Author Topic: Light and darkness (US related post) (Read 1613 times)

NUKE · « **Reply #15 on:** June 30, 2003, 07:04:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
Who bombed Pearl Harbour, Nuke?

Japan?????

Japan attacked us Dec 7th, and on the morning of the 11th, Germany and Italy declared war on the US, not the other way around

The Europeans started WWII and we got sucked into it.

Arlo · « **Reply #16 on:** June 30, 2003, 07:15:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu
I'm afraid the europeans have already learned from two world wars.. america has yet to learn about big war on its soil :>

So I'll bet the US will be involved in the causes of next big war.

Yeah ... that whole Civil War thingie was just a hoot.

And yeah, the U.S. will probably be involved in the causes of the next big war. But it won't be the cause of it, I guarantee you.

But you're right to start the blame game now while Finland still has an infrastructure and technological capability. After the war starts may be too late.

Vulcan · « **Reply #17 on:** June 30, 2003, 07:51:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Whats wrong with the US frowning upon bans of a product we produce? Why does it matter who holds the patents? If there was no ban, companies still wouldn't be forced to buy GM products from the US, it would be an option if they wanted to. The market would decide, as it should.

Plus, the patents could be licensed.....like any other patent I suppose.

Now if there are concerns about the safety of the product, I can understand that point. If GM foods prove to be safe, banning it only because the US holds the patents would be a farce.

Pot meet kettle.

The US regularly imposes trade sanctions/taxes/tarrifs on imported goods to protect its own markets. The US has been taken to the WTO on numerous occasions (and lost) because of its protectionist market policies which contradict its own "free global trade" statements.

Hardly letting the 'market decide' is it now Nuke?

NUKE · « **Reply #18 on:** June 30, 2003, 07:58:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan
Pot meet kettle.

The US regularly imposes trade sanctions/taxes/tarrifs on imported goods to protect its own markets. The US has been taken to the WTO on numerous occasions (and lost) because of its protectionist market policies which contradict its own "free global trade" statements.

Hardly letting the 'market decide' is it now Nuke?

Never said it didnt happen.....happens both ways, tit for tat trade violations.

My point was that why should it be bad (as devious said) for the US to not be happy about an outright ban on a product? He gave an example of the US owning the patent as a reason to fear GM products, and that was what I thought was most humorous.

Vulcan · « **Reply #19 on:** June 30, 2003, 08:34:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
He gave an example of the US owning the patent as a reason to fear GM products, and that was what I thought was most humorous.

Two years ago an Australian farmer had his entire crop taken by a commercial farming business. His crop got contimanted with GE crop from the commercial farm next to his which this company owned the patent on.

They legally took his crop, and left him with nothing.

Not that humorous is it?

NUKE · « **Reply #20 on:** June 30, 2003, 08:39:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan
Two years ago an Australian farmer had his entire crop taken by a commercial farming business. His crop got contimanted with GE crop from the commercial farm next to his which this company owned the patent on.

They legally took his crop, and left him with nothing.

Not that humorous is it?

If it was "legally" taken then I'm not sad. Let me see some details.

But even then, has nothing to do with banning GM foods from the EU market.

straffo · « **Reply #21 on:** July 01, 2003, 01:38:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
If it was "legally" taken then I'm not sad. Let me see some details.

But even then, has nothing to do with banning GM foods from the EU market.

It depend of the law and nothing else.
GM are banned in the EU by the law/reglementation/rule whatever you call it.

Imagine we legalise cocaine in the EU will the EU be able to sell cocaine to the US ?

I guess no ... so why should we modify our laws according to some of megacorp need ?

The day pharmaceutical industries will be able to have patent on some DNA sequence our future will be doomed ...

Maverick · « **Reply #22 on:** July 01, 2003, 10:48:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by devious
Oh and the US frowns upon bans on genetically modified food - which ogf course is patendet and can only e bought from US companies.

Just thought I'd throw this little bit of reality in for your edification.

ALL food commonly found in a grocery store is genetically modified. This was finally put into scientific terms by a little fellow named Gregor Mendell. It is STILL being practiced by farmers and livestock breeders. Let's hear the collective gasp as reality sets in........

