SHAKA Maui GMO March & Rally October 26, 2014

SHAKA Maui GMO March & Rally October 26, 2014 (video)

by Jon Rappoport

November 25, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

This video documents the historic SHAKA Maui GMO March and Rally of October 26, 2014 which helped turn the tide of public opinion to secure a people’s mandate for a moratorium on growing GMO crops on the islands of Maui, Lan’i and Molaka’i. (produced and edited by Robert Malerba of Maui Motion Media)

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBiaeXt9ti4&w=560&h=315]

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

Chemical warfare: the State of Hawaii vs. the people

Chemical warfare: the State of Hawaii vs. the people

by Jon Rappoport

November 25, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Barry Kurren is the federal judge overseeing Monsanto’s lawsuit against the county of Maui.

Monsanto sued, after the people of Maui dared to say no. After they voted to stop new Monsanto/Dow GMO development on the Island.

This is the same Judge Barry Kurren who ruled against the people of Kauai in a similar case.

As the New York Times put it (8/26/14):

“A federal judge in Hawaii has struck down a local ordinance that would have restricted or regulated the use of pesticides and genetically modified crops on the island of Kauai, saying the measure was pre-empted by state law.

“United States Magistrate Judge Barry M. Kurren wrote in one of his two related decisions… ‘The court’s ruling simply recognizes that the State of Hawaii has established a comprehensive framework for addressing the application of restricted-use pesticides and the planting of G.M.O. crops, which presently precludes local regulation by the county.’”

Precludes. Local. Regulation.

Ah yes, jurisdiction. Which government entity can decide how much pesticide poison the people of Hawaii should be exposed to? Local, state, or federal?

Judge Kurren shifted the “legal problem” to the State of Hawaii, meaning the government, not the people.

Apparently, because of “jurisdiction,” the people have no right to resist the spraying of poison. This is, you see, a game in which certain chess pieces are superior to other chess pieces, and the bigger and superior ones make the decisions.

Does this give you a clue about what Judge Barry Kurren is going to do to the people of Maui?

Exactly what was and is happening on the Island of Kauai? Dr. Lorrin Pang helps to answer the question. Pang is a Maui County District Health Officer:

“It was disclosed during the class action suit of a biotech company on Kauai that 80+ chemicals are used.”

Dr. Pang is referring to pesticides sprayed on the Island of Kauai. 80.

What are their names? Unknown.

What are their chemical formulas, as revealed by independent investigators? Unknown. Because there is no independent investigation.

Who does know what’s going on? The biotech giants who are doing secret research on Kauai.

The First Hawaiian Bank, on its website (page 4 of 6), names these giants in glowing terms:

“Kauai is an ideal research laboratory for the seed corn industry…there are currently five parent seed corn operations on the island: Pioneer Hi-Bred…Syngenta, Dow Monsanto, and BASF. Dow Agrosciences recently leased 3,400 acres of former sugar land…”

And oh yes. Judge Barry Kurren’s wife, Faye, is a board member of the First Hawaiian Bank.

The giants say to the people: “We’re spraying you with chemicals. We can’t tell you what they are. It’s a secret. But don’t worry, be happy.”

I’m not a scholar when it comes to traditional Hawaiian spiritual beliefs, but I’m going to make a wild guess and say the secret spraying of chemicals on the people is not part of that tradition.

And jurisdiction issues, which come down to which government entity is going to make the people sicker… well, that’s just a cheap hustle to accommodate Monsanto and its partners.

Wait. Newsflash. Apparently, we do know something about the restricted-use pesticides (RUPs) sprayed on Kauai. From stoppoisoningparadise.org:

“Atrazine, for example, is known to cause birth defects, cancer and reproductive issues. Lorsban is known to cause impaired brain and nervous system functions in children and fetuses, even in minute amounts. Some RUPs are shown to effect brain cancer, autism, and heart and liver problems. Children are at especially high risk of illness from pesticide exposure. For these reasons, many of the RUPs used on Kauai are banned in other countries.”

[Update: More info on the restricted-use pesticides used on Kauai can be found here.]


power outside the matrix


All the upcoming court hearings in the Maui-Monsanto suit should be conducted in the following fashion:

The people of Maui, their lawyers and experts should view and take part in the proceedings from, chemically speaking, the cleanest spot that can be found on the Island.

Via Skype, they would watch Judge Kurren, the Monsanto lawyers and their experts, who would sit under heavy spraying of the Monsanto/Dow pesticides. All day long.

Just like in real life.

No coughing allowed.

After all, everybody on Monsanto’s side knows these chemicals are completely harmless. They might even be good for health. They might have a beneficial tonic effect. Who knows? They might be a cure for cancer and heart disease.

You bet. And Monsanto might be the corporate reincarnation of an ancient god, come back to save the people from…clean food and a healthy life.

I’m all for labeling GMOs—only my label would be different. It would read, in very large letters:

“This food product is from Monsanto. They fiddled and diddled with it. They made sure it was sprayed with poison. Do you want to ingest it? Are you sure? Check your head. Are you completely crazy? Suicidal? Did you know Monsanto is subjecting the people of Hawaii to chemical warfare?”

That’s a nice label. It would improve my “shopping experience.”

Dear Judge Kurren: which jurisdictional government entity would approve my label?

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Is Judge in Maui GMO case connected to Monsanto?

Is Judge in Maui GMO case connected to Monsanto?

by Jon Rappoport

November 24, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

After the citizens of Maui just voted to stop Monsanto and Dow from further GMO development, Monsanto filed suit.

Barry Kurren is the US federal magistrate overseeing the court battle between Maui and Monsanto.

Judge Kurren’s wife, Faye, is the past president of the University of Hawaii Foundation, which is the fund-raising arm of the University.

On September 6, 2011, Monsanto donated $500,000 to the University to establish a Monsanto Research Fellows Fund for “plant science.”

On July 8, 2010, Monsanto gave $100,000 to University for its scholarship fund.

Judge Kurren’s wife, Faye, has also served as a trustee of the Nature Conservancy, which has a long-established relationship with Monsanto. From the Conservancy’s website: “Monsanto has supported the Nature Conservancy for years.”

Presently, Kurren’s wife is a board member of the First Hawaiian Bank. On its website, there is this quote of “GMO praise” (page 4 of 6):

“Kauai is an ideal research laboratory for the seed corn industry…there are currently five parent seed corn operations on the island: [biotech GM giants] Pioneer Hi-Bred…Syngenta, Dow Monsanto, and BASF. Dow Agrosciences recently leased 3,400 acres of former sugar land…”

These academic, corporate, non-profit, bank connections are part of Hawaii’s overall social and political networks, which form a “community of interest.”

What would happen if Judge Kurren suddenly ruled against Monsanto? How many shocks would ripple out into protected interests? How many social friendships would suddenly collapse? How embarrassing would it be for Faye Kurren?

How much easier would it be to “honor” those connections and friendships and moneyed interests by siding with Monsanto?

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Smoking guns: why Maui can defeat Monsanto

Smoking Guns: why Maui can defeat Monsanto

Smoking gun 1: 1993 Joint Resolution of the US Congress, signed into law by President Clinton, 21 years ago today (November 23, 1993)

Smoking gun 2: Hawaii State Constitution

Smoking gun 3: US Constitution

by Jon Rappoport

November 23, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

To recap: on Election Day, the voters of Maui passed a ballot measure that blocked Monsanto and Dow from developing and using new GMOs.

In the wake of this historic victory to ban GMOs, Monsanto sued Maui.

The forces now aligned against the citizens of Maui include: Monsanto and Dow, the US federal government, and even the Maui County government, which has caved in, opposes the will of its own voters, and is colluding with Monsanto to strike down the ballot measure—after it won.

However, there are smoking legal guns in this case, and they provide an opening for the citizens of Maui.

1. An opening big enough to drive a fleet of trucks through—if their legal team makes the right moves.

2. And if—this is a big if—massive international pressure is brought on behalf of the people of Maui and against the people’s opponents.

Who would bring that pressure?

I’m talking about anti-GMO groups all over the planet, as well as indigenous peoples everywhere who share common urgencies to survive.


Here is the first legal opening:

On November 23, 1993, the US Congress passed a Joint Resolution on Hawaii, and President Bill Clinton signed it the same day. It became US federal law 103-150. It’s known as the Apology Resolution.

It concerns the overthrow of the land of Hawaii by the US government:

“[The United States]…apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination;

“…[and] expresses its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people…”

Below are key sections of the Resolution. Three years before the introduction of GMO crops in America and the overwhelming spraying of the toxic Monsanto herbicide Roundup, it is as if these sections were written to stop Monsanto and Dow:

“…the health and well-being of the Native Hawaiian people is intrinsically tied to their deep feelings and attachment to the land…

“…the long-range economic and social changes in Hawaii over the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries have been devastating to the population and to the health and well-being of the Hawaiian people…

“…the Native Hawaiian people are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territory, and their cultural identity in accordance with their own spiritual and traditional beliefs, customs, practices, language, and social institutions…”

—Deep attachment to the land. Health and well-being of the people. Transmitting the deep belief in the health of the land and the people to future generations. What more do you need?

The Maui ballot measure is most definitely in line with the 1993 Resolution which, as I stated, is also federal law.

The huge GMO/pesticide incursion of Dow and Monsanto on Maui is a direct violation of the US Federal Resolution and Law of 1993.


The next smoking gun is the Hawaii State Constitution.

Article 11, Section 9, “Conservation, Control and Development of Resources”:

“Each person has the right to a clean and healthful environment, as defined by laws relating to environmental quality, including control of pollution and conservation, protection and enhancement of natural resources. Any person may enforce this right against any party, public or private, through appropriate legal proceedings, subject to reasonable limitations and regulation as provided by law.”

Subsequent regulation and law, however, cannot sabotage the basic enumerated right to a “clean and healthful environment.”

Monsanto and Dow can’t legally run facilities on Maui and carry out more than a thousand experiments with GMO seeds and pesticides and avoid independent scientific review.


Finally, there is the US Constitution itself. The smoking gun here can be found in its opening assertion:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Federal law, state law, federal regulations, state regulations—they are all accountable to the Constitution, and the Constitution itself is accountable to its own opening statement, above.

What do “general welfare,” “blessings of liberty,” and “posterity” mean, if the state of Hawaii and the US government can legitimize poison (Roundup) and inserted experimental Monsanto genes, whose negative health impacts on the people of Maui are Monsanto “trade secrets?”

Monsanto’s mindless justification? State and federal laws trump county ballot initiatives.

No they don’t. They don’t trump regulations based on fraudulent science. They don’t trump the US Constitution, either.

The so-called Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution (Article 6, Clause 2) assumes a superior “trumping” law or regulation is, in fact, in line with the Constitution—but a law/regulation permitting the use of toxic GMO technology and Roundup, passed in Congress on the basis of fake and deceptive science, thereby undermining liberty, posterity, and the general welfare, is not in line with the Constitution. It’s a fraud and a crime.


power outside the matrix


The people of Maui are demanding a fair, honest, independent, and comprehensive investigation of the practices of Monsanto and Dow on their land.

That was explicitly stated in their ballot measure that won on Election Day. A stop to all new GMO operations until the investigation is done.

Monsanto and Dow desperately want to avoid such an investigation, because they know what it will bring: exposure of massive crimes. Their lawsuit is about avoidance and nothing else.

Right now, Maui is the center of the GMO universe, and it has spoken against GMOs.

That voice and that vote is the spark. It must not go out.

The whole world needs to know what is happening on Maui. Now.

Massive pressure needs to be exerted to prevent an illegal, unconstitutional, and blatantly evil Monsanto court victory.


Finally, I am making this an open communication to the men who have been bankrolling the GMO-labeling initiatives in the US:

Fund something quite different—bring to Maui the native people from the jungles of Brazil and the Indian reservations of America and the small farms of India and Africa, where Monsanto and other mega-corporations have been destroying and poisoning the land.

Bring these indigenous peoples together on Maui. Let them stand together and expose the combined truth.

Attract the international press, as the Maui court proceedings move forward, under a withering glare of attention.

Make this a story the world has been waiting for.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

Follow the money: the Maui-Monsanto war

Follow the money: the Maui-Monsanto war

by Jon Rappoport

November 22, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

This is a stunner.

On Election Day, Maui passed a local initiative blocking Monsanto and Dow from developing new GMOs in Maui County.

According to Ballotpedia, the winning war chest in the election was, overwhelmingly, composed of contributions from five individuals.

Total? $55,000.

The losing war chest consisted of contributions from three groups: Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and the Council for Biotechnology Information.

Total? $7,876,000.

I can think of a hundred things to say, but I’ll let most of them ride.

You decide what the lessons are.

Yes, Monsanto is now suing Maui to reverse the results of the ballot measure, claiming state and federal law trumps a county vote.

But check your cynicism at the door long enough to appreciate what it took for the citizens of Maui and the local SHAKA Movement to shock the world.

Authentic hope and change? THIS is what it looks like.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

Alert: Monsanto is trying to crush Maui right now

Alert: Monsanto is trying to crush Maui right now

by Jon Rappoport

November 21, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Right now, the heart of the ACTUAL American struggle against Monsanto is in Maui.

On Election Day, voters in Maui County passed a local ballot measure blocking Monsanto and Dow from further development of GMOs.

Maui is a very importance piece of Monsanto’s empire. Because of the year-round weather, they can run many, many tests on new GMO crop varieties.

So Monsanto and Dow immediately turned around and sued Maui County.

On top of that, the federal judge in the case is Barry Kurren, who has already sided with Monsanto against Kaui’s attempt to regulate GMOs.

Monsanto’s mouthpiece, John Purcell, released a statement: “This local [Maui] referendum interferes with and conflicts with long-established state and federal laws that support both the safety and lawful cultivation of GMO plants.”

Really.

In that case, why was the ballot measure allowed to be voted on, in the first place?

Why didn’t Monsanto file suit, win its case before Election Day, and knock the measure off the ballot? (Update here).

The truth is, Monsanto lost the vote. Now, they’re whining. If they had won, they wouldn’t uttered a peep of protest about the legality of the measure.

The county of Maui has every right to make a decision about GMOs and Roundup. They have every right to put the clamps on Monsanto and Dow.

This is a matter of public safety.

I don’t care what state or federal law says.


power outside the matrix


Local citizens always have a right to defend their lives and health. In this case, they are challenging official science. They are ready to oversee authentic investigations of GMO and Roundup safety.

Essentially, they are saying that any state or federal law that would hamstring them is based on false science.

And what is the sub-text of Monsanto’s remarks? “We got the laws on GMOs passed in the first place. We lied about the science. We got the FDA, in 1996, to lie and obfuscate and allow GMO crops to enter the US. So now we are appealing to those laws to make our case.”

I don’t know, Michael Carroll, the lawyer who is defending the voters of Maui against Monsanto. I know they could use a man like Gerry Spence, if he would come out of retirement and take up the sword one more time.

I know they could use a few PR sharks, who would blow this case up into the global scandal that it is, for all the world to see.

But that costs money.

The men who have been bankrolling the soft and weak GMO labeling initiatives could start writing checks, if they really cared about banning GMOs. Talking to you, Gary Hirshberg. Joe Mercola, David Bronner, Grant Lundberg.

And there is another man who could step in and make a difference. He lives far away, but he was raised in Hawaii. He claims to cherish those roots. Once upon a time, he seemed to be an ally.

His name is Barack Obama, and his silence is deafening.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Support GMO labeling or turn the oil tanker around?

Support GMO labeling or turn the oil tanker around?

by Jon Rappoport

November 20, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Face it, America is in a shopping trance. A consumer trance. A buying trance.

So it’s natural that the more “enlightened shoppers” would see labeling GMO foods as a way to create a revolution.

Inside that bubble-trance, labels feel like a revolution.

The fact that Monsanto keeps selling high-level poison (Roundup) and Monsanto’s genes drift from plant to plant across the landscape doesn’t make an impact, because people don’t palpably encounter those elements when they look at food products on shelves.

Which is where they live when they aren’t living at home. In stores. Moving along aisles. Putting things in carts.

A GMO label on those things, or a non-GMO label, is as far as the eye can see.

The labels are also symbols: “I’m doing good in the world by making the right choice. I’m helping the planet. The Universe is looking at my shopping cart and nodding Yes.”

Meanwhile, more toxic Roundup blows across America. More Monsanto genes drift from plant to plant, infecting them, changing them.

But the shopper is happy.

On this foundation of sand, the GMO-labeling movement in America was launched and bankrolled, calling itself a revolution.

People in other countries, many of which have already instituted outright bans on GMOs, look at America and think, “What is wrong with those people?”

They can frame that question because they’re outside the shopping trance.

If you look up the major funders of the GMO-labeling ballot initiatives, you’ll see that they, too, are outside the trance. They’re businessmen, and they sell non-GMO food to the shoppers.

They have a (self-serving) vision: when enough foods products in stores are labeled, consumers will choose the non-GMO products and put Monsanto out of business.

That will happen when a feather beats away a monsoon.

The labeling funders and their advocates also carry with them, like an ID, the following assumption:

“Americans are too dumb to understand what havoc Monsanto is actually wreaking; therefore, we can only approach them as consumers.”

This premise has never been tested in battle conditions. But it could be. Now.

Some of you know that Maui voters recently passed a ban against all new Monsanto/Dow GMOs in their county. Well, a judge has unconstitutionally put a temporary block on that, and Monsanto and Dow have sued the county.

If the natural and organic businessmen, who bankroll these losing labeling ballot-initiatives, called a time out, they could turn their ship around and pursue a new venture.


Exit From the Matrix


They could hire a team of lawyers who take no prisoners, a real PR agency (not one who represents Coke and Pepsi), some pro advertising people, and flood Maui (and the online planet) with what I’d call “Monsanto crime reports.”

Bold in-your-face support for the people of Maui, who executed a ban on GMOs.

Broadcast the triumph of Maui and the criminal actions of the judge and Monsanto/Dow, non-stop.

Do something right for a change.

Surpass the shopping trance.

Invent a new reality. The deceptive reality of labeling was invented. So try a different one.

Make it mean something.

Or confess you’re not in the battle to win; you just want to sell GMO labels.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

Anti-GMO movement’s PR agency represents who??

Anti-GMO movement’s PR agency represents who??

by Jon Rappoport

November 20, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Remember this name: The Mellman Group.

In my last several articles, and a number of earlier pieces (complete archive here), I’ve been highly critical of the anti-GMO political movement in America.

Whereas many other nations have chosen to enact full or partial bans on GMO food, in the US we have had…what?

Something much weaker. Ballot initiatives, which attempted to make GMO labels on food mandatory.

The monotonous and soft slogans? “You have a right to know what’s in your food.” “The right to choose.”

All four of these ballot campaigns have failed: California, Washington, Oregon, Colorado.

Where did these dumbed-down weak slogans come from?

They were justified as a result of a 2012 poll conducted for Just Label It, Gary Hirshberg’s organization.

Hirshberg supported, in election campaigns, two of Monsanto’s most influential political allies in the world: Tom Vilsack, now the head of the US Dept. of Agriculture, and Barack Obama, who has opened the door to the largest parade of new GMO crops yet permitted.

Who conducted that poll for Just Label It and Hirshberg?

A powerful PR agency based in Washington DC: The Mellman Group.

In 2012, the Mellman Group’s poll yielded this result: 91% of the 1000 voters surveyed said they wanted GMO labeling, and this conclusion was interpreted as “consumers have a right to know what’s in their food.”

So that became the single mantra in the ballot measures.

Who has The Mellman Group represented? Get a load of a few of its clients:

Coca Cola. Nestle. Pepsico. The FDA. The World Bank. Do these names mean anything special to you?

Coca Cola, Pepsico, and Nestle were major funders AGAINST passage of the GMO-labeling initiatives in Western states.

The FDA is the criminal agency that allowed GMO crops through the door, to begin with, in 1996, by saying, based on zero research, that GMO and non-GMO crops were identical.

The World Bank heads up massive land-grab actions in Africa to turn small farms into corporate plantations, certainly featuring GMO crops.


power outside the matrix


How incredibly bizarre was it to go to The Mellman Group for a good poll that would determine the future course of the anti-GMO movement in America?

Stupid? Crazy? Naïve? Or intentional?

In case you think that PR firms, like defense lawyers, simply take on clients and push any cause for money, consider that the mega-corporations mentioned above, and the FDA and the World Bank, are not just Mellman’s clients. They wield enormous influence in the world. They are special and favored.

Would you walk into Mellman’s lion’s den and ask the firm to do a crucial poll for you, if your objectives were directly opposite to those of Mellman’s biggest clients?

Would you rely on the way the poll was conducted, and the results? Would you base your most important future actions on those results?

Are you kidding?

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Who is Gary Hirshberg? And why is he a leader in the anti-GMO movement?

Who is Gary Hirshberg, and why is he bankrolling a losing anti-GMO campaign?

by Jon Rappoport

November 20, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev recently announced that Russia will no longer import GMO products, stating that the nation has enough space, and enough resources to produce organic food. ‘If the Americans like to eat GMO products, let them eat them. We don’t need to do that; we have enough space and opportunities to produce organic food.’” (Collective Evolution, April 15, 2014, “It’s Official—Russia completely bans GMOs.”)

Gary Hirshberg (twitter) is the Chairman of Stonyfield Organics (twitter). “Love me. Hold me. Spoon me.” Yogurt, smoothies, milk, butter.

He is a founding partner of the Just Label It group (twitter). You know, “consumers have a right to know what’s in their food yada yada yada…”

That was the exclusive mantra of the losing GMO-labeling campaigns in California, Washington, Oregon, and Colorado.

Of all the leaders in the labeling movement, Hirshberg is the most overtly political. Let’s look at his strange track record:

During the 2008 presidential campaign season, his home in New Hampshire was a mandatory stop for candidates. Hirshberg’s first choice for the Democratic nomination was the execrable Tom Vilsack until he dropped out of the race.

Hirshberg hosted gatherings for John Edwards and Barack Obama, and eventually decided to support Obama.

Obama, despite his nods and winks, was, from the beginning, Monsanto’s man in Washington, allowing a parade of new GMO crops to enter growing fields and the marketplace, and appointing staunch biotech allies to key posts in his administration.

Vilsack, Gary Hirshberg’s first choice for President, became the Secretary of Agriculture under Obama. Vilsack is an avid supporter of GMO food. During his term as governor of Iowa, Vilsack was given a Governor of the Year award by the Biotechnology Industry Organization.

Hirshberg serves as a co-chairman of an organization called AGree (twitter). Its objective is to “build consensus around solutions” to “critical issues facing the food and agriculture system.” As researcher Nick Brannigan (twitter) has pointed out, AGree includes, among its foundation partners: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.

It would be hard to find foundations more friendly to, and supportive of, big corporate agriculture and GMOs.

With colleagues like this, why is Hirshberg a leader in the anti-GMO campaign? Good question.

Hirshberg is the author of Stirring It Up: How to Make Money and Save the World. He advocates revolution-by-the-consumer as an exceedingly powerful force.

It may be pretty to think so, but giving American consumers a clear choice about whether to buy GMO or non-GMO food, through labeling, isn’t going to push Monsanto up against the wall.

***It isn’t going to stop Monsanto gene drift into non-GMO crops. It isn’t going to stop the aerial attack of toxic Roundup all over the planet.


The Matrix Revealed


Instead, an all-out counter-assault is necessary. And it doesn’t take a genius to see where to start: TV ads. Web ads.

The objective? To make Monsanto’s threat to health and life and liberty very real and very personal. To make that threat as imminent as it was when millions of students, in the 1960s, saw the military draft as their ticket to going to Vietnam to die.

After you’ve aired a few thousand plays of such attack ads against Monsanto, then you can do polls. Then you’ll see what people believe and think and feel in a new light.

The labeling movement should be a ban-GMO movement. It should be enlisting artists of all kinds to make ads that move people, that attack the poisoners of the food supply, that hold up to ridicule the corporate agenda of monopolizing and degrading the food of this planet.

Gary Hirshberg isn’t the man for the job.

He’s the soft salesman, a businessman who tap dances with strange partners when he enters the political arena. He’s with the wrong people on the wrong side.

He’s calling shots in a campaign that’s designed to lose the war.

Why is that?

Well-intentioned political stupidity? New Age cheese-melt mind? Supreme confidence based on nothing? A desire to issue orders and have them followed?

Or something worse?


power outside the matrix


Coda: Suppose you ran a TV ad in which a salt-of-the-earth farmer was standing on a barren piece of land, the camera zoomed in on him, and he showed his callused and worn hands to the audience and said:

“I am an American farmer. I’ve been on this land forty years. My family has been on this land every day for a hundred and fifty years. I’m a human being just like you. My relationship with Monsanto and their genetically engineered food ruined my farm, my future, and my life…”

Or this: a mother and her little child stand on their lawn in front of the camera. The mother says, “See the rashes and lesions on my son’s body? Do you know where he got them? From the weed killer we sprayed out of a bottle. It’s called Roundup. It’s made by Monsanto. Do you want this for your child?”

Lawsuits from Monsanto? Bring them on.

The discovery and deposition would be a nightmare for Monsanto, as their lies came tumbling out.

TV stations and websites would refuse to run the ads? Terrific. That spawns a global online underground who post the ads anyway, along with: “Monsanto took legal action so you couldn’t see this ad…here are the outlets who refused to run the ads…”

Get the picture?

Gary Hirshberg doesn’t.

Or maybe he does but he isn’t on our side. Never was.

While his soft and weak “label-it” ballot initiatives suck up time, energy, money, and distract people from the real answer—banning GMOs—the clock keeps ticking:

More toxic Roundup invades the air, land, water, humans, and animals; Monsanto genes drift on the wind and infect plants and crops across America.

Which is exactly what Monsanto is hoping for: a fait accompli. Too little, too late.

The label-it ballot initiatives are enabling the goal of Monsanto.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

Jerry (Ben & Jerry’s) lives in a fake world

Jerry (Ben & Jerry’s) lives in a fake world

by Jon Rappoport

November 18, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

The first time I realized the money and the leadership of the anti-GMO movement was guiding millions of people into ballot-labeling initiatives, I pictured a million people in the street calmly marching in orderly columns against the Vietnam War.

They all held pretty pink signs that said: “You have a right to know that war might be dangerous.”

Of course, there was a forced national draft at the time, so there was no legal right to choose staying at home vs. going to Vietnam.

As regards Monsanto, we are definitely in a “draft” situation. The genes inserted in food crops drift across the land and wind up in all sorts of plants.

Roundup, the highly toxic Monsanto herbicide used to kill weeds on farms, also blows in the wind across America. And the world.

And of course, weeds that are resistant to Roundup are growing tall and choking farms and ruining farmers’ lives.

“Just label it” and “the right to know what’s in your food” are diversions from an uncomfortable truth. Monsanto and other biotech giants are affecting everybody with their crazy technology and their poison.

If these facts had been the springboard, ten years ago, for money, time, and effort—triggering an all-out no-holds-barred attack against Monsanto, instead of soft ballot initiatives—we’d be in a much better place now.

Consider the November 6th Democracy Now! interview with Jerry Greenfield (of Ben and Jerry’s). When asked, “And, Jerry Greenfield, is Ben & Jerry’s opposed to GMOs, per se?,” Jerry answered:

“No, Ben & Jerry’s doesn’t really take a position on that. We always say we’re not scientists. You know, there really haven’t been independent studies. But our issue is simply about transparency, having a consumer have the right to know.”

Really, Jerry? There haven’t been independent studies? You don’t take a position? You know nothing about gene drift and Roundup? How convenient. How pleasant and liberating it is not to be a scientist.

Why don’t you reach out to Jeffrey Smith, author of Genetic Roulette, and ask him to send you links to those independent studies?

Better yet, just drop the know-nothing bullshit front.

Ben and Jerry’s is moving into all non-GMO ingredients by the end of 2014. Do I understand this correctly? You’re doing that just because you want to give consumers an alternative to something you know nothing about?

I see. You’re a kind of theoretician of the free market, an abstract thinker. As a general rule, ahem, it’s better to have more choices. As far as you know, there’s nothing right or wrong about GMO food. But why not expand alternatives anyway?

And while you’re at it, you could also offer several other lines of ice cream sweetened with: NutraSweet, Splenda, Corn Syrup, Glycerine, and the original classic, saccharine.

Because choice per se is good.

Monsanto is just another player in the marketplace. Ditto for Dow and Syngenta. You’re okay, they’re okay, we’re all okay.

Monsanto has its style. Ben and Jerry’s has its style.

Some people like pink, some like powder blue.

It’s all good, or if not, we’ll figure it out by trial and error. Because we aren’t scientists.

And since you’re completely ignorant, Jerry, why not offer a line of Chunky Funky sprayed with Roundup?


power outside the matrix


Here’s a rule for you. When businessmen bankroll a political movement, they cater to the consumer at the lowest common denominator: “what the consumer will pick off the shelf and buy.”

That’s the thrust. The weak soft approach.

Not an all-out attack against the evil—in this case, Monsanto—with powerful in-your-face ads and lawsuits and outrage and revelations about how government is a key partner in crime.

No, attacking evil is out of the question. It’s non-New Age. Bad Karma. The Universe doesn’t like it. Anger is unhealthy.

Instead, put a smile on your face and tell the world, “We don’t know, we’re not scientists.”

Ride that tune into the sunset.

It certainly won’t win a political war, but it’ll get you new customers.

Customers who wear a badge that says, “I’m proud I have the right to choose.”

Toot that horn, shuck and jive. It’s fun, isn’t it?

What’s coming out of your ears, Jerry, ain’t ice cream.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com.