Tag Archives: monsanto

"Miami Rice": The business of disaster in Haiti

“As we file this article, Port-au-Prince is thick with the smoke of burning tires and with gunfire. Towns throughout the country, along with the national airport, are shut down due to demonstrations. Many are angry over the government’s announcement on Tuesday night of which two presidential candidates made the run-offs: Jude C

Across Europe Anger Spills Into The Streets

COMING TO AMERICA SOON! added by: GLOBALPOLITICAL

Senate Bill 150., Safe Food?

This is very very very very important, even if you do not live on a farm or even raise a tomato plant. Please write your senator and tell them to PLEASE not pass this bill. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-510 Posted above is the text to Senate Bill 150. My canary in a coal mine is to oppose anything that Monsanto and Cargill are for.. as they are usually always 99.99999% FOR anything that I am AGAINST. Monsanto guys are the one who wrote the law and then got a senator to sponsor it. British Columbia did something like this a few years ago due to one of the ‘congress people’ lost her child due to some kind of tainted (STOREBOUGHT PROCESSED) food. What it did was kill farmgate sales (although we just did it where we were anyway) and after a few years, they revoked alot of the legislature on it. It also helped put many farms, CSA’s and ranchers out of business. The new section 418 Hazard Analysis and Risk-based Preventive Controls applies a requirement to all businesses required to register under the 2002 Bioterrorism Act. This will ensure that farmers markets are endangered. This also puts CSA (community supported agriculture) in danger. Interstingly, there is no reference to GMO Foods in this legislation. “Food safety” as referenced in S. 510 is concerned with controlling foodborne pathogens. The bill states food producers will have to register with the FDA, pay a $500.00 fee, submit to on-site inspections, and implement a complex “Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) System. What’s the cut-off point? Is it acreage? Yield? Average income per acre of the previous year? Is it determined by crop? This sounds an awful lot like NAIS (The brainchild of Monsanto and crew regardling livestock) which is also not dead and just currently under the radar. Here is my rant about that: http://www.downtotherootsmagazine.com/Blogs/december_02.htm http://www.downtotherootsmagazine.com/Blogs/07_march_4.htm This bill also goes further than just an apple out of hand. Us seed producers, especially seed exchanges and organizations that seek to preserve heirloom seeds will be affected. Did you know that the USA government imposed that Iraq farmers can no longer save seed? At all. This will kill Seedy Saturdays and also put small vegetable seed growers and maybe even larger ones out of business. Sen. Richard Durbin [D-IL] is the one who sponsored this bill and these are the newest amendments. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-510&tab=amendments In short.. this bill: * It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening not just US security, but we are working our way to famine. * Includes NAIS (see above), an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically modified animals on which corporations hold patents. * Threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc. * It extends the policy Hazard Analysis & Critical Control Points (HACCP) – to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production put it in corporate hands and probably worsen food safety. This bill S. 150 is very much like the C-6 bill in Canada. Bill C6 allows inspectors to enter and cross private property without a warrant, and it releases them from liability for damages they may cause. Bill C6 has a schedule of listed products that can be added to by the minister without going to parliament for approval. This could be used to restrict the health freedoms of Canadians by limiting access to health supplements and organic products. I am not sure how it stands currently, but I do watch the bills on each side of the border pertaining to agriculture. Basically the plan is that they are voting in the bill and ‘addressing all the details later”. Here is how to contact your senator. http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm In the last year ONLY 6,000 people died from ANY food related issues and the majority of that was processed foods, whereas 100,000 ppl died from drugs which were OK’s by the FDA in the same amount of time. tenzicut http://www.downtotherootsmagazine.com added by: treewolf39

