Colombian Military Massacres Peasants in Oil-and-Coal Related Protests

Police violently disperse unarmed peasant protesters in Catatumbo, Colombia, Jun 2013 (photo by Telesur)Police vio­lent­ly dis­perse unar
Police violently disperse unarmed peasant protesters in Catatumbo, Colombia, Jun 2013 (photo by Telesur)Police vio­lent­ly dis­perse unarmed peas­ant pro­test­ers in Cata­tum­bo, Colom­bia, Jun 2013 (pho­to by Telesur)

27 June The Colom­bian mil­i­tary has killed at least four peas­ant pro­test­ers in the region of Cata­tum­bo, wound­ed dozens more (includ­ing 21 gun­shot wounds) and arrest­ed hun­dreds.

From Alliance for Glob­al Jus­tice:

In Cata­tum­ba, peas­ants have been hold­ing protests, block­ing roads and occu­py­ing facil­i­ties to protest to the government’s chem­i­cal spray­ing of Monsanto’s RoundUp Ultra her­bi­cide as part of coca erad­i­ca­tion efforts; and the refusal of the gov­ern­ment to estab­lish a Peas­ant Reserve Zone, as autho­rized by leg­is­la­tion in 1994 and 1996. That leg­is­la­tion would pro­vide pro­tect­ed land for col­lec­tive farm­ing. Pro­test­ers say that they are being denied this in favor of con­ces­sions made to for­eign coal [and oil] com­pa­nies.

Learn more about the back­ground of the protests here, then send a let­ter to Colom­bian offi­cials demand­ing an end to the  vio­lence.

 

FBI Chases Anti-GMO Activists While Ignoring Monsanto’s Transgressions

25 June 2013  Some exper­i­men­tal GMO crops were torn out of a field in Ore­gon this month. That means it’s time for the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment to freak the fuck out and do its best to clamp down again on eco-activism.

25 June 2013  Some exper­i­men­tal GMO crops were torn out of a field in Ore­gon this month. That means it’s time for the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment to freak the fuck out and do its best to clamp down again on eco-activism.

The sug­ar beet plants, which were genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered by Syn­gen­ta to sur­vive appli­ca­tions of the her­bi­cide Roundup, were uproot­ed in the mid­dle of the night from a cou­ple of fields, pre­sum­ably by anti-GMO activists. The destruc­tion of the exper­i­men­tal crops occurred in the same state where a strain of Monsanto’s ille­gal her­bi­cide-resis­tant wheat recent­ly showed up in a farmer’s field, threat­en­ing America’s multi­bil­lion-dol­lar wheat export mar­ket.

 

Guess which crime the FBI is des­per­ate to crack?

That’s right: The sug­ar beet one. The agency announced that it “con­sid­ers this crime to be eco­nom­ic sab­o­tage and a vio­la­tion of fed­er­al law involv­ing dam­age to com­mer­cial agri­cul­tur­al enter­pris­es.” Accord­ing to the FBI, a $10,000 reward is being offered for clues by Ore­go­ni­ans for Food and Shel­ter, a cor­po­rate forestry and agri­cul­ture group that lob­bies for pro-GMO and pro-pes­ti­cide leg­is­la­tion.

The Ore­gon­ian reports that 1,000 genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered sug­ar beet plants were uproot­ed from land leased by Syn­gen­ta on June 8:

“Three nights lat­er, the destruc­tion con­tin­ued on anoth­er prop­er­ty, where anoth­er 5,500 plants were ruined.

“It doesn’t look like a vehi­cle was used. It looks like peo­ple entered the field and destroyed the plants by hand,” said Paul Mine­hart, head of cor­po­rate com­mu­ni­ca­tions in North Amer­i­ca for Syn­gen­ta, a glob­al agri­cul­ture cor­po­ra­tion based in Basel, Switzer­land.

Esti­mates for the dam­age were not spec­i­fied but the finan­cial loss­es are sig­nif­i­cant, accord­ing to FBI spokes­woman Beth Anne Steele.”

