• Free subscription via e-mail!

  • Support the site!

  • Join me on Facebook!

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • August 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Nov    
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • Top Posts

  • RSS Farm Wars

  • RSS SMCC

  • RSS The PPJ

  • Meta

Bay Area Spraying Stopped, Phony Program Revealed!

The LBAM “infestation” and resultant “emergency situation” is a manufactured “threat” so that the CDFA and pesticide maker can get a whole lotta MONEY.
 
There is NO LBAM THREAT!

From The Monterey County Herald

1. The LBAM is not a threat to agricultural products because it has no history of doing extensive crop damage.

2. The only threat to growers is a trade quarantine that exists only because the U.S. Department of Agriculture made poor decisions decades ago and could correct the problem with a policy change.

3. Fear has been falsely planted by Kawamura, causing the Monterey County Farm Bureau and state Chamber of Commerce to act hastily on misinformation. Not only is eradication unnecessary, but some scientists say it is impossible.

Won’t the LBAM damage hundreds of crops? Evidence and some scientists say “No.”

In Santa Cruz County, which has more LBAMs than the rest of the state, zero crop damage has been found.

In New Zealand, the LBAM has become a minor pest. A report by Dr. Daniel Harder, adjunct professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of California-Santa Cruz, and Dr. Jim Walker, technical research scientist for Hort Research in New Zealand, said, “Hawkes Bay horticultural researchers report that … if LBAM were controlled,

… the maximum damage caused by LBAM would be 1 percent or less of crops.”Isn’t the quarantine real and valid? It may be real, but not valid.

The USDA protected U.S. growers by incorrectly classifying the LBAM when it was in Australia and New Zealand. Now Canada and Mexico follow the USDA zero-risk trade policy, refusing to buy some U.S. products. The advice of UC-Davis entomology professor James Carey to the California Assembly’s Committee on Agriculture was to “consider more realistic trade policy, consider non-zero risk.”

Fear, in the form of gross exaggeration of the LBAM problem, caused growers to believe the LBAM must be eradicated. Carey is the author of three books on insect demography. In his testimony to the Assembly Ag Committee on March 12, he said, “The population growth model presented by the (state agriculture department) would not be taken seriously by any editor of any entomology or ecology journal in the world.” By the state estimate, Carey said there would already be 50 moths per square inch in Berkeley, a total of two thousand trillion moths. Nevertheless, he said that eradication with or without spraying pheromones is impossible and that ground crews should be used to “control” the LBAM. This is a repeat of what happened in New Zealand, following widespread reaction against the conduct of the aerial spraying plan. We should learn from New Zealand’s experience.

Because the state threat is exaggerated, can be removed by a USDA policy change, and cannot succeed, Californians must demand that the state terminate any plans to spray.   

Evidently, current plans to spray have been stopped thanks to public resistance! Can we say, GOTCHA?

A reader just sent the following compilation, which details the amount of funds the CDFA can access if it “is able to establish and maintain an emergency status and resulting eradication effort for this moth.”    

 
 

 

LBAM Eradication Program – A Fraudulent Program.

 

1. The Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM) is not a significant pest.

any more than thousands of other insects including 300 moths in California that are routinely monitored, but do not require any treatment, unless some balance goes out of control, generally caused by a pesticide induced kill-off of their predators.  European Union doesn’t even monitor LBAM.  They just live there like ants or crickets live here, and like over 80 other moths in LBAM’s exact family that already live here too.  After 30-50 years we see that LBAM is already well balanced in nature being eaten by the same predators as its cousins: birds, earwigs, spiders, beetles, etc.

 

2. The Light Brown Apple Moth has been in California about 30-50 years.

Looking at location spread and population density of the LBAM in California and scientifically comparing it to other moth movement and then adjusting for specific LBAM characteristics.

 

3. LBAM has done NO damage in California

CDFA confirms that, courts have ruled that, no one denies it.

 

4. LBAM in California requires NO treatment, certainly not eradication.

Based on #3 and #4 above, and so much supporting independent scientific information.

 

However:

5. If the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) is able to establish and maintain an emergency status and resulting eradication effort for this moth, the CDFA will be able to access approximately $500 million of emergency funding over the next five years, increasing its annual budget approximately 40%.  And with control of delivery and monitoring for such a program, they will almost certainly be able to substantiate continuing the program for at least another five years at about another $100 million per year.

