Tag Archives: Monsanto

Don’t miss the big fight: Bernie “Birdie” Sanders versus Hillary the War Hawk!

Posted on by
2

democratic-convention-bellini-fight-poster
A Damn clever poster for the 2016 DNC. Forgot to list fight venue. SHOWDOWN IN PHILLY.

Biggest U.S. national political showdown of the century.

Democratic Convention. July 25-28, 2016 at 8:00 AM.

Mainstreet vs. Wall Street.

Bernie ‘Birdie’ Sanders, aka Lefty Sanders, aka The Bern, aka The Sandman, aka El Sabio (the wise) vs.

Hillary ‘War Hawk’ Clinton, aka Goldman Girl, aka Monsanto Mama, aka The Fracker, aka Not My Abuela.

Spouses discuss: internships at the White House, favorability polls vs GOP, FBI investigation, independent voters of the USA, Bernie or Bust reality check, election fraud, political revolution or status quo, public interest or corporate interest.

Tickets are $27 bucks for general admission or $250,000 VIP seating.

At the WELLS FARGO CENTER in PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, USA.

Mainstream Media Missed The Mark, or give me another helping of Monsanto GMO potatoes and corn and pass me the latest comic book

Posted on by
Reply

March against Monsanto, Denver, May 23, 2015:
Once again the main stream media failed to show up when one of their corporate paymasters tells them to go sit in the corner and be quiet. All mainstream media were noticeably absent. However they could be found at the Colorado Convention Center where the fourth annual COMIC CON event was held. The message we can all take away from this; when it comes to the health of human beings, watching your local news or reading the Denver Post is akin to reading the funny papers or watching cartoons.
 
KGNU sent the only newsperson to the Monsanto Protest

Huge Denver protest of corporate food supply is ignored by corporate media. PHOTOS

Posted on by
Reply


DENVER, COLORADO- The 2015 March Against Monsanto may have been Denver’s largest public demonstration to draw absolutely no coverage from local media. To the surprise of no one.

Monsanto-eric-

Facebook advertisers can repost “likes” in your name so you don’t have to

Posted on by
Reply

Users of Facebook are accustomed to seeing friends listed in right-column ads, mentioned liking such-and-such a brand, or two or three. It’s understood that those friends at some point visited the brand’s page and clicked “like”, permitting that company, Amazon for example, to pay Facebook to advertise the “like” as frequently as it wishes. It’s also understood that when one “likes” a page, a post is simultaneously shared to herald the act and appears on the user’s wall unless that feature is turned off. What you may not know is that your initial timeline post can be reposted, in the center-thread, at the advertiser’s whim, perhaps limited to when you’re online, perhaps triggered when you log on, but not logged on your wall and thus unseen by you. Does it also boost the number of people pretended to be “talking about” that brand? Are 372,523 talking about Starbucks? That could include “you”, repeating yourself ad-maybe-nauseum.

Or maybe, for a premium, your original “like” is not shared simultaneously, but doled out as each of your friends comes online to guarantee one hundred percent reach. Who knows. As personalized as we know the ads can be, no doubt the algorithm is not calculated for clarity.

Do you remember which pages you’ve liked or not? Perhaps you clicked like to be able to comment on the page, or to monitor a monopolistic miscreant, or perhaps it was before Wells Fargo, Bank of America, or British Petroleum became persons and not-so-grata. Maybe now you’d rather not be said to like Chevron, Monsanto, or killer Coke. You can review your “likes” under INFO, then INTERESTS. Or you can check the list below. On each page, see if beside the LIKE button, you have the option to unlike, for example, Facebook.

Here’s a quick list of corporate brands which have fallen from fashion among those with fashion sense. You can click on each to check whether you are counted among their unpaid repeated endorsers.

