Comments on: Judge rules against Monsanto’s GM sugar beets

By: Rick Cain

Rick Cain — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:00:45 +0000

The only reason for GM food is to patent life, so you can restrict others access to it and license it out at obscene prices.

It has nothing to do with “feeding the planet”

By: amodedoma

amodedoma — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:26:15 +0000

#11 Soundwash,

WOW, usually I find such a long rant boring, but you really did your homework. Good thing you didn’t start in on the history of Monsanto, GAWD! when I discovered how they protected their PCB monopoly I wanted to throw up. Monsanto should be shut down permanently. By no means should this company be trusted with anything that can affect public health.

By: LibertyLover

LibertyLover — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:59:59 +0000

#24, I agree. It would be a serious dent in the corruption of public officials. ALL lobbying groups are corporations (as are all unions).

The only difference between non-profits and for-profits is how the money is counted. There are some MONSTROUS non-profits in this country that rival many for-profits.

My only concern, and it’s one I have yet to resolve to my own satisfaction, is the apparent violation of the freedom to associate with anybody.

All groups are made up of individuals. If a group of individuals wish to make a statement through a “group voice,” should they not get the same legal protection as if they stood up individually? I think so.

My only (shaky) solution is to break up all non-profits into state level entities. I personally think that a nationwide union including all autoworkers is a monopoly unto itself. If you want to go nationwide, you are considered a for-profit. YMMV.

By: Named

Named — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:22:23 +0000

23 LibertyLover,

If anything could be changed to make a real, significant, tangible difference, repealing the personhood of the corporation would be one of the greatest.

But, there are so many billions of dollars greasing the wheels to make sure it doesn’t… I think that learning about that was one of the shining moments in my education of the real world…

By: LibertyLover

LibertyLover — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:30:49 +0000

#22, Agreed. And all because of a clerical error by the SCOTUS.

But as we know, if SCOTUS says so, it must be right

By: Named

Named — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:03:22 +0000

20 LibertyLover,

Common sense is anathama to the Corporation. Afterall, the corporation itself is a “person” unto the law… and THAT is prima facie why justice can never be served.

By: LibertyLover

LibertyLover — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:59:36 +0000

#20, blasted html tags . . .

By: LibertyLover

LibertyLover — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:59:03 +0000

#19, bio-terrorism

Hmm. I wonder if someone could sue under property rights violations.

Or maybe someone could get them on one of the 1,000′s of anti-pollution laws on the books. Seriously, we have laws that prevent man-made chemicals from being released into the atmosphere because they’re dangerous — what’s the difference?

I can just see Monsanto’s defense. “They used our terminator technology without our permission. They have no case, your Honor!”

common sense

Perhaps the judges should read this:

http://tinyurl.com/ydfwga9

By: Named

Named — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:47:00 +0000

18, LibertyLover,

They probably don’t have a choice. The framework and prior cases all dictate how the case should be resolved regardless of sense; common or otherwise.

Monsanto also has terminator seeds so that when the pollens blows into your non-Monsanto fields and mixes it will kill your plant. Bio-terrorism at it’s finest!

By: LibertyLover

LibertyLover — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:27:06 +0000

#15, Anybody with half a brain and a 4th grade education understands pollination and how there is no way to isolate it to one field.

I can’t believe judges actually listen to these cases without laughing their asses off.

By: Named

Named — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:09:32 +0000

Controlling the food supply is easier than controlling the water supply. And what happens when you own, patent and control the food supply? Victory. That is all Monsanto is trying to do.

By: Alick Rubin

Alick Rubin — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 07:30:26 +0000

Non-labeled GMO food causes allergies. They just cannot be diagnosed like Morgellons.

By: SimonSezz

SimonSezz — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:55:27 +0000

I know farmers who hate Monsanto. If the farmer grows corn and doesn’t use Monsanto seed and another farm nearby does, Monsanto corn can invade the other farmers crop and Monsanto will sue that farmer for “using” Monsanto product without paying for it.

By: Rich

Rich — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:02:19 +0000

They probably rape, strangle and eat non-Monsanto beets. Jesus.

By: Satchmo Bevins

Satchmo Bevins — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 03:48:34 +0000

“Monsanto GM beets down Mother Nature while USDA turns blind eye”

Government agency phail. Evil corporation win.