 

6. It is impossible to eradicate the LBAM and there is no reason to.

Maybe, if all the people were moved out of the entire state of California and all remaining life in California was exterminated, that might do it, but even that is not certain as such an experiment has never been performed.  It would be similar to trying to eradicate ants or cockroaches.  It simply cannot be done.

 

7. The CDFA created a huge charade using science like a shell game.  There is probably not a single independent Entomologist in the state that thinks that LBAM can be eradicated from California.  CDFA handpicked a group of people on their Technical Working Group.  Most are willing to consider only the information that CDFA provides them and many have an interest in the program proceeding.  Independent Scientists with alternate known opinions were intentionally and aggressively left off.  The University of California recently offered a panel of experts to look at the eradication program of LBAM, but CDFA refused. 

 

8. There is no problem managing LBAM as 100’s of other pests.  New Zealand has shown how successful that is given they are forced to ship their goods to the U.S. with a zero tolerance for LBAM.  They successfully use modern safe integrated pest management techniques, so their methods control LBAM, while they are controlling many other more significant pests.

 

9. But CDFA needs an “Eradication program to obtain the emergency funding.

 

a. That included an aerial spray of pesticide over populated areas.

b. CDFA claimed aerial spray as a state of the art technology using pheromones, a less toxic alternative that the people had asked for.

c. True, toxic synthetic pheromone based pesticides are preferred in agriculture fields to the more toxic WWII derivatives, but not sprayed over people and intentionally left to stay time released into the air for 24 hours per day every day until they spray again.

d. Tens of thousands got sick of which over 643 managed to get an illness report filed when no one wanted to accept a report.  An 11-month-old boy, perfectly healthy son of an air force major, went into respiratory arrest following the spray.  He was airlifted out and his life was saved at a Stanford Hospital and he will likely be on steroid cocktails now for the rest of his life to keep his airway clear.

e. CDFA had reports done using only the information that the CDFA gave to the analysts and then the results were manipulated to tell the public that there were no links found between the spray and the illnesses, when in fact, the relationships between the spray and the illnesses could not be disproved by even their own manipulated reports.

f. CDFA claimed that the window for eradication was only months and that they could not wait to do an Environmental Impact Report.

g. CDFA claimed that aerial spray was the ONLY method of eradication.

h. Stewart Resnick had recently purchased the chemical company that won the contract for the aerial spray pesticide.  Resnick, a life long democrat, had given Governor Schwarzenegger $144,600 for his reelection campaign, and Resnick is connected to previous USDA reviews of this same moth that worked in Resnick’s favor.

 

10. After Santa Cruz and Monterey Superior Courts ruled CDFA had violated the emergency exemption of CEQA law, after 31 cities representing 2.4 million people passed resolutions against the spray, after 90 additional labor unions, school boards and other organizations passed resolutions against the spray, after almost all elected officials in the region took positions against the spray, after bills to stop the spray finally made it through committee, after the governor did a 180 degree turn and requested that they not use the spray, the CDFA created another lie and on June 19 announced: based on a sudden science breakthrough, they were now going to discontinue the aerial spray over populated areas and instead use a release of sterile moths.

 

a. Up to that moment, only aerial spray was possible to eradicate the LBAM per CDFA.

b. Sterile release of moths has never been successful eradicating a moth on this earth.

c. CDFA announced the sterile release testing will start in 2009 and be fully operational in 2011, but CDFA never mentioned that was inconsistent with their previous information that their window of opportunity to eradicate the moth was just months.

d. Sterile moth release has never eradicated any moth, and for LBAM, there are even further reasons it cannot possibly work:

– LBAM males guard over female pupae and mate when the female matures to a moth.

– LBAM females are promiscuous mating multiple times.

– LBAM females will live longer to successfully mate in order to produce their eggs.

– This method has never been tested.

– To rely on this method, therefore, is beyond absurd in science.

e. Releasing 20 million sterile moths per day could interfere with the natural balance involving predators and ultimately cause serious problems with unlimited numbers of other insects and pests.