Nike
Gap
Fox News
CNN
AT&T
Caterpillar
Disney
Walmart
Target
K-mart
Toys-r-us
Lowes
Ikea
Home Depot

And the fat merchants:
McDonalds
Burger King
Hardees
Carl’s Jr
Wendy’s
Taco Bell
KFC
Pizza Hut
Sonic
Chick-fil-A
Jimmy Johns
Subway
Outback
Dairy Queen
Dunkin Donuts
Krispy Kreme

Organic corn soon unavailable to you

Posted on by
Reply

organic-corn-flakesI was shopping the other day for organic corn flakes, thinking that of all the cereals, Dr. Kellogg’s first processed food breakfast would similarly be predominant among the organic breakfast cereal offerings. I found exactly none; neither at the supermarket, nor the health food store. I found plenty of organic bran, wheat, oat and Kashi –whatever that is, but nothing made of corn. Would you say that’s something to find curious, or alarming?

I became acutely reminded of a detail from a documentary I’d just seen, The Real Dirt on Farmer John. There’s a fleeting scene where farmer John Peterson is telling his Angelic Organics CSA customers (Community Supported Agriculture) about that year’s successful crop of corn. He’s enthusiastic, he explains, because a harvest of organic corn has become a very difficult accomplishment.

Does that give you pause, when you consider the prevalence of corn in the American diet? Before genetically modified corn, before High Fructose Corn, before Yellow Dent No. 2 which is so inedible it can be stored in piles outside (farmers used to build silos to store corn), and before corn became ethonol, corn was sweetcorn was corn.

From King Corn viewers learned about Monsanto and Cargill’s present stranglehold on the corn seed market, all of it GMO. And sporadically American farmers make the news for discovering that a neighbor’s GMO crops have overtaken theirs.

cornfield cargill nebraskaI had occasion this summer to drive through several corn-producing states. On the side of so many fields were logos designating which commercial seeds had been used. I scarcely remember a single field that did not have a sign. Some bore lot numbers, representing test samples.

Is it possible that organic corn production has begun coming up short?

Have organic corn crops become too expensive to supply the breakfast cereal makers? Organic corn flakes are still available online, manufactured by Barbara’s or Nature’s Path, but they are priced far above the average box of breakfast cereal.

Eventually all cream rises to the top. The best Bordeaux are only accessible to the super-rich, not simply because of price, but because the upscale marketers corner the supply. The same can be said of many food delicacies and nature products. Some woods for example, available for centuries to ordinary luthiers, have been purchased lock, stock and by the full forest growth, monopolized to supply only specialists. What we think of as ordinary corn may soon be available only to the affluent customer, who wouldn’t be caught dead feeding their children genetically modified foods.

Coming at this development from a completely diametric angle, Kellogg’s has decided it needs to protect its brand of conventional genetically modified corn flakes by laser-etching their logo across each one. Instead of suffering the stigma of accusations that its corn product is tainted, Kellogg’s wants its dupes to feel they’re getting value added with their balanced breakfast.

In fact, the laser process will toast the already toasted product just a little bit more, robbing it of further nutrition and resistance to carcinogens.

But the patented technology could be a welcome development. When FDA regulators decide to advocate for consumer health, as perhaps a universal health care system might mandate it, if the national diabetes or allergy epidemics don’t force the issue, the FDA can decide to make the food giants mark all their GMO products with a laser brand. Wouldn’t that restore the original meaning to the concept we know as “branding?”

UPDATE:
I had the usual Organic Corn Chips on my shopping list, but that product is gone too, both white and yellow corn varieties.

Speak 2 x 4 to power, just do it.

Posted on by
1

Nike inspired assault on WTCFound this brilliant submission in the Start-Propaganda collection. The Reichtag Fire false- flag attack will have nothing on the debris of the WTC. For your 8th commemoration of the enigmatic event which is still used to justify the occupation of Afghanistan, check out the Italian documentary ZERO. My favorite segment is George Bush on the perpetrators of 9/11: “It’s hard for Americans to imagine how evil the people are who are doing this.” Less and less so.

