The Corruption of the Clintons: HELPING MONSANTO vs. FAMILY FARMERS, PA farmers see Clinton=Monsanto

Dems Will Win

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-13-08 07:39 PM
Original message

The Corruption of the Clintons: HELPING MONSANTO vs. FAMILY FARMERS, PA farmers see Clinton=Monsanto

Edited on Thu Mar-13-08 07:57 PM by Dems Will Win

Clinton is already associated with Monsanto by PA farmers, and they have a long history with Monsanto, Jackson Stephens, the non-prosecution of BCCI, Tyson Foods cash payments and corruption. Read more:

In Getting Real in Pennsylvania--About Pennsylvania, ScaredHuman ties the Clintons to Monsanto. More significantly, he tells us that most dairy farmers in the state associate the Clintons with Monsanto wheeling and dealing. Next we learn some details of how Monsanto is a hated burden for dairy farmers.

Recently Pennsylvania survived a Monsanto push to ban labels telling consumers if the milk was rBGH-free or not.

We learn why "survive" is the appropriate word here. It turns out that liberals and PA dairy farmers are natural allies when it comes to truth in labeling. And don't expect Hillary Clinton to be able to get any traction with the issue. Our friend is inviting Obama to step into the breach.

Next comes an informative discussion of NAIS, how it has been forced on farmers by Monsanto, and what is wrong with it. NAIS is the National Animal Identification System, which will allow Monsanto to keep track of every animal on a farm. You need to read the diary to get the full implications of this. Once again, this is an issue on which progressives and dairy farmers need to make common cause.

How is this for making you want to mobilize:

For farmers who buy its GE-seeds, Monsanto sends Pinkerton agents onto their property to make sure farmers don't collect GE-seeds - Monsanto's patented "intellectual property." Monsanto also uses planes and helicopters to surveille farmers.

The issue of food safety also comes under scrutiny, with eye-opening results.

So, the Clintons are strongly associated with Monsanto in the minds of PA dairy farmers, and the way Monsanto is riding roughshod over the small farmers is almost perfectly analogous to the insulting, dismissive treatment we progressives have been receiving at the hands of the GOP.

Here's a comment from ScaredHuman from his dairy diary:

Oh, believe me, these are their issues. I am in touch with farming groups around the county and they are so enraged by NAIS you have no idea. Or how they feel about Monsanto, though many didn't know Monsanto was behind NAIS. These issues are survival ones to them. I am only trying to make the links between all the parts and to make them be compelling enough together, to possibly jump over into mainstream media attention for the farmers and on Hillary's current connection to Monsanto and Bill's really grotesque (as far as genetic engineering being released and all information shut down or warped and democratic processed subverted) history with them.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/6/32635/47711/600/470281

Going Backwards:
Clinton Administration Appoints A Former Monsanto Corp. Lobbyist To Represent US Consumers On Genetically Engineered Food Issues
by Tom Abate

Leading consumer and environmental groups are fuming because the Clinton administration has appointed a former Monsanto Corp. lobbyist to represent U.S. consumers on a transatlantic committee set up to avoid a trade war over genetically engineered foods.

U.S. farmers have planted millions of acres of corn and other crops that have been genetically engineered to resist pests, and the growers want to export such produce freely. But in Europe, where genetically altered crops have been dubbed Frankenfoods, governments have imposed labeling rules and safety tests that have restricted U.S. imports.

Friction between the United States and Europe over the foods issue torpedoed last year's World Trade Organization (WTO) talks in Seattle and now threaten to erupt into a transatlantic trade war.

In a last-ditch effort to settle their differences, U.S. and European leaders agreed in May to create a 20-person Biotechnology Consultative Forum, representing pro and con interests on both sides of the Atlantic.

In a letter appointing the U.S. members of this advisory forum, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright asked them to suggest a compromise on labeling, safety testing and other regulatory issues, and to present it to the next U.S.- European economic summit in December.

To build support for this compromise effort, the State Department asked environmental and consumer opponents of bioengineered foods to nominate their representatives to the biotech powwow.

But this gesture backfired when the State Department ignored the nomination of consumer representative Michael Hansen -- a scientist with Consumers Union -- and instead gave the post to Carol Tucker Foreman, a Capitol insider who recently took over food issues for the Consumer Federation of America after 18 years as a lobbyist.

What angered critics most is that during her lobbying days, Foreman helped Monsanto -- the firm most closely identified with genetically engineered foods -- win approval for bovine growth hormone, a chemical that stimulates milk production.

``We think it's a big mistake to appoint a person to represent consumers who's been so closely tied to the biotech industry,'' said Dan Seligman, the Sierra Club's representative on trade issues.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/072600-03.htm

What did Bill do?

1. Bill's put Monsanto people in at the FDA, as US Agricultural Trade
Representatives, on International Biotechnology Consultive Forums,
and more ... or http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9904b/monsantofda.html or http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Revolving-Door.htm

2. Bill's FDA gave Monsanto permission to market rBGH (a GE bovine
growth hormone), the first genetically engineered product let loose
on us (or did tomatoes with fish DNA get there first?).

3. Despite reports of bovine illness and death, Bill's FDA did not
recall it or put warnings on it. Even "a very angry, very vocal
nationwide consumer base" had no impact. "

4. Bill's FDA wouldn't even label rBGH as "present" in milk.

5. When dairy farmers tried to label their own milk rBGH-free so the
public could choose, Bill's USDA threatened all dairies that their
products could be confiscated from stores. Michael Taylor, USFDA
Deputy Commissioner, was formerly Monsanto's counsel.

6. How were consumers to protect their family, given Bill's FDA
enforced public blindness, except to buy only organic? But Bill's FDA
tried to close off that last escape, proposing to include
in "organic" standards, "the dirty three" a : genetic engineering of
plants and animals, use of irradiation in food processing and use of
municipal sewage sludge as a fertilizer. (My emphasis.) The FDA
backed down.

Had this gone through, Monsanto could have finally labeled rBGH
milk ... as "organic." And animal waste from factory farms, a
pollution nightmare for Tyson and others, could have been sold as
fertilizer.

USDA head Dan Glickman: "This is probably the largest public response
to an rule in modern history." In fact the
response was 20 times greater than anything ever before proposed by
the USDA.

...

Politically, Bill sided against small farmers and against the
public's right to know, and with Monsanto.

http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/626639

PLEASE RECOMMEND IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE CLINTONS HELPING MONSANTO