 

11. CDFA needs a full-speed-ahead eradication program to keep the money flowing.

 

a. CDFA needs lots of activity and hoopla to substantiate just this years approximate $100 million that was already allocated to the LBAM emergency within the aerial program.

b. Previously, every item of CDFA’s fraudulent eradication program that was documented was refuted by qualified independent scientists.

c. Now, after the announcement of the sterile moth scientific breakthrough, and to avoid independent scientist review, CDFA is representing their eradication as a tool box of methods containing many tools that they alone know which one to use under which circumstance, and they are no longer detailing or documenting any of them.  This strategy successfully avoids scientific review, since scientists generally want to review a written document rather than verbal statements made by PR people to the media, etc.

d. At least one tool in their box, splatting, is more toxic than the aerial spray.  Combinations of permethrin and synthetic pheromone attached to 3,000 fixed objects in each square mile of populated areas, such that the chemicals permeate the same air children breath 24 hours per day, and maintained that way with repetitive applications.

e. This means that people will live between 0 and 45 feet away from a poison source 24 hours of their day, whether they are at home, work, school, the park, the playground, the pool, etc.  The air is permeated from these poison sources.  The poison source is cancer causing and a reproductive effector in that it affects the ability to reproduce, and it impacts newborn survivability and impacts pregnancy loss.  It can cause genetic damage as demonstrated in a lab study using human cells and women on farms using permethrin get asthma at higher rates than those not exposed to permethrin; and permethrin is more dangerous for children than adults.  These problems do not include the effects of toxic synthetic pheromone pesticide or the effects of the two in combination, the manner in which they will be deployed.

f. Mobile fogging is totally unknown to the public at this time, but there is no limit that the CDFA will put on themselves, nor is there any amount of dishonesty, intentional deception or harm to children and people generally that they will avoid to accomplish garnering the funds that an emergency eradication can provide them.

g. A proper management program of LBAM and other insects will simply not bring any additional funds to their normal annual budget.  The LBAM “Eradication” represents a potential increase in their annual funding of approximately 40%.

 

Recent videos relating to the newly packaged fraudulent LBAM eradication program:

 

 

1. State Drops Plan For Bay Area Moth Spraying  3 minutes, 1 second June 19, 2008 first video. 

2. Daniel Harder, Ph.D. Executive Director, The Arboretum, University of California at Santa Cruz.  LINK June 23, 2008.  14 minutes, 2 seconds 

 

ISIS Press Release 28/04/08 Agrobacterium & Morgellons Disease, A GM Connection?

Finally someone is taking the connection between GMO and Morgellons disease seriously. Here is a report released today:

Preliminary findings suggest a link between Morgellons Disease and Agrobacterium, a soil bacterium extensively manipulated and used in making GM crops; has genetic engineering created a new epidemic? 

Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Prof. Joe Cummins

Excerpt:

Extensive genetic manipulation of Agrobacterium does have the potential to transform it into an aggressive human pathogen. Genetic engineering is nothing if not enhanced and facilitated horizontal gene transfer and recombination, which is widely acknowledged to be the main route for creating new pathogens. Mae-Wan Ho was among an international panel of scientists have raised this very issue in 1998, calling for a public enquiry into the possible contributions of genetic engineering biotechnology to the aetiology of infectious diseases which has greatly increased since genetic engineering began in the 1970s [16]. 

The epidemiological data of Morgellons Disease are very incomplete, and the Morgellons Research Foundation’s registry of more than 12 000 families afflicted worldwide is almost certainly only a fraction of the emerging epidemic. Still, it is significant that the majority of the cases are in the United States, the first country to release GM crops and remaining the top producer ever since.

Read the entire article HERE.

The World According to Monsanto Expose’ Disappears from the Internet!

The excellent French documentary titled “The World According to Monsanto – A documentary that Americans won’t ever see,” is evidently living up to its name. When I first became aware of this movie, I immediately watched it, then placed it on my websites. Today I checked the link, and found that the video is gone. In fact, when I typed the title “The World According to Monsanto” into the Google search engine, I couldn’t find the full video anywhere.