In keeping the anniversary of 9/11, we also revisited the sentimental documentary by the Naudet brothers, whose video had captured the impact of the first plane, and the ensuing action of the firefighters inside Building One. Excised from the final cut were the firehouse discussions of other explosions they’d heard and their observations that the collapses resembled demolitions. Those clips are accessible online, and now you’ll recognize the individual firemen. Perhaps those details were deemed inappropriate for the CBS audience in 2004.

It’s also sad to look upon these interviews of men who later worked ceaselessly at Ground Zero, often without masks, and wonder how many are now dead, or dying of respiratory ailments, victims of the government fraud about the safety of the environment in the aftermath of the disaster.

Watching the doomed firemen ascend into the WTC without a thought that the towers might collapse, and being shown the buildings vaporize, narrated by uncritical newspeople, we cannot wonder now but did they take American viewers for idiots?

Among the many documentaries which question the official version of events, Italian Telemaco’s ZERO: an Investigation into 9-11 takes the least sensational approach. Italian celebrities, a laughing physicist (and Nobel laureate), and Gore Vidal shrug off the sheer pretense of the USA narrative.

Watching the original 911 exposés like 911 Loose Change and 911 Conspiracy – In Plane Sight gets old doesn’t it? Not because their presentation is shrill, but because unanswered, what can they do but repeat themselves?

The mainstream response has only been to dismiss the 911 Truth movement as Conspiracy Theory. Throw Alex Jones’ Prison Planet TV into the mix with his 9/11 The Road To Tyranny and alternative versions of September 11th, 2001, begin to look paranoid.

For a fresh perspective from the UK, check out 911 and the British Broadcasting Conspiracy.

Remember, the mainstream media which dismisses 9/11 truth seekers as conspiracy theorists, is the same media which is now telling us that the American public does not want universal health care.

The same media which has been “questioning” Global Warming now puts the onus for change on whether an American public will believe Global Warming.

The same corporate media is owned, and speaks for, big agra, big pharma, big oil, and the arms industry.

Is there a Monsanto/Cargill/Archer-Daniels-Midland conspiracy to monopolize the food supply? Is there a military industrial conspiracy to foment war and instability? Is there a globalization conspiracy to harness developing world resources while enslaving all peoples?

Who is the corporate media to defend the 911 myth against accusations of conspiracy?

What the impregnability of the accepted 9/11 story means to me, is that the 911 Truth Movement clings to an outdated notion that what the population knows matters. In a post-democratic world it doesn’t. The people can believe their feudal overlords to be ogres, so long as it isn’t uttered with intent to dethrone. Then it’s heresy.

More on the Dow-Monsanto-Daddy Warbucks connection…

Posted on by
Reply

on another forum the point was raised that acknowledging their guilt and paying for the blood they shed wouldn’t be practical in todays economy.

BUT

It’s not government money being discussed.

In fact, although Monsanto and Dow got huge sums of (Billions of) WarBux off the Taxpayer, they also got every tax break imaginable.

Capital gains tax? weeeelllll now, we got us some fancy-nancy accountants that’ll prove beyond any doubt that Capital Gains isn’t actual income, even though it does put more money in our bank accounts…

Of course the Tax Rebellion people will chime in with how it would be Stealing to have the Daddy Warbucks types pay back a proportionate amount to what they steal from the people with their War-mongering.

They make money off the Deaths of Americans and whoever the Enemy-du-jour is.

It’s about the sickest possible relationship there is.

They get the money, our “class” gets lined up and mown down like grass…

Bleeding screaming grass…

Every now and then I have to refresh the memory of what the whole schtick with Little Orphan Annie was.

“Daddy” Warbucks got his surname because he was one of the Profiteers from World War One.

Like the ones who made 5 helmets for every doughboy.

7 pairs of boots bought for each soldier.

Then the Punks bought back all the shit they sold to the Army, at pennies on the dollar, and resold it for another profit as scrap.

Some of it, the Army paid them to haul away.

They literally forced the Soldiers to take half their pay in War Bonds and then shamed them into buying more War Bonds.