Mean­while, Mon­san­to is con­tin­u­ing to push its claim that its genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered wheat turned up on an Ore­gon farm because of an act of sab­o­tage. That claim is draw­ing skep­ti­cism from the expert whose tests first con­firmed that the rogue wheat was devel­oped by Mon­san­to. From a report in The Guardian:

“While Monsanto’s chief tech­nol­o­gy offi­cer sug­gest­ed eco-activists were to blame, [Ore­gon State Uni­ver­si­ty weed sci­ences pro­fes­sor Car­ol] Mal­lo­ry-Smith said delib­er­ate con­t­a­m­i­na­tion was the least like­ly sce­nario:

‘The sab­o­tage con­spir­a­cy the­o­ry is even hard­er for me to explain or think as log­i­cal because it would mean that some­one had that seed and was hold­ing that seed for 10 or 12 years and hap­pened to put it on the right field to have it found, and iden­ti­fied. I don’t think that makes a lot of sense.’”

We may learn more about the cause of the GMO wheat con­t­a­m­i­na­tion after the U.S. Depart­ment of Agri­cul­ture com­pletes an inves­ti­ga­tion.

But let’s get back to the sug­ar beets case. If you hap­pen to know who uproot­ed those plants, The Ore­gon­ian has a request for you:

“Ring the local offices of the FBI at (541) 773‑2942 dur­ing nor­mal busi­ness hours or call the FBI in Port­land any­time at (503) 224‑4181

Tips may also be emailed to portland@ic.fbi.gov.”

Yeah, right.

FOOD LIBERATION FRONT — WHOSE FOOD? OUR FOOD! — Fri 14 Jun

THIS EVENT IS PART OF THE STOP G8 LONDON WEEK OF ACTION:
https://network23.org/stopg8/week-of-action/key-events/

Hashtag: #FLF

Magical mystery tour!
Fun non-violent direct action!

THIS EVENT IS PART OF THE STOP G8 LONDON WEEK OF ACTION:
https://network23.org/stopg8/week-of-action/key-events/

Hashtag: #FLF

Magical mystery tour! Fun non-violent direct action! Jenny Jones on food poverty in London, Graciela Romero of War on Want on food sovereignty, Bianca Jagger (tbc) on GMOs & Ben De Vries on Permaculture. Free food!

We will be holding our first annual feast, with invited speakers, to discuss how to we can collectively liberate our food supply from corporations like Monsanto, and reclaim our food. You are invited to bring your ideas and healthy food to share.

The elites of the G8 nations will soon be meeting in 5 star luxury while the poorest sections of society, particularly children, women and older people, are increasingly going hungry in both the global south and the richest cities of the developed world.

Our governments are using the crisis that neo-liberal economic policies created to impose austerity in Europe , increasing food poverty. Western governments are supporting agricultural policies that are leading to international land grabs and a growing concentration of land ownership. This is leading to escalating food prices in some of the poorest countries in the globe.

However peoples movements are fighting back and developing real solutions: La Via Campesina is a global solidarity movement which represents 200 million agricultural producers globally and calls for "Food Sovereignty". Food Sovereignty prioritises local food production and consumption . It ensures that the rights to use and manage lands, territories, water, seeds , livestock and biodiversity are in the hands of those that produce food not the corporate sector.

People's movements in Bolivia are kicking out GM and supporting agroecology , just as the people of Europe continue to resist GM entering our food chain.

This year will see the launch of the IF campaign, during the G8 summit. This proposes more aid, transparency and an end to land grabbing, but fails to address the issue of corporate control of our food supply, the need for food sovereignty, and the increasing concentration of wealth and land in the hands of the 1%.

Join us in our campaign to highlight the real solutions to food poverty and enjoy a feast of free healthy food, together. We have invited after dinner speakers from War on Want, FareShare, Farmers' Unions and other assorted food campaigners.

Whose Food ? Our Food!

Friday 14 June, 5.30pm Crossharbour DLR station, Eastferry Rd, Isle of Dogs, E14 9QD

https://www.facebook.com/events/572992462744134/

Monsanto Set to Halt GMO Push in Europe 2nd June

The march against Mon­san­to,

The march against Mon­san­to, Ger­many. (Image from twit­ter user@@HarvestPM)

Mon­san­to plans to halt lob­by­ing for its genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied plant vari­eties in Europe due to low demand from local farm­ers, a rep­re­sen­ta­tive from the US agri­cul­tur­al giant told a Ger­man dai­ly.

