GMOs | GMO Scrapbook

THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: THE VATICAN HAS BEEN “LOBBIED”(READ, ...

In Thursday's News and Views from the Nefarium, I reported on some interesting developments in Russia regarding agricultural imports. You'll recall, Russia is banning most agricultural imports from the USA, Canada, Australia, and the EU, and expanding its imports from countries like China, Turkey, South Africa, Ecuador, Brazil, Chile, and Argentina. Notably absent from that list was India, and we'll see why tomorrow. Now, this was interesting, because as many regular readers here know, for a couple of years or so now, I've been arguing that eventually we would see the BRICSA nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), making GMOs a geopolitical issue. In Thursday's News and Views, I was essentially arguing that the Western sanctions against Russia were being used by President Putin as a "crisis of opportunity" to perhaps put into place the first planks of that structure.

In order to make GMOs a geopolitical issue, and to position themselves as suppliers of natural or organic agricultural products could occur, however, I argued in the News and Views that certain steps had to occur first: (1) a market or agricultural trade - imports and exports - had to be built up among the BRICSA bloc nations and nations trading with it (such as Chile, Turkey, Argentina, and so on); (2) once this was done, then the call would inevitably occur that some sort of agreed-upon standards for agricultural products would have to be negotiated among those nations, e.g., are GMOs allowed or not, how many pesticides, can farmers retain the right to grow crops of their choice - i.e., specifically non-GMO crops - and do they retain the right to warehouse heirloom seeds and use them for traditional agronomical breeding and planting in the future, and so on.

This last question assumes some importance, because as regular readers here will also recall, both Russia and China - the two most powerful BRICS nations - have already either imposed partial bans on GMO products and imports (in China's case), and Russia is considering a complete ban on their planting in Russia. Thus, the stage has been carefully set and managed for precisely the step that I have been suggesting will ultimately emerge as agricultural policy among the BRICSA bloc: the use of anti-GMO opposition as a geopolitical tool, and a direct challenge to western "agribusiness".

Well, we're not there yet, of course, but it is interesting in the above context that the Vatican has been targeted by western agribusiness to make some sort of pronouncement in favor of GMOs, which thus far, neither the Papacy itself nor any of its bureaucracies have seen fit to do:

GMOs and environmental destruction - Pope Francis urges humanity to respect nature

There's a significant statement in this article I want to draw your attention to:

"Andrews said the U.S. has "repeatedly" pushed the Holy See to endorse GMO seeds "as a moral obligation," but that the "policy of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has been to resist officially adopting GMOs." (Emphasis added)

Now, as the article makes clear, the Vatican in under pressure both from pro- and anti-GMO groups, but in the case of the pro pressure, it is coming from the US government, and this, I suggest, speaks volumes, for it means first that it is official US foreign policy, and this in turn means that the US government is but a shill for large agricultural business interests (no surprise there).

But it also speaks to something much more hidden, and that is the silly idea that the Papacy is a reliable guide on the scientific and moral consequences of something like GMOs. The track record on scientific pronouncements isn't exactly great (think Cardinal Bellarmine and Galileo here folks, or for that matter, Giordano Bruno and heliocentrism, Copernicus, etc etc). It is clear what is really being sought here: the moral sanction for a product whose productivity and environmental and human health safety are increasingly under question from genuine independent scientific scrutiny (a scrutiny, you'll recall, that ultimately lay behind Russia's considerations of a total ban on GMO products). In short, what they are after is a wave of the papal magic wand, and to cloak their products and policies with the aura of religion, and of an institution claiming an infallibility ex cathedra in matters of faith, morals, and doctrine.

And there's the rub: GMOs are not about any part of Roman Catholic faith or doctrine. They're looking for that moral sanction. Francis is not about to give them an ex cathedra statement, and so far, he is wise to avoid making any statement that could be interpreted as unequivocally favorable to GMOs.