Then in the Inter-Bellum the War Bonds tanked, the Daddy Warbucks “people” bought them off the suddenly destitute ex-soldiers at 72 cents on the dollar of their face value, then sold them back to the government at 110%, in a deal much like the Bush Bailout.

See, this is the kind of stuff you learn at the VFW.

VFW and American Legion got a huge kick-start when they had protest marches in Washing Tundy Sea, on the issue of bonuses they were promised when they were sent off to France to be Cannon Fodder.

Until they were fired on by… their fellow American Soldiers.

The Tax Warriors like to whine about the “raw deal” Herbert Hoover was cut by history.

Screw that. The man ordered American soldiers to fire on American Soldiers.

MacArthur gladly obliged.

No heroes anywhere in that pair of Jacks.

But they both died rich with Some Really Foolish People worshiping them as though they were heroes.

Daddy Warbucks of cartoon fame semi-adopted a 10 year old orphan girl with big empty eyes.

It doesn’t take much to see a really sick relationship there.

Making money off death, what other moral depravity even comes close?

They were the ones screaming, like the Tax Warriors of today, about “Redistribution of Wealth” and “Class Warfare” when Roosevelt made them pay PART of what they really owed.

They cheerfully redistributed the Wealth of the Nation to their own nasty slop-trough… and they gladly made war on the Lower Class.

It’s not hard to see which way the rifles were pointed in the “Class Warfare”, not then and not now.

Corporate Murderers get away with it… AGAIN!!!

Posted on by
2

High Court Rejects Agent Orange Case -3/3/09 -Associated Press

The other two suits were filed by U.S. veterans who got sick too late to claim a piece of the $180 million settlement with makers of the chemical in 1984. In 2006, the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 on whether those lawsuits could proceed.

Guess if you die after the “Deadline”.. ….

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has turned down American and Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange who wanted to pursue lawsuits against companies that made the toxic chemical defoliant used in the Vietnam War.

The justices offer no comment on their action Monday, rejecting appeals in three separate cases, in favor of Dow Chemical, Monsanto and other companies that made Agent Orange and other herbicides used by the military in Vietnam.

Agent Orange has been linked to cancer, diabetes and birth defects among Vietnamese soldiers and civilians and American veterans.

The American plaintiffs blame their cancer on exposure to Agent Orange during the military service in Vietnam. The Vietnamese said the U.S.’ sustained program to prevent the enemy from using vegetation for cover and sustenance caused miscarriages, birth defects, breast cancer, ovarian tumors, lung cancer, Hodgkin’s disease and prostate tumors.

Learn more about Agent Orange

All three cases had been dismissed by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.

The appeals court said that lawsuit brought by the Vietnamese plaintiffs could not go forward because Agent Orange was used to protect U.S. troops against ambush and not as a weapon of war against human populations.

The other two suits were filed by U.S. veterans who got sick too late to claim a piece of the $180 million settlement with makers of the chemical in 1984. In 2006, the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 on whether those lawsuits could proceed.

The appeals court ultimately said no to both. In one case, the court said companies are shielded from lawsuits brought by U.S. military veterans or their relatives because the law protects government contractors in certain circumstances who provide defective products.

In the third suit, the appeals court ruled that the companies could transfer claims from state to federal courts.

The cases are Isaacson v. Dow Chemical Co., 08-460, Stephenson v. Dow Chemical Co., 08-461, and Vietnam Association for Victims of Agent Orange v. Dow Chemical Co., 08-470.

Little Eichmanns, anybody?

$180 million divided among thousands of veterans.

Miss Johnnies husband had more than $180K in hospital bills. Still unpaid by the VA.

Monsanto and Dow made BILLIONS selling their Death.

The Military Contractors, they’re shielded from responsibility for the lives of any of their Victims being destroyed or ended.

There’ll be Rejoicing in the Republican Households, they got away with it, AGAIN.

They sell Murder by the Ton.

I haven’t told Miss Johnnie about this one yet.

Eco-conscious, yes. Sustainable? Hardly.