“We are no longer work­ing on lob­by­ing for more cul­ti­va­tion in Europe,” Bran­don Mitch­n­er a rep­re­sen­ta­tive for Monsanto’s Euro­pean branch, Tageszeitung, said in an inter­view set to be pub­lished on Sat­ur­day.

“Cur­rent­ly we do not plan to apply for the approval of new genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied crops. The rea­son is, among oth­er things, low demand of the farm­ers,” he con­tin­ued.

A spokes­woman for Mon­san­to Ger­many, Ursu­la Luttmer-Ouazane, admit­ted that Mon­san­to rec­og­nizes that GMO crops were cur­rent­ly not embraced on the Euro­pean mar­ket.

“We’ve under­stood that such plants don’t have any broad accep­tance in Euro­pean soci­eties,” Luttmer-Ouazane said. “It is coun­ter­pro­duc­tive to fight against wind­mills,” she added.

A spokesper­son for the Ger­man Min­istry of Econ­o­my and Tech­nolo­gies described the move as an “entre­pre­neur­ial deci­sion” which need­ed no fur­ther com­ment. The min­istry added, how­ev­er, it has long made its oppo­si­tion to gene mod­i­fi­ca­tion tech­nolo­gies known.

“The promis­es of the GM indus­try have not come true for Euro­pean agri­cul­ture, nor have they for the agri­cul­ture in devel­op­ing and emerg­ing economies,” the min­istry said in a state­ment.

Eight nation­al gov­ern­ments in the Euro­pean Union have already banned Monsanto’s MON810 maize and oth­er forms of GMO cul­ti­va­tion in their coun­tries under an envi­ron­men­tal pro­tec­tion pro­vi­sion known as the ‘Safe­guard Clause’.

Par­tic­u­lar­ly fierce protests in Ger­many prompt­ed the gov­ern­ment to intro­duce the mea­sures in 2009 due to con­cerns that such cul­ti­va­tion could lead to eco­log­i­cal degra­da­tion.

Monsanto’s rivals, such as Bay­er Crop­Science, BASF and Syn­gen­ta, had by and large pulled out of the Ger­man mar­ket because of large-scale pub­lic oppo­si­tion, the Ger­man dai­ly report­ed.

Aus­tria, Bul­gar­ia, France, Greece, Hun­gary, Lux­em­bourg and most recent­ly Poland are among oth­er EU mem­ber states enforc­ing the ban. In April, Italy joined the ranks of EU states look­ing to ban the cul­ti­va­tion of GM crops on its soil.

The march against Monsanto, Germany. (Image from twitter user@Julia_etc)

The march against Mon­san­to, Ger­many. (Image from twit­ter user@Julia_etc)

The announce­ment comes amidst a series of recent pub­lic rela­tions bat­tles that have brought the US firm con­sid­er­able world­wide atten­tion.

On Wednes­day, the US Depart­ment of Agri­cul­ture (USDA) said it had con­duct­ed genet­ic tests on wheat from an 80-acre farm in Ore­gon this past April. The tests revealed the wheat was an exper­i­men­tal vari­ety cre­at­ed by Mon­san­to that had nev­er been approved for sale.

The dis­cov­ery prompt­ed Japan­ese author­i­ties to can­cel part of a ten­der offer to buy US west­ern white wheat and have sus­pend­ed imports of both that vari­ety and feed wheat, while sev­er­al oth­er large importers of US-wheat through­out Asia said they were close­ly mon­i­tor­ing the sit­u­a­tion.

The Euro­pean Union for its part said it will test any incom­ing ship­ments, with plans to block those con­tain­ing GMO wheat.

The USDA announce­ment fol­lowed a mas­sive, glob­al “March Against Mon­san­to” held on Sat­ur­day that saw demon­stra­tions against the Mis­souri-based firm in 52 coun­tries.  Orga­niz­ers for the glob­al protest said around 2 mil­lion pro­test­ers showed up at ral­lies being held in 436 cities to protest against the seed giant and the genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied food.

