Conquer Club

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

True dat.

-TG

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions. I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

DoomYoshi wrote:So property rights = bad health side effects. Great investigative journalism, saxitoxin.

One simple question... If I sell you brand new BMW with an engine of Yugo will you consider our deal as fraud?

*I will get to my point once you answer

Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

saxitoxin wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions. I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

lol. And why are a pro-GMO stance and 'universal health care' & 'sensible firearms regulation' mutually exclusive? Are you saying that the nefarious Monsanto is shutting down universal health care or advocating for the NRA?

-TG

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions. I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

lol. And why are a pro-GMO stance and 'universal health care' & 'sensible firearms regulation' mutually exclusive? Are you saying that the nefarious Monsanto is shutting down universal health care or advocating for the NRA?

-TG

Some - such as people who support the Iraq war - may perceive this to be one of those cases where the U.S. is right and the world is wrong. And that's okay. I personally believe in the global consensus policy position enacted by all European states, and most other industrialized nations, and support Russia's decision to act according to the global consensus policy position and require labeling of GMOs on their integral territory, Crimea. There will always be outliers on the fringe, such as the U.S., who irrationally oppose consensus on issues like GMO labeling and climate change, and that's their right, I guess.

Of course, these places can't be part of a modern, progressive, civil society where decisions are made according to democratic deliberation, such as the decisions to require GMO labeling and work against climate change, pursued by the EU and Russia. It looks like the whole Crimea situation has come down to a battle between conspiracy theorists (American climate change deniers and their anti-GMO labeling allies like Symm) on one side and the people who support the consensus position on the other.

GoranZ wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So property rights = bad health side effects. Great investigative journalism, saxitoxin.

One simple question... If I sell you brand new BMW with an engine of Yugo will you consider our deal as fraud?

*I will get to my point once you answer

Symmetry wrote:Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

I know that you wont understand but this is not intended for you anyway

Selling BWM with engine of Yugo and presenting it as BMW is fraud.
Now the good question is... Why selling tomato with additional genes from some insect is not fraud?

GoranZ wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

I know that you wont understand but this is not intended for you anyway

Selling BWM with engine of Yugo and presenting it as BMW is fraud.
Now the good question is... Why selling tomato with additional genes from some insect is not fraud?

Who was this intended for? It's nonsense.

saxitoxin wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions.
I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

Strawman. Nobody here said it was part of a socialist plot.

As pcm mentioned, those 3 things are totally unrelated.

This is a safety regulation "requiring seatbelts in automobiles"
This is a saxitoxin regulation "requiring black automobiles"

Name one reason GMO labeling requirements have anything to do with safety. It doesn't lead to personal choice and consumer awareness. It leads to California Green-Party puppets frothing at the mouth about concepts they can't even understand and calling it "awareness".

Why not have a label for foods that have been touched by Mexican hands? Why not have a label that indicates it comes from Mississippi? Why not a label saying which selection regimen the farmer uses? These are all concepts completely unrelated to safety. Anti-GMO is just a flavor of the month whore. Thanks for bringing back mumps and measles saxitoxin. Your brand of science successfully did that.

2000 years of recorded medicine history succeeded in almost eradicating both those diseases and a bunch of California Green-Party puppets successfully brought them back.

God forbid geneticists try to make food be able to feed more people. God forbid we put vitamins in rice. Saxitoxin and his army of cunt-soaked illegal alien-loving dandies won't stop until disease is rampant, and so is hunger. If you try to make the world a better place, you are deemed a warmongerer.

GoranZ wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So property rights = bad health side effects. Great investigative journalism, saxitoxin.

One simple question... If I sell you brand new BMW with an engine of Yugo will you consider our deal as fraud?

*I will get to my point once you answer

Symmetry wrote:Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

I know that you wont understand but this is not intended for you anyway

Selling BWM with engine of Yugo and presenting it as BMW is fraud.
Now the good question is... Why selling tomato with additional genes from some insect is not fraud?

Ok, so it's fraud. What are the health side effects? I can commit fraud against someone without giving them cancer, right?

I heard there has been only 1 study on the effects of GMO on the human body. I also heard the body can be capable of producing its own insecticide in the stomach after repeated consumption of GMO with Roundup in it. I'm pretty sure the former CEO or Lawyer for Monsanto was in charge of the FDA when GMO's became legal. Also heard mice cannot reproduce after 6 generations of GMO feedings.

saxitoxin wrote:

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions. I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

lol. And why are a pro-GMO stance and 'universal health care' & 'sensible firearms regulation' mutually exclusive? Are you saying that the nefarious Monsanto is shutting down universal health care or advocating for the NRA?

