Belgijski protestniki uničili eksperiment z gensko modificiranim krompirjem

jype je 1. jun 2011 ob 14:56 izjavil:

Tisi, ki ne mislijo na profit, eventuelno ostanejo brez denarja.

hja, glede na to da si z denarjem lahko kupiš svoja pravila...

da ga je vedno več ne spremeni zadeve.

jype je 1. jun 2011 ob 16:09 izjavil:

mihec87> Sedaj ko se še da izbirati se to seveda da..

Čemu naj bi se pa to nehalo?

Okapi je 1. jun 2011 ob 12:23 izjavil:

Ja, Komatu je treba vse verjeti. Hudobci so trosili škodljive hrošče, da so lahko prodajali insekticide. Samo še chemtrailsi in Illuminati manjkajo.

Da, da, to je tisti herbicid, ki so ga Američani trosili po Vietnamu.

Agent Orange is the code name for one of the herbicides and defoliants used by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971.

Da, dragi moji. To je razvil - Monsanto.

A 50:50 mixture of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D, it was manufactured for the U.S. Department of Defense primarily by Monsanto Corporation and Dow Chemical.

Rezultat: visoka smrtnost novorojenčkov, rojenih z genetskimi okvarami (celo 3. generacija!)

Vietnam estimates 400,000 people being killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects.

Vojaška stroka naj ne bi vedela, kako nevaren je agent orange in kako škodi človekovemu zdravju. Drugače je bilo pri kemijskih proizvajalcih. Konec sedemdesetih je namreč prišla na dan interna zabeležka njihovega sestanka, kjer so med drugim govorili o nevarnosti dioksina. Zapisnik je dokaz, da so se vodstva zavedala resnosti položaja, vendar o tem niso želela obvestiti pristojnih v vojski, saj bi se potem morala odpovedati dobičku.

tale 'memo' piše samo o obveščanju _Vojaških Častnikov_ BREZ da bi se od njih zahtevale kakršnekoli spremembe ali dejanja.

Iz revije Radar:

A se cist zares kregate o tem, ali so biloska orozja nevarna za ljudi? In ali vojske, ki taka orozja uporabljajo, (ne)vejo da so nevarna za ljudi? In posledicno se celo krivite firme, ki orozje izdelujejo, da so kriva za smrti ljudi? Hypocrite much?

The industry's methods include genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and hybrid seeds, which cannot be reproduced by farmers

Kaj pa meniš ti, Okapi?

Matthai je pisal, da jih niso obvestili. In od kdaj je dolžnost neke firme, da od vojske kaj zahteva?

Ok. Potem pa melamin v mleku.

Poleg tega Monsanto _NI_ obvestil javnosti.

Monsanto:
Nothing happened. Plačali so odškodnine, pa še to so se trudili, da jih nebi.

Narod ni vedel 0 do leta 1969.

In zakaj bi bilo danes kaj drugače ?

Oni so plačali natanko to, kar so dobili.

Monsanto's Dr. James Wilson's testimony shows that Monsanto decided to sell its 2,4-Di despite Monsanto's having assumed that it contained 2,3,7,8. In fact, Wilson testified that Monsanto knowingly sent TCDD-contaminated 2,4-Di to its customers from 1978 to 1983 and that there was no evidence that any customer ever was notified of the contamination. Wilson testified that Monsanto possibly was shipping out Santophen [the Lysol ingredient] with 65 parts per billion of TCDD before February of 1979, and that who got the contaminated product depended on the 'luck of the draw'. Wilson testified that Monsanto has produced products with dioxin for fifty years. Even though Monsanto had adapted Dr. Paget's recommendation that one part per billion 2,3,7,8 is 'probably medically acceptable', Monsanto knew that higher levels of TCDDs that 'coeluete like' 2,3,7,8 were in its products, and yet gave no notice to its customers. Wilson knew Monsanto was sending out 2,4-Di with much more than 100 parts per billion of TCDDs. Wilson testified that he knew Lysol was used on children and dogs."

.......The brief continues, explaining that Monsanto's Elizabeth Fay "testified that the Santophen Monsanto had been selling for 23 years was used in hospitals and homes, and that it could have contained levels of TCDD The transcript contains literally hundreds of admissions that Monsanto was selling dioxin-contaminated chlorophenol products to its customers for nearly 30 years, and that it did so with the knowledge that these products contained a contamination that was highly toxic to both the environment and to human beings."

.......In 1976, Congress passed the Toxic Substances Control Act, which gave new powers to the EPA. This law required companies like Monsanto to report dioxin contamination to the federal government if they discovered it in their products. Despite this, testimony revealed that in 1978, all Monsanto products were contaminated with dioxin.

......."At one time in 1979, Monsanto represented to the EPA that Monsanto could not test its products for the presence of 2,3,7,8 because the extreme toxicity of the 2,3,7,8 precluded its use in Monsanto's labs.* The testimony was that this was an untrue statement and that the upper echelons of Monsanto Company knew 2,3,7,8 was being used in Monsanto's labs. In fact, Monsanto had a 2,3,7,8 sample in its lab no later than 1970. [*Carr's footnote: At trial, one of Monsanto's excuses for its not having tested its products and not having reported its TCDDs and 2,3,7,8 was that Monsanto did not have sufficiently precise testing methods to detect it at low levels. Wilson testified TCDD testing could have been done as early as 1957, but Monsanto tested very few batches before the Sturgeon spill. Fred Hileman admitted that it was possible that Monsanto just did not utilize its full testing capacity. Monsanto had no regular testing program before the spill. James Mieure's testimony shows that Monsanto implemented only after the Sturgeon spill a much more precise TCDD testing method that it could have implemented before the spill.]

......."At trial, Monsanto offered several other excuses for its having not reported the 2,3,7,8 TCDD contained in its products to the EPA. In one instance, Monsanto identified 9.5 parts per billion of what 'coeluetes like 2,3,7,8 ', but failed to report this because they were not certain that it was not indeed 2,3,7,8. Yet, there is no evidence that Monsanto told the EPA when these 'uncertainties' later were removed by exact identification of 2,3,7,8. It was [Monsanto lawyer] Phocion Park's opinion that Monsanto had no duty to report small amount small amounts of 2,3,7,8 in its products. Park stated that reporting very low levels of 2,3,7,8 would merely 'add fuel to the media fires'. Park testified further that the EPA need not have been notified of dioxin in Monsanto's products because the EPA already knew that dioxin was dangerous!"

.......This kind of circular reasoning can be found all through the environmental lawsuit files of almost every corporation that's been brought to court. With Monsanto, even as the catastrophic dangers of its products were being exposed in environmental and health disasters, its product development committee was voting to increase sales of the same products, in one case by twenty-fold. And if customers were ever warned about potential dangers, it was a special situation, and it came after many years of denials. Carr deals with the warning issue in the Kemner Brief.

......."Monsanto never warned any of the potential customers even though it knew the consumers would be exposed to quantities of Monsanto's dioxin. Monsanto knew that people were spraying their lawns with a product containing 2,3,7,8 and that these people had no way of knowing of the presence or toxicity of 2,3,7,8 in these products. Monsanto knew that Lysol contained Monsanto's 2,3,7,8 and that Lysol was recommended for cleaning [household items] and children's toys, although there was no warning to customers that Lysol contained any dioxin."

.......But now for the obvious question:

......."Why did Monsanto lie and fail to notify the world about the dioxin in [its] chlorophenols?" Carr asks in the Kemner Brief. "Monsanto knew that its chlorophenols would be less marketable if customers learned about the dioxin content. Monsanto's James Wilson testified that it was profitable for Monsanto to not notify its customers."