GMO Ban Blocked: Maui Citizens Win … Then Lose

Judge-Gavel

By: Roger Landry (TLB)

Can the people ever win? Is this more proof of complicity? Is the democratic process even valid anymore in America today?

On November 4th, the citizens of the Hawaiian island Maui voted to stop any growth, testing or cultivation of GMOs until scientific studies succeeded in proving their safety, something that is seriously lacking in the eyes of many independent researchers today. The measure is also meant to stop any GM or GE operations in the county until such a study was successfully completed.

The lawsuit filed by Monsanto. and a Dow Chemical unit in federal court in Honolulu asks a judge to immediately block this law from going into effect. It also seeks the invalidation of the new law. The law was passed by a narrow margin and adopted during the recent election. This action followed an intense campaign in which about eight million dollars was spent by these bio-tech companies to stop the initiative.

When the people decide something is wrong and take action in a legitimate and democratic fashion to protect themselves, this shows community awareness initiative and involvement.

But alas Bio-tech giants like Monsanto, who enjoy massive complicity in both the political and judicial systems prevail in blocking the voice of the people because of said influence.

There is enough scientific data available to prove unequivocally that GMOs can and do cause harm to the biosphere and human physiology, after all they are banned in over 30 countries. But these Bio-tech giants are not even pushing back on this premise, the push back is coming from their complaint that Maui’s new ban will cause them to suffer financial harm … REALLY ???

So in-order to protect the profit margin or bottom line of these companies … WE THE PEOPLE MUST EAT POISON … ??? … !!!

(EXCERPT)

Monsanto Doesn’t Play Fair

Needless to say, this is far from the only corrupt action Monsanto has taken on the US population as a whole. Since 1997, Monsanto has filed 145 lawsuits, or on average about 9 lawsuits every year for 16 straight years, against farmers who have “improperly reused their patented seeds.”

Further, the biotech giant led to the suicides of almost 300,000 farmers in India, as Monsanto’s intrusion into India’s traditional and sustainable farming community has led to massive debt and the loss of farmland, leading many farmers to suicide. And once the farmer is gone, the debt falls on the remaining family members. Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, and other suicide seed sellers have essentially created a generational slave economy based on their toxic chemical and seed monopolies.

Legal Battles Infringing People’s Decisions

In June this year, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, an industry association funded by Big Food, sued the State of Vermont for instituting its GMO labeling law. Again last year, Syngenta and Bayer sued the EU for placing a limited ban on their neonicotinoid pesticides, which are killing the bees!

GMO/chemical companies suing governments seems to be a growing trend. Unfortunately, this trend will continue as long as corporate budgets exceed the resources of state governments, and as long as corporations are granted the rights of individuals without the responsibilities or consequences.

Read more here: Biotech Bully: Monsanto Sues State over Newly Victorious GMO Ban (Natural Society)

(END EXCERPT)

When in a Nation, the will and profitability of a corporation outweighs the will, health and safety of its citizens …

Fascism is the rule, NOT Democracy!

Please watch the provided video.

 

 