-TG

Some - such as people who support the Iraq war - may perceive this to be one of those cases where the U.S. is right and the world is wrong. And that's okay. I personally believe in the global consensus policy position enacted by all European states, and most other industrialized nations, and support Russia's decision to act according to the global consensus policy position and require labeling of GMOs on their integral territory, Crimea. There will always be outliers on the fringe, such as the U.S., who irrationally oppose consensus on issues like GMO labeling and climate change, and that's their right, I guess.

Of course, these places can't be part of a modern, progressive, civil society where decisions are made according to democratic deliberation, such as the decisions to require GMO labeling and work against climate change, pursued by the EU and Russia. It looks like the whole Crimea situation has come down to a battle between conspiracy theorists (American climate change deniers and their anti-GMO labeling allies like Symm) on one side and the people who support the consensus position on the other.

K. Way to pull a JB, saxi.

warmonger1981 wrote:I heard there has been only 1 study on the effects of GMO on the human body. I also heard the body can be capable of producing its own insecticide in the stomach after repeated consumption of GMO with Roundup in it. I'm pretty sure the former CEO or Lawyer for Monsanto was in charge of the FDA when GMO's became legal. Also heard mice cannot reproduce after 6 generations of GMO feedings.

You wanna sauce any of that? Like, from an actual scientific journal? Cuz I've read 100x the literature you have regarding plenty of studies, and I've never seen any such definitive evidence against the use of modified organisms.

"I heard" is the war cry of the ignorant the world over.

-TG

I heard that you're all wrong, and I'm right.

If you disagree, it's because you're wrong.

QED

warmonger1981 wrote:I'm pretty sure the former CEO or Lawyer for Monsanto was in charge of the FDA when GMO's became legal.

you're thinking of Michael Taylor

He was a staff attorney at the FDA, then was hired on to Monsanto, then went back to work for the FDA, then went back to Monsanto, then was appointed by Clinton to head the Food Safety Service, then was appointed VP of Lobbying at Monsanto, then was appointed Deputy Commissioner of the FDA which is where he is now and in which his job is to issue rules determining whether foods containing Monsanto GMOs are labeled as such - http://www.fda.gov/aboutfda/centersoffi ... 196721.htm

Obviously Monsanto's FrankenCrops aren't designed to - or at least have no utility - in the increase of yields. The U.S. has more arable land than any nation in the world. Just farm land in the U.S. is equal to 3X the entire territory of France. And yet the overwhelming majority of it is sitting empty because the U.S. is already producing more food than it could ever consume or export. If it produced to full capacity it would crash the global price of food and bankrupt the agricultural sector of every nation on the planet. So obviously GMO crops aren't about increasing yield.

GMO is about selling RoundupReady® crops. With the TRIPS Agreement, a couple of well-connected U.S. companies could soon have a monopoly on all food production on the planet. This is the greatest business coup in human history. Your marketing spend on food, when you have a monopoly, is $0 because everyone needs to buy your product to avoid dying.

It's important to say that GMOs are dangerous because it's easier for most people to understand things like this -



- than a discussion about patent standards. GMOs are dangerous because they are designed to bring about a disharmonious economic system, which is dangerous. So saying GMOs are dangerous is 100% accurate. Russia stands tall with the 34 EU states who have banned and/or required warning labels on GMOs.

DoomYoshi wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So property rights = bad health side effects. Great investigative journalism, saxitoxin.

One simple question... If I sell you brand new BMW with an engine of Yugo will you consider our deal as fraud?

*I will get to my point once you answer

Symmetry wrote:Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

I know that you wont understand but this is not intended for you anyway

Selling BWM with engine of Yugo and presenting it as BMW is fraud.
Now the good question is... Why selling tomato with additional genes from some insect is not fraud?

Ok, so it's fraud. What are the health side effects? I can commit fraud against someone without giving them cancer, right?

1. When Europeans decide on some issue they usually involve the History, this is opposite from US/Canada, US/Canada never involves history when it comes to making decisions. And we all know how dark is Monsanto's history. How can I trust a company that was involved in such atrocities?
2. Previous problem with the fraud... Selling crops that hijack the name from natural organisms.
3. The effect on the environment and on human health(deceases like cancer etc...)

