives in public, but in reality he is using food as leverage over his political opponents. It has been reported that he has halted shipments of food into areas that did not support him in the recent elections. It also ties into his siezures of white owned farms. Apparently he is trying to starve his country.
with all the shit industry's been known to pull, i wouldn't want engineered corn with a patent on it either. What kills me is that they could probably get away with patenting and licensing this corn despite the fact that in logical, sense-making thought, once you've sold the corn, it should be the right of the user to do what they will with the corn. i don't think you can sell corn under a license, and i'm damn sure you can't click-wrap it with an EULA. As much as I can go on about the evils of patents and EULAs, this whole debacle doesn't make any sense at all...you could chase it in legal/logical circles from here to eternity.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
the president of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe is the same guy that told his people that it was OK to kill white farmers and take their land. He also rigged the last election to keep himself in power. I'm not suprised that he'd ignore the starvation of his own people to show the world how 'powerful' he is.
On the subject of patented crops, only.
I find it quite disturbing that African Countries are prepared to starve their people, rather than contribute money to big overseas giants. This must speak volumes about the problems with patented crops.
Food should never come patented, as it is THE basic necessity of life. What next, patented water?
While Mugabe's regime is corrupt to the core, and the government bought this on themselves, there should be no excuse for forcing third world countries into a subservient like existence, where they have to pay multinationals for their basic food.
Get rid of patents on food. The companies deserve to be paid for advancing food technology and supply, but this isn't they way to go about.
(Disclaimer: Yes, i have read the article (it was on Fark the other day), and yes, it's only meant to be used for feeding, but that doesn't mean it will be.)
Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.
The famine in Zimbabwe is mostly the creation of one man, el presidente for life Robert Mugabe. Mr. Mugabe tried to circumvant the constitutional limits on his terms by inciting black on white genocide. This has turn Zimbabwe, once the breadbasket of the Southern African countries into needing to import food just to survive.
Seriously, even if God should rain mana onto the starving masses, the problem is still there. I see no future for that country as long as the thugs are in charge.
The first issue is simple: they don't want to become HUMAN GUINEA PIGS for Monsanto and their ilk. GE corn has NOT been proven to be "safe". Quite the contrary--there is evidence that it causes sterility in pigs. Pigs are pretty "close" genetically to humans, so think hard on this.
Second, exactly what KIND of GE corn is being offered? If this is Monsanto, you can bet that these are "terminator" seeds--seeds that have been genetically engineered to EXPIRE after a season. It doesn't take a Ph.D to imagine what would happen if these monstrosities cross-pollinate.
Given the choice, I would choose "starve" myself.
Considering that a large proportion of their population is facing starvation, I doubt education is #1 on their list of priorities. Besides which, I don't think there's a country on Earth which has even almost reached a consensus on GM foods.
So blame Europe, fate, and a cynical, Machievellian leader, not insanity for this one.
personal attacks hurt, especially when deserved
then BE foods, or GE food, or IP laws or anything else. The ol dictator in charge over there is useing this for his own ends, nothing more.
It has been discussed further down in the comments of this section. While his idea is insightful, it's not the full reason.
Om, nomnomnom...
i want some of Homer J Simpson's Tomacco...
UserName and comment do not match. Go shoot yourself.
Ideological distortion that benefits the right: "ignorant 3rd world government listens to tree-hugging granola crunchers and selfishly lets its own people starve."
Ugly, complex reality: if Zimbabwe's own corn crop were adulterated with GM corn, they could lose their primary market for food exports, Europe, and then could end up suffering more down the line; if they get their local production back on track, the survivors would probably better off not having GM corn in the fields. I have always felt the complexity trumps ideology, and this is a classic instance of it.
finally killed someone.
...the more likely reason the grain was refused is that the Zimbabwe government is currently on a militaristic campaign to take land away from white farmers and give it to black ones as part of a Land Acquisition Act. President Mugabe can use the starvation of his own people to further cast blame on the white farmers and rally more support for the governments policies. Pretty good K5 article on the whole situation here.
Please note, also, that I'm not trying to make commentary on whether land distribution in Zimbabwe is right or not, only on the methods used by the government to achieve that end.
The Mugabe government has been blocking food aid--GM or otherwise--to weaken its political opponents, like Stalin did to the Ukraine.
t m.
See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/2157949.s
"Food aid has been blocked in some areas which voted against Mugabe during elections in March. Opposition supporters have also been prevented from buying commercial stocks of grain."
Why don't they follow Brazil's lead and take the corn, plant it, and then give the corporations the middle finger? Brazil doesn't care about patents on AIDs drugs, and Zimbabwe shouldn't care about patents on food.
Damn!
.NET on Slashdot!
I just saw an ad for MS Visual Studio
I know this is totally off-topic, but I'm frickin going to have a seizure!
The dissonance I'm experiencing is totally overwhelming! I don't know how to make sense of the experience!
Help!
Has this happened to anyone else, or am I hallucinating?
They've got a reason to be worried about importing genetically engineered crops into Zimbabwe, especially if it's seed from Monsanto. There is a story on Guerilla News Network about a Canadian farmer whose crop was infected with Monsanto engineered crop he never wanted and still was made to pay:
" (GNN) In a Kafkaesque ruling sure to send a chill up the spines of farmers around the world, a Canadian farmer has been ordered to pay thousands of dollars to Monsanto for violating their patent on genetically modified canola seed. The twist: the farmer, Percy Schmeiser, says he is accused of stealing something he never wanted in the first place. Schmeiser's fields were contaminated when pollen from genetically engineered seeds blew onto his then GE-free land from neighboring farms. Shortly after, Monsanto's "gene police" invaded his farm, took seed samples without his permission, and then charged him with violating Canadian patent law that says it's illegal for farmers to re-use or to grow Monsanto's GM seed without signing a licensing agreement. Even though it was Schmeiser whose fields were polluted with organisms he never wanted, the court says he must now pay Monsanto $10,000 for licensing fees and up to $75,000 in profits from his 1998 crop."
You can read the rest of the article here. For more in-depth information go to Percy Schmeiser's website.I especially like the part where they fly over farmers' fields and dump chemicals on them without knowledge or permission of the farmer to "prove" the farmers were using their seeds.
I just don't seem to get it. Why is it that genetically engineered corn is created in the first place? I'm sure that if you ask the people who did they work (i.e. scientists), they'd say it was for the betterment of humanity. If you ask the money-greedy, idiotic, bastard executives they'll say that it was for the royalties they'd get from its creation.
I'm sorry, but is our society too aloof to the problems of the world? Being a person who has taken a fair numbere of science classes in college and also done research with geneticists, these people are largely doing this work for the desire to help humanity, not to make a cheap buck. Our system is so screwed up that we insist that the food that may get planted will lead to lawsuits. So what if a thousand children die? Who gives a shit as long as these greedy idiots can drives their benzs and live in million dollar homes.
How many of you would help someone in car accident if it was possible? How many of you would help someone trapped in a place they couldn't get out of? I think that most people would answer yes because we as humans strive for not only our own survival but the survival of others. That is the very thing that makes us unique.
After September 11th and the subsequent bombardment of Afghanistan, I honestly thought that humanity had gone the way of savages and animals just bent on killing each other. Yet, on a drive down Interstate-5 to Los Angeles I saw a black pickup flip over and land on its side in the middle of the road. You know what I saw? I saw my fellow Americans stop on the side of the road in both directions and try to help the people inside the pickup. People were directing traffic, others were cleaning the mess on the road, more were trying to assist the occupants. This is humanity. Humanity is there to stop the suffering of others.
So I ask, why does a country have to worry about lawsuits when its people are starving? There is something really wrong with the system.
Guess what...
As of today, nobody knows.
Not even the highest genius in Bio Tech.
=> Neither don't u
and the soil is only one part of the problem. Add the patenting issue, the fact we don't know what happens to humans being after feeding for years on GE Corn, the fact that to know u have to live test (ie sell to millionw of ppl and wait to see, cause testing on human IS forbidden)...
The fact the soil is used the same is 1/100 th of the problem.
+ They are GIVEN the corn, as in starving and having no money. They accept to get the corn, but are afraid it gets planted... which is another debate here altogether.
BTW, EU + USA + CCCP (of the old time) had more than enough to feed the planet with "convensionnal" food for years.
We just don't do it because it costs less to destroy the stocks in situ than to ship them abroad.
now call me cynical...
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
No one ever accused the Negro of having high IQs - quite the contrary if you consider the best seller The Bell Curve. Those nigs over in Africa are open step below the monkey. If a starving nigger isn't smart enough to eat perfectly good corn, let 'em starve.
/great/ company. im surprised someone with as little sense of humanity is even reading a site like this.
wait, im sorry, who did you said had the low IQ? the only people i ever hear talking like this are degenerate pieces of shit. you're putting yourself with
way to go, man. you really got your point across...if your point was that post-natal abortion should be legal.
Wide scale irradiation would seem to be cheap and sterilize the corn, no? Also, couldn't they just mill the damn stuff? Hard to grow something from seed when it's been pulverized to powder. There has to be more to it than this.
If I had no sense of humor, I would long ago have committed suicide. -Ghandi
Some studies have suggested corn sirrup is a significant factor in weight problems. I don't have the URL to the article handy, but there's more to the story than just some african country not taking some corn.
Is some sort of DRM system for organic matter.... not only would it solve the "corn" problem (BTW, corn has hardly ANY nutritional value; why is a starving country looking at planting corn to solve their hunger problem!??!?!), but, then it could also control what we hear, see, taste, smell, etc, etc, based upon weather or not we have valid "licenses" to do so...
Yeah, I'm being sarcastic, but think about it, it's really not THAT far-fetched....
Tons of ethical issues here, which have hardly been touched upon in the U.S. press.
One of which is the fact that Zimbabwe actually does have the right to turn down these shipments.
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
How about get your ass off AOL, and fucking learn to type.
now call me cynical...
I'd rather call you a moron for being so fucking ignorant of basic rules of grammar.
They are starving due to "drought and political mismanagement". In other words, they don't have enough food to feed themselves. However, the food that could feed them is not politically correct in the EU, therefore they couldn't sell it (or its proginy if planted) in Europe. So, they would rather let half their population starve rather than at some point become the breadbasket of Europe... now it's all making sense! The government doesn't want to feed their people, they want to resell the food and buy new cars, if you're really cynical. If you're not then this makes very little sense. Starve or not? I bet the people that are starving (as opposed to the people making the decisions) would have a very different take on this if they were allowed to express it.
Large multinational corps are using poor 3rd world nations as their own private laboratory
to see if there really are any side effects.
See you can either starve, or eat this probably
safe corn, and we can observe what happens
to you.
There isn't any other kind. Corn as we know it today did not exist at all until it was selectively bred for several dozen generations. Prior to about 7000 years ago, there was no such grain.
I realize, of course, that GE as used here means "trans-species", which is just a newer form of selective breeding.
Corn is good for making farm animals gain weight very quickly. Works on people, too. In a way, the farm animals are lucky, because they are killed and eaten before they have a chance to develop heart disease, arthritis, diabetes, and other maladies caused by excess carbohydrate consumption (especially grains, which were not parts of the human diet prior to about 7000 years ago).
Concealed Handgun License Courses in Plano, Texas
milling expenses, which are estimated at $25 per metric ton
Wait...so I could get an ENTIRE TON of corn milled for only $25? How do the milling people make any money anyway?
If food is being donated for a good cause it must be given away with NO strings attached. Sorta like being given away under the GPL if you will. How can you give away food with a threat of taking it back? Now in this case there is more going on here since the government on the receiving side is corrupt so this story looses it's bite.
Corn fileds in Africa?? I believe welall know thr real reason begind GE crops. Whats next, BEES????
Down with Crapitali$m. Anarchy NOW!
Famines happen, but actual starvation generally only happens when its in a tyrant's political interest for certain people to die.
----------
I am Jack's writable stack pointer.
Mother Jones had an article last June about the same problem with GM (genetically modified) crops, this time happening in Oaxaca, Mexico, where corn originated. The government is trying to silence scientists sounding the alarm. -- http://www.motherjones.com/magazine/MJ02/seeds_con troversy.html
Any Babylon fan would know this scene(edited for relevance)...
Lord Refa: And why would I accept your corn, Molari?
Molari: Well, 1. Because I asked you.
2. Because you're part of the U.N., and obliged to help your people.
and 3. because I poisoned your food supply.
Refa: What?
Molari: Yes. Remember those planes flying overhead? They were planting seeds containing the first part of a two part poison. If you don't accept our demands, I'll see to it that the second part is added. When the two meet, they have a little party in your cardiovascular system.
Refa: You're insane!
I think you get the point. I LOVE Babylon 5, and applying it to any situation
isnt that the mom from good times?
Welcome to the new world order........
The time for pacifism is over, people, the time for action has begun, no more peace, but TOTAL WAR!!
Doesn't anyone else have a problem with corporations owning entire strains and eventually genus(ii?) of crops and animals?
Science and technology will always take a back seat to nature!!
Also, keep in mind that Mugabe ordered a halt to the winter wheat harvest in June. This is part of a plan that will redistribute 95% of commercial farmland. Some 60% of commerical farms, 2,900 farms, where ordered to halt work. This was done during a food shortage, with the country on the brink of salvation. The plan is redistribute the commecical farms from white to black ownership. In practice, the land becomes gifts for Mugabe's cronies. Cereal production has fallen 67% since 1999-2000 accoridnig to the World Food Program, and will certianly tumble further.
Rather than looking for grand conspiracies by US firms to starve Zimbabwians, look at the corrupt government of Robert Mugabe. It seems unlikely that someone who has wrecked such havoc on his nations agri-business would be interested in protecting his crops for the European market. If he is, then its the nature of the dictator to set absurd priorities.
Zimbabwe is a country towards the bottom tip of Africa. It's above South Africa which is the Southern most country.
Nominally it's a democracy - a long and vicious war was fought against the colonial-style white dominated government to gain democracy. However the winners, lead by Robert Mugabe, crushed any opposition soon after independence in a terror campaign involving at least tens of thousands of murders.
In recent years another generation of oppostion has arisen. Mugabe is still president; he recently won an election that was marred by intimidation, the large-scale use of terror as a political weapon and the persecution of the opposition. Despite this, and huge electoral fraud, the opposition hold a significant number of seats in parliment.
One of Mugabe's chief tactics in the recent election was to support land reform. Even after more than 20 years of indepence, white people still own most the farmland in Zimbabwe. Mugabe supported a campaign to drive farmers and their workers off their land, and the government has passed laws to seize farms from their owners which are now taking effect. Many of the farms seized have been re-distributed to members of the government. (Corruption is rife; amazingly president Mugabe was the winner of the first lottery!) As a consequence, Zimbabwe which previously had an agricultural surplus (agricultural produce was one of their major exports), now has a huge deficit.
Whilst the drought is a regional problem, a huge amount of blame can be laid directly on Mugabe. His farm policies and use of terror have hugely exacerbated the problem, his war in a neighbouring country has wiped out the Zim dollar and made it impossible for Zimbabwe to afford to import food. In a saner world he would be standing trial on many counts.
Readers should take the claims of not wanting to use genetically modified wheat because of contimination with a whole shipload of salt. Nothing that he or the Zimbabwe government says can taken at face value; you can only judge by his actions, which speak nothing about caring for his nation.
and what was the human lifespan 7000 years ago - they were lucky if they made 30.
IMHO...it sounds like you're arguing the wrong point! The problem is these crops are sterile! Companies give this stuff to these poor countries and after the harvest let them know it doesn't reproduce! Those poor starving children and people are then forced to a Microsoft environment by paying for each subsequent harvest. THe issue isn't whether it's Gene Altered, starving people could care less, but they know if they take this "poisened apple" there will be nothing left next harvest.