Posted on by
Reply

COLORADO SPRINGS- Johann of First Affirmative Financial Network, asked me to relate my experience at the now notorious PPJPC meet-up to discuss Economic Sustainability. Though Tony wasn’t able to attend, he’s initiated a debate here: is there such a thing as “economic sustainability?” Since I was there, perhaps I could elucidate, because I believe I heard the answer.

I was quite impressed by the questions brought to the event by the audience, who proved to be no shrinking violets. The interests ranged from some who wanted to indict the Fed, to those who questioned economic growth as being sustainable. The housing market for example is predicated on real estate increasing in value. Must it? Should it? Can it? Successful investing is inherently about your investment growing, otherwise you are losing money. Can investment be done without growth? When posed this question, our intrepid investment-biz guest braved an answer: “I don’t know.”

I supposed as much, hence my initial skepticism about the subject of the talk. But I expected to hear about options, not to hear my foregone conclusion foreclosed. What then does FAFN, our fellow sustainability boosters, have to offer? It turns out it is the usual green investing. Working Assets was so 90s, “sustainability” is the eco catch-phrase of the new millennium. It’s still about the 3Es, as Johann told us they say in the greening biz, or the 3Ps: people, planet and profit.

Johann’s employer’s concrete claim to “sustainability” was a novel certification of a green office remodel. No small task, although the pitch from Johann is that it requires a surprisingly small expenditure. So, small task. And FAFN is all about giving recognition for setting a good example. Here’s how this works in their business model: Chiefly their portfolio is comprised of only green stocks, plus stocks you might want to encourage to be green. General Motors is decidedly not green, but you could recommend them as an incentive for GM to show some eco-thinking. That’s an actual example from our discussion. I’m hoping if Monsanto issued a press release that they would be recycling their break-room Dixie cups, our sustainability cheerleaders wouldn’t jump tp award the bold step with a buy recommendation.

I came to the PPJC meeting with an even more hardcore question. How can someone who makes a living from the interest earned on money, consider themselves sustainable? Our guest’s response was “there certainly are plenty of us around.” But is that an answer? Economically sustainable, yes. Environmentally? Hardly. I believe that is the crux of what Tony raises as a paradox.

Charging interest for the loan of money has presented an age-old moral dilemma. The function of money was to facilitate barter, as one good or service was exchanged for another. Religious thinkers have most often concluded that a person should not profiteer from the exchange of money itself, adding as they have, no value to the equation. Jesus was certainly against it. Although Johann interpreted “go forth and multiply” to mean you should multiply your money.

Whether it’s moral or not, how can money lending be environmentally sustainable? If you are producing no good or rendering no labor, what should you be taking out of the system for your consumption? Can a negative-contribution be sustainable?

When I first moved to UCLA, and saw the mass of wealth built around the west side of Los Angeles, the opulence seemed to me built on an intangible cloud of finance. I wondered what kind of bank vacuum lay behind the scene, sucking from the natural and human resources of the world to sustain the decadence beyond imagination of LA’s suburbs, foothills and ridge-tops. I concluded something then. The arbitrary financial arrangements, probably no more legitimate than royal lineage, or less usurious than a loan shark, were the only grip the owners had on the victims of their exploitation. Short of militarized enforcement, it would become tenuous at best, and certainly will not be sustainable, economic or otherwise.

Brand name taste is an abstraction

Posted on by
1

A friend of mine is a restauranteur who by his own admission doesn’t know much about wine. Never the less his wine rep was bringing over a bottle of Chateau d’Yquem for some occasion. I asked my friend if he’d read up on Sauterne vintages, the better to appreciate it. He looked at me quizzically. I persisted, thinking something along the lines of Tom Wolfe’s Painted Word, that you had to know about the theory of abstract art to appreciate what you saw. I didn’t get far because my friend was attuned to the un-abstract measure of his customer’s palate. Did they taste a distinctive quality? That was enough. You don’t need a text to appreciate pre-abstract art. Epicure likewise is not abstract.