 

This is a call for action. If you find this video anywhere on the Internet, please let me know. If you haven’t seen it, you need to. If you have seen it, you know what a powerful video it is for exposing the corruption of Monsanto and the U.S. government. If Google Video has removed this documentary in acquiescence to the U.S. government or Monsanto, then that is testimony to the power and corruption behind the massive corporate movement to wage war on the environment and all living things in the pursuit of profit and power, the people be damned.

 

Siv O’Neall states:

 

The gospel according to Monsanto is that their patented GM seeds and their bovine growth hormone (BGH) will increase worldwide production of agricultural, dairy and meat products and Bt cotton to the extent that worldwide hunger and poverty will be eradicated.

 

The actual truth is rather the opposite. GMOs are creating serious damage all over the world and artificial BGH injection in cows cause numerous health problems, and even death.

 

Monsanto is not held back by any considerations of ethics and it hides the reality of its sordid machinations behind a wall of secrecy. Everything Monsanto does is exclusively with the intent of increasing its own profit – everything else be damned. [2008]

 

This is an information war, and it is highly possible that either Google Video is doing its part to help the corporate giant pull the wool over the public’s eyes so it can poison the planet with impunity, or has been threatened. Fight back! Spread the word and try to find a source for this extremely important expose’ about collusion between the U.S. government and Monsanto. It is too important to put off. Our planet is in imminent peril because of the machinations of this evil corporation.

 

If left to its own devices it (Monsanto) will most certainly destroy the livelihood of millions of farmers – a process begun a decade ago in India and certainly in many other countries as well. The planet’s ecosystems will be seriously threatened by unnatural ways of changing agricultural patterns. The dangers of GMO cultivation to the environment come in many forms:

 

·         Switching from age-old biodiverse crops that can tolerate low-level amounts of water to industrial monocultures of crops such as GM soya, cotton, sugarcane, etc. that require large amounts of irrigation.

·         Inundating cultivated lands with toxic herbicides, in particular the dangerous Monsanto product Roundup, to which the GMO seeds have been made biotechnically resistant. Any other growth should succumb to Roundup, were it not for the fact that weeds to a very large extent become Roundup resistant.

·         Putting an end to biological farming and poisoning non GM cultures through pollenization from GM crops and accidental exposure to Roundup herbicide.

·         Deforestation to make more land available for the culture of the GM seeds Monsanto sells at high prices to poor farmers. [O’Neall, 2008]

 

This issue is too important to put off. Please, try to find the video. People need to have this information. “The World According to Monsanto” is one of the most important videos I have ever seen. Help expose Monsanto!

 

 

© 2008 Barbara H. Peterson

 

References:

 

O’Neall, S. (2008). The World According to Monsanto – A documentary that Americans won’t ever see. The Intelligence Daily. 

Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear

Monsanto already dominates America’s food chain with its genetically modified seeds. Now it has targeted milk production. Just as frightening as the corporation’s tactics–ruthless legal battles against small farmers–is its decades-long history of toxic contamination.

by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele May 2008

Gary Rinehart clearly remembers the summer day in 2002 when the stranger walked in and issued his threat. Rinehart was behind the counter of the Square Deal, his “old-time country store,” as he calls it, on the fading town square of Eagleville, Missouri, a tiny farm community 100 miles north of Kansas City. READ MORE…

 

The World According to Monsanto

The World According to Monsanto video is a documentary that exposes Monsanto’s GMO agenda. It is powerful, thorough, and chilling. A must-see video: 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-842180934463681887&hl=en 

I will be distributing this as far as I can, and I recommend you do too. 

Barb

Bay Area Population to be Sprayed with Unregistered Pesticide

The people who live in the Bay area of California are about to be sprayed with a new pesticide not registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a pre-emptive strive against a non-existent threat.