 

The march against Monsanto, Munich. (Image from twitter user@nasimjo)

The march against Mon­san­to, Munich. (Image from twit­ter user@nasimjo)

 

Fearing Protestors, Tree Biotech Conference Cancels Visit to GE Tree Test Plot 2nd May

irB

EF! con­fronts GE tree sci­en­tists on the high seas in Charleston, SC in 2007

irB

EF! con­fronts GE tree sci­en­tists on the high seas in Charleston, SC in 2007

There is still a month to go before activists hit the streets of Asheville, NC to protest the 2013 Tree Biotech­nol­o­gy Con­fer­ence, but the indus­try is already show­ing signs of retreat. Appar­ent­ly fear­ing that pro­tes­tors will fol­low them wher­ev­er they go, the con­fer­ence orga­niz­ers recent­ly can­celled a group trip to a test plot of genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered euca­lyp­tus trees. While the coun­ties in which these test plots are plant­ed are pub­licly known, the exact loca­tion of these mutant trees is a close­ly guard­ed secret. It seems they don’t want a mob of Earth First!ers to find out where they are!

 The 2013 Tree Biotech­nol­o­gy Con­fer­ence is an inter­na­tion­al gath­er­ing of sci­en­tists, forestry cor­po­ra­tions and uni­ver­si­ty researchers with a major focus on genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered tree pro­duc­tion. GE trees pose an unprece­dent­ed threat to native forests. Tim­ber and util­i­ty cor­po­ra­tions want to plant mil­lions of acres genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered trees through­out the South to burn for elec­tric­i­ty, as well as to con­tin­ue sup­ply­ing the unsus­tain­able lum­ber and paper indus­tries. These trees would be engi­neered to pro­duce their own pes­ti­cides, grow straighter and faster, tol­er­ate man­u­fac­tured pes­ti­cides, pro­duce ster­ile seeds, and reduce lignin con­tent (this is what makes the wood in a tree strong enough to stand up). If these traits escaped into native tree pop­u­la­tions, the effects would be dev­as­tat­ing and irre­versible.

 In anoth­er set­back for the GE tree indus­try, the USDA just announced the results of their pub­lic com­ment peri­od on the pro­posed approval of com­mer­cial plant­i­ngs of genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered euca­lyp­tus trees. While over 30,000 peo­ple spoke out against the com­mer­cial plant­i­ng of these Franken­trees, an under­whelm­ing, four, yeah that’s right four, peo­ple spoke out in favor of plant­i­ng GE trees. Though this pub­lic com­ment peri­od shows that there is next to no sup­port for GE trees, it is no time to let our guard down con­sid­er­ing that gov­ern­ment agen­cies reg­u­lar­ly ignore the pub­lic opin­ion.

 Help us keep the up the pres­sure on the USDA and the tree biotech indus­try. Join activists from around the coun­try as we stand up for native forests and send a loud NO to GE trees with a week of protests and edu­ca­tion­al events in Asheville, NC May 26-June 1st.

Indigenous Hawaiian’s Take on Monsanto and GMOs 15th April

At 9 am on an over­cast morn­ing in par­adise, hun­dreds of pro­test­ers gath­ered in tra­di­tion­al Hawai­ian chant and prayer. Upon hear­ing the sound of the conch shell, known here as , the pro­test­ers fol­lowed a group of women towards Monsanto’s grounds.

A’ole GMO,” cried the moth­ers as they marched along­side Monsanto’s corn­fields, locat­ed only feet from their homes on Molokai, one of the small­est of Hawaii’s main islands. In a tiny, trop­i­cal cor­ner of the Pacif­ic that has ward­ed off tourism and devel­op­ment, Monsanto’s fields are one of only a few cor­po­rate enti­ties that sep­a­rates the bare ter­rain of the moun­tains and oceans.