Monsanto and Blackwater’s black ops infiltrating websites

NOTE: Internal company documents show Monsanto paid a Blackwater entity (Total Intelligence) over $200,000 to scan “activist blogs and websites”, and suggest the issue of infiltration also arose. — http://www.thenation.com/article/154739/blackwaters-black-ops?page=0 ,0 Over the past several years, entities closely linked to the private security firm Blackwater have provided intelligence, training and security services to US and foreign governments as well as several multinational corporations, including Monsanto, Chevron, the Walt Disney Company, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines and banking giants Deutsche Bank and Barclays, according to documents obtained by The Nation. Blackwater's work for corporations and government agencies was contracted using two companies owned by Blackwater's owner and founder, Erik Prince: Total Intelligence Solutions and the Terrorism Research Center (TRC). Prince is listed as the chairman of both companies in internal company documents, which show how the web of companies functions as a highly coordinated operation. Officials from Total Intelligence, TRC and Blackwater (which now calls itself Xe Services) did not respond to numerous requests for comment for this article. One of the most incendiary details in the documents is that Blackwater, through Total Intelligence, sought to become the “intel arm” of Monsanto, offering to provide operatives to infiltrate activist groups organizing against the multinational biotech firm. Governmental recipients of intelligence services and counterterrorism training from Prince's companies include the Kingdom of Jordan, the Canadian military and the Netherlands police, as well as several US military bases, including Fort Bragg, home of the elite Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), and Fort Huachuca, where military interrogators are trained, according to the documents. In addition, Blackwater worked through the companies for the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the US European Command. On September 3 the New York Times reported that Blackwater had “created a web of more than 30 shell companies or subsidiaries in part to obtain millions of dollars in American government contracts after the security company came under intense criticism for reckless conduct in Iraq.” The documents obtained by The Nation reveal previously unreported details of several such companies and open a rare window into the sensitive intelligence and security operations Blackwater performs for a range of powerful corporations and government agencies. The new evidence also sheds light on the key roles of several former top CIA officials who went on to work for Blackwater. The coordinator of Blackwater's covert CIA business, former CIA paramilitary officer Enrique “Ric” Prado, set up a global network of foreign operatives, offering their “deniability” as a “big plus” for potential Blackwater customers, according to company documents. The CIA has long used proxy forces to carry out extralegal actions or to shield US government involvement in unsavory operations from scrutiny. In some cases, these “deniable” foreign forces don't even know who they are working for. Prado and Prince built up a network of such foreigners while Blackwater was at the center of the CIA's assassination program, beginning in 2004. They trained special missions units at one of Prince's properties in Virginia with the intent of hunting terrorism suspects globally, often working with foreign operatives. A former senior CIA official said the benefit of using Blackwater's foreign operatives in CIA operations was that “you wouldn't want to have American fingerprints on it.” While the network was originally established for use in CIA operations, documents show that Prado viewed it as potentially valuable to other government agencies. In an e-mail in October 2007 with the subject line “Possible Opportunity in DEA—Read and Delete,” Prado wrote to a Total Intelligence executive with a pitch for the Drug Enforcement Administration. That executive was an eighteen-year DEA veteran with extensive government connections who had recently joined the firm. Prado explained that Blackwater had developed “a rapidly growing, worldwide network of folks that can do everything from surveillance to ground truth to disruption operations.” He added, “These are all foreign nationals (except for a few cases where US persons are the conduit but no longer 'play' on the street), so deniability is built in and should be a big plus.” snip Through Total Intelligence and the Terrorism Research Center, Blackwater also did business with a range of multinational corporations. According to internal Total Intelligence communications, biotech giant Monsanto—the world's largest supplier of genetically modified seeds—hired the firm in 2008–09. The relationship between the two companies appears to have been solidified in January 2008 when Total Intelligence chair Cofer Black traveled to Zurich to meet with Kevin Wilson, Monsanto's security manager for global issues. After the meeting in Zurich, Black sent an e-mail to other Blackwater executives, including to Prince and Prado at their Blackwater e-mail addresses. Black wrote that Wilson “understands that we can span collection from internet, to reach out, to boots on the ground on legit basis protecting the Monsanto [brand] name…. Ahead of the curve info and insight/heads up is what he is looking for.” Black added that Total Intelligence “would develop into acting as intel arm of Monsanto.” Black also noted that Monsanto was concerned about animal rights activists and that they discussed how Blackwater “could have our person(s) actually join [activist] group(s) legally.” Black wrote that initial payments to Total Intelligence would be paid out of Monsanto's “generous protection budget” but would eventually become a line item in the company's annual budget. He estimated the potential payments to Total Intelligence at between $100,000 and $500,000. According to documents, Monsanto paid Total Intelligence $127,000 in 2008 and $105,000 in 2009. Reached by telephone and asked about the meeting with Black in Zurich, Monsanto's Wilson initially said, “I'm not going to discuss it with you.” continued added by: JanforGore