 “In August, the California Department of Food and Agriculture plans to spray pesticides in five Bay Area counties” (CBS 5, 2008) in response to a perceived threat from the Light Brown Apple Moth. One of the chemicals being used is Checkmate, manufactured by Suterra, LLC, which is owned by Stewart Resnick, one of the richest men in California, and owner of the largest farming operation of tree crops in the world. Mr. Resnick is also included in California Governor Schwarzenegger’s top 100 donors. (Arnold Watch, 2008) 

Mr. Resnick has developed and owns a number of successful companies including Paramount Agribusiness, the largest farming operation of tree crops in the world, which includes Paramount Citrus, Paramount Farming and Paramount Farms, growers, processors and marketers of citrus, almonds and pistachios; POM Wonderful, grower of pomegranates and maker of the all-natural POM Wonderful pomegranate juice; Teleflora, the largest floral wire service in the world; FIJI Water, the second largest imported bottled water in the United States and the newest member of the Roll family of companies; The Franklin Mint, a leader in high-quality collectibles; and Suterra, the largest biorational pest control company in the United States. (Political Friendster, 2006) 

The pesticide used to spray Santa Cruz last year was the same product, but without a new active ingredient. The new and improved Checkmate contains two active ingredients. It is this version that will be used on Bay Area residents. The new version of the pesticide contains an active ingredient that has not been approved by the EPA. The picture below shows the original ingredient, (E)-11-tetradecen-1-yl acetate, which was in the original product, and the second ingredient, (E,E)-9,11-tetradecadien-1-yl acetate, which was not, and is the ingredient currently under exemption from EPA registration. 

 active-ingredients-in-checkmate.jpg

(C&EN, 2007) 

Tests have been conducted with the original version of Checkmate, but not on such a large scale. 

It is the second active ingredient, (E,E)-9,11-tetradecadien-1-yl acetate, that is the wild card. The EPA has not approved this new ingredient! In fact, the EPA has granted an exemption just for the Bay Area spraying and waived the public comment period due to the “emergency situation.” The following is taken from the EPA site: 

SUMMARY: EPA has received a quarantine exemption request from the United States Department of Agriculture/Animal and Plant HealthInspection Service (USDA/APHIS) to use the pesticide (E,E)-9,11-tetradecadien-1-yl acetate (CAS No. 30562-09-5) to treat host plants tocontrol the Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM). The Applicant proposes theuse of a new chemical which has not been registered by EPA. Due to the unique nature of this emergency situation, in which the time to reviewthe conditions of this situation was short, it was not possible toissue a solicitation for public comment, in accordance with 40 CFR166.24, prior to the Agency’s decision to grant these exemptions. 

DATES: EPA is waiving the public comment period, as allowed in 40 CFR166.24, due to the short period of time available with which to reviewthis situation and render a timely decision. However, comments maystill be submitted and will be evaluated. (EPA, 2007) 

This exemption is dated July 2007. The spraying is to begin in August 2008, over a year after the exemption was granted. “Because of that exemption, the spraying program isn’t subject to state approval, according to representatives of the state Department of Pesticide Regulation” (Kay, 2008). 

Just what is this emergency situation? Some say that it is no emergency at all. According to botanist Daniel Harder, Executive Director of the Arboretum at UC Santa Cruz, “It’s not such a nasty pest. You’re not going to see a plant succumbing to the Light Brown Apple Moth.” The bug is considered a minor pest in New Zealand, where it arrived from Australia, they say. (Kay, 2008) 

No eradication measures have been taken against the moth in New Zealand, and none are planned. The moth is a minor pest whose larvae are eaten by earwigs, birds, and spiders. Furthermore, “there is no widespread infestation of the light brown apple moth [in the U.S.], but U.S. Department of Agriculture officials say they are trying to head off a potential disaster” (Kay, 2008). Therefore, Bay Area residents will be sprayed with an untested unregulated pesticide on the pretense of this non-existent emergency by Stewart Resnick, owner of the largest farming operation of tree crops in the world, and one of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s top 100 contributors, and are basically told to just shut up and take it. Cities to be sprayed are as follows:

Alameda County:
Albany
Alameda
Piedmont
Emeryville
Oakland

Contra Costa County:
El Cerrito
El Sobrante
Hercules
Kensington
Pinole-N. Richmond
San Pablo

San Francisco County:
San Francisco

San Mateo County:
Daly City
Colma
Pacifica
San Bruno
South San Francisco

Marin County:
Tiburon
Belvedere
San Pablo
Corte Madera
Larkspur
Sausalito 

Copyright 2008, Barbara H. Peterson    References: Arnold Watch. (2008). Arnold’s Top 100 Donors. Retrieved from: http://www.arnoldwatch.org/special_interests/index.html C&EN. (2007). Rancor over Pesticide Spraying in California. Retrieved from: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/85/i46/8546news3.html 