This spir­it­ed march was the last of a series of protests on the five Hawai­ian islands that Mon­san­to and oth­er biotech com­pa­nies have turned into the world’s ground zero for chem­i­cal test­ing and food engi­neer­ing. Hawaii is cur­rent­ly at the epi­cen­ter of the debate over genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied organ­isms, gen­er­al­ly short­ened to GMOs. Because Hawaii is geo­graph­i­cal­ly iso­lat­ed from the broad­er pub­lic, it is an ide­al loca­tion for con­duct­ing chem­i­cal exper­i­ments. The island chain’s cli­mate and abun­dant nat­ur­al resources have lured five of the world’s largest biotech chem­i­cal cor­po­ra­tions: Mon­san­to, Syn­gen­ta, Dow Agro­Sciences, DuPont Pio­neer and BASF. In the past 20 years, these chem­i­cal com­pa­nies have per­formed over 5,000 open-field-test exper­i­ments of pes­ti­cide-resis­tant crops on an esti­mat­ed 40,000 to 60,000 acres of Hawai­ian land with­out any dis­clo­sure, mak­ing the place and its peo­ple a guinea pig for biotech engi­neer­ing.

The pres­ence of these cor­po­ra­tions has pro­pelled one of the largest move­ment mobi­liza­tions in Hawaii in decades. Sim­i­lar to the envi­ron­men­tal and land sov­er­eign­ty protests in Cana­da and the con­ti­nen­tal Unit­ed States, the move­ment is influ­enced by indige­nous cul­ture.

“All of the resources that our kapuna [elders] gave to us, we need to take care of now for the next gen­er­a­tion,” said Wal­ter Ritte, a Hawaii activist, speak­ing in part in the Hawai­ian indige­nous lan­guage.

“That is our kuleana [respon­si­bil­i­ty]. That is everybody’s kuleana.”

In Hawai­ian indige­nous cul­ture, the very idea of GMOs is effec­tive­ly sac­ri­le­gious.

“For Hawaii’s indige­nous peo­ples, the con­cepts under­ly­ing genet­ic manip­u­la­tion of life forms are offen­sive and con­trary to the cul­tur­al val­ues of alo­ha ‘āina [love for the land],” wrote Mililani B. Trask, a native Hawai­ian attor­ney.

Deadly practices

Mon­san­to has a long his­to­ry of mak­ing chem­i­cals that bring about dev­as­ta­tion. The com­pa­ny par­tic­i­pat­ed in the Man­hat­tan Project to help pro­duce the atom­ic bomb dur­ing World War II. It devel­oped the her­bi­cide “Agent Orange” used by U.S. mil­i­tary forces dur­ing the Viet­nam War, which caused an esti­mat­ed half-mil­lion birth defor­mi­ties. Most recent­ly, Mon­san­to has dri­ven thou­sands of farm­ers in India to take their own lives, often by drink­ing chem­i­cal insec­ti­cide, after the high cost of the company’s seeds forced them into unpayable debt.

The impacts of chem­i­cal test­ing and GMOs are imme­di­ate — and, in the long-term, could prove dead­ly. In Hawaii, Mon­san­to and oth­er biotech cor­po­ra­tions have sprayed over 70 dif­fer­ent chem­i­cals dur­ing field tests of genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered crops, more chem­i­cal test­ing than in any oth­er place in the world. Human stud­ies have not been con­duct­ed on GMO foods, but ani­mal exper­i­ments show that genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied foods lead to pre-can­cer­ous cell growth, infer­til­i­ty, and severe dam­age to the kid­neys, liv­er and large intestines. Addi­tion­al­ly, the health risks of chem­i­cal her­bi­cides sprayed onto GMO crops cause hor­mone dis­rup­tion, can­cer, neu­ro­log­i­cal dis­or­ders and birth defects. In Hawaii, some open-field test­ing sites are near homes and schools. Pre­ma­tu­ri­ty, adult on-set dia­betes and can­cer rates have sig­nif­i­cant­ly increased in Hawaii in the last ten years. Many res­i­dents fear chem­i­cal drift is poi­son­ing them.

Monsanto’s agri­cul­tur­al pro­ce­dures also enable the prac­tice of monocrop­ping, which con­tributes to envi­ron­men­tal degra­da­tion, espe­cial­ly on an island like Hawaii. Monocrop­ping is an agri­cul­tur­al prac­tice where one crop is repeat­ed­ly plant­ed in the same spot, a sys­tem that strips the soil of its nutri­ents and dri­ves farm­ers to use a her­bi­cide called Roundup, which is linked to infer­til­i­ty. Farm­ers are also forced to use pes­ti­cides and fer­til­iz­ers that cause cli­mate change and reef dam­age, and that decrease the bio­di­ver­si­ty of Hawaii.