Why not just grind it to cornmeal before shipping/distributing it? Planting cornmeal wont do anything, but it can be stored/eaten just fine.
Interesting that people will starve as a result of Junk Science. The European Union has rejected genetically engineered food based not on any reliable scientific studies but on public and political pressure from small special interest groups. Has there been ANY reliable scientific study relating ANY harmful effects to bio-engineered food? When such pseudo-scientific opinions result in real people dying of starvation, then those responsible for publicly advocating such import restrictions should be held morally responsible.
I don't know who I hate worse. Ignorant racists or ignorant dumbshits.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I wonder who educated you, Citizen :-) Whoever did that, obviously did a thorough job. They're not "slightly more immune" to corporate pressure in Europe, they're just "slightly more finicky" about what goes over the wire and into the newspapers.
I find the same thing here in New Zealand, with the non discolsure policy that the US has with reguards tto G.E. food causing many people here to boycott all US made food. We are now testing all incoming shipment of corn for contamination. After all no one wan Monsanto to decide what your children have for breakfast.
Evil cocksuckers.
If you grow corn. You know the regular old "open-source" corn and your field is pollinated (from 10 miles away) by GM corn, the fuckfaces at Mansanto will sue you saying you are growing their product.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_c
The simplest solution is accept the corn and process it into a non plantable form before distributing... ie ground. If the kernels are destroyed they can only be eaten.
Why on earth doesn't this farmer sue Monsanto and the local farmers that use GM plants for irresponsibly contaminating his plants?
Clearly, the poor design of these plants and their irresponsible use caused him financial hardship, and potentially have made his crop dangerous for the land and/or human consumption...He's now limited where he can sell his crop, and the jury's still out on the hazards of using GM foodstuffs.
Hey, if the megacorps want to play hardball to protect their bogus patents through illegal, extortionist tactics, then the victims should use any means available to strike back -- even hysterical, sensationalist ones.
Make them eat creamed corn. Taco can cream it.
Fuggin niggahs.
ok, a few things. first, any company that GE's food products does one thing first of all. make them sterile!! ;) have to buy every year or you grow nothing!
what the hell is the point of creating a great strain of a plant that someone only has to buy once. much better to have agricultural assurance
on top of that, the fear of GE crops for the most part is unfounded and ignorant.
for example, BT corn was given all sorts of crap for possible killing monarchs. however, it was basiclly unfounded paranoia based on one crappy study that was completely worthless. (the scientist himself said it was pointless to draw conclusions from, his first test was just to see if Bt would do anything)
on top of that, no one seems willing to accept the fact that if the corn didn't have Bt in it already, farmers would just be spraying the corn with pesticide. which do you think is worse, a perfectly targeted weapon or one of spray and pray?
by putting the Bt straight in the corn you keep it from getting to beneficial insects, from running off the plants when it rains, and you don't have to keep reapplying it any time a new infestation occurs
as a whole, GE plants cut way back on dangerous pesticides, and are likely much better for people overall
the only thing better, IMO than GE plants would be pure organic grown plants. problem with them is that yeilds are so low you can't support the population on them.
i used to work at a bio research facility, and i can tell you right now the shit they spray on the plants that you eat is waaay worse than anything they're trying to put straight into the plant.
and if you think that 2 second rinse job you gave that fruit or veggie before you ate it cleared it all off, you're delusional.
If a choice between dying and paying, (let them try and sue a poor starving farmer (isn't worth the court costs)). It sounds like another oportunity for open source, open sourced GM foods to feed the world. How does one prove that you are using GM corn??? All life (by the theory of eveolution is a mix of parents, all food is crossbred to gain benificial characteristics, i.e. all tomatos were small and not particularly tasty, but with crossbreding they are now, small, large juicy, meaty etc... GM is only the manual version of random selection. So once the GM corn is planted in a field with other corn species won't it cross and become a hybrid of the native/GM???? This is all kinda mute as if the people are starving they aren't targets for payments. The other simple solution is the grind the provided corn a meal or flour, which is what the poeple would probably do to eat it anyway. This doesn't have as long a storage life, but if you are feeding the starving how long does it need to last anyway??? I have never understood this patenting of living things (DNA, plants etc...) they don't invent, they just mix existing materials which would in general mix on a random basis in the environment anyway. There are some extreme cases where a fish gene is placed in a plant but for the most part that is rare. I can see that the food companies have the right to charge more for a optimized product but once they have sold/provided the material they shouldn't have any rights to future use and if thats what they want then they should make the equivalent of seedless grapes that don't reproduce just provide a single harvent and not generate seed.
Zimbabwe is afraid some of the corn will end up
planted instead of eaten -- and growing patented
corn is a no-no, of course! If the corn is
planted even once, it may contaminate all future
crops grown in those fields or any fields
nearby, leading to huge lawsuits - and then the
fields are contaminated, exacerbating the food
shortage.
a) Plant patents pre-date genetic engineering: much of the none-"GM" corn they are receiving will have been grown from patented seed.
b) "GM" corn (maize, in Europe) varieties are hybrids. The seed companies do not need to file lawsuits to protect their patents as hybrids do not reproduce themselves. The yield from planting the donated "GM" corn would be extremely disappointing and the problem self-limiting.
c) The putative lawsuits would have to be filed in Zimbabwe. I doubt that they would get far.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Interesting.. as some posters have pointed out, Zimbabwe's government is a bunch of thugs. But in America, the corps are the thugs:
The article then mentions how Monsanto says the "policy would be adapted to accommodate local traditions in other countries". I'm not a farmer, and I'm certainly not a modern farmer dealing with this patent nonsense, but it strikes me as pretty damn fucked up that saving food seed from year to year is now illegal and considered a quaint "local tradition" in a few backwards third-world countries.
Though I suppose they should be thankful that King Monsanto is merciful enough to "accommodate" this "local tradition" of growing plants from your own seed. As soon as Zimbabwe is finally paved over and the shopping malls put up, we can revert back to the usual policy.
When will the "intellectual property" madness stop?
So, in order to pay for the cost of this research and, what the heck, even make a buck or two, what ways can this fictional company hope to receive compensation? They could lobby various governments to tax their citizens to pay for the research, they could attempt to sell the seeds at a higher cost than regular seeds, or they could patent the process and then sell licenses to produce the new grains.
The tax option is used, but it generally doesn't come anywhere close to paying for the research. Not only that but people are constantly complaining about taxes and these kinds of taxes are ripe for corruption and pork-barrel politics. Not exactly a great path to travel.
If you simply produce and sell the grains at a premium then it won't be long before your competition gets a stock of seeds and begins producing their own supplies to sell. The problem here is that the research company used a lot of money in developing the seeds, while the company that sat on its butt didn't spend dollar one. So the first company needs to recoup expenses and can't lower prices on the food, but the second company can sell them at normal prices without going broke. No company will do research under these conditions, so no research will get done and no improved grains will be made.
The last option is patenting. If you patent the genome which you created (remember, this now is not a grain found in nature - it is something INVENTED), you can then protect the patent and make sure that no one is undercutting you. You can then sell the seed at a higher cost, due to its higher production potential. You can't ask an arm and a leg for the grain, if you do so then the higher production will be offset by the cost of the seed.
Overall, I would say that it is just fine to patent a new grain that you have genetically engineered. I do think that these patents should be given short time limits, be strictly monitored, and that the requirements for granting be stringently reviewed. In other words, ideally these patents should be difficult to obtain and last just long enough for a company to make back its investment plus a bit more.
Sapere aude!
the seeds don't reproduce. As a result, farmers who plant the seeds (which they will if they are not milled) will not get any crop and will have to buy seeds from other places. Other places will typically indicate the US again... A vicious cycle - at this rate Zimbabwe will never get out of its eternal famine.
how do you figure?
Informative and intersting.. Thanks!
- Disevidence
If I was donating any food to Zimbabwe, I'd want to be in the lead truck and personally ensure fair distribution. The country is following the dismal tradition of using food as a political tool. I.e., the people who support the Other Side don't get any. See this BBC report from May
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Americans are the most entertained and least informed population on earth. The "news" industry here is a joke. People were better informed in the former Soviet Union.
Good point. While this is not to say that what we know of ourselves 7000 years ago is of no use, I don't feel that it ought to dictate how we eat today. We've changed, and so has the food we eat.
"I may be quite wrong." - Socrates
There's a lot of misunderstanding about genetic engineering. It's treated as some kind of highly secret art in the media, but genetic work of the
kind we're talking about in the corn is done routinely in undergrad biology labs. It's not rocket science. It's not even differential calculus. It's just upperdivision lab work in any university worth a damn. Hell, you probably do some of it in junior college these days.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
The issue about GE corn is not about risk to the soil. The issue is
1) If planted, its GE genes will contaminate the native corn, making it unsellable in places where GE crops are banned. (Europe)
2) GE crops are patent protected. Already, one farmer in Canada has been sued for growing crops that contain the GE gene, who didn't purchase the seed from Monsanto. 10 years down the line, it could mean Zimbabwe could not have an agrocultural industry. Its a choice between starve now, or starve later.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Whoever said that either gets all his news from ESPN, slashdot and the onion, or else they have selective filters that shelter them from news about Africa.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
"Genetically modified seeds imposed on farmers in developing countries trigger famine and social devastation"
Sowing the Seeds of Famine in Ethiopia by Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa
The above article shows exactly what happened when Ethiopia accepted GE grains from the U.S. It's a must-read for anyone involved in this current discussion about Zimbabwe. Self-appointed 'president' Robert Mugabe isn't going to let others have all the fun of ruining the peasant economy; he'd rather do that himself.
Zimbabwe's government brought this upon themselves. They have disrupted the farms, killed and driven off the farmers. Too bad Mugabe doesn't weight enough to provide a pound of flesh for everyone who is starving. His murderous, racist regime is an example of all that is wrong with Africa.
most of the people on this site really have no clue.
I've made it past 30 on Top Ramen, Pizza, Pepsi and Beer as regular parts of my diet.
I'm pretty sure it's not the carbohydrates....
Carpe Canem - Seize the Dog
I really dislike the idea of the people starving, but if they accept this food, they are destined to become slaves to the "Intellectual Property" slave owners of this century....quoth the article...
"Some biotech advocates are criticizing the Zimbabwean government for balking at the humanitarian assistance, saying President Robert Mugabe seems to care more about his political independence than his citizens' lives."
Of course they're going to say that....they're shills for the biotech industry.....this same scenerio happens with software too (insert un-named company) donates so many liscenses to third world country A. Country A is now on the hook to make the payments for upgrades, keep other software out or be forced to return "gift"...we all know the drill.....on President Mugabe's part, it seems clear that he's interested in not having to make payments for this "product" into perpetuity....allowing something like this to start is equivalent to selling yourself into indentured servitude. So really, his choice isn't quite as clear, and it's not really about HIS independence as much as it is about the independence of Zimbabwe...if he accepts, his citizens become slaves to the west FOREVER...
I wouldn't be surprised if there is "diplomatic" pressure to accept the corn too, something like "...if you want us to approve your loan from the WMF, you'd better accept this generous offer." Nothing bothers the biotech people like customers that don't want their product....they give it a bad name....again, quoth the article...
"That response has fueled suspicion among some observers in the United States and Africa that Washington is using the food crisis to get U.S. gene-altered products established in a corner of the world that has largely resisted them."
EXACTLY RIGHT!....for two reasons, 1)get the public to accept a genetically modified product and break down their resistance to it and 2) to extend some level of "Intellectual Property" control over the continent of Africa! Remember the uproar over South Africa's plans to copy AIDS drugs without royalty? Handled by quiet dealings on the part of the drug companies, the issue got swept away by the lawyers...can't have anyone breaking step with "World Intellectual Property" laws....
If they really wanted to give a "gift," they would also lift the IP restrictions on this corn...forever...so the people of Zimbabwe would not have to worry about this....then they could just eat in peace.
--"it's a trap! it's a trap!..that's MY individual fruit pie!"--Benny Hill
Best evidence we have is that prior to the agricultural 'revolution', the maximum lifespan was around 70-75 years. The *average* was lower, due to infant mortality, and accident (hunting was a hazardous job). But those folks who managed to get past childhood diseases were actually likely to live to a ripe old age, provided they didn't get eaten by something. Take a look at this article on Dr. Loren Cordain's research on that topic.
Concealed Handgun License Courses in Plano, Texas
and what was the human lifespan 7000 years ago - they were lucky if they made 30.
I believe this kind of thinking has been widely debunked. Mean lifespan != median lifespan != typical lifespan. If you have a high infant mortality rate, that can really skew your average, even though most adults will live to a relatively old age (except in very warlike societies). It says in the Bible that man shall live for 3 score and 10 years, and that was written several years ago. Take a look at some modern "primitive" societies, such as the Inuit or historical accounts of isolated tribes. They all had plenty of tribal elders.
-a
How to rationalize theft.
What else can't you believe? That there are other risks involved besides hurting dirt?
AC
I'm sure there are many EU countries lining up, free corn in hand, ready to help the African countries in need. Or at least willing to chip in for the milling costs.
Right?
Right?
*crickets chirping*
Hello?
GM food-related patent problems can be a real bitch. I remember a story from a while back about a farmer who was sued for using GM seeds without permission and didn't know why... until it was revealed that a neighbouring farm was using the GM seeds, and those plants were cross-pollenating with his own.
Although there is no actual link, this reminds me of the Food for Peace project that the US did in Columbia. In that case the US gave them a bunch of grain, which wrecked the domestic market, which drove the farmers to cocaine as the only viable cash crop, since we also wouldn't let them stabilize the coffee market (which would be anti-free market.) The only way that this corn problem is similar is that our "gift" could potentially wreck their potential to make money growing corn. It is a sad situation really.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Until 1960, American cars had chrome. They had chrome everywhere you could put chrome. They had chrome around the windows, long, wide solid strips of chrome all around the body outlines, big solid chrome hubcaps, chrome grilles, chrome!
A large part of that chrome came from Rhodesia, which is, guess where?
Civil unrest in Rhodesia led directly to shortages of chrome, and American cars suddenly had far, far less chrome in 1961 than they did in 59-60.
The country hasn't had a minute of peace since then. In the last few decades, Africa has basically fought World War III, in both political and sociological terms.
The only explanation I can find for the perception gap is that, while most people in the Rhineland were light skinned, most in the Congo basin are dark skinned.
Seriously, a full scale war has been fought, and tyranny won, and the west doesn't give a f?ck.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I don't see any relation between one's ability to reason and apply knowledge and one's caring for others.
Zimbabwe has a corrupt government: It drives white farmers off farms so there is little incentive for people with money to invest in agriculture; It rigs elections for political power. In many ways it makes Microsoft look like a friendly guy. It has nothing whatsoever to do with this decision.
Zimbabwe would love to accept the food. But just as Zimbabwe must feed its population, it must also protect its income and if a single farmer anywhere plants this corn it could destroy what remains of the country. If it sacrifices future earning potential in return for food then it has no chance of getting out of the third world ever.
This has nothing (directly) to do with Monsanto's patents on GE corn. A starving man will happily ignore his fears about GE being dangerous or his ideologies about patented food in order to feed his family. Perhaps the EU could be more tolerant about accepting GE imports, but then perhaps the US could be more willing to supply consumers with what they want.
Normal corn is not genetically engineered. It is crossbred but it has only ever been crossbred with other grains, never with soya beans or frogs. It may be that crossing it with these things doesn't make it any more dangerous and the EU's policy is unnecessary caution, or it might not be. Either way there is a difference between GM food and selective breeding.