CBS 5. (2008). Outrage over Planned Bay Area Apple Moth Spraying. Retrieved from: http://cbs5.com/local/apple.moth.spraying.2.662703.html 

EPA. (2007). Federal Register Environmental Documents. Retrieved from: http://www.epa.gov/EPA-PEST/2007/July/Day-06/p12872.htm 

Free Patents Online. (2008). Communication Disturbing Agents and Method for Disturbing Communication. Retrieved from: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP0962137.html 

Kay, J. (2008). Experts Question Plan to Spray to Fight Moths. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/06/MN69VD309.DTL 

Kay, J. (2008). State Plans Bay Area Pesticide Spraying. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved from:  http://www.sfgate.com:80/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/15/MN99V2PMN.DTL 

Political Friendster. (2006). Rate the Roll International Corporation – Stewart Resnick Connection. Retrieved from: http://www.politicalfriendster.com/rateConnection.php?id1=5223&id2=5220

America’s Silent Killing Fields

America’s silent killers are deadly, and do not discriminate. They target babies, the elderly, teenagers, young adults, middle-age housewives, and businessmen alike. They poison livestock, pets, and wildlife, and the people behind them deny complicity in the carnage. Who or what are these silent, deadly killers? They are the beautiful, green, uniform, and seemingly beneficial, killing fields of genetically modified (GMO) crops. The people behind them are the U.S. government, the Rockefellers, Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, and Syngenta.

How it Began

Eugenics is a dirty word, yet particularly applicable to America’s killing fields and their inception: Henry Kissinger drafted the controversial NSSM-200 in 1974, called “the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government.”  

According to NSSM-200, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include: 

            a)      the legalization of abortion;

b)      financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates;

c)      indoctrination of children; and

d)   mandatory population control, and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs

NSSM-200 also specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations to do its dirty work.

(Human Life International, 2008)

In 1970, Henry Kissinger said, “Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.” How do you control food? By consolidating agricultural interests into what was to be termed agribusiness, creating genetically modified organisms out of heritage seeds with funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, patenting the new seeds, and making sure that these new seeds are force-fed to U.S. farmers as well as the rest of the world. By holding the patents on these seeds and requiring farmers to purchase new seeds every year, the control is complete. Also, by controlling how these GMO seeds are created, other more sinister uses come to mind. But first, you must convince the world of your good intentions. This is accomplished through lies, deception, and a bit of media manipulation. By promising farmers that this technology was safe, and would result in increased yields at less cost, they were more than happy to give it a try. The fact that in most cases this claim was false had yet to be proven by the innocent farmers that believed the lie. By the time independent studies started revealing that GMO is harmful, it was too late, and the freight train called agri-business was on its way to fulfilling its purpose – to make as much money as possible by spreading GMO seeds as far as possible, and thus gaining control of the population via food.  

The U.S. Farmland Takeover

It is now 2008, and the U.S. is in the midst of a deadly trend. From time-tested agricultural processes that involve tilling the land, planting, and harvesting both produce and seed, to mass-produced, genetically engineered seed injection requiring less workers and more pesticides, agribusiness has taken hold and is strangling the country with its GMO crops and farming methods. The end-result? The family farmer is squeezed out in favor of agribusiness’ mass-production methods using genetically engineered crops grown with poisoned seeds, good for one harvest only. Here are some statistics that show how GMO crops are taking over U.S. farmland:

The adoption of HT [herbicide-tolerant] corn, which had been slower in previous years, has accelerated, reaching 52 percent of U.S. corn acreage in 2007…

Plantings of Bt [insect-resistant] corn grew from 8 percent of U.S. corn acreage in 1997 to 26 percent in 1999, then fell to 19 percent in 2000 and 2001, before climbing to 29 percent in 2003 and 49 percent in 2007… Plantings of Bt cotton expanded more rapidly, from 15 percent of U.S. cotton acreage in 1997 to 37 percent in 2001 and 59 percent in 2007.

Adoption of all GE [genetically engineered] cotton, taking into account the acreage with either or both HT and Bt traits, reached 87 percent in 2007, versus 91 percent for soybeans. In contrast, adoption of all biotech corn was 73 percent.

