“Economic sabotage” or “taking matters in our own hands.” You decide. Reminds me of the “Hero or Traitor?” debate about Snowden and other whistleblowers.
Question: Is breaking an unjust, terricidal law unethical?
Activists destroying GMO crops is not new. Examples:
France and Spain: http://www.realfarmacy.com/activists-destroy-gmo-crops/
Does this breaking, still barely reported news out of Oregon portend a new U.S. front in the contagion of courage now sweeping the world? If you recall, at the beginning of June traces of GMO contamination were found in Oregon wheat bound for export, which caused Japan and South Korea to cancel their orders.
You might ask, “Why Oregon?” Here’s an interesting background article.
And if you want to read an article about this developing situation in Oregon that really flames, go here:
I’ll post this milder version.
June 21, 2013
by Sayer Ji
In a breaking development, the FBI confirms that 1,500 GM Sugar Beet plants were destroyed this month in Oregon, in what they are calling an act of “Economic Sabotage.”
When GM pollen blows into a non-GM farmer’s fields and irreversibly contaminates his crop with ‘biopollution,’ who does the law side with? Historically, Monsanto. Also, it’s not called ‘economic sabotage’ but rather ‘copyright infringement,’ and the victim not the aggressor is threatened with economic ruin.
When Monsanto’s unapproved and therefore illegal GM wheat is found years after open field trials growing freely in an Oregon wheat field, the entire state crop’s export fate is held in limbo, jeopardizing the present and future living of thousands of farmers and their dependents, with Monsanto receiving little more than a reprimand, followed by rapid USDA assurance that despite a lack of approval their GM wheat is “safe.”
Given the unfair rules of the game, no wonder some folks in Oregon, having been treated much like feudal peasants lately, are taking things quite literally into their own hands.
So, when the FBI investigates the destruction of genetically modified sugar beets from two fields in Southern Oregon’s Jackson County this month, the act is immediately labeled “economic sabotage,” presumably against the multinational corporation who owned the plants.
How fitting an FBI description, considering that Monsanto already planted these ‘evil seeds’ of doubt by suggesting their unapproved GM wheat in Oregon was a result of sabotage, and not negligence (orintentional contamination) on their part.
According to the Spokesman Review, “The agency [FBI] said in a statement Thursday that about 1,000 sugar beet plants were destroyed on June 8, and more than 5,000 plants were destroyed on a different plot three nights later.”
The article went on to explain that the plants were owned by the Swiss-based biotech company Sygenta, and that the FBI spokewoman, Beth Anne Steele, would not comment on the manner in which the crops were destroyed “…because we don’t want to encourage copycats.” However, an article published on OregonLive.com demystified the FBI’s account, quoting Paul Minehart, head of corporate communications in North America for Syngenta: “It doesn’t look like a vehicle was used. It looks like people entered the field and destroyed the plants by hand.”
When multinational corporations like Monsanto have already succeeded in genetically modifying the political system, splicing in their ex-executives and ex-lawyers into positions of great power within the government [see image above], how can folks rely on these Monsanto, Dow and Sygenta-influenced regulatory agencies, and the enforcement arms within their control, to make decisions in the interest of their health or basic civil rights?
Some resort to pulling up, burning and otherwise destroying the plants themselves. Are they terrorists or freedom fighters? And if you answer affirmatively to the latter definition, will you yourself be defined as sympathizers to these “economic saboteurs,” or terrorists?
Sayer Ji is an author, researcher, lecturer, and advisory board member of the National Health Federation.
He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is internationally recognized as the largest and most widely referenced health resource of its kind.