Monsanto Roundup: Save our biodiversity edition

This is the tenth installment of the Monsanto Roundup that seeks to keep you informed about news of the GM world and its effects on your environment and health. Some important stories regarding our biodiversity are in this edititon: * First Strong Evidence Of GM Plants Growing In The Wild In The U.S. * Federal Court Rescinds USDA Approval of Genetically Engineered Sugarbeets * Gates Foundation and Cargill Paper To Force Soy Monoculture Into Africa Other sidenotes: Crops pulled up in Italy Gm grapevines pulled up in France BT eggplant protested in the Philippines DNA from transgenic plants found in milk and animal tissue Jeffrey Smith spills the beans about GMOS And various tidbits about this most important topic which the media is seriously remiss about in dessiminating this information to the public at large… plus a few other messages. 😉 Thanks for supporting this monthly feature of the Sustainable Agriculture Group on Current. added by: JanforGore

Super weeds put USDA on hotseat

“Farmers who expanded farm size are finding it difficult, if not impossible, to manage the larger operations now that additional time is required for weed management.” The U.S. Congress got an earful from farmers, university researchers and pro-food groups during the first round of hearings into the increase in super weeds, deemed so because some are becoming resistant to multiple modes of actions and families of chemistries used in popular herbicides. Eyes and ears for the U.S. House of Representatives in the case of super weeds is the Domestic Policy Oversight Subcommittee. The late July hearings were called to evaluate the impact of genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant crops on the environment and on the abundance and quality of the U.S. food supply. The Congressional Committee is chaired by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio). The hearings are titled “Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy?” An Indiana farmer Troy Roush, who was the target of a 2000 suit brought forth by Monsanto, gave a scathing indictment of GM plants. The suit was dropped by Monsanto, but Roush says he and his family spent two years fighting it. In his testimony to the House sub-committee, Roush documented the development of glyphosate resistant weeds on his 5,500 acre family farm. “In 2005, we first began to encounter problems with glyphosate resistance in marestail and lambsquarters in both our soybean and corn crops. Since there had been considerable discussion in the agricultural press about weeds developing resistance or tolerance to Roundup, I contacted a Monsanto weed scientist to discuss the problems I was experiencing on the farm and what could be done to eradicate the problematic weeds. “Despite well documented proof that glyphosate tolerant weeds were becoming a significant problem, the Monsanto scientist denied that resistance existed and instructed me to increase my application rates,” the Indiana farmer reported. “The increase in application rates proved ineffectual, and I was forced to turn to alternative methods for weed management including the use of tillage and other chemistry. “In 2007, the weed problems had gotten so severe that we turned to an ALS inhibitor marketed as Canopy to alleviate the problem in our preplant, burndown herbicide application. “In 2008, we were forced to include the use of 2,4-D and an ALS residual, to our herbicide programs. Like most farmers, we are very sensitive to environmental issues and we were very reluctant to return to using tillage and more toxic herbicides for weed control. However, no other solutions were then or are now readily available to eradicate the weed problems caused by development of glyphosate resistance,” Roush said. There is little doubt the discovery of genetically altered, target herbicide tolerant plants has made billions of dollars for U.S. farmers. Few can argue the management decisions on farms across the U.S. being made easier by having this technology. In fact, the ease of operation has made good land out of marginal land and some contend, good farmers out of fair farmers. Again, there is little doubt that the introduction of Roundup Ready cotton and soybeans has allowed growers in the Southeast to expand their acreage — a reality that is coming back to bite some large farmers who are having problems managing weeds with resistance to multiple families of herbicides. Roush, who is also vice-president of the National Corn Growers Association, says bigger farms with multiple herbicide resistance problems are in great danger. “The increased ease of use and convenience of herbicide tolerant crops enabled many farmers to significantly increase crop acreage which helped to offset higher production costs and, in some cases, lower yields. Biotech companies encouraged farm expansion by offering discounts for buying seed in bulk. “The advent of glyphosate tolerant weeds necessitated the return to using tillage for weed control, eliminating the time savings that was initially afforded by using biotech crops. “Farmers who expanded farm size are now finding it difficult, if not impossible, to manage the larger operations now that additional time is required for weed management,” the Indiana farmer said. The driving force behind the congressional look into super weeds is the Center for Food Safety (CFS), which is a project of the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). CFS is headed by Andrew Kimbrell, who was mentored by Jeremy Rifkin at the Foundation on Economic Trends. For sure there is plenty of ammunition to be fired by both sides: Corn (85 percent of U.S. production is GM), soy (91 percent GM), cotton (88 percent GM), canola (85 percent GM) and sugar beets (95 percent GM) are all genetically engineered to withstand large amounts of glyphosate herbicide. Since the introduction of Roundup Ready technology yields per acre have gone up and continue to increase, especially for corn and soybeans. Worldwide the adoption of GM products is astounding. The latest figures come from 2008, at which time herbicide tolerance deployed in soybeans, corn, canola, cotton and alfalfa occupied 63 percent, or roughly 200 million acres of the global biotech area of 325 million acres. HT soybeans are currently grown mostly in the United States, Argentina, Brazil, and other South American countries, accounting for 70 percent of worldwide soybean production. Insect resistance to GM products, primarily based on different genes from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis, worldwide is estimated at 50 million acres. These Bt genes control the European corn borer, the corn rootworm, different stemborers, and of most importance to the Southeast, bollworm and budworm in cotton Kimbrell, an attorney and founder and head of the watchdog group Center for Food Safety, testifying before the House Subcommittee laid much of the blame on development and proliferation of super weeds at the feet of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. “The history of USDA’s oversight of genetically engineered (GE) crops is littered with failures. The Government Accounting Office (GAO), the USDA’s own Office of Inspector General (OIG), and the Federal Courts have repeatedly condemned USDA for oversight deficiencies and inadequate management,” Kimbrell testified. “Regulation of GE crops has in part been defined by judicial decisions in lawsuits brought by CFS and others on behalf of farmers, consumers, and environmental groups. American agriculture cannot afford such “regulation by litigation,” an approach that has become standard operating procedure at USDA,” Kimbrell said In response to the testimony from farmers, watchdog groups and university scientists, Rep. Kucinich said, “the Agriculture Department (USDA) has been too quick to approve new varieties of herbicide-tolerant crops and other biotech products. “Now, more than ever, farmers need to have a Department of Agriculture that takes care to preserve and protect the farming environment for generations to come,” Kucinich concluded. added by: JanforGore