I hope that clears up some of the FUD being posted. It still leaves open a number of possible solutions:
Oh, and if GE grain is shipped to NZ it is destroyed by customs; No sane exporter of food can dare import GE food. The market for GE food is just too small with the US on its own making ten times more than the total demand for GE food, it isn't just Zimbabwe that fears GE imports because of its export market.
Corn is good for making farm animals gain weight very quickly. Works on people, too. In a way, the farm animals are lucky, because they are killed and eaten before they have a chance to develop heart disease, arthritis, diabetes, and other maladies caused by excess carbohydrate consumption
Um, no. Corn is a bad thing to feed Cows.
read this... http://www.all-organic-food.com/beef1.htm
abstract
According to James Russell, USDA researcher working at Cornell, an all-grain diet is not natural to cattle. As ruminant animals, cattle are designed to consume and digest huge quantities of high-cellulose, low-nutrition grass. That's why they have four stomachs. "When you feed cattle 90 or 100-percent grain, it creates an acidosis in the rumen (stomach) and the rumen wall becomes ulcerated,"
"Russell said high-grain diets may cause other problems in cattle, such as bloating. He estimates that approximately three of every 1,000 cattle in feedlots die of grain-related disorders.
The fatty, starchy grain causes food to move slowly and sluggishly through a steer's digestive system, building up high levels of acid in the rumen.
About half the bicarbonate soda produced in the United States -- a common home treatment for stomach problems in humans -- is fed to cattle to help neutralize the acid in the rumen
"
Who's getting food? Europe, obviously! Why else would they be hung up on exportability to Europe?
Seriously, I'm sure that any foreign aid that reaches the ground there will be translated into Swiss bank accounts, and I'm sure that any that can't be stolen by Mugabe won't be welcomed. I suspect that Mugabe was hoping to reexport for cash any food aid that arrived, in order to line his own pockets.
Certainly Mugabe and his cronies won't let relief agencies screw up the murderous famine he's worked so hard to create. Do you think that Stalin would have let us send food to the Ukrainians that winter in the 1920's when he starved half of them to death?
just pointing out that blanket generalizations suck
Which itself is a blanket generalization.
"Genera" of crops, believe it or not.
The Internet is full. Go away.
First, I am not so sure about the issue of exporting. The world bank [google cache of PDF file], indicates that Zimbabwe mostly exports Tabacco, gold and manufactured products. Manufactured products are about 50%, and I do not know if any these are food products. They, of course, must export to pay off debts, even if it is only theoretical payments. They therefore have every right to protect their products from contamination that their customers find distasteful. As always, it is the customer, and not the supplier, who is correct. Cross contamination is not a hypothetical situation. It happens. Of course, the GM seed suppliers want this to happen so that all these pesky GM bans can be dropped and they can extract payment from every farmer in the world.
It would seem then that for cash strapped countries GM crops are dangerous. Companies that manufacture the seed do not allow the seed to be planted without payment. Furthermore, these companies have been known to send private investigators to check fields. Since these investigators are often limited to checking the edge of fields, and since the edge of fields are the most likely to be contaminated by cross pollination, quite a bit of trouble can ensue even the planter has not ever seen a GM seed. If a significant amount of GM seed were to find it's way into a country, that country could be, over time, liable for significant amounts of money. These issues are litigated seriously.
My understanding is that such a situation would threaten a nations food supply. I have read that many farmers survive only because they can replant seeds from the last harvest. Although the economics of GM seeds might make sense in countries where planting in a technology intensive process, it might not make sense elsewhere.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Everyone seems to be indicating that the Zimbabwe government is at fault here, but it seems me that the economic reasons (law suits or limiting exports) for not accepting GM food may be enough. I don't know how good that government is about using money where it is needed, but in general, the country having money is good for everyone in it and is good for long term planning and infastructure. In the long run, the choice may not be so much starve or be bankrupt as starve or be bankrupt *and* starve.
I'm not saying that this is definitly the case (perhaps immediate food is better that possible bankrupcy), but I do think that it is very reasonable for Zimbabwe to at least consider the situation carfuly.
So irradiate the corn so it can't sprout. Then ship it! Problem solved.
Of course the real problem is that Robert Mugabe is a gangster and despot who's killing Zimbabwe.
Thanks for the explanation.
If so, slashdotters should apply for the patent.
It's not either (export rights)/or (IP rights). They _will_ lose the ability to export crops to Europe if their crops are contaminated, unless the EU changes it's policy. Also, they should get an undertaking from certain biotech companies to avoid situations like this.
http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
Must be you that caused it. It wasn't socialism.If you're dumb enough to confuse despotism with socialism you're not worthy of discussing the topic.
Liberty.
Just because it looks like corn, smells like corn doesn't mean that it is corn. I mean, if corn were genetically modified then you can't really call it corn anymore. Its hacked corn. Maybe the solution to all this mess is to patent corn, and when any company tries to genetically modify it, call it hacking and make it illegal.
If the owner of the corn sells it to Zimbabwe, and they can make some of it grow, then good luck to them. I don't see how you can expect to sell a product like that, and then expect to retain some kind of owdership of it. If the seller wants to prevent the buyer from replanting, the onus is on the seller to make it infertile... IMHO.
I'm sure people who still believe in patents will disagree. Tough.
-----
For great justice!
Compare the reproduction rate of blacks and other non-whites to the reproduction rate of whites in formerly white countries like the USA. The black welfare mother having nine children isn't just a stereotype, it's a fact. It is only a matter of time until non-whites are the dominant power in countries founded by europeans. Now take a look at the voting statistics and see who the non-whites vote for... it is always the left wing candidate. Whites will vote for either the right or left wing candidate depending on their views, but non-whites always vote for the left wing candidate. It comes as no suprise that it is the left wing candidate who always wants to give handouts to people, increase the size and power of the government, and punish whites for their success (via schemes like affirmative action, reparations, income taxes...).
It becomes clear that we are headed for a situation where non-whites vastly outnumber whites (worldwide, whites account for only about 8% of the population!). Now take a look at Africa, a country with abundant natural resources. After thousands upon thousands of years, it is still in the stone age! The only places in Africa that are not in the stone age are where whites rule or once ruled, and these places (like South Africa) have gone to the blacks too. Compare backwards Africa to the western world... there is no comparison... western countries are technologically advanced and solved simple problems like feeding the population centuries ago! Look at our scientific advancements and artistic masterpieces -- these too are the work of whites. Now look at Africans, a festering pool of shit.
Think Robert Mugabe could never happen here? Think again. Look at the changes that have happened over just the last 50 years or so. These changes are minor compared to what is going to happen in the future. With all the immigrants flooding across the border, and with the high breeding rates of non-whites it will soon be the end of "the age of whites." The funny thing is, even when thugs like Mugabe have taken over our government, there will be some liberal faggot complaining about how whites are oppressing nonwhites. Well, I think I've said enough. You can choose to study the facts for yourself or you can continue to live in a politically-correct dreamworld.
Here are some web sites you might want to check out:
www.natall.com
www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com (slashdot-like news site)
www.stormfront.org (nice discussion board)
www.white-history.com (learn the accomplishments of your ancestors)
"Today, largely because of immigration, there is no majority race in Hawaii or Houston or New York City... In a little more than 50 years there will be no majority race in the United States."
President Clinton, Portland State University Commencement, June 13, 1998
"Whites will be an ethnic minority in Britain by the end of the century... It would be the first time in history that a major indigenous population has voluntarily become a minority, rather than through war, famine or disease."
Anthony Browne, Sunday September 3, 2000 The Guardian, UK
Much ado about Zimbabwe
Much ado about Zimbabwe - Redux
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
...and you're not an economist?
In 2002, I plant natural corn, using seed kept from last year's harvest. My neighbour upwind plants GM corn bought from Monsanto. During the year, pollen from his corn blows across my field. My harvest at the end of the year seems normal, but in 2003, 1/3 of the corn I plant does not grow, and a small percentage of what does grow produces grossly deformed kernels which I cannot sell, and would have to locate and remove by hand if I wanted to make my massively reduced corn crop saleable.
Note that, not including the cost of removing deformed kernels, my costs have not changed but my take is down 30%. If my margin was 20%, I just made a minus 10% profit that year. Since it's not economical to hand-pick deformed kernels, I just made considerably less.
Oh... wait...
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Hey guys what CARS from GM and Lamps of GE have guilt of food and poor of Africa?
This is a stupid question?
I happen to live in dairy country and had a tour of the dairy across the street from me about two years ago. They have a nutritionaist on staff or retainer (as most dairys in my area do now) that manages their diet. They eat a variety of hay, supplimented with things like old bread, orange rinds, and grain. It's not 90%+ grain - much more like 10-20% from what I see in the feeders. 80% +/- is hay with the rest as suppliment.
The dairymen aren't stupid. They want the cows to be healthy so they can give good milk - and lots of it. Sick cows are seprerated from the herd until they are better. I don't think they can even use their milk until it is tested and comes back clean from antibiotics. If you don't feed them the right stuff, they don't give as much milk - thus the dairys can't sell as much milk.
The Bible also has a lot of mentions of 500+ year lifespans, so using it as a source for lifespans probably isn't the best idea...
There is a new draft on the way:
3 59 8:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.
A bit off topic I know, but I could not resist.
that /. actually has a thread and discussion about a topic that is deeper than usual. A topic in which I actually learned more in 5 minutes than I usually do in 5 days of reading /.
I'm not American, but I don't think that American citizens at all, are responsible for hungry in third world. Specialy in Brazil, where I live.
The biggest problem here is Justice and politics.
Q: Why we don't change this?
A: some americans people and corporations, don't want, curiously they are part of same group that make false account in big co....
What annoys me about this story is the way it's being presented here. This isn't a technical story at all; given Robert Mugabe's past record of 'using' valid issues as an excuse to terrorise his own people (black or white), I'd bet my life that this is a political move- Mugabe being responsible for the destruction of Zimbabwe's agricultural system in the first place.
If this had happened in another "poor, starving, bankrupt" African country, the GM-based concerns may have been more relevant- and here's the problem. It seems the poster mentally grepped the original article for tech-friendly fodder- "Yeah! Here's something interesting about GM foods- good excuse to criticize^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h have a valid discussion about them"(*)- and ignored any other issues. In this case, taking part of the story out of context has totally altered what it was really about.
So much (valid) mistrust of Bill Gates in geekland- so why the naive (or lazy) willingness to take everything else at face value?
(*) I don't like them either; primarily because of the reasons they're being pushed- but that's not the point here.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
It's always heartening to see people suggesting stuff that they're eager to try out on themselves before sending the technology to someone else's backyard!
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
I lived in England in 2001 and many restaurants post "No GM Food" signs, indicating that they use no genetically-modified food. For some Brits (and other Europeans) it's a big deal.
Couldn't Zimbabwe just plant the corn and tell Dupont or whoever to go fuck themselves should a lawsuit occur?
Besides, should someone sue, what's 0/2?
I'm eating food that even starving people won't eat :) I never thought that day would come.
Is it `giving' to hand a university money to put up a `Bill Gates Building' or is it simply a commercial exchange?
Since he's cooking the books to avoid paying income taxes on over $15,000,000,000.00 a year, have you contra'ed those taxes against even those commercial exchanges?
Ignoring all of the above considerations, it has been truly said thay Trey Gates gives less, pro rata, to charity than the average single mother.
WHG3 is greedy, and AFAICT has always been greedy. The above items are just the tip of the iceberg of greed.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
I wonder, just how many farmers read slashdot?
Europe not buying GE food is not the only problem. Europe is covered by the same intellectual property laws as the US. So even if Europe did want to buy corn from Zimbabwe, they couldn't due to IP laws.
i d=01/01/2 7/2024245&mode=thread&tid=155
And if you don't think that agribusiness will go after poor countries to keep them from growing/using their GE foods, you are ignorant. Look a the big drug manufacturers (and American government officials) who went after poor African and South American countries for trying to manufacture AIDS drugs for their people.
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?s
This is why these African nations are afraid! They _know_ what the US and its corporations will do if any GE genes get into their corn supply.
All the fuss is because if the trojan corn somehow gets planted and grows, then that represents unlicensed used of the product and Zimbabwe's corn can't be sold because the crop was "stolen" from Monsanto or Ortho or whoever's GM seeds it came from.
Even if the corn manufacturer didn't come after them for theft, Zimbabwe still wouldn't be able to sell ANY of their corn to countries that don't accept GMO food becuase they're very picky about tiny amounts of contamination. It's kinda like to be "organic" fruit or the fields have to have been free of pesticides for thee years -- only then do they say it's organic. Before that it's transitional.
Now, I have strong feelings about GMO foods. It's one thing to cross this rose with this rose and make a new rose. It's something else when you splice a gene from a salmon into a strawberry. Maybe it's no different from a functional biology perspective but to me, selective breeding is very different than molecular level manipulation of DNA.
The other thing is: how do we know this stuff is safe? Who tests it? What is so wrong with non-GMO food that it's reached the end of its useful lifespan and needs to be "overclocked" to provide any value?
And this whole concept of the "terminator" seed, one that only grows once, and the seed it produces is sterile. I don't think I'm being alarmist whey I say I'm very concerned about those kinds of seeds being introduced in the wild. Who is to say it wouldn't cross-breed with "normal" plants and keep them from reproducing? Don't many of the variations in life around us stem from mutations or genetic mishaps of one form or another?
If you want me to believe that GMO food is just fine, then I need to see empirical data. Show me leukemia rates for children who eat "normal" crops and ones who eat GMO. No such studies exist, to my knowledge. I'm not going to just take the word of the salesman that the product is safe, and the USDA shouldn't either.
even in non-starving countries, while people are taught to believe that any 'engineered' or 'developed' biological product is amoral, unethical, non-Christian (**gasp**), or has the potential to overrun your country like some science fiction monster.
I'd better burn all my carefully cultivated irises and rose bushes now; before the bioethics police come to burn me at the stake!!!
I think with the interesting people, their lives can't possibly be wrapped up into a nice little package.
Give a man some corn, and you feed him for a day. Teach him to plant it, and you'll be feeding him for 25-to-Life.
It also says that God got tired of people living into their 700's, so he set the limit at 120. ...but wait! A number of people have been proven to live past 120. Therefore the Bible is wrong, therefore it can't be the inerrant word of God, taking the big three religions down with it.
Oh well, better luck next time.
"Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
I can not belive this! Mill the God Damn corn so they will be able to eat it! They cannot just allowed genetically engineered frankenfood to be planted. All the reasons they cite are valid. The idea that a living thing such as a corn plant can be patented, and therefore, someone's intellectual property is a crime against nature. Making crops that only grow once so farmers must buy new seeds each year is so obscene that I think my brain will melt if I think about it any more. "Beggars can't be choosers" is the battle cry of self-serving horn tooters who think throwing away their garbage at a Goodwil or Salvation Army center is giving charity, and of bastards with ulterior motives who are doing a disservice with their Giving.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
Milling it adds 25% to the cost of the aid, and I imagine irradiation would add even more than that.
Genetically modified seeds that won't germinate sound very similar in concept to bastardized CDs that can be copied. I wonder if Monsanto ever fears that their "protection" might be "cracked" one day by an "agricultural hacker".
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
> ok, a few things. first, any company that GE's food products does one thing first of all. make them sterile!!
Wrong. There was a move to do this - called "terminator" technology, but it was abandonned some time ago.
Currently, GE seeds are viable.
In 20 years time, the anti-GM people will have 'won'. Automated genetic sequencing will allow standard Mendellian techniques to be much more precisely targetted.
Before GM, researchers irradiated a bunch of seeds to induce mutation, then planted them. Then cross-pollinate plants with interesting characteristics. Rinse and repeat.