Many aspects of our lives have become experiences of abstract quality. We may not prefer a fashion, but are happy enough with it so long as we believe others like it. A designer label says what we want about us, regardless whether we have a say about it. Marketing goes a long way to produce our appreciation. When we use the product we feel ourselves in the commercial. For some beverages, I’m certain the commercial has become the product. We begin enjoying the Coke from the first cold beads of condensation on the can, through the Shtffk of cracking the pop tab, until it’s down our throat. Right then we all know Coke doesn’t satisfy our thirst, because we already want more. It satisfies our craving to inhabit the Coke world.

Sugar is not an acquired taste, but wanting to be a Pepper is. Breakfast cereal feeds a pathetic sweet tooth. Cheap beer and the new soft-liquors feed conditioned desires.

Not only is the processed food industry relying on its talent to taylor our appetite, it undermines our reliance on our own senses. If something is not advertised, can it be of value? Ice cream flavored of cookies ‘n cream isn’t good enough unless they are Oreo brand cookies. Toffee must be Heath Bars, peanut butter must be Reeses. Except for regional salsas or steak marinades, products fade from the supermarket shelves if nt cross branded with a national identity. This has become an easier feat for the big guys because they’ve conglomerated so many diverse products, from babies diapers to tobacco.

The brand name is now the critical ingredient which we all taste with our imagination, crafted by ceaseless ad campaigns. A product’s advertising is itself a stipend paid to the media companies to ensure a brand stays on the public palate. Remember Oh Henry? Somebody lapsed in their payment.

Now the powerhouse food corps are using the same manipulative method to plant doubt in the consumer’s mind about their own ability to judge taste. (I remember an subscription tag line for GQ magazine to this effect: You don’t know fashion, let GQ tell you.) How could what you think tastes good, have any bearing on what they tell you tastes good?

With health food the fearful conglomerates caution, how do you know it’s really organic? But isn’t that the same assumption I threw at my friend? It’s true with processed food, we can’t taste BGH or Mad Cow spinal matter, or protein additives necessarily. But other factors like refined sugars, fats, or chemical pesticides we can detect. In the produce department, it’s not just a matter of stickers that say “organic” or higher prices or more easily blemished fruit, it’s the taste. Organic produce tastes fuller, richer, more pleasing, more satisfying.

Our own natural sense of taste tells us whether we are enjoying it or not. No textbook, afficionado’s article, or 30 second commercial need tell us what we think of that apple. Or what we think of the non-stickered apple which tastes like the floor cleaner we thought they used in the supermarket. That isn’t the floor we were smelling, it was the apples. If it weren’t for the antiseptic packaging, the inert food content and the slick marketing directing our taste buds, we’d realize the whole supermarket smelled of Union Carbide and Monsanto.

Chemistry in the food supply

Posted on by
Reply

Ask any veterinarian what you’re supposed to be feeding your dog or cat, they’ll tell you dry food only, and water. So perhaps people poisoning their pets with wet canned meals have achieved their result, more recently accelerated by the accidental Melamine additive in wheat gluten imported from China.

The FDA has been reluctant to reveal the companies behind the wayward toxin, even as the public grapples with the possibility that the plastic derivative may have reached the human food supply. Naming names reveals not just the corporate logos but also the extended interweaving of chemical companies in the food industry.

Did you have any idea the can of Alpo held by Mr. Publishers Clearinghouse contained Wheat Gluten from Xuzhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Co. or partner Suzhou Textile Import and Export Co. of Jiangsu, China; imported by ChemNutra Inc. of Las Vegas, Nevada; sold to pet food giants Nestle Purina, Del Monte, Hill’s Pet Nutrition, and behind-the scenes giant Menu Foods Inc. of Canada which makes 100 of the different smaller pet food brands? Whatever are you deliberating in the pet food isle, which TV commercial will best please your domestic companion?

You knew pet food wasn’t made by Keebler Elves or the Jolly Green Giant, but did you suspect the truth was so sordidly mundane? Nearly all people food passes through the chemical fingers of Archer Daniels Midland or Monsanto or both. Wait until the FDA tries to keep their names out of the spotlight.