Liberation continues... Donetsk proclaim independence from Ukraine
http://rt.com/news/donetsk-republic-protestukraine-841/

GoranZ wrote:Liberation continues... Donetsk proclaim independence from Ukraine
http://rt.com/news/donetsk-republic-protestukraine-841/

Great news but it's troubling the threats of ethnic cleansing that are coming out of Kiev in response to these developments. Russia should immediately deploy peacekeepers in Donetsk to protect the rights of self-determination of the independence protesters.

saxitoxin wrote:

GoranZ wrote:Liberation continues... Donetsk proclaim independence from Ukraine
http://rt.com/news/donetsk-republic-protestukraine-841/

Great news but it's troubling the threats of ethnic cleansing that are coming out of Kiev in response to these developments. Russia should immediately deploy peacekeepers in Donetsk to protect the rights of self-determination of the independence protesters.

--Andy

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions.
I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

Strawman. Nobody here said it was part of a socialist plot.

As pcm mentioned, those 3 things are totally unrelated.

This is a safety regulation "requiring seatbelts in automobiles"
This is a saxitoxin regulation "requiring black automobiles"

Name one reason GMO labeling requirements have anything to do with safety. It doesn't lead to personal choice and consumer awareness. It leads to California Green-Party puppets frothing at the mouth about concepts they can't even understand and calling it "awareness".

Why not have a label for foods that have been touched by Mexican hands? Why not have a label that indicates it comes from Mississippi? Why not a label saying which selection regimen the farmer uses? These are all concepts completely unrelated to safety. Anti-GMO is just a flavor of the month whore. Thanks for bringing back mumps and measles saxitoxin. Your brand of science successfully did that.

2000 years of recorded medicine history succeeded in almost eradicating both those diseases and a bunch of California Green-Party puppets successfully brought them back.

God forbid geneticists try to make food be able to feed more people. God forbid we put vitamins in rice. Saxitoxin and his army of cunt-soaked illegal alien-loving dandies won't stop until disease is rampant, and so is hunger. If you try to make the world a better place, you are deemed a warmongerer.

GoranZ wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So property rights = bad health side effects. Great investigative journalism, saxitoxin.

One simple question... If I sell you brand new BMW with an engine of Yugo will you consider our deal as fraud?

*I will get to my point once you answer

Symmetry wrote:Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

I know that you wont understand but this is not intended for you anyway

Selling BWM with engine of Yugo and presenting it as BMW is fraud.
Now the good question is... Why selling tomato with additional genes from some insect is not fraud?

Ok, so it's fraud. What are the health side effects? I can commit fraud against someone without giving them cancer, right?

To be honest in Africa most people starving, and still in US and West Countries(high developed ) are throw food in garbage . So if Monsanto create GMO to increase more food , so that people not starve , then he need to sell GMO to Africa for low prices. If Monsanto sell GMO to rich countries to make big profit, then this reason "geneticists try to make food be able to feed more people" are pointless, because poor people in Africa , who starving, can not buy GMO, and will stay hungry.

US companies look for profit, they dont care for poor people in Africa who starve to dead.

Beautiful twist saxi. We have to lie, because otherwise corporate interests will win.

If you lie, the corporate interests will win anyways.

Monsanto isn't the only company making GMO. My university has 100s of GMO crop lines. I am working on GMO evergreens, that will light themselves. Long process, since the tools aren't fully designed yet.

Qwert wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:All I know is that Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, and France provide universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling.

The U.S. does not.

I understand some people hate things like universal healthcare, sensible firearms regulations, social safety nets, and mandatory GMO labeling. We'll have to chalk it up to a conflict of visions.

Kudos to Russia for joining all major industrialized nations (except the U.S. and Canada) by enacting sensible GMO safety regulations in their integral territory.

What makes them sensible?

In what regards are they "safety" regulations?

It's more like the Kansas public school board requiring teaching of Creationism than it is about safety. It's simply caving into people who are not only dumb, but proud to be so. Anyways, I'll see you later. Wrestlemania is almost on.

Like I said, I think it's a conflict of visions.
I don't consider universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to allow personal choice and consumer awareness to be dumb, and applaud Russia for its progressive outlook. Others may think universal health care, sensible firearms regulation, or the European Union's GMO labeling requirements to be un-American, part of a socialist plot and so forth. And that's okay.

Strawman. Nobody here said it was part of a socialist plot.

As pcm mentioned, those 3 things are totally unrelated.

This is a safety regulation "requiring seatbelts in automobiles"
This is a saxitoxin regulation "requiring black automobiles"

Name one reason GMO labeling requirements have anything to do with safety. It doesn't lead to personal choice and consumer awareness. It leads to California Green-Party puppets frothing at the mouth about concepts they can't even understand and calling it "awareness".

