Melissa Melton
Infowars.com
The showdown for food freedom is intensifying.
In one corner, we have the lucrative Big Agra complex; in the other, the organic community (which includes all the people who just want the right to know what’s in their food). The epic struggle between good and evil, er, mega corporations is heating up as we enter the final days before Californians are able to cast their historic votes on Proposition 37: The Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.
The opposition is so ardently devoted to not having to label products that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs), that the companies behind it are now spending an average of a million dollars a day to see that Prop. 37 is defeated.
If you didn’t know any better, you might think these companies are doing it because they are scared consumers will stop buying products they know have cancer-causing GMOs in them. You might wonder if they are worried people will realize when a food package says “all natural,” that phrase could actually mean the food was all naturally made in a laboratory out of once-natural things that, when combined with a little agriscience, no longer grow the way Mother Nature intended. You might ponder if these agribusinesses and their ilk are trying to block GMO labeling because they don’t want you to stop feeding your family the same Bt corn that produces it own insecticide, has been linked to honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder, and therefore was banned in Poland, France, Germany, Austria, Hungary and Greece among others.
After some critical reflection, you might start to get concerned that the “Big Six” multi-billion-dollar bioscience companies — Monsanto, DuPont, Dow, Syngenta, BASF, and Bayer — just want you to keep poisoning yourself so they can keep it business (and gratuitous profits) as usual.
You’d be wrong, though.
You see, the number one reason all of these companies and coalitions have spent over 35 million dollars to defeat the labeling initiative is to save you money.
According to the website No on Prop. 37.com (tagline: “Stop the deceptive food labeling scheme”), if GMO labeling is mandated, it will increase the average Californian family’s grocery bills. The site says:
“…by forcing food products to be repackaged or remade with higher priced ingredients, Prop 37 would cost the average California family up to $400 per year in higher grocery costs.”
See? These GMO manufacturers and sellers care about you and your family so much, they just want to save you money, that’s all. You don’t need repacking or “higher priced ingredients.”
Where is the logic in a profitable company policy of “We’re spending 35 million plus so you don’t have to spend $400,” you ask?
It probably came from the same bag of crazy where these companies found the ideas for their Frankenfood GMO science experiments, Agent Orange and DDT. Or maybe it came from the same shallow logic pool that the American Academy of Pediatrics found “Forget common sense: because there are no long-term studies to prove eating more pesticide is bad for you, it’s probably fine to keep feeding it to your kids.”
Also note that the “economic analysis” from which the magical $400 amount came is Northbridge Environmental Management Consultants, a consulting firm with no economic expertise that has been previously hired by soda companies to defeat Californian recycling initiatives.
The brilliant concept that, if these corporations just keep throwing ridiculous amounts of money at us in the form of propaganda and lies, we won’t care about what’s in our food is just the latest morally repugnant behavior to come out of Big Agra. The U.S. government works for the biotech industry on record. Meanwhile, corporate elite and politicians are all about organic food. While the First Lady was busy lauding her new organic garden, President Obama was busy appointing Michael Taylor, a former Monsanto lobbyist, as our FDA “Food Safety Czar.”
Makes total sense, right?
How about another no-brainer: If the scientists who work at Monsanto making the genetically modified food refuse to eat their own creations in the company cafeteria, why should you?
Speaking of Monsanto, at the bottom of No on Prop. 37′s “About” page (which also conveniently lists all the companies and people financially bankrolling the opposition), it says, “Major funding by Monsanto Company, E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) and more than 40 food company members.”
It might as well say, “This pathetic attempt at misleading people brought to you by the same guys that stand to lose a lot of money when consumers can decide for themselves if they want to put their health at risk by eating GMO.”
If you could gather a bunch of bought-and-paid-for Big Agra bioscientists in a room right now and ask them about Prop. 37, it would probably look a lot like this:
The truth is, there are over 60 countries that have either banned GMOs or require them to be labeled. The only reason America is one of the last industrialized nations not to as least require GMO labeling can be summed up in one word: money.
Rest assured, though, it isn’t about that fictitious $400 more a year families will supposedly spend at the grocery store just to earn the right to know something they should have already been told a long time ago anyway.
Californians: Please vote yes on Proposition 37. Start a trend that will send shockwaves across our nation and force these chemical companies to be accountable to We the People instead of profits.
We have the right to know what is in our food. We have the right to know what we are putting inside of our bodies.
It’s just that simple.
- Monsanto, pesticide companies have now spent more than $19 million to kill Prop. 37
- So which companies are paying big bucks to fight GMO labeling?
- California’s Prop 37 exposes Monsanto GMO agenda
- Monsanto-funded ‘No on 37′ campaign fabricates FDA quote, engages in criminal misconduct
- Say NO to GMO – Vote YES on Prop 37!
"There is no Left or Right. There is only Tyranny and Freedom"
Divided We Fall
Save people money? Is that a threat? That they will raise prices if forced to comply with labeling? What d’ya wanna bet?
Was that blonde Michelle Pfeiffer?
It’s a poor argument from the No on Prop 37 bunch, that changing labels “will increase food prices over $400 a year per family”. Companies routinely change their product labels without increasing the cost.
MR