Now’s Your Chance to Stop Monsanto’s FrankenSugar

The Center for Food Safety has won an important legal victory in the fight for appropriate controls on the introduction of new genetically engineered crops. After ruling that the USDA (under president George W. Bush) shouldn't have approved genetically engineered sugar beets without assessing the Frankencrop's potential to contaminate conventional and organic varieties, a federal judge has blocked future crops of Monsanto's genetically engineered RoundUp Ready sugar beets. The ball is in the USDA's court. The pro-biotech sugar industry is urging the USDA to rush through an Environmental Impact Statement so they can plant a new crop of Monsanto's Frankenbeets next year. The only thing that can stop Monsanto's Frankenbeets now is massive public outcry. The Center for Food Safety's legal work has given the USDA, under President Obama now, the opportunity to do the right thing. Now's our chance to press Obama's USDA to protect biodiversity and human health from contamination with FrankenGenes that never should have been released into the food system! added by: JanforGore

Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food

Update: Since the story first broke, a lot has happened. One reason for this could be that food is being poisoned. Collecting rainwater is now illegal in many states. Your intake is being controlled. For more information, visit the following articles as well: “Raiding organic food stores. A sign of new times?” at: http://www.firetown.com/blog/2010/08/05/raiding-organic-food-stores-a-sign-of-ne… “Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water.” at: http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/collecting-rainwater-now-illegal-in-many-states… “Why do people in America refuse to take active interest in their future?” at http://www.firetown.com/blog/2010/08/03/why-do-people-in-america-refuse-to-take-… ———————————————————————————————————— S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money. “If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.” ~Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food. Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create — without judicial review — if it passes. S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food and farming. History In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton’s HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization “WTO”) meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP. In 2008, Hillary Clinton, urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller*, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband’s firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510. S 510 fails on moral, social, economic, political, constitutional, and human survival grounds. 1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency. It resembles the Kissinger Plan. 2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO, thus threatening national security. It would end the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994, which put US sovereignty and US law under perfect protection. Instead, S 510 says: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS. Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party. 3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.” Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, “entry of food into the US” covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and “entering into” it by virtue of being produced It imposes Codex Alimentarius on the US, a global system of control over food. It allows the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the WTO to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements. Its bizarre history and its expected impact in limiting access to adequate nutrition (while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc.) threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, since the world knows now it needs vitamins to survive, not just to treat illnesses. 5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security. See Seeds – How to criminalize them, for more details. 6. It includes NAIS, an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically engineered animals on which corporations hold patents. Animal diseases can be falsely declared. S 510 includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite its corrupt involvement in the H1N1 scandal, which is now said to have been concocted by the corporations. Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad) 7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production – put it in corporate hands and worsen food safety. 8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy. It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economies, out of the hands of the citizenry, and puts them under the total control of multinational corporations influencing the UN, WHO, FAO and WTO, with HHS, and CDC, acting as agents, with Homeland Security as the enforcer. The chance to rebuild the economy based on farming, ranching, gardens, food production, natural health, and all the jobs, tools and connected occupations would be eliminated. 9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs. This would industrialize every farm in the US, eliminate local organic farming, greatly increase global warming from increased use of oil-based products and long-distance delivery of foods, and make food even more unsafe. The five items listed — the Five Pillars of Food Safety — are precisely the items in the food supply which are the primary source of its danger. 10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control. The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postpones defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied. It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country, making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review. It is (similar to C-6 in Canada) the end of Rule of Law in the US. … Continued at http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/senate-bill-s510-makes-it-illegal-to-grow-share… http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr360/ourhomeremedies/NaturalCureHomeRemedies… added by: Dagum