Why not have a label for foods that have been touched by Mexican hands? Why not have a label that indicates it comes from Mississippi? Why not a label saying which selection regimen the farmer uses? These are all concepts completely unrelated to safety. Anti-GMO is just a flavor of the month whore. Thanks for bringing back mumps and measles saxitoxin. Your brand of science successfully did that.

2000 years of recorded medicine history succeeded in almost eradicating both those diseases and a bunch of California Green-Party puppets successfully brought them back.

God forbid geneticists try to make food be able to feed more people. God forbid we put vitamins in rice. Saxitoxin and his army of cunt-soaked illegal alien-loving dandies won't stop until disease is rampant, and so is hunger. If you try to make the world a better place, you are deemed a warmongerer.

GoranZ wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So property rights = bad health side effects. Great investigative journalism, saxitoxin.

One simple question... If I sell you brand new BMW with an engine of Yugo will you consider our deal as fraud?

*I will get to my point once you answer

Symmetry wrote:Or you can just make your point, assuming it's an actual point and not something reliant on what an internet poster says.

I know that you wont understand but this is not intended for you anyway

Selling BWM with engine of Yugo and presenting it as BMW is fraud.
Now the good question is... Why selling tomato with additional genes from some insect is not fraud?

Ok, so it's fraud. What are the health side effects? I can commit fraud against someone without giving them cancer, right?

To be honest in Africa most people starving, and still in US and West Countries(high developed ) are throw food in garbage . So if Monsanto create GMO to increase more food , so that people not starve , then he need to sell GMO to Africa for low prices. If Monsanto sell GMO to rich countries to make big profit, then this reason "geneticists try to make food be able to feed more people" are pointless, because poor people in Africa , who starving, can not buy GMO, and will stay hungry.

US companies look for profit, they dont care for poor people in Africa who starve to dead.

The company could make it in China, a country which contains both tens of millions of people who live in absolute poverty and tens of millions of people who throw an insane amount of food away.

That said, GM is currently meeting with fierce resistance here due to the usual 'GM will cause mutant cucumbers to eat our children', so the future is not looking bright for ol' Monsanto.

DoomYoshi wrote:Monsanto isn't the only company making GMO.

I don't care about other companies making GMO, except a few like Dow and DuPont. Opposition to GMO is based on business practices. Where business practices are innocent and non-entangled with regulatory regimes, or non-disruptive (make all the GMO Venus Fly Traps you want), there's no problem.

As of today, April 7, global consensus is against GMOs as evidenced by EU and Russian law. Anyone advocating for them is, therefore, espousing a fringe viewpoint.

The U.S. State Department-sponsored "band" Pussy Riot has appeared in an ad yesterday to promote Bank of America, MERCK, Unilever and Toyota. They appeared at MERCK/BOA/Toyota-sponsored event with the former Wal-Mart director Hillary Clinton - turned BoA elderly spokesmodel - and posed for photos in front of a step-and-repeat with the corporate logos. Going viral, the photos will help repair the image of MERCK which was plagued by scandal after its VIOXX death drug killed numerous Americans. Unilever, meanwhile, is attempting to grow its access in the potentially lucrative Russia market and wants to open minimum wage slave labor factories with unsafe working conditions where factory workers can be whipped into maximum productivity. Pussy Riot is helping to promote those agendas to enhance their personal wealth.

These aren't color revolutions - they're banditry under the guise of democracy. This banditry is imposed and paid for from the outside, is carried out to benefit individuals who don't care about their countries and peoples, and interests only those who are trying to conquer new markets. - Alexander Lukashenka (2004)

It's pretty lame to watch totally boring naysayers such as Chen Guangcheng or Pussy Riot get so enthusiastically lapped up by Obama and his posse. Give me George Bush any day.

foxiboxin wrote:As of today, April 7, global consensus is against GMOs as evidenced by EU and Russian law. Anyone advocating for them is, therefore, espousing a fringe viewpoint.

All great visionaries - from Galileo to Pankhurst to Mao - started out as fringe thinkers.

mrswdk wrote:

foxiboxin wrote:As of today, April 7, global consensus is against GMOs as evidenced by EU and Russian law. Anyone advocating for them is, therefore, espousing a fringe viewpoint.

All great visionaries - from Galileo to Pankhurst to Mao - started out as fringe thinkers.

Not all fringe thinkers end up as great visionaries.