With gene sequencing and modelling software, the cycle time can be reduced (ie, you don't have to grow the corn to see how it will turn out). Whammo, GM without GM.
Of course, it's actually worse, because they're be undesired mutations in the crop as well as the ones they were trying to induce. But they'll be able to sell it as "organic' GM free.
Humans have been doing GM work for 10,000 years now. There is no such thing as wild corn, for instance. The scientific method did much more to improve the rate of change than tools like genetic modification.
Bryan
This is just more Robbie Mugabe genocidal paranoid maniac horseshit. He's already ordered the army to STOP people from farming and harvesting because he wants to take the industrial farms away from their owners and give them to his cronies in some kind of deluded Marxist land distribution scheme. He doesn't want the corn because he doesn't want to feed his own people so they will rise up and support him in his war against the farm owners.
boo hoo, whitey feels opressed
USA controls your justice and politics. If USA didn't exist, Brazil's problems wouldn't exist either. USA needs to go to the dustbin of history.
n/m
world medical fund
click (free) to give food
mercy corps
second harvest
help out.
More topical drift... oh well :)
>> It also says that God got tired of people living into their 700's, so he set the limit at 120.
Spoken like someone who only skimmed it (at best). The context of this isn't God setting a limit on any one human's life. This is in the story of Noah (Gen 7). It was God setting a time limit for the lifespan of *the whole human race* before he wiped them out in the great flood, save for the few that were on the Ark. There were people who lived longer than that only a few chapters later in the same Bible, that should have been a bit of a clue.
I don't really want to debate whether the Bible is right or wrong, but please read carefully before you make sweeping statements like that.
Ps, No, I don't trust ages given in the scriptures - any scriptures - either.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
No, it's not.
I don't know enough about this situation to be able to say whether this is a reasonable decision in the short term or whether it will condemn millions of people to starvation. If it's the latter, I think we are morally obligated to donate food products, not give these people loans.
In the long term, one way or another, poor nations must eliminate their dependency on food imports. They need to address their internal social and political problems, they must work on infrastructure, commerce, and population planning. And they need to develop crops domestically that work well within their countries.
Big numbers and biblical times don't get along very well, anyway.
These were folks, after all, who used 40 to mean a very long time.
40 days and 40 nights of rain, 40 years wandering the deserts, etc.
If it says forty, it means a long time, whatever that may be.
Insane racist dictator turns down genetically-engineered corn in starving country because the Europeans won't buy it, and it's the US's fault. I wonder if I'm not the only one who gets tired of everyone blaming all the ills of the world on the US?
"You evil jerks! Give us $25 million more so we can use the corn!" Hello? The US doesn't owe you anything! Get it from your European friends who refuse to import GE corn! We were nice, we gave you free corn - but
I think people have lost sight of what "charity" is - it's voluntary. And if we give you $75 million, please don't come running back and act as though it's your birthright to get $100 million. We didn't screw your country up - European colonialists did.
This is either Europe or Mugabe's fault. It is certainly not the US's.
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
cross breed ALL the corn in the world with genetic corn that has IP rights, then, techinically, every single kernal of corn belongs to them, which would be impossible to uphold.
hehehehe
....
the worlds most popular sport
Blaming US
get a clue
Sorry to say, but no one facing a drought in Zimbabwe made any such statement. It was fat Americans and Europeans who run the "aide" organizations with their own political-economic aims, some of whom may have visited Zimbabwe at some point in the past, but never more than a couple days at a time.
Correction:
That response has fueled suspicion among some observers in the United States and [Europe]
There is one thing you need to understand about starvation in non-democratic nations. They consider it a Good Thing (tm) because it allows them to passively kill off the minorities. Do you think everyone in these contries are starving? People starve because the government allows it.
The reason this doesn't happen in places like the US is because ... as if I really need to explain this to you ... those in power are in power because the people chose them, so piss them off and you'll be out of work.
Capitalism also helps. Where there is a demand for something (food) there is someone willing to deliver the supply (being that the demanders have the money, of course).
As for the starving nations... Got a problem with some (ethnic, geographical, religous, etc) group in your country? Deprive them of food. You bet the government officials aren't starving.
Had this been a democratic capitalistic country, the solution would be simple: stick a supermarket in the troubled areas and issue food stamps to the poor. The supermarket will get the food there because it can profit from it. Plus, you jump-started the economy by creating jobs. Those working there are rich compared to the other locals. Other shops will spawn up around the supermarket for these new "wealthy" individuals to spend their money. More jobs, more money, more jobs... more supermarkets. If there is food somewhere in the world, the supermarkets will obtain and sell it.
This is why I will never donate food or money to the needy in other countries. It nurtures the symptoms with a temporary relief that decreases the desire for self-dependence, and avoids addressing the cause. The government turned down corn? No surprise, but not for patent issues. The government doesn't need the corn, the people do. In these countries the government is not the people, otherwise they would be a democracy.
Help the needy in your own country. The US doesn't have mass famine, but there are still many people who can't afford to live up to our (admittedly high) standard of living. A dual income minimum wage family can't afford to rent in most places. Our problems may not be as widespread, but we are more likely to discover cold fusion than to solve mass famine in another country.
TodayTM BillyJoelTM GoogleTMd for StitchTMes due to WindowsTM while RollerbladeTMing with an AppleTM and a PopsicleTM
The European Union has rejected genetically engineered food based not on any reliable scientific studies but on public and political pressure from small special interest groups.
Yes, and they are right to do so. Perhaps this has become an unfamiliar concept in the US, but by and large democratic governments are supposed to listen to their citizens. A large majority of EU citizens do not want genetically modified food, and there is no economic reason to do so - the EU already produces far more of most foods than it requires to feed itself. So much so that in fact the EU spends a lot of money paying farmers NOT to grow certain crops - because some countries within the EU are more efficient than others, and having massive surplus generated by these countries would kill agriculture in some of the less-efficient EU countries. Using GM crops to increase yield would only exascerbate this problem. Perhaps you think this is a stupid idea and that the free market should sort it out, but most Europeans would disagree - national identity is a key issue within the EU, and part of that national identity in most countries is being able to feed your own population. In addition, since most of the GM crops developed so far are US in origin, use of GM crops widely would change the balance of trade negatively. Instead of the seed company->farmer relationship being entirely intra-EU trade, it changes to a drain of money from the EU to the US. So both the EU agriculture and financial bigwigs are against it, because it would cost them more money.
Because of this slightly funny way agriculture works within the EU, gains in yield from GM foods would be unsellable, and since the GM seed is more expensive, and is a recurring expense due to the inability to use saved seed, GM crops actually end up in less profit for the EU farmer, who is on average quite poor anyway. So the farmers are against it too.
There is also the cross-pollination problem, as illustrated by the Canadian farmer that some other have written about, who suffered exactly this problem. Once GM crops are established in an area, it becomes impossible for non-GM crops of the same species to grow in that area without becoming 'infected' by the genes of the GM crop. The GM seed producer can then clamp down using patent laws and extract money from farmers who weren't even growing the GM crop in the first place - because patented genes from the GM crop end up in the genome of non-GM crops. It could become an effective non-governmental 'tax' on all EU farmers, and worse, chances are it wouldn't even be collected by an EU company but rather a US one.
The fact that most EU consumers would rather die than eat genetically modified food is helpful to EU farmers and ministers in banning widespread use of GM crops and keeping the ban in place, but it's not the key issue here.
It isn't that the EU is behind in genetic research and is playing Not Invented Here - after all, 1/3 of the human genome project was done in the UK, not to mention that the structure of DNA was discovered there too. The EU could develop its own GM crops, which would sidestep some of the issues but not most, and indeed it is and has. But still the ban on commercial GM agriculture remains, so these crops remain research tools, and have met with fierce opposition wherever they have been test-planted.
Has there been ANY reliable scientific study relating ANY harmful effects to bio-engineered food?
As far as I'm aware, no, not directly. However, research in this area is still young, and more importantly, mostly corporate-funded. It's the same kind of situation as with the pharmaceutical industry - we ingest these substances, so we'd better make damn sure they're safe, yet most of the research is funded by the companies that want approval. I shouldn't have to remind you that the pharmaceutical industry managed to get things like thalidomide on the market, and no-one had any credible evidence (that hadn't been suppressed) against that for several years after it was available on the market.
It was interesting to read that somehow two extra genetic fragments that shouldn't have been in the genome of the Monsanto GM soybeans ended up there. Are we really sure we know all the knock-on effects? What else was missed? What if those genetic fragments had coded for a protein that switched off one of the human body's immune responses to cancer, or were themselves carcinogenic? Unlikely perhaps, but it took 3 years after commercial growing of these crops had started for the discovery to be made. Are you willing to take the risk, just so some company you've never worked for, never met anyone from, never bought anything from and which could well not even be in your own country or continent can make a few extra dollars for their shareholders?
Perhaps the general mistrust in the EU of genetic modification is due to other food safety scares like BSE, caused by considerably less obvious tinkering than with genetic modification, but with the same aim - increasing efficiency and yield. The US hasn't had to deal with a food scare of similar scale, which is perhaps why the US public are so dismissive of the dangers. From an EU perspective, it seems the US consumer simply doesn't care what they eat, as long as it's cheap. The widespread use in the US of growth hormone to fatten livestock is another example of this, but this too is banned in the EU and repugnant to EU consumers.
There are indirect environmental reasons to dislike some GM crops too. As an example, take Monsanto's GM soybeans, which are resistant to the Monsanto weedkiller Roundup (glyphosate). Here is a product that is designed to encourage use of Roundup and to allow farmers to spray willy-nilly without worrying about the effects it will have on their crop. If this doesn't mean farmers end up using more weedkiller than they would have done with a non-resistant crop, I'll eat my hat. The farmers are supposed to do this - it maximizes their yield. Goundwater contamination beckons...
As an EU citizen, I am very glad that the EU has rejected genetically modified food, and I am glad that Zimbabwe has taken the same viewpoint, whatever I may think of their political leadership. GM foods are being used as a tool of economic imperialism, encourage environmental bad practice, encourage patent system abuse, are insufficiently tested and understood and simply aren't necessary. Chalk up another one on the US image problem score board.
Grind it to corn meal before shipping it out of the US.
If the supplier won't let that be done, you know their motive.
The government of Zimbabwe has agreed to accept the corn, with the proviso that it be milled either before being shipped, or immediately on arrival.
AllAfrica story
Financial Gazette story
There have been a lot of thoughtful comments on this story. It's true that Zimbabwe's immediate economic problems -- plumeting agricultural production, inflation, industrial collapse, an exodus of skilled workers -- are the result of a corrupt and repressive regime that is determined to hold onto power at all costs. But it's also worth considering how difficult it would be to solve the country's problems even were a democratic and functional government in place.
Like most African countries, Zimbabwe's foreign debt load is enormous (US$1 billion; the country has a GDP of roughly US$5 billion). Even if the country were to somehow turn itself around and bring production back up to pre-turmoil levels, the debt ratio is almost unbelievable. And the country has been terribly affected by the AIDS epidimic. It is estimated that one quarter of the adult population is infected with HIV/AIDS. There are predictions that within a decade, half of Zimbabwe's children will be orphans.
And what do you do about land ownership? The violence against white farmers is indefensible, and Mugabe's cynical manipulation of that violence is vile. But the problem is serious. At independence (in 1980), perhaps half the country's farm land was owned by 1% of the population. These (white) farmers had been on the land for generations, and believed that the land belonged to them -- legally, morally, emotionally. But this economically- and racially-skewed distribution didn't come about by accident. The colonial government systematically expropriated and "re-settled" the "native" population. Most of this redistribution happened this century, so we're not talking about ancient history, here. And even if you choose not to think about the problem in historical terms, how do you build a free and egalitarian society in an agricultural economy with such unequal land ownership?
I work at allAfrica.com. We distribute news about Africa, most of it from African newspapers and magazines. If you want to understand what's going on in a country, it's worth reading the local press occasionally. We have half a dozen Zimbawean papers, from across the political spectrum. (Which is a polite way of saying that one of them is controlled by the ruling party. We don't make judgements about a newspaper's integrity; we try to get as many "read-on-the-street" papers as possible and let readers make their own judgements.)
You can take a look at our Zimbabwe headlines page. Here are some stories relating to the issues I've mentioned:
I admit, I think destroying your own agricultural capacity is a pretty dumb way to keep people fed, but I can understand the reasoning for not allowing GM corn into the country. There /have/ been problems with GM crops that are engineered to be unable to reproduce cross-pollinating with normal crops, producing a second generation of said crop with the gene that keeps them from reproducing properly. Should corn that has been modified to carry genes like this make it into Zimbabwe and be used as seed corn, Zimbabwe could go from little food to no food in a few growing seasons.
Since biotech firms aren't always very forthcoming about the products they make, I think I'm going to have to say that Zimbabwe's fear/paranoia is not unfounded in this case.
They're still blathering idiots for destroying most of their agricultural infrastructure, though.
This sounds familiar. I thought the Marines were supposed to destroy the world?!
The patents surrurnding their use are bad.
Just another example of "intellectual property" laws running amuck.
Anarchists never rule
Can we just stop posting anything about Africa? On slashdot it just descends into:
1) People pretending they know what they're talking about.
2) A rare educated comment that either criticizes Africa or the UN.
3) A lot of racist comments from the typical slashdot geeks who get very bold when their statements are over a computer.
Well, considering that the blacks in Zimbabwe have just stolen their land from white farmers, now they just realized that those 300,000 white farmers were in fact producing most of the crops for the 12+ million black population and they just cannot keep it up. This shows the uteer emptiness of the black supremacists, espcially in the US and they deserve starving to death, now. Enjoy !
You are correct in your assessments.
I know I'll be modded way down for this, but in Robert Mugabe's pandering to the European view that genetically-modified foods are not a good idea, Zimbabwe have refused food imports that could have done much to save the country from a very serious famine.
It is a classic Catch-22 with tragic results.
OK, I see some comments about why can't the US just mill the corn to prevent it from being planted. How about we turn this around and say, why can't Zimbabwe mill the corn before distribution, to prevent it from being planted?
The article mentions that they are too poor to afford the $25/ton fee. However, as others have pointed out, up until recently Zimbabwe was a major agricultural exporter. I find it hard to believe that they lack sufficient milling capacity to grind the corn themselves -- unless things really have deteriorated that badly since Mugabe took power.
Gee I love this wonderful new free market economy we have that supposed to make everything fair and help the impovourished!
The real problem here is precisely the command economy that now exists in Zimbabwe, where what should be productive farmland is being "redistributed" by the government for the sake of racial politics.
I would defend free markets not primarily on the grounds that they are the "fair," but because they tend to make those operating within them better off. On the other hand, I think the pursuit of absolute fairness (what Thomas Sowell would call "cosmic justice") by means of government controls is likely to produce greater unfairness, along with increased resentment between segments of the society and a lowered standard of living all around. As, again, in Zimbabwe, where president Mugawe is confiscating white farmers' land to rectify the injustice done by their colonial ancestors.
Why are so many slashdotters keen on blaming Mugabe for this famine?
- Is Mugabe the President of Swaziland?
- Is Mugabe the President of Lesotho?
- Is Mugabe the President of Malawi?
- Is Mugabe the President of Zambia?
- Is Mugabe the President of Mozambique?
- No, Mugabe is the President of Zimbabwe, only one of many countries in Southern Africa faced with famine.
By the way, other sources report that a settlement has been reached between Zimbabwe and the United States. Let's hope they get it milled and distributed ASAP.On a lesser note, nobody has pointed out that Africans prefer their own varieties of maize to American maize because American maize makes lousy nsima (nshima in Shona). Crosspollination is a real concern for everybody, not just the exporters. If the US intends merely to provide assistance, they should just go ahead and mill the stuff. Or send rice.
