Is Putin Right to Call Monsanto a Terrorist Organization and Ban GMOs?
Sometime before wrestling bears and after hunting tigers, Russian President Vladimir Putin found a few minutes to denounce the use of genetically modified crops (again). While Russia was widely believed to allow the use of biotech crops shortly after joining the World Trade Organization, the country believes it has found a way to remain GMO-free without violating its obligations as a member nation. A new bill introduced to the Russian parliament would treat producers of biotech crops from companies such as Monsanto (NYSE: MON ) , The Dow Chemical Company (NYSE: DOW ) , and Syngenta (NYSE: SYT ) as criminals -- with fines comparable to terrorism. As co-author of the bill Kirill Cherkasov told RT:
When a terrorist act is committed, only several people are usually hurt. But GMOs may hurt dozens and hundreds. The consequences are much worse. And punishment should be proportionate to the crime.
If the proposed bill becomes law, punishment could range from 15 years to life. That seems a bit harsh to me and, when coupled with numerous anti-science quotes and ideologies from the bill and its supporters, I just don't see how a policy could be sustainable scientifically or economically (what Russia really cares about) speaking. Additionally, most crops grown in Russia today (wheat, barley, sunflower, oats, potatoes) don't have GM varieties. That's good news for Monsanto and Syngenta shareholders, but Russia claims that it can grow enough organic food to never need biotech crops. Are those bold claims actually true?
Can Russia farm without engineered crops?
Russia is free to ban biotech crops, but it should do so with more accurately worded proposals. I'd start by scrapping the proposed bill or amending it to a point where it is generally unrecognizable from its initial submission. Then, Russia should insert language that speaks to (1) its concerns that GMOs are not sufficiently tested and (2) its belief that organic farming practices can sustain the country on their own.
more...
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/05/25/is-putin-right-to-call-monsanto-a-terrorist-organi.aspx
He is resisting Food Fascism, Inc. and its degenerate consequences. At least Pooty Poot is doing one thing right to protect the human beings.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)JoeyT
(6,785 posts)The definition of terrorism is watered down enough as it is. Monsanto is an awful company, but what they do isn't terrorism.
To use the Bhopal disaster as an example, since Dow is mentioned too: Terrorists couldn't have hoped to cause that much death and destruction in their wildest dreams, but it still wasn't terrorism, because that death and destruction wasn't specifically done to deliver a political message, intimidate, or destabilize. It was willful criminal negligence to the point heads should have rolled, probably literally, over it, and a certain company should've definitely had their assets seized and sold off to pay for it, but it wasn't intentional. Intent is what makes terrorism.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Not just for their products, but for the way they do business and are attempting to monopolize the worlds seed stocks.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)But a KGB thug can be correct now and again and still be a thug.
wolfie001
(2,205 posts)I say yes!
roody
(10,849 posts)Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)I wouldn't take anything Putin says seriously. He's a demagogue, first, last and always. He sees some advantage in this that will enhance his power in the long run. The thing that gets him to stand up to Monsanto today is the same thing that has him bashing gays, murdering Chechens and promoting civil unrest in Ukraine. If there were any benefit to him to embracing Frankenfood, he'll sing a different tune tomorrow.
santamargarita
(3,170 posts)roody
(10,849 posts)dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)YES.