Mothra vs Nopalzilla, Taco Bell, GM food, and bioengineering

Posted on by
2

Two articles today in the news got me thinking about genetically modified food and bioengineering again. In short, I think we have Ag gone mad, medicine gone mad, and Hey!, we just plain got Science gone mad! What drove HighTech crazy? Unfortunately it is the same thing that is driving all of us crazy, the constant insane drive by our ruling class to find new ways to profit and to max all profits out, and to speedup profit making all for themselves. In short, their greed is doing us all in. Let’s look at the story of Mothra vs Nopalzilla first, to see what got me into a tizzy on this one. It would be comical, except it’s really not.

As we can see, the moth that came to threaten Mexico got its start 90 years ago by an attempt of ‘scientists’ to ‘bioengineer’ in Australia. Some 125 years previously, settlers in Australia had imported a dye producing bug to help color their uniforms red. How important was that! They then imported cactus nopales to feed this bug with the red dye inside. But the nopales ran amuck in Australia like the poisonous cane toads later did, and wrecked havock on the natural habitat. That’s when the genius scientists stepped in with the moth that they took from Argentina to kill the nopales. Great success!

But this moth then made its way from Australia to Florida and started heading south towards Mexico, where 1/2 of all the world’s many species of nopal lives. Stopped in Alabama, the moth decided to hit the Isla of Mujeres offshore in southern Mexico, where now it may be blown a few miles to mainland Mexico in a few days, and then go on to destroy the nopal plants that just happen to hold down much of the soil of Mexico! In short, bioengineering scientists can later be proven that they have been about as adept as the Three Stooges.

So speaking of the Stooges, we have Taco Bell and Monsanto genetically modifying corn. But these stooges forgot the scallions it seems. E-coli, served at Taco Bell in the scallions has been killing and injuring folk now in several Eastern States, and Taco Bell and US health officials initially blamed Mexican produce for that. But just today, the actual culprit had been tracked down to California once again, where just a few weeks previous the Spinach had been killing folk that had bought those nice packaged, clean looking bagged specimens we are all tempted to buy while grocery shopping. Should we really trust people like Taco Bell with the GM corn, when they can’t even get the regular old onions right? I rather think not. Plus, we have the example of Mothra and Nopalzilla, too, to also help make us think twice about the supposed benefits that the HIghTech Ag folk say will come our way with mutating corn and other farm products.

Which brings us to medical bioengineering. It’s just the big thing now to be playing with genes, Dr Moreau. Go to the journals Lancet and Scientific American, and all sorts of groovy things are on the way, they say. Not only farm animals and farm plants are going to be modified right and left genetically, but medicines, vaccines, and lab rats. And you and I are the lab rats, it appears. All disease is going to disappear due to these tinkerings! Never mind the trillions being spent to blow the world up, reduce people down to utter squalor and despair, and to make us …. well…. SICK.

We need a lot less techology guiding the world on behalf of rich pirates that own the ag labs where it is being produced, and more common sense from the peasants. So in regards to genetically engineered foods, we should still say Down With the Food Czars! They are interested in making more bucks, and not interested really in our overall health. Don’t believe that? Walk down the grocery aisles some and ponder it a little more then.

And Doctor Moreau? You scare me the most. Your bizarre experiments on us all through your med labs and hospitals are producing a monstrous world ahead. The net result of the last decades’ practice by the corporate docs, is a world of disease we never ever dreamed possible not even in Hell, all flying our way at once. Don’t believe me? Pay a visit to some of the cancer wards perhaps. Try the burn units. Try the ICUs. Then go to the labs where reaserch is done on Dr. Moreau’s creatures. Hell with George Orwell and 1984. It’s more like HG Wells and his famouns book about the mad doc, instead. Todays’s Dr Moreaus promises us vaccines to cure all diseases that taste just like lollypops to lure us aboard his grand experiment. Yes, the bioengineering story has a little of Hansel and Gretel in it, too.