lol, I like the Microsoft ad as I waited for the article to load...

"Chief Executive Hugh Grant, 51, is both manager and evangelist"

Yay!!! let's all celebrate corporate greed and homogenize the entire worlds food supply!!!

What was that about biodiversity? I couldn't hear it over the noise cracking lobster and popping champagne corks...

Frying pan in hand...stop messing with my planet!!!

plusaf:

No, it isn't irrelevant, it's BS. And anyone can see it by clicking on the link posted. I wasn't hiding it, just too sickened by the paid for PR to post it here. And in all honesty, anyone who defends Monsanto is nothing more to me than an immoral accomplice to environmental devastation and human misery, and I don't give two farts what they think. The only thing being hidden is the truth in that obvious PR fluff piece.

Plusaf, I wasn't suggesting, because the story itself had that kind of picture, that I wanted to leave ground in the country fallow. Not at all. These towers could be built in the country, practically anywhere.

As for the Omega-3 fatty acids, it is true that there are other sources than fish, but transforming a living organism from something that does not naturally produce a substance, to producing a substance, needs to be observed carefully over a long period of time for its efficacy. I may be wrong, but this new "wonder" plant from Monsanto seems to be rushed to market. How many independent studies have been undertaken to determine its safety? How many of those studies were not censored by Monsanto?

Also there is plenty of evidence, there have been several recent stories here on Current linking to reports on studies conducted in the US and EU about the effects GMO's have had on internal organs. Or is that not proof enough? Do you need to see the actual data and talk to the scientists yourself before you will consider that things aren't as rosier as the article would have us believe?

Besides, fish, they are found in eggs, botanical sources, meat, and seal oil. But one thing that is rarely ever mentioned, is that there is another source of Omega 3 that is the best of all; raw cannabis/hemp oil. It has the longest long chain fatty acid of all and it easily absorbed. Why don't you research that. Why do we need a GMO to do the job of a weed that grows everywhere in the world?

And now this!
Breaking News: Monsanto Takes Center for Food Safety Legal Victory to Highest Court

(January 15, 2010) Today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear a first-time case about the risks of genetically engineered crops. Named Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms, No. 09-475, the case before the high court will be yet another step in an ongoing battle waged by the Center for Food Safety to protect consumers and the environment from potentially harmful effects of genetically engineered (GE) crops.

The modified alfalfa seed at the heart of the dispute has been engineered to be immune to Monsanto’s flagship herbicide Roundup. Monsanto intervened in a 2007 federal district court ruling that the Department of Agriculture’s approval of GE alfalfa was illegal. The Center for Food Safety (CFS) filed a 2006 lawsuit on behalf of a coalition of non-profits and farmers who wished to retain the choice to plant non-GE alfalfa. CFS was victorious in this case – in addition CFS has won two appeals by Monsanto in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: in 2008 and again in 2009. Now, upon Monsanto’s insistence, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case.

“This is truly a ‘David versus Goliath’ struggle, between public interest non-profits and a corporation bent on nothing less than domination of our food system,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety. “That Monsanto has pushed this case all the way to the Supreme Court, even though USDA’s court-ordered analysis is now complete, and the U.S. government actively opposed further litigation in this matter, underscores the great lengths that Monsanto will go to further its mission of patent control of our food system and selling more pesticides.”

The federal district court required the Department of Agriculture to undertake an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) assessing the impacts of the crop on the environment and on farmers; the first time the U.S. government had ever undertaken such analysis for any GE crop. The court permitted farmers that had already planted to continue, but halted any further planting pending the agency’s re-assessment. That the EIS was required is not in dispute; the legal issue is only the scope of relief while USDA analyzed the impacts of the crop for the first time.

In October 2009 Monsanto asked the Supreme Court to hear further arguments. In response, the Center and the U.S. government separately opposed that request the following December. USDA completed the first draft of the EIS in December 2009.

“Although we believe a further hearing is unnecessary, we are confident we will again prevail, as the lower courts have already three times determined,” continued Kimbrell. “We hope that this grand stage will further inform the public, policymakers and the media about the significant risks of genetically engineered crops and the vital need to protect farmers and the environment.”