(USDA, 2007)

The Killing Fields go Worldwide

Not content to restrict the use of GMO to the U.S., a larger, more ambitious plan was in the making.

By Presidential Executive Order [1992], the US had defined GMO seeds as harmless and hence not needing to be regulated for health and safety.

It made sure this principle was carried over into the new WTO in the form of the WTO’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (SPS), which stated, ‘Food standards and measures aimed at protecting people from pests or animals can potentially be used as a deliberate barrier to trade’…

Other WTO rules in the Agreement to Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) forbid member countries from using domestic standards or testing, food safety laws, product standards, calling them an ‘unfair barrier to trade.’

The impact of those two US-mandated WTO rulings meant that Washington could threaten that any government restricting import of GM plants on grounds they might pose threats to health and safety of their population, could be found to be in violation of WTO free trade rules! (Engdahl, 2006)

This resulted in a long awaited plan by the multinational GMO pushers to take over global agriculture, as represented in the following chart that outlines just how many hectares of land were devoted to GMO crops from 1996 to 2006:

GMO World Hectares

(GMO Compass, 2007)

 

Take a good look at the chart above, and let’s do the math. Keep in mind that all figures are approximate.

 

1 hectare = 2.4711 acres. In 2006, there were 102 million hectares of land on planet earth devoted to GMO crops, or 252.05 million acres. 1 square mile = 640 acres. Therefore, by 2006, there were approximately 393,828 square miles of GMO crops.

 

The earth’s total landmass is approximately 92,229,476 square miles. In 2005, Taipei Times reported that 40% of the earth’s land mass was being used for farmland. Not accounting for any increase from 2005 to 2006, the amount of land being used for farmland was, in 2006, 40% of 92,229,476 square miles, or 36,891,790 square miles, and this includes grazing land for livestock production.

According to Science Daily, “grazing occupies 26 percent of the Earth’s terrestrial surface.” 26% of earth’s total landmass of 92,229,476 square miles = 23,979,664 square miles. So, subtract that from the total amount of land being used for farmland, and we get 12,912,126 square miles of farmland devoted to raising crops.  

Of this total amount of farmland that is being used to raise crops, 393,828 square miles are devoted to GMO crop production as of 2006.  

Let’s look a bit further:  

According the chart above, in 1996, there were 1.7 hectares, or 4.2 million acres, which equates to approximately 6,563 square miles of farmland devoted to GMO crops. In 2006, there were 393,828 square miles of farmland devoted to GMO crops, which was 387,265 square miles more in 2006 than in 1996. Using a rate of increase calculation, this equates to

 

A 5900% INCREASE IN LAND DEVOTED TO GMO CROPS IN A 10-YEAR PERIOD!

 

If you think that this trend cannot continue, think again.

 

In 2007, the cultivation of genetically modified plants also increased. The area dedicated to such plants rose by 12 million hectares to reach a total of 114 million hectares. The greatest increase was shown by maize, which added 10 million hectares to its area. Genetically modified plants are commercially employed in 23 countries, twelve of which are developing nations. (GMO Compass, 2008)

 

GMO Yearly Graph

(GMO Compass, 2008)

 

It looks like the agri-giants are right on schedule, with an average yearly increase of approximately 10 million hectares of land. The increase from 2006 to 2007 was 102 to 114 hectares. At this rate, the amount of land dedicated to the growth of GM killing fields will double in another 10 years.

GMO – What Harm Can it Do?

Contrary to claims by the U.S. government and Monsanto et al, who claim that GMO crops are beneficial, independent studies have been conducted with shocking results.

 

In a 2005 report by Regnum, a Russian news agency,

 

 

On October 10, during the symposium over genetic modification, organized by the National Association for Genetic Security (NAGS), Doctor of Biology Irina Ermakova made public the results of the research led by her at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS). This is the first research that determined clear dependence between eating genetically modified soy and the posterity of living creatures.