I'm glad someone's looking into that. I was once puzzled why, if we live so much longer, the biblical limit of 70 isn't all that much different. Why, if you look through lists of famous people in history, so many of them had lifespans comparable to our own. Then I more/less figured out it was figure-fiddling propaganda, much like `aircraft are safe' statistically (The Royal Society showed that per-journey, counting injury and not just death, aircraft are *not* the safest.)
...23 of the 34 nations reported showed a drop in the life expectancy of their 65-year-olds from the previously recorded 1958 figures. Except Japan, all the highly industrialized nations were in this group of 23. - Ivan Popov, MD, Stay Young
Some interesting quotes from the Medical Dark Ages collection along these lines:
The life expectancy of the 40-year-old American is near the lowest in the world. - Adelle Davis, MS, Biology, USC Med. School, Let's Get Well
In 1972 WHO issued its statistical report...for 34 countries...the life expectancy for persons who had already reached 65.
Although in America today life expectancy at birth is near the best of any civilized country in the world...at age 40, life expectancy is near the bottom...' - New York State Medical Journal, Sept. 15, 1955 [funny how at about the same time NYS was denying any danger from the Troy-Albany radioactive rains]
Complete Expectation of Life in Years (Remaining) for each sex at selected ages, Massachusetts, 1789-1929:
1789: Expectation of life in years, at...age...60: Male: 14.8; Female 16.1
1929: Expectation of life in years, at...age...60: Male: 14.0; Female 15.4
- E. Sydenstricker, Health and Environment
More of the MDAQ collection at
http://home1.gte.net/res0k62m/mdaq.htm
Your website seems to indicate you've spent the last 20 years working on computers for small business interests.
I'm curious what your background is to know whether I can trust your statements.
Geez...
Surely what must be done to make everything better is to create some sort of genetically engineered open source corn which has no patents! Duuuh!
"If these crops get in, then farmers basically lose their rights to their own agricultural resources," said Carole Collins, senior policy analyst for the Washington-based Africa Faith and Justice Network.
Uh, did Ms. Carole Collins miss the part where the insane leader decided to take all the land from the people who actualy knew what to do with it?
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
This is an elaborate catch-22 that the US has set up to make Mugabe look bad no matter which way he decides to go. Without delving back into Mugabe's internal policy regarding starving out his opponents, consider this scenario.
If he accepts the grain, he becomes seen as hypocritical by his people by admitting that there is a food shortage while at the same time he is telling his own people to stop farming. Additionally, if he accepts it, it sets up the US to be able to make him do what they want, lest the food shipments stop. Shant bite the hands that feeds, you know...
If he declines the grain, he sends a message that the country's situation is fine, and when the Zimbabwean people begin to starve in mass numbers, he will be labeled as a blundering fool, a ruthless dictator, and as a person who the world can not trust. It sets him up for failure in this case as well.
This is a carefully crafted ploy by the US to use Mugabe's own policies against him. They are forcing him to either change his ways or to send his country into mass starvation by way of politics. Either way, this is a brilliant move by the US in the chess game between these two countries.
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
>there should be no excuse for forcing third >world countries into a subservient like >existence, where they have to pay multinationals >for their basic food
That's why we have all these acronymed organizations for.
I will never forget the fact that while yugoslavia was being bombed by the US for 3 months (I keep saying that New Yorkers would have shit on themselves if it happend to them), Romanians were trading petrol for fresh vegetables at the border.
With IMF sponsored economic reforms, a country with absolutely gorgeous farming land had to import "tasteless Dutch hydroponic vegetables" while farms layed in unused.
"Sure, we'll give you loans but you have to spend it on EU goods."
Previous posts were right about man made starvations....
if it can be done with C - why not corn?
The "ban" on GE corn in Eruopa has some ground you know. Firast most consummer don't ant GE food, with good reason or not. Second the long term effect on gene spreading in the "bad grass" of the environnement thru cross polinisation or even some weird gene exchange process I did not udnerstand (I am not a genetician) has apparently NOT been fully studied. The US GE crops producer did some half assed study apparently (to Europa standard) and got quickly a green light from US governement. Finally there is the commercial and patent issue but they are only a political concern. Not a consumer concern, and the consummer concern & scientific concern in Europe are right now the big stumble to GE food. Now if Zimbabwe contamine its plant with GE... Byebye sellling to Europe.
Now the funny things is why in the first place is a starving country selling food to Europe ???
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
eat a dick, nigger.
reduce yields. But dictator Mugabe has been having his thugs do exactly that. Seeking out all the English-descent farmers, raping their wives and children and murdering them all. This reduces yields, as you might imagine.
But Mugabe wants to murder all the whites, -and- all his black political oponents, and is following the tried-and-true Marxist means for doing so.
In South Africa, as it should surprise no one, the Xhosa terrorists working for the ANC have been doing the same to the Afrikaners there (longer in that land than whites in America), as well as to the Zulu and other tribes, as they were doing prior to overthrowing the elected government with Western help.
Heh, that's interesting. I remember there was this one thing on Sesame Street where there was this guy out counting stars and he went up to fourty and then just said "and many more". For a long time I actually thought fourty was some sort of upper limit to counting...
Duct tape, XML, democracy: Not doing the job? Use more.
So if it costs 25% more to mill the corn, then why not just donate less corn but milled so that the resulting cost is the same? Better than not donating at all right?
Crop farmers don't get anywhere near 20% margin. Not even close.
Both Bill and Microsoft fail this measure miserably regardless of tax deductability arguments.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
They killed, raped & MULTILATED all white farmers!
Over 90% of the large farms that allowed that country to be able to EXPORT excess food, were destroyed and taken over by military force.
Worse, the fascist-communists took over all the farms, (coincidentally run by educated white people) and in many cases tortured and killed all farmer family members!
Cutting off genitals was a popular tact by the black attackers. Many press phtos exist.
Naturally, as in The Congo in the 1960s the white flight in other engineering disciplines and industries will kill off this hell hole of a country.
Its a political mess, and like every other communist-fascist country in Africa it has no future unless they start mass sterilization policies.
I hope the people in power suffer as well as their supporters.
They killed, raped & MULTILATED all white farmers!
Over 90% of the large farms that allowed that country to be able to EXPORT excess food, were destroyed and taken over by military force.
Worse, the fascist-communists took over all the farms, (coincidentally run by educated white people) and in many cases tortured and killed all farmer family members!
Cutting off genitals was a popular tact by the black attackers. Many press phtos exist.
Naturally, as in The Congo in the 1960s the white flight in other engineering disciplines and industries will kill off this hell hole of a country.
Its a political mess, and like every other communist-fascist country in Africa it has no future unless they start mass sterilization policies.
I hope the people in power suffer as well as their supporters.
I tried to mention this once and was marked as a -1 troll by a black-african sympathizer or a person who does not follow CNN reports. (Thats Why I had to post another time). Why do people not wnat to know the truth regarding the multiple counts of genital mutilations of whites?
Grind them up and make some tortillas!
They killed, raped & MULTILATED most of the white farmers!
Over 90% of the large farms that allowed that country to be able to EXPORT excess food, were destroyed and taken over by military force.
Worse, the fascist-communists took over all the farms, (coincidentally run by educated white people) and in many cases tortured and killed all farmer family members!
Cutting off genitals was a popular tact by the black attackers. Many press phtos exist with the grisly details.
Naturally, as in The Congo in the 1960s the white flight in other engineering disciplines and industries will kill off this hell hole of a country.
Its a political mess, and like every other communist-fascist country in Africa it has no future unless they start mass sterilization policies.
I hope the people in power suffer as well as their supporters.
I tried to mention this once and was marked as a -1 troll by a black-african sympathizer or a person who does not follow CNN reports. (Thats Why I had to post another time). Why do people not wnat to know the truth regarding the multiple counts of genital mutilations of whites?
True, its insane (cross pollination, as in canadian court cases and monsanto) but the mass slaying and mutilations of white farmers is the cause.
Not the IP issues.
They killed, raped & MULTILATED all white farmers!
Over 90% of the large farms that allowed that country to be able to EXPORT excess food, were destroyed and taken over by military force.
Worse, the fascist-communists took over all the farms, (coincidentally run by educated white people) and in many cases tortured and killed all farmer family members!
Cutting off genitals was a popular tact by the black attackers. Many press phtos exist.
Naturally, as in The Congo in the 1960s the white flight in other engineering disciplines and industries will kill off this hell hole of a country.
Its a political mess, and like every other communist-fascist country in Africa it has no future unless they start mass sterilization policies.
I hope the people in power suffer as well as their supporters.
I tried to mention this once and was marked as a -1 troll by a black-african sympathizer or a person who does not follow CNN reports. (Thats Why I had to post another time). Why do people not wnat to know the truth regarding the multiple counts of genital mutilations of whites?
...and thanks for your support. (-:
:-)
Pity I have karma to burn. Wanna hold a Karma Bonfire? (-: I have a list of topics
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
If the U.S. Postal Service can afford to think about irradiating every piece of mail, I think they could probably irradiate some grain. It isn't all that hard, as you can do it in bulk. I'm sure there must be a facility already set up somewhere, as companies and organizations have already done market testing of irradiated food to the public. People don't like it, but we certainly have the techonology laying about.
If I had no sense of humor, I would long ago have committed suicide. -Ghandi
Zimbabwe refused to accept *whole* grain. The U.S. refused to supply processed grain which would have fed people but not risked imposing GM on the country by stealth.
To claim that Mugabe has refused the grain is misleading.
The refusal of the U.S. to provide processed grain says as much about the aims of the suppliers and their attitude towards the starving population of Zimbabwe as it does about Mugabe.
Honestly, shouldn't corn hybrids by GPL'ed? :) I mean, we're talking about advances that benefit the greater good* on something that already exists, and if they are bad, they need to be under peer review. I have a real problem with anyone having a "patent" over a hybrid of corn!
Chris
*I am not against the patent concept as a whole, and I think that people will probably try to use the "medicine" argument against me. But most medicines are new and corn...well corn is already there, these companies are just making it better.
Zimbabwe have a record of developing crops to meet their climate. Wheat in particular. Crops just do not grow once planted they have to be suitable for the climate. Most the GM designs so far do not meet the needs of countries outside the developed world. No doubt some used in australia may. Either way I would bet zimbabwe have devloped their own strains of maize for their environment, just importing things ad hoc is normally bad news.
Most anglers in the states ae begining to realize this now due to the snake fish infecting lakes and eating everything in sight. Australia have very strict import requirements to stop pests entering. The same goes for crops.
The maize is GM and may reduce the amount grown, since it may not be adapted to the climate. Low water. low nutrients. Where as Zimabawean strains of wheat are designed to make the most of this.
Also GM crops have a tendency to cause resistancy to infections and investations grow. This would hit those farmers that do not use GM doubly hard.
THis would be bad for zimbabwe.
IN china were they have llet GM cotton grow for over a decade there are very mixed reports of its effects. The scientists on the ground tend to say that the yeilds are dropping from the records as resitance among the infections/investations has grown. Also over bugs have grown hardeir as well, affecting other crops as well (they had to compete with these attacking the cotton). THos not on the ground tend to refute the claims. The net effect is that current GM methods look like they will not very effective.
One post here about Ethiopia woes due to IMF and USa interference is stunning. Sell your grain stores that save guard u from famine and then have reimport the lot when famine stikes a year later. IMF and USA enforcing free market polices that further there national interest when the those that they enforce them on are not an economic threat is confounding.
Enjoy, well never give up.
I have no problem with redistribution of wealth, but I much prefer taxing the rich rather than just taking one person's stuff and giving it to another person.
But if that were all Mugabe had done, I would not mind so much. What he has done is to take land, and either declare it unusable by anyone, or given it to someone who does not know what to do with it. For crying out loud, if you're going to give people farmland, at least educate them about how to use it properly. And what's more, what food Zimbabwe does have is distributed inquitably by Mugabe to favor his supporters and punish his detractors. The guy is basically Stalin Junior.
So (in Canada at least) there is nothing criminal about growing seeds which happened to blow into your land. And if Monsanto wants to prosecute a farmer, they must prove that the violation was deliberate.
I personally don't know if I am in favor of IP laws applying to organisms, but the website you have pointed to is definitely misrepresenting the case.
If you have access to Lexis-Nexis you can find the original Washington Post article, with its correction, for yourself.
Of course, 7000 years of gradual human created evolution is a decent amount of time to make sure there isn't any major side-effects.
Creating hybrids overnight, especially including genes from other speicies altogether is a *tad* risky IMHO. Not worth it.
We'd be better off concentrating on better, more sustainable farming methods, especially in the developing world - but that's not as SEXY as GM. Oh, and it won't allow Monsanto to make a heap of gold.
* * Always question "the National Interest" - 9 times out of 10 it is a cover for evil
This is why we need open-source food. We need a RMS of the food industry... Time to start the FFF - Free Food Foundation?
This is standard North American corn. I eat GM foods and I don't se why you have a problem with them.
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
If you compare this to software piracy, you might see the insanity. Software is easily copied. It is much more often copied than bought. Seeds copy themselves. It's just the way life works. It's like microsoft adding virus code to copy itself on every computer it can hack, while threatening to sue if it succeeds!
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
Michael, you suck!
Linux is so bad it's free and most people don't use it. But you have the source code, so it's your fault.
OK, so basically you are equating the USA with Iraq. Both are bullies by your own words.
Iraq does not have the right to complain about being attacked because it _WAS_ a bully in the past.
By your logic Panama could launch an attack on the USA any day.
But obviously American have become so selfcentered in their view of the worls, that you don't notice how many people are starting to hate your foreign policy.
Moritz
The Draka would have run it better. Had history gone another way, Most of Africa would be lush green paradise by now, dotted with First World cities and productive farms. As it is, it's a disaster that's gonna get worse before it gets better.
We need to keep these modified crops out of the environment - everywhere they have been used they contaminate the environment leading to long term damage that cannot be repaired.
no, zimbabwe would have an agriculture industry. however it would essentially owe a tax to the gm corn company from every farmer in zimbabwe.
isn't private industry great! no more of this progressive tax system from icky governments, no, private industry loves leeching on starving people to enable people in richer, developed countries to send their kids to college and see friends on an even bigger tv.
it just makes ya proud, don't it?
sigh.
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
While I don't like Mugabe (he's a power crazed maniac in my eyes) or the way he's handled the land distribution (lots of violence and threats, oppressing the opposition, and violating Zimbabwes own laws), the white farmers got their land in the first place because it was given to them by the UK in some kind of deluded fascist land distribution scheme, where the native population was forced of their land - so Mugabe has just taken a leaf out of the book of the colonial powers that preceded him.
Contrast to traditional farming...
Typically there are a huge variety of strains, running into three figures (base 10), chosen for natural resistance to disease, drought or whatever local hardships. The fear is that contamination by GM crops may weaken local strains and immerse an area into lasting entrenched famine.
Mexico has apparently seen local maize(?) strains contaminated by GM's.
Regarding political shenanighans, I refer you to all the other excellent comments made by other contributors
Since I remembered the lawsuit by Monsanto, I entered into Google:
farmer sued genetically corn patented
And these articles came forth:
The farmer's page
Article"
Another
Another
Tale of the Absurd
Monsano wins
Commentary
and on...
and on...
Comment
Good ol' Mother Jones
Y'all see, there is a damned good chance that such corn will contaminate the other crops, and then Monsanto or whomever will own their souls. Or GNP, whatever works.