In short, what we have, I suggest, is a measure of desperation being exhibited. Perhaps the bought-and-paid for agribusiness shills of the US government have read the signals from the BRICSA nations, and come to similar conclusions as I have been suggesting.

See you on the flip side...

16 thoughts on “ THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: THE VATICAN HAS BEEN “LOBBIED”(READ, ...”

  1. In all due respect for the Pope he has so far resisted monsanto’s plea for endorsement of GMO’s. That said,remember the vatican bank has been involved in some shady deals that not all have led to a complete investigation or only partial cases have been built to resume at will. The papacy may be blackmailed ,by threat of future procecutions of past bond scandals and the like,into throwing its considerable weight behind the safety of GMO’s. Remember Israel’s founding and existance depends on international blackmail and always will,so, it’s not outside the realm of possibilities that the vatican will aquiese to wall streets wishes. I hear Dascha”s are selling cheap on the volga,but first we must check out a few things in Argentina.

  2. in my estimation anyone still believing the hideous Vatican and all of of its despicable, deplorable tentacles (including the present pope) can somehow be an organization of benevolence needs to first re-read true history, shed their “what I’ve been told” religious beliefs and come to terms with reality; reality isn’t exactly “what we’ve been told”-

    Larry in Germany

  3. I’m eager to read why India was absent from the list of countries Russia will be expanding its imports from in the future, but in the meantime I wanted to write a long post on an interview I read that appeared in the IndianExpress about 9 months ago. This one had me wagging my head at first, then as I read more of the interview I was in disbelief of the intellectual shallowness of GM proponents. I hoped Dr. Ferrell would respond to it, which I think he did, but as usual he does things a bit differently than the rest of the blogs out there, and he does so in a superb way. The interview is about GM technologies, a subject we should here more about tomorrow. Anyway, here is my post.

    Mark Lynas, was in the anti-GM movement as an early opponent to GM technologies. He has since switched sides and has been associated with the Borlaug Global Rust Initiative in India as an ardent proponent of GM technologies. According to a November 26, 2013 interview posted by IndianExpress.com his support is not based on science, believe it or not.

    He says in the interview for the IndianExpress, “It took me 10 years to really understand that the science wasn’t’’t supporting what we as activists were saying.” Further on he says, “I did not base my opposition on scientific evidence…”

    Perhaps what swayed his apparent reversal on the issue was the lack of any science to prove GM technologies does no harm to humans, animals or beneficial insects. He goes on to say, “There has never been a substantiated case of any impact on human health.” No impact could be interpreted as “no good impact”, or “no bad impact” In other words his actual statement says nothing at all about the safety of GM technologies.

    The interview just gets better, or worse depending on your position.

    Lynas also says, “I am pro-choice. Farmers should have the choice to benefit from modern science, just like everyone else.” Well that raises the question in my mind about farmers who choose not to raise GMO crops. Do they have a pro choice solution to prevent their non-GMO crops from becoming polluted by GMO crops in nearby fields?

    Lynas associates non-GMO proponents in the interview as believing myths. He belittles his opponents by claiming they are too suspicious of GM technologies and believe it is going to allow multinationals “to enslave farmers.” He goes on to compare it to a
    ideology that is “anti-progressive and anti-development.”

    He does not stop with that sort of mis-characterization, but also attempts to assassinate the character of a respected Indian activist, Vandana Shiva.

    He goes off-track a bit to stress just how safe GM technologies are by stating, “Nuclear power is the safest form of power generation developed.” You read that right. You don’t need me to spell it out for you because the first thing that pops into your head is Fuki…

    Even the interviewer was stunned by that statement and asks, “But when such a pro-science country like Germany bans nuclear energy, how do you persuade us Indians? Lynas answers, “Germany has a strange position on this. I think it goes back to the war. They somehow identify nuclear with Adolf Hitler.”