4 Comments on GMO Ban Blocked: Maui Citizens Win … Then Lose

  1. Banning GMO’s is not likely going to solve the GMO threat, but restoring human rights etc might… Please consider helping us with this text asap.
    This is a ruff draft of the text that can be adapted for any locality. Here’s what we have so far…all suggestions are encouraged, welcome and will be thoroughly considered. Please use this if you can. If you can make it better, please do so and send it back to us so we can forward it to others, thanks!
    ‘The Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration And Natural Seed & Plant DNA Protection Act’
    An Act to restore and protect the natural Human Right to grow and use natural seeds and plants for the basic necessities of life.
    Whereas in the State of (here using the Ca. example where any state/county etc can be inserted/substituted) California, the People of the County of Lake do hereby Find, Declare and Ordain as follows:
    When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for people to declare and restore the fundamental human rights with which they are naturally endowed, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s origins entitle them, and to recognize a decent respect for the opinions of humankind, requires that they should declare the causes which compel them to come forward toward the restoration of those rights.
    We hold these truths to be self-evident:
    That all humans beings are created equal. That human beings are naturally endowed with certain rights, and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, and that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to declare, restore and protect such inherent self evident human rights in effort to repair such governmental negligence, and to enumerate such in a form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Therefore, in accordance with the 9th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America,
    Amendment IX:
    “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”,
    and also in accordance with the (using the Ca. example where any other state and state constitution can be sited inserted/substituted in this regard) California State Constitution, Article 1 Declaration of Rights, Section 24.:
    (states vary slightly on how they word this part, this is the CA. example)
    “This declaration of rights may not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people.”,
    and, whereas disregard and contempt for certain human rights have resulted in acts which have outraged the conscience of humankind, be it here proclaimed that it has become necessary to declare, restore and specifically protect the self evident inherent freedom to grow and use natural seeds and the plants thereof as described and defined in Section 4.(d) herein, and to protect the same natural seeds and plants from cross pollination induced genetic modifications or other contamination’s related to genetically engineered DNA:
    Section 1., Findings:
    That human beings are naturally endowed with the fundamental self evident right to have and plant the naturally occurring seeds of this earth, as defined in Sec 4 (d) herein, and care for the naturally occurring plants thereof , to be used for their own needs as individuals in pursuit of life and in effort to live, and that such fundamental human rights have been recognized as self evident, and that these rights are held in perpetuity outside and apart from the jurisdictional responsibility of government to regulate commercial endeavors and activities as defined in Sec 4 (a) herein. And further, that commercial jurisdiction has allowed for the genetic engineering of DNA, seeds and plants and has allowed for the privatizing/patenting and legal protections of such which has left all naturally occurring seeds and plants legally unprotected and physically vulnerable to irreparable genetic modifications from cross pollination contamination with said genetically engineered DNA, seeds and plants, and that human beings have a naturally endowed right to have and plant the naturally occurring seeds and plants of this earth free of genetic modifications stemming from contamination from genetically engineered DNA, seeds and plants.
    Section 1.(a)
    That all (example)County of Lake residents residing within the (example)unincorporated areas of the County who exercise the rights described in Section 1. of this Act at their residence within said area, and are compliant with Section 2., Section 2.(a) and all other Sections and provisions of this Act, and are gardening outside (outdoors) or in a greenhouse (and not withstanding any generally applicable urgency ordinance(s) specifically relating to water conservation), are, as accorded in the paragraphs above, necessarily exempt from any county permitting or other state statutes that would limit an individual’s home gardening efforts or abilities in conjunction with Section 1.
    Section 2., Responsibilities:
    Any individual exercising the rights and exemptions described in Section 1., and Section 1.(a) of this Act, shall be in compliance with all other provisions of this Act, and shall take reasonable care to prevent all negative impacts on the environment relating to all types of run off or any other preventable negative impacts to the environment including any toxic health risks to humans related to the growing and processing of natural seeds and plants, and any individual exercising the rights and exemptions described in Section 1., and Section 1.(a) of this Act, shall be responsible to mitigate any circumstances of negative impacts to the environment or possible toxic health risks to humans related to the growing and processing of natural seeds and plants as determined and directed by the (example)county Environmental Health Department as directed by Section 2.(a), in response to any complaint or other circumstance as described in Section 2.(a) herein.
    Section 2.(a)
    The (example)County of Lake Environmental Health Department shall respond and administer to complaints and other circumstances that may arise related to Section 2., and Section 3.(b) of this Act, and shall develop whatever standards, protocols, definitions and appeals processes necessary to implement its authority under this Act as consistent with existing law and as described in Section 2., and in Section 3.(b) herein pertaining to protecting the environment and guarding against public health risks as long as such standards, protocols, definitions and appeals processes are not in conflict with any Sections, provisions or definitions of this Act, and all such administrative authority and compliance inquiries shall be restricted to circumstances where a neighbor (or other resident of the county) complaint in writing and signed by the complainant has been officially registered with the county, except In circumstances of a clear and present immediate toxic threat to public health, in which case(s) a written and signed complaint is not required.
    Section 3., Special Circumstances:
    Any law, to the extent that it would specifically deny or disparage the Human Rights as described in Section 1. of this Act, is to be set aside unless it can be determined that the individual circumstance is occurring within the context of commerce related activities as defined in Section 4.(a) herein, or if an individual’s violation(s) of Section 2. or Section 2.(a) of this Act are to the extent of violating a criminal statute, or if an individual is in violation of using illegal gardening chemicals, including but not limited to, certain pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers.
    Section 3.(a)