I'm surprised that the Canadian case isn't common knowledge. Then again, it wasn't exactly Evening News material for the U.S. No network news department head wants to seem "liberal" nowadays, which translates to "damned few stories critical of corporations" (balance), which of course is not connected to trying to please conservative corporate owners who have become quite.... proactive in their news departments of late.
The submitter of the item is correct in identifying IP lawsuit threats as an important datum in the decision to decline the food, even if the article cited doesn't make a point of it. An informed person would already know about the enormous lawsuit potential, and add that to the stack.
Who told you that? The author?
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Has no-one noticed that we've run out of fish in many areas of the world, so it might not be a good idea to train up more fishermen?!?
Perhaps a more sustainable metaphor is required.
Excellent !
First yes, Mugabe should go to hell, he is a bastard.
/.ers seem so incensed about restrictions on receiving US GM crops given the fact that anybody that goes to the US knows that any fresh produce or plants will be confiscated on arrival and destroyed, one can be subjected to heavy fines for failing to declare any such products.
But second, it is quite amusing to see how many
Would that be yet another example of double standards? Naaaah, the god ole U. S. of A. can be as touchy as they want regarding importing agricultural products, but if it is Europe who refuses then all of the sudden serious issues become "unfounded fears".
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Iraq does not have the right to complain about being attacked because it _WAS_ a bully in the past.
Iraq _is_ a bully. You let Saddam Hussain free from the restrictions, and he'll do exactly what he did before.
But obviously American have become so selfcentered in their view of the worls, that you don't notice how many people are starting to hate your foreign policy.
But obviously, you have become so anti-American in your view of the world, that you don't realize that there is no nice solution. A nation must react to threats to the lives and interests of its citizens. Moreover, people and the nations composed of them naturally want to help those being unjustly oppressed or slaughtered. Superpowers, like the US, are frequently directly invoked for help, and will likely get blamed for the deaths if they do not help. On the other hand, nations object to actions taken by other nations on their soil, whether just or unjust, and people will complain if it didn't go perfectly. There is no obvious, perfect path; neither complete isolation nor world conquest are acceptable solutions, and which point between those two is the right answer is an open question.
We are dealing with natures failure. That is the black race. Perhaps not failure but evolution has doomed this Black race to be nothing more than a plague on the other Races. British General Montgomery privately reported to the English Queen after a tour of Africa after WW2 that Africa should be racially cleansed of blacks and repopulated with Whites. To the point?
It always amused me that one of the most common GM crops (at least here in the UK) is rapeseed. Seems to be a certain amount of irony in that name.
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
Well there's been a fair amount of:
The USA sucks becuase they are trying to _________.
And
Mugabe sucks because he is ________.
Bottom line the poor people of Zimbabwe are _starving_. (Note poor.) Mugabe is not a nice guy or leader.
So I ask you USA bashers, WHO THE FUCK ELSE IS GIVING ZIMBABWE FOOD? Is Great Britan rushing their corn to them? Is Austrialia? Germany? Finland? Canada? Oh. Well then, you pompus assholes, why not piss off? While your countries are barely able to feed YOU, continue to piss and moan about the USA and how the USA continues to feed the fucking planet. The USA gives away more food/supplies/money than the other side of the fucking PLANET (mostly because the shit is going there.) So go ahead and continue to bash the USA. I, for one, don't want my tax dollars going where they are are OPRESSING you.
If the USA went isolationist your economies would fall and you'd take glowing corn.
This
"starve now" versus "starve later and be bacrupt".
Genetic sequences should not be patentable. It's the source code of life.
Why would Zimbabwe care about US patents?
Regards...
Forget the arguments about GM corn.
Zimbabwe is one of the most fertile countries in Africa but it isn't actually growing anything - by presidential degree!
Mugabe is a mad man who is systematically starving districts that voted against him in the recent elections. This is FACT. The BBC had to mount an illegal undercover operation to get into Zimbabwe to gather the evidence as they and many other news agencies are banned. Who bans the BBC for god's sake?!
Over the last few years Mugabe has forced white farmers off their land insisting that it must be redistributed to nationals. All that happens is that so-called "war veterans" move in, smash the farms up, get bored and fuck off.
Zimbabwe has been ripped apart by very evil and stupid men.
Oh, and Mugabe has a really stupid-looking moustache.
Monsanto publicly boasted about conducting random tests as they drove by canola fields in the countryside. Monsanto representatives had no respect for property rights as they then stole canola plants that were growing in the farmer's fields or the "right of way" along the road (which are the property of the farmer). Monsanto representatives commented in local newspapers that in their opinion Canadian farmers had no property rights and they were entitled to trespass of farmer's canola fields (without the farmer's permission) to see if their patented canola gene was present in the field. Even more troubling was the aerial spraying of a Saskatchewan farmer's field. A farmer, located in central Saskatchewan, had an unexpected visit by Monsanto representatives. They accused the farmer of growing Round Up Ready canola without a license, and this was denied by the farmer and his wife. Shortly thereafter, the couple noticed a spray plane flying over their canola fields, and subsequently, he noticed patches in his field of canola plants that were dead, the result of spray bombs of Round Up dropped in his field.
The problem here is not about patents - it's about
America bowing down to mega corps and allowing genetically modified food to be grown that has the potential to pass modified genes into other crops, viruses, bacteria and species.
Europe recognises that genetically modified foods should be treated as a bio-hazard until at least 30years of research in extreme conditions prove that the inserted genes have a lower mutation rate than once in a thousand years. per billion plants.
Europe is Zimbabwe's primary export market.
If Zimbabwe's crops were tainted, they could lose their primary source of revenue.
Why doesn't Zimbabwe sue the fuck out of monsanto or whoever if there crops get contaminated, it shouldn't be the other way round!!!!!
Anyhows Zimbabwe probably doesn't recognise patents on genes.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
It looks like Africa, through AIDS and misgovernance, is about to experience massive depopulation.
Does anyone know of a commercial outfit that's preparing to recolonize afterwards?
668: Neighbour of the Beast
Maybe I'm missing something here, but:
If the concern is that this corn is going to get grown instead of eaten, why not just grind it before distributing it? I've never tried growing flour, but I don't imagine it'd work :)
And a million people will starve to death. Hooo-Ray for postcolonialism!
In my opinion this is nuts.
I plant a field of corn, someone else plants a field of corn, it contaminates mine. I get sued for infringement.
THEY contaminated ME. I should have to right to not have my crops contaminated.
Your right to swing your fist ends at my face.
This is like pesticide spraying on lawns, I should have the right to not have my neighbhours poison in the air I breath.
I am a South African living in Switzerland and even though I've been gone for many years I still love my country of birth for it's diversity of culture and it's survival despite so many problems. On top of this I was born and grew up in the South African version of the corn belt.
My worries and thoughts on reading this:
I find it starnge that US companies and organisations have this view that what other nations think is of no consequence. Here in Switzerland where I live, GM maize and animal hormone feeding are illegal and in the EU GM products have to be clearly marked as such on the product (similar to tobacco) and the EU has had a long runing argument with the USA because the view in the EU (quite correctly IMO) is that the hormones that are pumped into the animals destroy the animals natural growth potential and eventually end up in human bodies. In the USA it seems to be the norm to eat food that is technically processed and yet you Americans are one of the world's most overweight nations. Your government attempts to combat this with laws and even more high technology. Come over to Europe and look at the average weight of people here. You are what you eat!
Moving on to Mexico, a country that has readily adopted GM maize only to discover that the GM maize has taken over from many indigenous species, making some of them extinct. And it is spreading. Does anyone care? Will Mexico be the next recipient of USAID?
Zimbabwe has a government that is under sanctions for the abuse of power and the taking away of land from white farmers that up until now were profitable and producing a large crop surplus. The sanctions are by the US and the EU (amazingly agreeing on one issue for a change). This makes Zimbabwe an easy target for whatever action the west decides to take because it is a regional pariah. Mugabe is an evil bastard IMO, but he isn't stupid. One only has to read one in depth article on what happend in Mexico to know that it isn't something one would wish for one's own country. Being a slave to large food companies, supported by their government, is no joke I would imagine.
As a South African I would also worry that this maize would spread to South Africa and wreak it's havoc there as well. South Africa has enough problems without needing GM crops added to them.
Get your pro-Mugabe t-shirt here to support Dr. Robert Mugabe, the greatest Civil Rights leader since Dr. King!
http://www.cafeshops.com/cp/store.aspx?s=zimara
Monsanto has the dumbest patent that is *severely* hurting innovation in the plant genetics research field. Basically, as far as my wife tells me, their patent manages not only to cover what they have discovered regarding certain plants, but also covers things, but in certain cases things not yet discovered by them, in certain cases. I do not know the patent number, but it seems that they patented everything about certain key plants and managed to get words to the effect of 'and all discoveries not yet known' to persist in the patent. So if someone else tries to beat them to the punch regarding something with these plants, they'll be sued into bankruptcy before they can get anywhere with it.
Would this part of the patent stand up in true due process of law? No way in hell. But as we have seen time and time again, the US justice system does not fairly handle civil cases. Almost always the party with more money wins, and for this reason this patent may never go away, unless a behemoth company sees fit to do so...
Still, in this case it is likely just an excuse. Mujabe exercises control in part through starvation, and if food were in large supply, his power would be weakened.
I've seen some of the stuff they are doing with corn and have been given a pretty good description of it. Most of the Genetic Engineering is ultimately just an extremely controlled and fast way to do what breeding does in the long term. Pesticides hold more potential harm than pure genetic engineering. The questionable thing is when they bring in hormone treatments to cattle and stuff, that, like pesticides is ultimately eaten by the consumer...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Maybe the reason that you've made it past 30 is because of our medical system and our life style. 7000 years ago there probably were no doctors who could save your life if you got really sick. There sure as heck wasn't a vaccine for this and that and ever other disease (ie small pox, etc.) that used to kill people even 100 years ago.
Let's stick this issue to Zimbabwe, please.
First of all, Zimbabwe became the breadbasket of Europe and Asia because the farmers came in and INCREASED THE YIELD. Increasing the yield allowed more people to live off of the land in higher density.
Then Robert Mugambe said that he was going to take all of the land from the high yield farmers... and give it to a people that have not traditionally had much interest or ability at high yield farming. So the Mugabe government is letting people starve instead of GRADUALLY letting black farmers into the food business with incentives. After all, America doesn't have this good of a growing season, and Americans seem to always be shipping food to Africa. ALL THE TIME. Constantly. You put American farmers in Africa? You'd have corn flying out your ass. I assume the currently displaced farmers were doing the same. Africa should be shipping us food on the cheap. Instead we always seem to be sending it to them.
Matter of fact, it appears to most US citizens that we are constantly sending food and resources to countries that have an abundant ability to make and refine food and resources. Countries that have been around for hundreds more years... countries that should have taken us under their wings and showed us how their culture "works SO WELL and is better than ours" generations ago. Cultures that are thousands of years older.
Cultures that had more than enough time to really start giving a shit about agriculture.
IMHO it appears (please note appears, because I know there are some that are) as though most native groups in Africa have absolutely NO INTEREST IN AGRICULTURE. And with no interest in agriculture and a increased population brought about by the arrival of cheap food from whites, people starve. No interest in agriculture means no civilization.
No civilization means constant bickering and war over the table scraps instead of sitting at the head of the table like the big boys.
Two words: system instability. Nature as we know it is a honking huge complex system. The folks behing GE's have already proven that they do not have a complete grip on this. The simpliest example is finding the GE plant where they didn't expect it.
Now, mixing things like animal genes in with a plant is a funky kewl thing to do, but you've essentially just taken a "random", w.r.t. nature's ability, huge leap in genetic mutation (not selective breeding). Do we know how this will pan out in a large emergent system? Personally, I do not think that we understand nature at this level. I'm not sure we actually require GE's, but am not against them per se. However, as an engineer this type of thing smacks majorly as one of those things that's going to come back and bite us on the ass!
And of course there are all the economic/whoring factors too, but I'll leave that for others to point out.
HCB has since been banned and is no longer produced.
So, based on that horrible incident, I wouldn't really expect these folks to plant the genetically engineered corn if they're starving.
As a lot of readers already mentioned, most famines have a political background. In those cases there isn't a need for some high-tech corn, but for another policy. Somebody mentioned the famines in China in the 50's/60's. Now China has 1.5 billion inhabitants - more than ever - but you didn't hear of any famines lately - did you? And in the 40's they were estimating that China could only support 400 to 500 million inhabitants... And for those interested in history: in the sixties the american agricultural industries produced already some kind of high-tech corn (it was called the "green revolution"). They did breed the corn the old-fashioned way however. The business plan then (as today) was: Sell each year seeds, and sell special fertilizer and pesticides ... already then it didn't work because the people didn't have the dollars or the knowledge to handle this high-tech thing. Those countries just dont have the money to buy european or american seed, fertilizers or pesticides.
So you don't really need such high-tech stuff, you need more land in the hand of small farmers (right now in the third world a very small percentage of farmers own a very high percentage of farmable ground) producing for the local market.
BBC article
and a small percentage of what does grow produces grossly deformed kernels
Which kernel are we taking here? Mach, Linux, NT?
funny munging
Yeah, it also defines Pi as 3.
(Well, a lot of people believed it did, because it says some part of Solomon's temple was 10 cubits in diameter and 30 cubits in circumference. Eventually some Jewish scholars decided 30 cubits was the INNER circumference, while the diameter went from outer end to outer end. Read the whole story from a guy who takes it way too seriously.)
grep -ri 'should work'
...as thier former colonial masters, you OWE it to them.
He and several other experts recommended that the United States pay for milling costs. "It is highly unethical not to just cover the costs for milling," said Thompson, the Arizona professor. "Tell me how much it costs to drop one bomb on Afghanistan. Who is starving whom here?" Let me get this straight. How much did they pay for that food? Isnt aid a goodwill donation to help out suffering fellow human beings....since when is relief aid an obligation? So not only do you want us to pay for the growing, harvesting, and shipping of the food, but now we have to pay for the milling. Well hell why not pay for the cooking of the food, and spoons to feed to people, plus we should pay for drinks to wash it down with. Give me a break it's a donation, you dont get prime pick of the US harvest because your government is incompetent. I've never seen the salvation army turn down clothes because they were out of style. I can think of lots of US programs that would love to have either $950,000 dollars (not even including the cost of shipping) or that amount of food to feed hungry people here. I think the US official got it just right "Beggars cant be choosers" but dont criticize us because we wont spend even more money because your government has their head up their ass.
The fact is that in the United States farmers do NOT save corn seed. Hybrid seed is the 99% of the market. Planing seed that you have kept from the harvest will NOT yield anywhere NEAR the original seed. Most farmers in United States do not even keep bin-run soybeans for planting (even though they are not hybrid)...the kept seed argument in the United States, Europe or any other well developed economy is bullshit, as for the third world? who is going to check to see if your field contains cross genentic traits?
To be announced later on today, beggers can officially be choosers.
There have been a couple of articles and books released recently (I am too lasy to look up this links right now, but start with a program aired recently on The Connection which discussed the issue at length. We have GM corn largely because our subsidy model encourages the production of far more corn than we can use. Then, in an attempt to keep polititions in office, attempts to find new ways to use the corn in an attempt to keep the farmers happy. The patent issues IMO are a big concern, but the bigger problem is the really broken way the industry works in the US. If we didn't propagate the broken system, we would have (most likely) some non-GM corn/soy/wheat... which the rest of the world would like. As other posters have noted: there is more than enough production in the world without greater efficiences (for now) politics, dictators, and human stupidity and lack of empathy is the source of most hunger.