You really wouldn't be much interested in the stuff in its original form after being accustomed to the food you were raised on now would you?

Vulcan · « **Reply #23 on:** July 01, 2003, 11:53:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
If it was "legally" taken then I'm not sad. Let me see some details.

But even then, has nothing to do with banning GM foods from the EU market.

It has everything to do with it.

Many farmers outside the USA are pushing for the ban to ensure their crops don't get 'accidentally cross contaminated' and then repo'd by the companies who own the 'patents' on the GM version.

I'm not against GM crops per se. I agree with maverick in that we have been modifying crops and livestock for thousands of years, its just we've recently changed the way we do things. But these 'patented' crops are dangerous stuff, from a commercial point of view. No laws enforce any kind of isolation of GM crops, to prevent contamination.

We're talking about farmers losing their entire crops because of this patent issue.

Theres a good reason Nuke, you still think its humorous?

Perhaps you should read what you write Nuke:
"The market would decide, as it should"
"tit for tat trade violations"

So its OK for the US to do it but you squeak about the "market should decide" when the Europeans do it to you?

Maybe you have more in common with the French than you think Nuke?

NUKE · « **Reply #24 on:** July 02, 2003, 12:30:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan
It has everything to do with it.

Many farmers outside the USA are pushing for the ban to ensure their crops don't get 'accidentally cross contaminated' and then repo'd by the companies who own the 'patents' on the GM version.

My point was GM foods, not crops. How can crops be cross contaminated by food?

Dago · « **Reply #25 on:** July 02, 2003, 01:38:53 AM »

Quote

america has yet to learn about big war on its soil

Oh, I guess the 618,000 that died during our civil war don't count?

Vulcan · « **Reply #26 on:** July 02, 2003, 02:26:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
My point was GM foods, not crops. How can crops be cross contaminated by food?

Quite easily. Spend some time on a farm, learn about where human waste goes. Just look at the UK sources foot in mouth outbreaks for an example.

Dowding · « **Reply #27 on:** July 02, 2003, 02:48:45 AM »

Quote

Just thought I'd throw this little bit of reality in for your edification.

ALL food commonly found in a grocery store is genetically modified. This was finally put into scientific terms by a little fellow named Gregor Mendell. It is STILL being practiced by farmers and livestock breeders. Let's hear the collective gasp as reality sets in........

Sorry to dispel your aire of self-conceit... but GM food is not commonly found in UK food. The US is entirely different.

Quote

Japan?????

Japan attacked us Dec 7th, and on the morning of the 11th, Germany and Italy declared war on the US, not the other way around

The Europeans started WWII and we got sucked into it.

Of course! Japan is part of Europe now! Thanks for the geography lesson, mate.

And I like how you justify US protectionism through the 'tit for tat' argument. What's next? A 'you started it' assertion? If you want to criticise Europe, then you must be ready to criticise your own country.

Maverick · « **Reply #28 on:** July 02, 2003, 11:51:31 PM »

Dowding,

Unless you eat ragweed or dandelions you are eating genetically altered food. Get over it. All the food that is commonly grown has been the subject of genetic breeding for various traits. The most desired traits are increased yields, better nutrition and resistance to disease.

Do you eat beef? It has a LONG history of breeding for various products and breeds of cattle. Milk production was a big goal in breeding, but I suppose you don't use milk products in Britain.

Do you eat chicken, same there naturally. Remember the push to create a chicken that would lay eggs with less cholesterol?? They succeeded.

BTW sheep were crossbred for better meat and wool production. Of course it was rather haphazard but they did make some changes didn't they.

Any corn products? Corn has come a LONG way since the early maize was used as food.

Don't get all in a huff because there is now a more refined scientific method for altering plants other than trying to cross polinate varous strains and see what pops up. The hit or miss experimentation is more likely to be hazardous IMO.

Vulcan · « **Reply #29 on:** July 02, 2003, 11:55:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Don't get all in a huff because there is now a more refined scientific method for altering plants other than trying to cross polinate varous strains and see what pops up. The hit or miss experimentation is more likely to be hazardous IMO.

Africanised Honey Bee's anyone?

AFAIK tradional genetic modification methods had NO safeguards whereas modern methods are highly scrutinised.

Must remember that for my next greenie-bashing session.