There have been marches, vocal demonstrations, petitions, and laws banning GMOs, but the US is still lagging in the ‘democratic’ freedoms it has promised its people. Russia, on the other hand, has completely banned GMOs, placing a moratorium on their imports for 10 years. The nation rejects GMOs due to numerous dangers, while the US continues to allow Monsanto, Dow, Bayer, Syngenta, and their bullying kind to contrive a cold war on the American people.
It appears that the EU is both vulnerable and sought after – economically and geopolitically.
Russia is making no bones about an open proposal to the EU. Essentially, dump the U.S. – don't join the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), but join the Eurasian Economic Union, which went into effect January 1st. It's a call to join other members at the “cool table” – a promise of a better trading table.
Western sanctions led Russia to ban food imports from the West. Russia has consistently rejected GMOs and went even further to tighten GMO sanctions. Is it any wonder why they have a valid card to use sway with the EU? Meanwhile, the EU can ostensibly continue keeping its patrons happy with consumer freedom regarding GMOs (yet is has been heavily tempted to give that power right back to GE …
Russia has presented a startling proposal to overcome the tensions with the EU: The EU should renounce the free trade agreement with the United States TTIP and enter into a partnership with the newly established Eurasian Economic Union instead. A free trade zone with the neighbors would make more sense than a deal with the US.
The Russian Ambassador to the EU, Vladimir Chizhov, said to the EU Observer :
Do you think it is really wise to put so much political energy into a free trade zone with the United States, while much more natural partner had at his side, in the immediate neighborhood? We do not treat our chickens in any case with chlorine.
Furthermore, Germany's Minister of Agriculture, Christian Schmidt, didn't make an EU/American trade deal sound appealing when he said, “we can't protect every sausage.” GMOs were a part of that conversation, too; and, lo and behold, during negotiations U.S. officials considered for the first time – GMO labeling! This shows that the U.S. government will not pay heed to its own consumers' desire for transparency and safety, but will if there is geopolitical benefit.
When it comes to activism and trying to focus passionately on one issue at a time, sometimes there is a temporary knowledge gap. For instance, trying to grasp the entire geopolitical and global economic picture of this current development is beyond the scope of this article.
However, when it comes to swift moves across the geopolitical chessboard, a nation's food supply has never been a separate issue. To fill in some gaps, it might help to read books by F. William Engdahl, because his book on GMOs and the food supply actually fits another puzzle piece with his other works on oil, money and geopolitics.
After the release of the French study, the coordinated verbal assault on the organic industry has grown even more aggressive by Monsanto supporters and beneficiaries. The new baseless accusations suggest that even organic foods contain some levels of hormones, antibiotics and pesticides. For instance, it is a fact that organic dairy products are 100% rBGH free and do not have any hormones or antibiotics. It is also a known fact that organic foods is described as foods that are not grown with the use of pesticides, herbicides and/or chemicals. But GMO-Monsanto supporters who clearly know that, wish to MISREPRESENT the FACTS.
So it is quite normal that you would ask the obvious question … why are the GMO supporters and Monsanto beneficiaries creating equivalency between GMO’s and pesticide-ridden foods and the organic foods that are known to be pesticides-free when it is quite well known that organic foods do not contain hormones, antibiotics and pesticides? The answer is that they wish to create doubt that there is any difference between the two and hope that people would lose their interest in non-contaminated food and the organic industry as a whole. Their aim by making these false and baseless statements of equivalency is to diminish the value of good wholesome foods for our families and convince us all that contaminated food made with GMO strands, DNA mutations, chemicals and pesticides is no different than foods that are made organically.
Please Read this Article at NaturalBlaze.com
Leave a Reply