    Hey folks, I’m not making up these quotes, they are in the interview here:

    http://indianexpress.com/article/news-archive/web/the-opposition-to-gm-crops-is-not-based-on-science-there-is-no-substantiated-case-of-a-health-impact-even-so-much-as-a-headache-2/99/

    Just to be fair to anyone who recently came aboard the website, Dr. Ferrell posted a very interesting blog that blows lame arguments, such as the one above, totally out of the water. Search the archives on this site for “ANTI-GMO ARTICLE IN SCIENCE JOURNAL SUPPRESSED”.

    gizadeathstar.flywheelsites.com/2013/12/science-journal-suppressed/

  4. I was watching TV the other day and there was a shot of the UN Security Council meeting. Well the camera was on one of the speakers with the name of the country in front of the speaker, but just to the right of this speaker, there was another “name plate”, and I couldn’t believe what I saw…..”Holy See”.

    Why is this religious organization sitting in on the UN security meeting? Yeah, I know, we have to have a “moral vote”. Well the idea of this barbarous, lying, child molesting, bankster group sitting in on this meeting makes me puke. As for GMO’, well it’s up to the individual to take food into his own hands, and even IF the Pope said it was OK, then it just goes to show how a discusting moral manipulating bunch of liers they are.

  5. Whatever one thinks of the Vatican, it is virtually certain it will never endorse GMOs and hand the USA (i.e., Monsanto) any sort of legitimacy.

    In fact, I expect the reverse, as soon as the BRICSA bloc gets its argricultural policy up and running. This is not anything Francis would sign on to, and I’m sure he’d be delighted to stick it to the Yanquis at the right moment.

  6. If Russia is successful in securing this alliance for their food supplies, then watch for China, Turkey, South Africa, Ecuador, Brazil, Chile, and Argentina to have bad weather, pests, or other means (drought?) to disrupt those supply lines.

  7. So our elites want Papal blessing for their murderous products. How low and what’s their real reasons for pushing GMO’s. And why so fast what the rush. This looks like the Papal blessing for the imperialism over five centuries ago Europe wanted before it began it reign of death and destruction. Anyway always behaving like the thugs at heart they are pushing for the Pope to bless their poisons. I don’t remember which president of the USA said it the business of America is business.

    1. Marcos, good points. That last statement you mentioned was made by President Calvin Coolidge in the 1920’s. He was a very unremarkable man. Critics say it was designed to be a policy of keeping the government out of the way of big business. In other word it is the Corporatocracy.

      I suppose it worked so well that they may as well confess that now “the business of America is war.”

  8. If the long term plan(the l o n g n o w) is for the Vatican to be the moral authority in the New World Order(or whatever, you-will-believe, marketing nomenclature) a Happy Face Vatican Smile Icon stamped upon GMOs isn’t going to cut it. There is just to much evidence in a field where it is almost impossible to do research. But the genie is literally out-of-the-bottle, & the GMO learning curve is only going to go exponentially UP!!!
    So the Vatican won’t step in it; they’ll dance around it for now. Then slam the hammer down.

    By the way the latest Max Keiser Report takes place in NYC and talks about the BRISCA and the fact that the latest Russian Economic Sanctions are the BEST Thing that’s happened to Russia in a long time. THE Economist, Michael Hudson is the guest in the 2nd half.
    http://rt.com/shows/keiser-report/180356-episode-max-keiser-641/

    1. Yes, that is a good point. Why are they so dang fired-up and seemingly in a big hurry to get potentially dangerous GMO crops endorsed by the moral leader of a billion people around the world?

  9. CAF, Solari Report, pointed to this YouTube video to give an astute Russian opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESapUYyUwls#t=497

    At about 5 minutes in, he explains how Russia must separate itself out, it must become independent of the West whether it is through BRICSA or some other zone, but that they can win because of “conceptual power”, not military or financial or anything else. Brilliant. This Russian fully supports what you have been predicting and the GMO issue, saving our food is about the strongest position they could make. Monstersanto etal is going to lose this one and, unfortunately because we continue to vote the greedy buffoons into office, us with it.

Comments are closed.