THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: MON(STER)SANTO REPORTS 4TH QUARTER LOSSOctober 18, 2014
So many people shared this one that it is gratifying to see that people are following the GMO issue closely, and registering every small victory along the way. This one is an important story:
You'll recall what the article alludes to: namely, that the agribusiness GMO sharks have begun to turn on each other, suing each other for lost profits. In this case, and Alex Jones' website reports, there are lawsuits filed against another GMO agribusiness giant, Syngenta - whom we lovingly refer to on this site as Synkrudda:
"There is a looming $1 billion dollar class action lawsuit Syngenta will face, currently pending in three states over the release of AGRISURE VIPTERA® 4. All three class action suits were filed this past week in Federal Courts by U.S. farmers.
"Syngenta also just happens to be the company that has covered up the true toxicity of Atrazine, and the company has been sued in six different states to clean up more than 1000 water systems in six states where the herbicide has been found polluting rivers, streams, and lakes.
"Soybeans sales are still around $200 million, doubled from previous years, but they account for a much lower market share than the GMO corn products which Monsanto sells and promotes for use with their toxic herbicide, RoundUp.
"Adjusted losses for the biotech bully come to 27 cents a share, three cents worse than estimates."
We blogged recently about these lawsuits, and about the growing grassroots movement against GMOs in India, and the Indian state of Gujarat's recent blockage of further GMO licenses.
What is interesting to ponder here is the "why" question. Why are Mon(ster)santo's profits deservedly declining? I suspect the answer is a combination of factors: (1) its heavy-handed policy with regard to non-GMO farmers, (2) its use of mercantilist policies and influence peddling in government, (3) like all other agribusiness companies, its "corporate science", which has been courageously challenged by a growing number of independent scientists who quite literally could not be bought off, and (4) other studies that indicate, over time, falling yields of GMOs versus ordinary crops, giving lie to the agribusiness meme that GMOs would help cure world hunger. This, of course, was pure claptrap to begin with, since cotton was one of the earliest, and remains one of the most commonly planted, GMO crops.
However, as the article indicates, Mon(ster)santo is not the only agribusiness giant with some sharp and dubious "business" practices. There are other agribusiness corporate giants that also studied at the Don Corleone Graduate School of Business and Management: Synkrudda would be one; Duponzanto and Crudgill would be others.
In a blog a little over a week ago, I suggested that the agribusiness giants might either eat themselves to death in lawsuits, or, following the lead of I.G. Farbenindustrie, form a huge GMO cartel, something like Interessen Gemeinschaft Agri-Giftindustrie, A.G. (or, for English speakers, I.G. Agripoisonindustry, Inc.) And since their tactics were remarkably similar to those by which the standardized testing "industry" sold the USA(and a growing number of other nations and corporations), on the "scientific" nature of their tests, each industry might want to consider resorting to the age-old tactic of plutocratic elites, and buy huge blocks of stock in each other's company: Mon(ster)santo and Synkrudda could buy huge blocks of stock in the Educational Testing Disservice, and vice versa. Over time, this could be expanded to major banks, such as Bank of Amerika, Hong Kong and Shanghaied Bank. With a few strategic investments in various news media corporations, such as Faux News, or See BS, they could peddle their products and "science" at cut rate prices.
Oh...wait... I'm too late. They already are following the I.G. Farben playbook. But that is another story...
They already are doing this.