How about this, where have you done research that says no research has been done? Have you heard of, say, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, or mayhaps the Environmental Protection Agency (to list only Federal groups, there are other industiry, scientific and advocacy groups looking in this issue, you'd be surprised) which requires, and perfoms, tests on any really new product before allowing onto the market.
g =& accno=A03410&rptno=GAO-02-566/ nceh/ehhe/Cry9cReport/default.h tm
http://www.gao.gov/docdblite/summary.php?recfla
http://www.cdc.gov
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/hhbioen2.html
There is some light reading if you intend to do any research.
Oh, and if you had read the original article, you might have notices that Mugabe's excuse not to sell to Europe, is because Europe's agro-import barriers are set by Luddites, not by Monsanto's lawyers.
It's clear you have strong feelings, but few facts on the issue of GE foods. It's not a matter of 'overclocking' the grain. It's about making food that's healthier for both people and the environment because you don't need pesticides. It's about making it cheaper and easier for farmers to grow food because they don't have to buy or use pesticides. It's also about getting more nutrients in the food per acre than you used to. For Monsanto, its about the buck, for the rest of us, its about feeding EVERYONE, a win win situation.
The reason US farmers are so into GE foods is because they're educated. The USGovernment requires farmers be chemists, dieticians, and ecologists. In europe, one might think all you have to be is ignorant.
If you're worried about the spread of improved corn genes, then why are you worried about 'terminator' seeds, you'd think you would be happy that Monsanto and others found a way to prevent your fears form coming true.
Unmodifyed plants who through some bizzare twist of science took on the traits of the terminator seed crop, would be replaced either by *gasp* new planting, or *gasp* its neighbor in normal biological fashion.
If you want me to believe GMO food is bad, fine. Just show me empirical data.
#-#
Ad Astra Per Aspera
A rough road leads to the stars
Just for all those who are making the US out to look like the good guy here, try some statistics The US consistantly ranks dead last among the 22 richest nations in terms of its foreign aid as a percentage of Gross National Product. The kicker is that it is behind Italy (which is in the midst of a political crisis) and Japan (which is in the middle of a decade long recession). If anything, the US should be apologizing for not having milled the corn in the first place.
More points:
a) Half of all US foreign aid is directed towards military purposes.
b) Of course, you might think this is just the democratic process at work. Americans don't want to spend that much on foreign aid. Of course, Americans also don't know how much we actually spend on foreign aid. Since they think we spend 15%, and we actually spend less than 1%, the first poll mentioned holds no water.
Look, I'm not here to demonize America. I like it here a lot. I just want to get it out there that as far as foreign policy is concerned, the American people are in the dark, and the American government does whatever is in its best interest. While I don't suddenly expect everyone to become foreign policy gurus, and the American government to be totally self-less (it shouldn't) some steps towards a nice middle ground would be a good start.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Well, there's stupid and there's 'deserves to be left out of the gene pool" stupid.
The "guy in Canada" is named Percy Schmeiser, and he's still in court on appeal, after getting squashed by Montsanto the first time. Read about it here [percyschmeiser.com]
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
If you didn't see it, there's a very good link to what claims to be an independent information source about Biotechnology in food. There's lots of (what appears to be) unbiased information, and background on the people running the organization as well.
pewagbiotech.org
Again, simply not true. There is a strip of publicly owned land along the side of the roads so that the government can do things like put in utility poles etc. Mr. Shmeiser planted his crops right up to the edge of the roads, onto the publicly owned land. This is customary among farmers and is accepted and legal. Monsanto took their initial samples from this public property without going onto his private property. On the basis of the results from these samples they went to court and got a court order allowing them to take samples from within his fields. It's all in the Federal Court of Canada judgement, if you're actually interested in getting actual, true, facts in the case. Of course, I think most people don't care what actually happened because they like to demonize Monsanto, so if the facts aren't in agreement with this, they seem to like to make up ones that are.
Does that make this situation a 'kernel panic' ?
You seem to be taking the stance that "the ends justify the means." On the other hand, it's been the morally questionable conduct of the US government in our Middle East policy that led to the arming and propping up of Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, the Saudi dictatorship, and Israel. We sell them all arms, watch them kill each other, then shout, "Hey, stop it!" Some foreign policy.
If the US government had listened when many Americans were warning them not to arm bloodthirsty, criminallly-minded people like Hussein and Bin Laden while it was happening, we wouldn't be stuck in this predicament. Now these same people are anti-American, of course. I say Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush were anti-American for arming and supporting these assholes.
http://share-international.org
If the US government had listened when many Americans were warning them not to arm bloodthirsty, criminallly-minded people like Hussein and Bin Laden while it was happening, we wouldn't be stuck in this predicament.
How can you know that? Hussein would probably have stuck his hand in the cookie jar earlier. Bin Laden's troops wouldn't have been as well trained, but there's no reason to think he wouldn't have done the same things. Of course, as Afganistan was in some ways the Soviet Union's Vietnam, it's possible we would still have the Soviet Union breathing down our neck while this was going on.
In addition the the article the Post also has an editorial today which explains how President Mugabe has run the country into the ground, including the agricultural industry.
(* sue Monsanto for contaminating your crop. *)
I am surprised nobody with this problem has counter-sued their Monsanto-using neighbor farmer(s) for contamination. That would put a hex on the product and nobody would use it in fear of down-wind pollen pollution suits.
What a fricken mess. Lawsuits seem to be a bigger problem than any risks in the food itself so far.
Table-ized A.I.
For the last 50 years or so North America has been using HYBRID Corn. This corn is infertile, think mull, cross between a donkey and a horse. Almost ALL commercially grown corn in North America is infertile. It has been for years as the seed companies want to protect their years and years of selective breeding. Other crops such as soybeans and canola cannot be made infertile easily, therefore they are not; therefore the warnings from monsanto
THe Zimbabwe President is on the outs with the West for his land reforms and this engineered corn is a countermeasure. If even Britain isn't allowing engineered corn why is the US trying to push it on poorer nations. There isn't a food shortage anywhere in the world because of the lack of use of engineered plants. Engineered food biggest benefits is for the patent holder not mankind. I do not fear engineered food but most situations are not so grave that we need to use them over natural food.
Euphemism, what is that a euphemism for something.
I think what will happen is that by 2022 genetic engineering will be good enough that we'll never run out of the "original" gene foodstuffs, since it'll be very easy to genetically make the original version of corn, wheat, oats, barley, alfalfa, etc. as reference standards for genetically-improved footstuffs.
Besides, today's yellow and white kernel corn are completely nothing like the maize originals with their reddish and bluish kernels.
Anyway, by then genome sequencing of grains will be so good we can pick and choose the exact traits down to the last DNA sequence we want for the grain, whether it's higher starch content for livestock feed, higher sugar content for human consumption, better disease and insect resistance, etc. The genetic engineering will be so precise that it would be almost impossible to tell from the unmodified original.
In the long term, one way or another, poor nations must eliminate their dependency on food imports. They need to address their internal social and political problems, they must work on infrastructure, commerce, and population planning. And they need to develop crops domestically that work well within their countries.
That is EXACTLY the problem brought on by Robert Mugabe's use of food production and distribution as a weapon against his enemies.
If the farms in Zimbabwe had been working at full capacity with proper planting and harvesting of foods and proper distribution of foods, the starvation that 50% of the population of Zimbabwe now faces would never have happened in the first place. The problem is that Mugabe has essentially short-circuited the entire agricultural infrastructure in the country, not only stopping food production but also channeling what foodstuffs are left to his closest allies only. This is the EXACT policy that has caused untold suffering all over Africa since the 1960's.
The problem is that the restrictions don't harm the Saddam one iota. It doesn't hurt the people in the government nor the people in the military. What it does is hurt the people at the bottom, the civilians that are so poor they can afford food. It's nice and all that we have finally allowed them to import medical goods, but without exports, how are they going to pay for it.
It's this economic warfare that directly attacks those not in the government nor in the military that justifies flying planes into economically related civilian targets.
-no broken link
Tell that to the indians. Ha.
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
We could also lay blame on certain ultra-rich white businessmen, but ultimately the blame lays on Mugabe.
Finding God in a Dog
The USPS can also afford to keep raising postage rates, whereas we can't start charging for food aid - it stops being aid.
José Lutzenberger (who recently passed away) wrote many good texts on modern agriculture and GM food. In this homepage you can download them. Most of the texts are in portuguese, some in german and some in english.
reason defies logic
You're must obviously shilling for Monsanto, El Christador. First of all, you're userid 302969 (I'm 324741 and I have had this account for two years now), but your posting history has only two messages in it in all, both posted on the same day and in this thread. (Verify this by clicking on his userid number).
El Christador has posted 2 comments.
1 Re:They just trespassed on the fields or sprayed t posted on Friday August 02, @11:21AM (Score:1)
attached to Starving Nation Turns Down Bioengineered Corn
2 Re:Canadian Farmer ordered to pay for GE crops. posted on Friday August 02, @11:12AM (Score:1)
attached to Starving Nation Turns Down Bioengineered Corn
second of all, surprise, surprise I went through the trouble of reading the ruling and it's plain obvious that you're lying through your teeth. It may be a little tedious to read through all this so feel free to skip to the middle or the end. Just remember, it gets juicier and juicier near the end.
"[8] The plaintiffs' claim alleges that in 1998 the defendants planted glyphosate-resistant seeds to grow a crop of canola, for harvest, having a gene or cell that is the subject of the plaintiffs' patent."
The plaintiff alleges, in other words, the plaintiff claims that this is what happened. Nowhere in that court ruling is there any information whatsoever to be found on how exactly the Monsanto product got onto Mr. Schmeiser's property, i.e. whether Mr. Schmeiser intentionally obtained it by any means, or whether the contamination to his crop was transmitted by pollen, the latter being the more likely of the two.
"[11]The defendants do not deny the presence of Roundup Ready canola in their fields in 1998, but they urged at trial that neither Mr. Schmeiser nor Schmeiser Enterprises Ltd. have ever deliberately planted, or caused to be planted, any seeds licensed by the plaintiffs containing the patented gene. The defendants further asserted that substantial damage and loss has been suffered by them because of the herbicide-resistant plants. It is said for them that it is not possible to control the growth of the Roundup Ready canola with normal herbicides, it interferes with crop selection, making it difficult to plant anything other than canola, and it requires the adoption of new farming practices."
Obviously there is a new angle to the consequences of exposure to Monsanto products. Not only does it adulterate a farmer's existing seed stock, but as some seeds always remain on the field after harvest, that field can not easily be used to grow a different kind of crop as the Monsanto product is tenacious enough to evade other herbicides targetted at the former crop (= crop selection). As such, Monsanto has caused Mr. Schmeiser damage and not the other way around, and clearly shows the audacity of Monsanto to sue in the first place.
"12] The defendants urged at trial that by the unconfined release of the gene into the environment the plaintiffs have not controlled its spread, and did not intend to do so, and they have thus lost or waived their right to exercise an exclusive patent over the gene.
[13] The defendants further asserted at trial that Canadian Patent No. 1,313,830 is, and always has been, invalid and void because:
(a) the alleged invention is a life form intended for human consumption and is not the proper subject matter for a patent; it is self-propagating and can spread without human intervention;"
Let's put this into perspective for slashdot readers who are aware of Digital Rights Management issues: Monsanto's actions are tantamount to an ISV spreading their software using an internet worm or virus and extorting license fees from each and every infected site. Since Monsanto did not deactivate the plants ability to reproduce, and since Monsanto does have the ability to disable the reproduction process of plants (re Monsanto's controversial "Terminator" technology) they neglected to take appropiate steps to control the distribution of their product. After all, a company that is capable of manipulating such fundamental processes in a plant should very well be aware of the plants natural reproductive processes and the ramifications of that, such as the uncontrolled spread of their genetic manipulation by natural means such as pollination. Apparently sueing unintended recipients of an by its very nature extremely uncontrollable biological agent is Monsanto's idea of protecting its patents, and it is saddening to see that court accepting this notion.
The court ruling then lengthily expounds on what the Monsanto patents are exactly... so let's skip to:
"[25] Moreover, in my opinion, the construction of the patent, in relation to the claims in issue, is not contested except in relation to the claim for infringement. There the scope of the patent is in issue by the defence that since the defendants did not spray their 1998 crop of canola with Roundup herbicide, after it had emerged, they did not use the plaintiffs' invention."
Obviously if Schmeiser had intentionally infected his fields with Monsanto product he would have used their matching "Roundup" pesticide. Interesting, isn't it?
Now let's move on to the mystery of how exactly Mr. Schmeiser's seed-stock may have gotten corrupted:
"[34] I note that in 1996 one of the licensed farmers, Mr. Huber, a neighbour of Mr. Schmeiser, grew seed under license from Monsanto on a quarter section just north and west of, and diagonally adjacent to, Mr. Schmeiser's field No. 6. It was the evidence at trial of Mr. Schmeiser's hired man, Carlysle Moritz, that at the end of the 1996 crop year, a substantial swath of canola had blown from Mr. Huber's land onto field No. 6. There was no evidence that seed from Schmeiser's field No. 6 was saved in 1996 to be used as seed for his 1997 crop."
So what do we have here? A "licensed" Monsanto crop in the immediate vicinity of Mr. Schmeisers property as well as the admission that there is no evidence that any of the Monsanto product was intentionally saved for planting in the following year.
The ruling then laboriously recounts on how the crop samples were obtained, largely the testimony of the investigating firm's staff which obviously has a direct economic interest in Monsanto's case succeeding.
After that follows a brief recapitulation of the evidence in the case, the attempts of the defense to make the evidence inadmissible on the grounds that it was fraudulently obtained and that the integrity of both the process of gathering the evidence as well as the testimonies of individuals testifying on behalf of the plaintiff are highly questionable to the question of the validity of the patents itself. That last section in of itself is very interesting, to say the least. Anybody who tries to follow the courts reasoning will find that it does not reflect much on the natural processes which preclude Monsanto from owning such a patent, but on legal technicalities. (But then the very fabric of law is spun from legal technicalities isn't it?). This goes on for quiete a while until we get to the juicy part, the reasoning behind the ruling itself:
"[92] Thus a farmer whose field contains seed or plants originating from seed spilled into them, or blown as seed, in swaths from a neighbour's land or even growing from germination by pollen carried into his field from elsewhere by insects, birds, or by the wind, may own the seed or plants on his land even if he did not set about to plant them. He does not, however, own the right to the use of the patented gene, or of the seed or plant containing the patented gene or cell."
It's apparently that easy in Canada. You're the owner of whatever pleases itself to be blown onto your fields but if it so happens that someone owns the a patent on it, you owe them money!
"[94]Here the defendants urge that having introduced its invention for unconfined release into the environment without control over its dispersion, the plaintiffs, as inventor and licensee have lost any claim to enforcement of their rights to exclusive use. It is said for the defendants that Monsanto obtained regulatory approval for the "unconfined release" into the environment of the patented gene pursuant to the Seeds Regulations, C.R.C. c. 1400. Whether that is so is not significant in my view."
What is significant then, Your Honor? What gives Monsanto the ability to hold on to their patent after blatantly releasing their patented genes into the wild without any way to control their dispersion?
The answer to this is given by recounting the various precaution Monsanto takes to cash in on its patents, the most important apparently being random audits by investigative firms to make sure everybody pays up that has Monsanto product on their fields. In other words, I throw something in your mailbox you never wanted, I send a detective to your house and if he finds that in your mailbox I can send you a bill and sue you silly if you don't pay up. In regards to farming this means YOU have the responsibility to make sure there is no Monsanto product in your crop. YOU have to go through all that crop and weed out something which by it's very design has been made difficult to weed out. Good luck, I say.
"Indeed the weight of evidence in this case supports the conclusion that the plaintiffs undertook a variety of measures designed to control the unwanted spread of canola containing their patented gene and cell."