    This Act shall not apply in circumstances where (a) private rental or lease agreement(s) (contract) exist(s) pertaining to the occupancy and or use of any private land unless such is otherwise specifically enumerated within said agreement(s) (contract), or unless the agreement(s) (contract) does not specify any conditions or agreement pertaining to outside (or greenhouse) home gardening.
    Section 3.(b)
    In effort to further assure protection of the restored rights and the other needed protections established by this Act, the (example)county Environmental Health Department shall continually remain vigilant to do everything possible within it’s authority under law to protect all naturally occurring seeds and plants from cross pollination or any other contamination’s related to genetically engineered DNA, including, but not limited to not allowing open air grown genetically engineered crops.
    Section 3.(c)
    With respect to any litigation that might arise within the jurisdictional reach of this Act, in regards to Section 1., and protecting home gardeners and naturally occurring seeds and plants from irreparable genetic modifications from genetically engineered DNA cross pollination or any other contamination’s related to genetically engineered DNA, seeds and plants, in every circumstance of cross pollination or other contamination to a home gardener’s natural seeds or plants, this Act shall be applied to hold individual’s, corporations, and patent holders of said genetically engineered DNA, liable and monetarily responsible for all reparations, including, but not limited to environmental restorations and all other types monetary restorations that might arise from such irreparable genetic modifications to a home gardeners naturally occurring heirloom seeds and plants, including punitive awards.
    Further, with respect to any litigation that might arise within the jurisdictional reach of this Act, in every circumstance of cross pollination or other contamination to a home gardener’s natural seeds or plants resulting from a genetically engineered source, this Act shall be applied to deny individual’s, corporations, and patent holders of said genetically engineered DNA, any counter claims or other claims against any home gardener relating to patent infringement.
    Section 3.(d)
    The protections, exemptions and rights established by this Act, including Section 3.(c), shall not apply in circumstances where it can be shown that a home gardener knowingly and intentionally planted genetically engineered DNA as seeds, or plants, or where a home gardener has by whatever method knowingly and intentionally cross pollinated their own garden’s seeds or plants with genetically engineered DNA as defined in Section 4.(g) herein.
    Section 4., Definitions:
    (a) For the expressed purposes of this Act, in Section 3., the word “commerce”, and in Section 1., the words phrased as “commercial endeavors and activities ” shall be taken to mean:
    The buying and selling of goods or services in any form, and in direct reference to the exchange of United States currency (or other such legally recognized tender) for such goods or services.
    (b) For the expressed purposes of this Act, the words phrased as “compliance inquiries” shall be taken to mean:
    A written and delivered inquiry or an in person inquiry as to responding to (a) specific complaint(s), and to which access to inspect private property shall only be in circumstances where the respondent has voluntarily agreed to and granted such access, or where on an individual basis, a court order has provided for such access.
    (c) For the expressed purposes of this Act, and in particular Section 1. of this Act, the words phrased as “to be used for their own needs” shall be taken to mean:
    For use as food, medicine, fiber, building materials, environmental damage mitigation or other environmental concerns, privacy, spiritual/religious requirement, (or other) basic necessities of life.
    (d) For the expressed purposes of this Act, and in particular Section 1. and Section 3.(b) of this Act, the word “natural” and the words phrased as “naturally occurring” shall be taken to mean:
    Seeds and plants species and varieties of such that have evolved in nature exclusively through the traditional pollination and cross pollination processes, be that by wind/weather, or animal (including human) assistance, and specifically free from (absent of) genetic modifications induced by cross pollination from genetically engineered DNA or contamination in any way related to genetically engineered DNA, seeds, plants and/or the pollen thereof.
    (e) For the expressed purposes of this Act, and in particular Section 1.(a) and Section 3.(a) of this Act, the word “greenhouse” shall be taken to mean:
    Any structure where the sun’s light can penetrate at least 50% of the roof (ceiling or top) surface to allow for said sun light to shine inside the structure for the intended purpose of sprouting seeds and/or growing plants in, and is being used for sprouting seeds and/or growing plants in.
    (f) For the expressed purposes of this Act, the words phrased as “genetic engineering” shall be taken to mean:
    The development and application of scientific procedures and technologies that permit direct manipulation of genetic material in order to alter the hereditary traits of a cell, organism, or population, and more specifically the group of applied techniques of genetics and biotechnology used to cut up and join together genetic material and especially DNA from one or more species of organism and to introduce the result into an organism in order to change one or more of its characteristics.
    (g) For the expressed purposes of this Act, the words phrased as “Genetically Engineered” (also commonly referred to as “Genetically Modified”, “GM”, “Genetically Modified Organism”, or “GMO”) , shall be taken to mean produced from an organism or organisms in which the genetic material has been changed through the application of:
    (a) In vitro nucleic acid techniques which include, but are not limited to, recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA), direct injection of nucleic acid into cells or organelles, encapsulation, gene deletion, and doubling; or
    (b) Methods of fusing cells beyond the taxonomic family that overcome natural physiological, reproductive, or recombination barriers, and that are not techniques used in traditional breeding and selection such as conjugation, transduction, and hybridization.
    For purposes of this definition: “In vitro nucleic acid techniques” include, but are not limited to, recombinant DNA or RNA techniques that use vector systems; techniques involving the direct introduction into the organisms of hereditary materials prepared outside the organisms such as biolistics, microinjection, macro-injection, chemoporation, electroporation, microencapsulation, and liposome fusion.
    Section 5., Severability:
    If any provision, or any part of any provision and/or Section of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Act which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable. The People of the (example)County of Lake hereby declare that we would have adopted this Act irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.

  2. SEE? Its like I was sayin.. We The People vote and win… Only to be out maneuvered by Greedy Money. They’ll tie us up in Our funded Courts to SUE us for daring stand up to them! Democracy for Sale –

  3. The so called “Judge” should be named so ordinary people can track his income starting a week before the case. There’s no way a court would reverse a democratic win unless there was some kind of stipend!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*