 

GMO Test

 

“The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results we obtained very disturbing,” said Irina Ermakova to NAGS press office. (Regnum, 2005)

 

Another glaring example is that of Syngenta and the German farmer, Gottfried Glockner of North Hessen. As William Engdahl explains in Seeds of Destruction,

 

This farmer found evidence that planting Syngenta Bt-176 genetically engineered corn to feed his cattle in 1997 had been responsible for killing off his cattle, destroying his milk production, and poisoning his farmland. Syngenta’s Bt-176 corn had been engineered to produce a toxin of Bacillus thuringiensis, which they claimed was deadly to a damaging insect, the European Corn Borer. (pg. 230)

 

Evidently, Syngenta’s GMO corn was deadly to a lot more than the corn borer.

Is Anything More Important?

To make a distinction between the health effects of GMO on animals and humans is reckless at best. If rats that eat GMO soy, and cattle that eat GMO corn have severe health effects and die, then what happens to humans that eat GMO soy and corn, drink milk from GMO-fed cows, and eat beef from GMO-fed cattle? Don’t we deserve more? If GMO killing fields are poisoning the animals whose products we consume, then they are poisoning us also.

What does it matter about the issues we fight about if we are being slaughtered slowly and silently by the foods we eat? Not only are we being killed off, but the diseases that we get because of this consumption keep the medical establishment in Ferraris and Penthouses while doctors treat the symptoms of the diseases we contract, while never addressing the cause.

Can it be Stopped?

GMO killing fields are taking over our farms and stores, as well as our very lives. These silent, deadly killers have been hiding in anonymity since “1992…when George H.W. Bush…issued an Executive Order proclaiming GMO plants such as soybeans or GMO corn to be ‘substantially equivalent’ to ordinary corn or soybeans, and, therefore, not needing any special health safety study or testing” (Engdahl, 2006). Even labeling foods containing GMO ingredients is not allowed. With the proliferation of GMO ingredients, it is no wonder that companies do not want to be responsible for labeling their products. They probably do not know if what they are getting is GMO or not! How can you label something if you do not know what it is? 

Planting individual gardens with organic seeds, then harvesting these seeds from one year to the next is one way to combat the GMO revolution. Also, local groups devoted to growing organic produce for the communities in which they live can stem the tide of personal GMO consumption one community at a time, at least for a while.

The Endgame

The U.S. government, Monsanto, Dow, Dupont, and Syngenta are not in business to keep people healthy. They are in business to make money. Unless this is understood, these corporations will continue using the public as guinea pigs for their experiments in population control, and in so doing, glean ever-increasing profits from the unsuspecting and naive. It is time to stand up and resist these giants by demanding accountability, and using what resources are left to become self-sufficient and say NO WAY to GMO! If we don’t, America’s silent killing fields will do their job, and we will no longer have a choice.

 

 

 

 

Copyright 2008, Barbara H. Peterson 

 

 

References:

 

ECO World. (2008). Earth. Retrieved from http://www.ecoworld.com/earth/ecoworld_earth_home5.cfm

 

Engdahl, F.W. (2007). Seeds of Destruction. Global Research.

Engdahl, F.W. (2006). WTO, GMO and Total Spectrum Dominance:WTO rules put free-trade of agribusiness above national health concerns. Global Research. Retrieved from http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2202

GMO Compass. (2008). Further Increase for GM Plants: Cultivation Risen to 114 Million Hectares. Global Cultivation Areas 2007. Retrieved from http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/agri_biotechnology/gmo_planting/257.global_gm_planting_2007.html

 

GMO Compass. (2007). Transgenic Crops by Trait. GM Trait Statistics. Retrieved from

http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/agri_biotechnology/gmo_planting/145.gmo_cultivation_trait_statistics.html

Human Life International. (2008). Kissinger Report 2004. Population Control: NSSM 200 – Exposed. Retrieved from http://www.hli.org/nssm_200_exposed.html 

Regnum. (2005). Genetically modified soy affects posterity: Results of Russian scientists’ studies. Retrieved from http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html

 

Science Daily. (2007). Harmful Environmental Effects of Livestock Production on the Planet Increasingly Serious says Panel. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070220145244.htm

 

Taipei Times. (2005). Earth is All Out of New Farmland. Retrieved from http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/12/07/2003283384

 

USDA. (2007). Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S.: Extent of Adoption. Economic Research Service. Retrieved from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/adoption.htm

 

%d bloggers like this: