Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Can you actually address any of the points at all?
"We're under genetic attack".
You're a window licker, good luck selling your bullshit to the scientific community.
Monsanto cannabis yes or no? The DNA Protection Act of 2013
- Thread starter DNAprotection
- Start date
"We're under genetic attack".
You're a window licker, good luck selling your bullshit to the scientific community.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
+rep for the bolded. cn
echelon1k1
New Member
I wouldn't but with no labelling required, as yet, how could I choose not to consume GM products?
If offered, free GM food, with the stipulation, it is all you consumed for 3 months - Only GM fruit, vegetables, that includes bi-products like bread etc... Would you?
I would be keen to see how you were feeling after the fisrt 2 weeks...
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
GM food doesn't require labelling in the EU anymore, I probably consume at least some GM food daily.
Im healthy as fuck.
DNAprotection
Well-Known Member
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty much done with your horseshit agenda and your horseshit bill.
If you can't even honestly discuss the bill YOU'RE FUCKING LOBBYING FOR then you've completely failed and this thread is a waste if inter-ma-net space.
Had you actually discussed it you may have changed people's minds whereas your EXTREMELY poor and dishonest attempt at presenting it probably harmed your cause.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
I'm nearly sure that regulation expired and wasn't renewed, I'll Google it again when Iv my laptop, researching things on a tiny touchscreen with no keyboard is difficult to say the least.
DNAprotection
Well-Known Member
That was my first approach Frank, but it didn't seem to acclimated to the environment reg army pps like you want to live in, so now you've just been used like a tampon in effort to get folks to view the Act proposal, and by the view count its going swimmingly and i urge you to keep on stroken...there has also been an increase in the margin of folks against GMO cannabis on the poll here ever since you've been posting, so thanks Frank and come again anytime...Frank Burns said:
in fond memory of Frank:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FevVfmog4JA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Eet_ZsGu8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8BcRTassOs
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
It's only as Act when it's passed and becomes law.
What you presented was a Bill, and that's all it'll ever be cos it's fuck-tarded.
Do you actually understand anything?
echelon1k1
New Member
It still requires labelling - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:268:0024:0028:EN:PDF
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
That's not how the world works.
Lawyers, judges and politicians are all he needs to impress.
CP/M lost it's IP theft case because DOS uses c:/ by default, while CP/M used a:/. That was enough of a difference to determine DOS was an original idea.
All you need to do is hope the judge is a Ninja Turtle fan, and show him Tokka and Rahzar. Or if you eat slimey mutanagenic spinach, criminals can become Super Shredder.
Think of the planet, dude! Do you really want mutants? There is already talk the Newtown killer was a mutant. If we can prove he ate GMO tofu, Monsanto needs to change careers.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Cheers man, must've been something else similar.
DNAprotection: Interestingly, it seems this year California rejected Proposition 37 which would have required the labelling of GM food.
If they don't even want it labelled, why in fuck would they want all GMOs banned outright?
Good luck shithead, maybe make your references harder to look up next time...just so anyone who chooses to look can't see you're a complete bullshitter.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
What you say is a lie. Prop 37 was worded in such a way as to confuse people even more.
That's because prop 37 was a scam to eliminate healthy foods. You'd have no way to identify GMO from milled wheat, for example. Monsanto could then sue mom and pop sellers for selling "unnatural" bread, since ALL bread would be considered unnatural as bread using GMO corn syrup.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Did you even read what you quoted? Do you understand English? Maybe it needs to be translated to Gaelic for you.
Notice that, "and not misbranded as natural ?" What is "natural?" Is grinding natural? Is heating with fire natural?
Does the words mean only GMO is unnatural? Are the phrases GMO separate from "and not misbranded as natural?" The way it's worded is ambiguous and could mean either one. Monsanto has more money than your local health store. They can buy off judges to interpret misbranded natural to include: pasteurized, milled, cooked or other human processing, including machine harvested.
Also, why do you think commercial organic farmers liked prop 37? Because they're altruistic? Fuck no! Organic farming currently bans GMO. If you violate the GMO rules, Uncle Sam sends you to prison to get ass raped by Bubba.
" Exempts
foods that are: certified organic; unintentionally
produced with genetically engineered material; made
from animals fed or injected with genetically engineered
material but not genetically engineered themselves;
processed with or containing only small amounts of
genetically engineered ingredients;"
Holy shit! Organic farmers are exempt from "accidental" or if "small amounts" of GMO are used. What's accidental? If you can prove it was intentional? If less than x% is GMO, it's ok too!
When I grow, I use 1,200 out of 1,000,000 parts chemicals. The other is natural spring water! I'm 99.88% organic!
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You need another hit of your crack pipe, cos you tweeking bro
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I'm going to bed. But whenever you post, I think of you here:You need another hit of your crack pipe, cos you tweeking bro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obnA2cKxhn0
Dude gets you high, all you think about is your fucking gold!
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You're thinking of Bucks wife.
Wants pics of those two critters I shot for you btw?
DNAprotection
Well-Known Member
First Frank I must apologize to you and the commune here for my miss use of the quote option, I have become aware that such custom applications are a forum rule violation and therefore I will no longer be using your real name in the quote option.
Second, prop 37, just like all the labeling campaigns, is irreparably flawed in concept as well as presentation.
If you could have seen the oppositions tv spots against prop 37 you might have a better understanding of what I mean.
Even if prop 37 in some way forced a GMO debate to occur (which as I eluded to above, it did not) it also provides the frame work of the 'debate' to be about GMO's in terms of 'good v bad' etc and of course the wonderful delusion that 'people have the right to choose' lol...
The corporate polls told p37's 'upper class deciders' that 'the people' would not vote for a ban on GMO's and that they would vote for labeling and so they went the labeling means nothing road instead.
Mitt Romney also counted on corporate polls and look how far it got him...sometimes its better just to do the right thing no matter the out come Frank...sometimes its simply the struggle itself that tests a humans worth if you will...so do the best you can at whatever you do is the moral of the story Frank, understand?