Monsanto Roundup – We don’t want a sterile world edition

Much is happening in the world of GMOs and biotech food and this is the latest Monsanto Roundup from the Sustainable Agriculture Group on Current that keeps you in the loop about it, because it is that important to our biodiversity and health. In this Roundup: 1: “Monsanto claims patent on animals fed GMOS” (Greed run amok) 2: “Unintended changes in GM rice and maize disprove “substantial equivalence” (you can run from the science but you can't hide) 3: Haitian farmers burn Monsanto seeds (finally a reason to dance) 4: USSC ruling on Monsanto vs. Gertsen Seed (GE alfalfa) (walking the GMO tightrope) 5: Dennis Kucinich introduces Genetically Engineered Food Right To Know Act (proving that there are at least some members of Congress who understand the constitution and the laws of nature) That and a couple other items and a little commentary to inform you about what multinationals are doing to control your seed and food.This is not science fiction folks, this is your life. . added by: JanforGore

Supreme Court Case a Defeat for Monsanto’s Ambitions

It should be no surprise that Monsanto's PR machine is working hard to spin the truth in this morning's decision in the first-ever Supreme Court case on genetically engineered crops (Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms). Despite what the biotech seed giant is claiming, today's ruling isn't close to the victory they were hoping for. The 7-1 decision issued today by the Supreme Court was on the appeal of the Center for Food Safety's (CFS) successful suit, which resulted in a ban on GMO alfalfa. And, while the High Court ruled in favor of Monsanto by reversing an injunction that was part of the lower court's decision, more importantly, it also ruled that the ban on GMO alfalfa remains intact, and that the planting and sale of GMO alfalfa remains illegal. This point, which seems to be lost in some news reports, is actually a huge victory for the Center for Food Safety and – most importantly – for the farmers and consumers who we represent. The Supreme Court ruled that an injunction against planting was unnecessary since, under lower courts' rulings, Roundup Ready Alfalfa became a regulated item and illegal to plant. In other words, the injunction was “overkill' because our victory in lower federal court determined that USDA violated the National Environmental Policy Act and other environmental laws when it approved Roundup Ready alfalfa. The court felt that voiding the USDA's decision to make the crop legally available for sale was enough. A different ruling could have had far-reaching ramifications that might have extended beyond our borders, affecting the health and status of world markets for U.S. alfalfa, and impacting the fastest growing sector of the US agriculture market – organic. But the court clearly saw that, and opted instead to rule very narrowly. And yet, Monsanto is out there in a public statement saying that they've won a great victory. They claim that they're ready to sell Roundup Ready Alfalfa seeds now, and that they hope that their farmers should be able to plant by fall 2010. It's a canny statement, but neither of those potential situations is by any means possible at this point. The bottom line: the ban on planting Roundup Ready Alfalfa still stands. The Center is victorious in this case in several other ways: most importantly, the High Court did not rule on several arguments presented by Monsanto about the application of federal environmental law. As a result, the Court did not make any ruling that could have been hurtful to National Environmental Policy Act or any other environmental laws. In addition, the Court opinion supported the Center's argument that gene flow is a serious environmental and economic threat. This means that genetic contamination from GMOs can still be considered harm under the law, both from an environmental and economic perspective. This Court opinion is in many ways a victory for the environment, the Center for Food Safety, for farmers and for consumers and a defeat for Monsanto's hopes of a green light. To represent this opinion in any other way is just spin. added by: treewolf39