Alfalfa is the fourth most widely grown crop in the U.S. and a key source of dairy forage. It is the first perennial crop to be genetically engineered. It is open-pollinated by bees, which can cross-pollinate at distances of several miles, spreading the patented, foreign DNA to conventional and organic crops. Such biological contamination threatens the livelihood of organic farmers and dairies, since the U.S. Organic standard prohibits genetic engineering, and alfalfa exporters, since most overseas governments also reject GE-contaminated crops.

“We trust the Supreme Court will uphold farmers right to choose their crop of choice and protect us from the constant fear of contamination from GE crops,” said Phil Geertson, an alfalfa farmer based in Idaho.

Related:

A 2009 study showed that the use of genetically modified crops, the vast majority Monsanto’s “roundup ready” crops, has caused over the last 13 years a dramatic increase in herbicide use, by 383 million pounds, and concomitant harms to the environment and human health.

I have read the article. It extols the virtues of Monsanto's profits and business model. It discusses them overcoming some legislative hurdles. I understand that form an investment point of view, they are darlings.

But the jury is still out on the safety of their GMO's especially when there is hard evidence in the scientific community that Monsanto practices are deceptive when they conduct their research, and just like the Climate Change Worshippers, play semantic word games stretching the scientific evidence or outright lying to accomplish their goals.

My main argument still stands on the issue of free markets vs social responsibility. When there is no voluntary social responsibility or tough regulation of certain markets, because they impact health and human services, there is nothing to stop perilous short cuts from being taken to ensure a steady and increasing stream of profits. It is my belief that certain industries or markets should not be about free market economics and unlimited profit. A modest return should be acceptable; under 10%. Anything above that should be funneled back into the system to develop new markets.

On my list of these limited profit markets I would put agriculture, health care, insurance, and energy production. Taking the cap off profits could be used to incentivise new emerging sub markets under these four major markets; as the business models for the new emerging markets focus on sustainability as the cornerstone of their economic policy.

Limiting profits is a sustainable idea. Unlimited profits is unsustainable and leads to huge fluctuations in all markets as manipulators use their vast army of lawyers to help them seek out and exploit loopholes, of which there are many in these new thousand page documents coming out of Congressional legislation.

@ +af Have you seen "The Corporation"? If not, please watch it and then come back and comment further on Monsanto.
I read your book suggestion (Atlas Shrugged) now you please watch my documentary suggestion.
Thanks

hahahahahahahahahaha - "the whole wide world seems upside down"

Appalling.

since when has forbes "not" been a great indicator of who the most evil shithead on the block is?

What a crock of shit.
F Forbes.

Amazing what money can buy.. Nothing but lies. This company is evil. Makes me so angry that Forbes can be bribed so easily. This just makes me sick. Thanks jan . Keep up the great work that you do

I practically barfed when I read the headline, my throat is burning.

OMG Monsanto should get the award for Most Evil Company of the Year.

Disgust :(

Well...it's evident what side Forbes plays for...

vote with your fork

This cannot be more WRONG !

csmonut: We must now go into the lion's den in order to fight this. Thanks for your help. There is a reason why more than half this world is against this. We are not enemies or extremists. We care for the planet and the biodiversity that preserves LIFE. And frankly, the fact that their blood money can buy their own version of the truth is downright sickening and immoral. I for one have had it. My grandchildren will NOT live in a genetically modified world at the expense of the beautiful world we were given.

Anymore it's not to amazing what money can buy...and Monsanto does have money to bribe, coerce and destroy. And they do it quite well.
Keep up the work, Jan and I'll keep adding the articles to my website. The more that gets out there, the more power the people can eventually have, if they pay attention.

how much did they pay for that?

Outrageous as well that the media in this country are so much in the pockets of industry and government that they allow out and out lies to be told to the people. There is no exaggeration in stating that the fate of this planet which then decides our fate rests on what we now do to counter this corporate domination of our food and water. The fact it is given not nearly enough the attention that it must have is also a sad statement on us as a whole.