I don't think I have to comment on this much, it is so painfully obvious that we're dealing with a Kangaroo court here: Again, it is enough to simply send a bill to whoever has the misfortune of receiving something they've never wanted nor asked for and which is even causing them a lot of pain.
Without further ado we skip the exact details on how exactly the defendant unknowingly infringed on the patent and come to the ruling itself:
"[130] While discretion to grant an injunction restraining further use or sale of the subject matter of the patent is expressly vested in the Court under s. 57 of the Act, the defendants here submit such relief, if it be to restrain the growing of Roundup Ready canola, would be impossible to comply with in light of the uncontrollable spread of the patented gene."
What Your Honor is saying here is "I know it's impossible to avoid having inadvertently your fields contaminated with Monsanto's product..." but a paragraph later he sentences Schmeiser to stop using his 1997-1998 stock of seed, handing that stock of seed over to Monsanto and paying $105,000 of damages to Monsanto.
A couple of paragraphs later it really gets interesting again when the judge goes on with:
"Exemplary damages
[141]The plaintiffs also claim exemplary damages. In my opinion this is not a case for exemplary damages. Neither the corporate defendant nor Mr. Schmeiser acted in a manner that would warrant punishment or that would deserve condemnation by the Court. Only conduct of that order would warrant exemplary damages. (Lubrizol Corp. v. Imperial Oil Ltd. (1996), 67 C.P.R. (3d) 1 at 18 (F.C.A.))."
Yes! Your Honor is saying, "Yes Mr. Schmeiser, it's not your fault, you did nothing wrong and I'm not holding anything against you but you will have to pay up anyway..."
Didn't think someone would actually read it, did you?
title says it
the idea that genetically engineered corn if replanted after purchased is a violation of copyright seems absurd.
once purchased the product is the owned by who ever bought it. what if i took a bite of corn a kernel fell to the ground, i left the location no one returned to the area for years and then when some did return theere is a whole field of genetically engineered corn, who is to be sued then....nature? or god?
That truth is that Negroes, although a hominid species, are in fact less than human. They are more primitive and animal-like. Negroes are inferior in all attributes which we consider human. They often excel in animal-like attributes like running fast. But at their core, Negroes are not human. They are sub-human.
Yes, drugs have to be tested. Who pays for those tests? It's the same companies that are making the drugs. And look how many new drugs have come on the market in the past five years. That's because, under pressure from pharmaceutical industries, the standards have been relaxed a bit; testing needn't last as long. Then there was that big recall of Claritin, remember that? And just recently they've had to stop a study on giving estrogen to menopausal women because too many were developing heart problems, and it was unsafe to continue the study. That didn't stop "educated" women and doctors from implementing the treatment. Only problem was the "education" was actually marketing propaganda. In that vein, you say the US farmers use GMO seeds because they're educated. I would argue that any "education" coming from Monsanto is just an effort to boost sales.
Are you aware that crops can be grown *without* pesticides? Regular, non-GMO crops have been sustaining mankind without pesticides for thousands of years. Pesticide use only became widespread in the 20th century. Maybe that was a mistake? DDT anyone? Silent Spring??
Now we've learned that insects will adapt to the pesticides, via mutation, etc. So the end result is that we add a bunch of poison to the soil and the food, but it doesn't really stop the bugs. They adapt soon enough. It's kinda like the problem we have with bacteria-resistant penicillin -- after 70 years they're starting to figure it out. Look at that can of Raid under the sink, it says something like "Formula 2001/Change 7." Kinda scary.
I don't know about you, but I don't want to be locked into a cycle of constantly having to re-engineer the crops or re-formulate the pesticides to stay one step ahead of nature, which is doing the same thing to the bugs. It kinda reminds me of Microsoft's new software licensing model.
I would love to show you empirical data regarding GMO food one way or another, but there isn't any. I can't prove that non-ionizing radio emissions are harmful or safe either, because in today's world, where are you going to find a control group? There was a study in England a few years back that showed that altered DNA is not broken down and destroyed right after ingestion in the stomach, but that's the only study that I've ever heard of.
Finally, it doesn't matter if reactionary Luddites or The Illuminati are responsible for Europe's anti-GMO stance. It is a political reality in which Zimbabweean agriculture must exist. They can't ignore it just because you don't agree with it!!
Maybe you should read my other post here; it takes a parallel trajectory down a different track altogether.
"But obviously, you have become so anti-American in your view of the world"
It saddens me that the educational system in this country has sunk to such low depths. Here is a guy who is so unable to grasp complex issues that he distills it into the simplest terms possible (suitable for any two year old) "If you disagree with me then it must be because you hate the US".
We used to have the best educational system in the world now it spits out people who fall apart at the slightest hint of complexity. Sad sad sad.
As for the rest.
"A nation must react to threats to the lives and interests of its citizens."
Iraquis never attacked the US, that was saudi arabians. You should be calling for the bombing of saudi citizens.
"Moreover, people and the nations composed of them naturally want to help those being unjustly oppressed or slaughtered."
This of course is pure bullshit. We are extremely selective about who we help and who we don't. It has nothing to do with morals, ethics, justice or anything and everything to do with oil, corporate interests amd money. Look no further then palestine for an example. They are opressed, occupied, under curfew, tortured, imprisoned without due process and the US does nothing. In fact the US gives money and arms to their opressors. There have been about a dozen American Citizens that have been killed by Israel and not a peep from George Bush. Imagine if any other army of any other country killed US citizens. When Bin Laden killed American citizens we bombed an entire country to bits. When Israel kills American citizens nothing.
War is necrophilia.
A nation must react to threats to the lives and interests of its citizens.
Iraquis never attacked the US, that was saudi arabians.
Where, pray tell, did you get your education? I said "threats to the lives and interests of its citizens."
Look no further then palestine for an example.
You seem to look at things in black and white. Israel is a nation surrounded by enemies who support Palestine. Palestinians have been sending a consistent barrage of terrorist attacks on Israelites, and has had trouble making peace treaties and keeping them. Israel is not perfect, but the Palestines are far from saints.
There have been about a dozen American Citizens that have been killed by Israel [...] When Bin Laden killed American citizens we bombed an entire country to bits.
Bin Laden set bombs in the World Trade Center. After that, he blew up _two_ US embassies, killing 224. I don't remember the US bombing an entire country after that. It wasn't until they killed 5,000 people that we released our full fury on him and his associates. Unlike Bin Laden, Israel has never targetted American citizens for extinction and has never stated an intent to attack us.
Got started in AlphaBASIC on an AM-100 in 1980, helping out the odd business, did some work for Computer Choice, a retail computer store in West Perth, 1981-82, on the likes of Apple ][, //e, //c, ///, Lisa, Macintosh, Hitachi Peach, NAC APC II thru IV, Osborne-1, KayPro II thru 10 etc (including Z80 assembler work in a display manager for K2s, whose only screen atrribute was `blink' - top choice, and an interactive realtime blast-the-spaceships game written in Z80 assembler for the O1 to see if I could find a use for the CPIR instruction). All sorts of stuff. Wrote and supported ForTran and RatFor programs under RSX-11-M-PLUS on PDP-11/23 and /73 systems, also touched BASIC-PLUS-TWO apps and the DECUS C compiler. Spent roughly eight years, on and off part time, working for ChiroSoft producing front-desk apps for Chiropractors in FoxBase Plus, later FoxPro, gave it up when Microsoft bought them - that included a software barcode scanner written in assembler and a record/replay for DOS and FoxPro written in asm and C. Built a FoxPro2-based order processing system for my brother in law which ran on a 386DX16 with a full-height full-length RAM board to give it a staggering 2MB of RAM. First Linux exposure was Slackware on a 386SX20 laptop with 2MB of RAM (which I still have, but the 100MB HDD has since died). Currently tinkering with LTSP systems and wanting time to write a 3D toy train sim for my son's 3rd birthday in 3 weeks. Lots of other stuff in between those.
You still have no particular reson to trust me, but at least you have a smattering more background. Why do you want to know?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...I have farming rellies.
It was a nice, neat margin. For the purposes of illustration, it could have been 50% and still made no practical difference.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...I don't support that, because it's not GPL and has tainted my kernels? (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
There are a lot of knock-on problems which are often buried under a wave of zealotry. Not the least of which is being totally controlled by foreign seed suppliers.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
We're talking second and successive generations here. You get all manner of interesting recombinant effects.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Nett worth is a linear measure, donation is time-dependent. A typical single mother will have a net worth of close to zero dollars (and not always on the positive side of that), so anything she gives would by your measure be essentially infinite.
Try rating Trey's donations against his income and when you're finished doing that, have a closer look at the charities he gives to and how he does that giving.
Y'know, if you hadn't over-reached yourself and used that word `all' in front of `legal', you might have escaped unpunished for that one sentence. However, read this and weep. There's a lot more elsewhere.
Sorry, what was it that your clueless comments prove?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
The less said about that, the better.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Or does that go too much against the grain?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...control over their own crops.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Better players don't shaft the other players at every opportunity.
He's using whatever power he has to get more power, the dollars are nearly incidental.
Again I say, have a careful look at the charities he's giving to, the conditions attached, and so on. He's more than getting value for money, and that makes it not a donation any more.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
"I said "threats to the lives and interests of its citizens.""
What interests? Oh I see you mean cheap oil.
"Israel is not perfect, but the Palestines are far from saints."
Israelis are attemting to domesticate palestenians. Throughout history there have been numerous attempts to domesticate humans. We did it with the africans, the south africans did it with the blacks and now the israelis are doing it with the palestenians. In the long run it never works because human beings are unable to be domesticated. Eventually they set themselves free one way or another. Look at what happened in soviet union or yugoslavia.
The palestenians are fighting for their freedom and independence with the only means they have. they have no guns, they have no tanks, no planes, no army, no navy, no air force. All they have is terrorism and so that's what they use. How else should they fight for their freedom?
As for israel. It is an uncivilized nation.
When a terrorist action occures it does not punish the guilty instead it kills civilians. This is not civilized behaviour.
It rounds up males and jails them without due process. No lawyers, no charges, no trial. This is not civilized.
It tortures prisoners. This is not civilized.
It takes over other peoples lands and forcefully drives out people who have been living there for hundreds of years. This is not civilized.
Sure you can make all the excuses in the world but there is no denying the fact israel stands alone as the only nation which does these things and the only nation with a system of apartheid in place. Let's see if theirs lasts as long as South Africas.
BTW perhaps if Israel acted in a civlized manner it might not be surrounded by enemies.
Also consider that those so called enemies are toothless. Israel has biological, chemical and nuclear weapons and the might of the biggest army in the world behind it. The US military will anhialate any country that dares to attack israel. Israel has nothing to worry about as long as Arial Sharon can dictate to George Bush the US middle eastern policy.
"Israel has never targetted American citizens for extinction and has never stated an intent to attack us."
nevertheless Israel has killed US citizens by their routine use of indescriminate bombing in civilian areas. These US citizens deserve the protection of the US army but unfortunately because they are arabs and moslems our born again president does not give a flying fuck about them. Have you ever heard him condem israel for killing americans? of course not! IF they were white christian americans you can bet your ass he would say something.
"It wasn't until they killed 5,000 people that we released our full fury on him and his associates"
We did no such thing. We did not bomb him, we did not bomb his associates. We bombed Afghanistan where he happened to be living at the time (he probably left before the bombing even started). Tens of thousands of people died who had nothing to do with WTC. But it sure got the presidents approval rating up didn't it?
War is necrophilia.
What interests? Oh I see you mean cheap oil.
That's certainly one interest.
[A bunch of half-truths deleted]
So you hate the American president and everything that America has done and does, but you aren't anti-American. Right...
So you hate the American president and everything that America has done and does, but you aren't anti-American"
Ah yes once again it seems like I have overloaded your meager reserve of synapses. You are now reduced to accusing me of hating america because you are unable to think any deeper then that.
Like I said it's sad to see the kind of idiots the education system in this country seems to spit out.
War is necrophilia.
Read paragraphs 33-34,38-40,102-104.
Also read 41,46,58,72.
(The two groupings are by topic.)
I assume you are aware of the distinction between Mr. Shmeiser's 1998 crop, over which he was sued, and his 1997 crop, over which he was not sued.
Mr. Shmeiser only claimed that the gene got in accidentally for the 1997 crop, not the 1998 crop. The 1998 crop was planted with seed obtained from the 1997 crop which Mr. Shmeiser knew to be Roundup resistant, and indeed, which he claimed he had treated with Roundup, presumably thus increasing the fraction of gene-bearing plants.
Also, specifically regarding your assertion that "Nowhere in that court ruling is there any
information whatsoever to be found on how exactly the Monsanto product got onto Mr. Schmeiser's property, i.e. whether Mr. Schmeiser intentionally obtained it by any means, or whether the contamination to his crop was transmitted by pollen, the latter being the more likely of the two.", in fact, in paragraphs 117-118 the judge concludes on the basis of evidence presented at trial that it did not get into Mr. Shmeiser's 1997 crop by any of the accidental means you or Mr. Shmeiser have proposed. Keep in mind that the nearest field of genetically engineered canola growing in the previous year (1996) was five miles away from field number 2 (paragraph 33). Note that this does not exclude accidental means that neither you nor Mr. Shmeiser have thought of, nor does it exclude the intentional placement by others. Note also that whether or not the original plants were intentionally brought onto Mr. Shmeiser's property to appear in 1997 crop is not relevant to whether he infringed the patent with his 1998 crop, or to the fact that he knowingly and intentionally planted his 1998 crop with Roundup resistant seed: patents don't just prevent you from using the brand name product, they also prohibit you from using no-name or home-made products that work by means of the same technology, which is essentially what Mr. Shmeiser is claiming happened regarding his 1998 crop. (Indeed, that is the whole point of a patent and they would be essentially of no effect if they did not do this.) Finally, this being a civil trial, keep in mind that the standard of proof applied to reach the conclusion in the last sentence of 118 is merely the "balance of probabilities" i.e. more likely than not.
[117] A variety of possible sources were
suggested, including cross field breeding by wind
or insects, seed blown from passing trucks, or
dropping from farm equipment, or swaths blown
from neighbours' fields. All of these sources, it
is urged, could be potential contributors to
cross-breeding of Schmeiser's own canola or to
deposit of seeds on his land without his consent.
[...]
[118] It may be that some Roundup Ready seed was
carried to Mr. Schmeiser's field without his
knowledge. Some such seed might have survived
the winter to germinate in the spring of 1998.
However, I am persuaded by evidence of Dr. Keith
Downey, an expert witness appearing for the
plaintiffs, that none of the suggested sources
could reasonably explain the concentration or
extent of Roundup Ready canola of a commercial
quality evident from the results of tests on
Schmeiser's crop. His view was supported in part
by evidence of Dr. Barry Hertz, a mechanical
engineer, whose evidence scientifically
demonstrated the limited distance that canola
seed blown from trucks in the road way could be
expected to spread. I am persuaded on the basis
of Dr. Downey's evidence that on a balance of
probabilities none of the suggested possible
sources of contamination of Schmeiser's crop was
the basis for the substantial level of
Roundup Ready canola growing in field number 2 in
1997.
they should take the corn and eat it. if it mixes with their crops and they can't sell their crops, so what? they can still feed themselves. if the GE corn can pervade their corn so easily, 10 years or so down the road the coutries that refuse their corn will be starving because there won't be any non-GE corn left on the planet. if the bio-engineering corps. try to sue, f**k 'em! who would handle the case? no one's gonna make them burn all their crops and starve because it's 'patented'! worst case, they'll have to pay a settlement...financed according to their economic situation.