Food sovereignty as resistance

At the first of the series of march­es against GMOs, orga­niz­ers plant­ed coconut trees in Halei­wa, a com­mu­ni­ty on the north shore of Oahu Island. In the move­ment, protest­ing and act­ing as care­tak­ers of the land are no longer viewed as sep­a­rate actions, par­tic­u­lar­ly in a region where Mon­san­to is leas­ing more than 1,000 acres of prime agri­cul­tur­al soil.

Dur­ing the march, peo­ple chant­ed and held signs declar­ing, “Alo­ha ‘āina: De-occu­py Hawaii.”

The phrase Alo­ha ‘āina is reg­u­lar­ly seen and heard at anti-GMO protests. Today the words are defined as “love of the land,” but the phrase has also sig­ni­fied “love for the coun­try.” His­tor­i­cal­ly, it was com­mon­ly used by indi­vid­u­als and groups fight­ing for the restora­tion of the inde­pen­dent Hawai­ian nation, and it is now fre­quent­ly deployed at anti-GMO protests when peo­ple speak of Hawai­ian sov­er­eign­ty and inde­pen­dence.

After the protest, marchers gath­ered in Halei­wa Beach Park, where they per­formed speech­es, music, spo­ken-word poet­ry and dance while shar­ing free local­ly grown food. The strat­e­gy of con­nect­ing with the land was also a fea­ture of the sub­se­quent protest on the Big Island, where peo­ple plant­ed taro before the march, and also at the state capi­tol ral­ly, where hun­dreds par­tic­i­pat­ed in the tra­di­tion­al process of pound­ing taro to make poi, a Poly­ne­sian sta­ple food.

The import econ­o­my is a new real­i­ty for Hawaii, one direct­ly tied to the impo­si­tion of mod­ern food prac­tices on the island. Ancient Hawaii oper­at­ed with­in the Ahupua’a sys­tem, a com­mu­nal mod­el of dis­trib­ut­ing land and work, which allowed the islands to be entire­ly self-suf­fi­cient.

“Pri­vate land own­er­ship was unknown, and pub­lic, com­mon use of the ahupua’a resources demand­ed that bound­aries be drawn to include suf­fi­cient land for res­i­dence and cul­ti­va­tion, fresh­wa­ter sources, shore­line and open ocean access,” explained Car­ol Sil­va, an his­to­ri­an and Hawai­ian lan­guage pro­fes­sor.

Inspired by the Ahupua’a mod­el, the food sov­er­eign­ty move­ment is build­ing an organ­ic local sys­tem that fos­ters the con­nec­tions between com­mu­ni­ties and their food — a way of resist­ing GMOs while simul­ta­ne­ous­ly cre­at­ing alter­na­tives.

Colonial history

The decline of the Ahupua’a sys­tem didn’t only set Hawaii on the path away from food sov­er­eign­ty; it also destroyed the polit­i­cal inde­pen­dence of the now‑U.S. state. And indeed, when pro­test­ers chant “Alo­ha ‘āina” at anti-GMO march­es, they are allud­ing to the fact that this fight isn’t only over com­pet­ing visions of land use and food cre­ation. It’s also a bat­tle for the islands’ polit­i­cal sov­er­eign­ty.

His­tor­i­cal­ly, for­eign cor­po­rate inter­ests have repeat­ed­ly tak­en con­trol of Hawaii — and have exploit­ed and mis­treat­ed the land and its peo­ple in the process.

“It’s a sys­temic prob­lem and the GMO issue just hap­pens to be at the fore­front of pub­lic debate at the moment,” said Keoni Lee of ‘Ōiwi TV. “‘Āina” [land] equals that which pro­vides. Pro­vides for who?”

The pres­ence of Mon­san­to and the oth­er chem­i­cal cor­po­ra­tions is eeri­ly rem­i­nis­cent of the busi­ness inter­ests that led to the over­throw of the Hawai­ian King­dom. Through­out the 19th cen­tu­ry, the Hawai­ian King­dom was rec­og­nized as an inde­pen­dent nation. That real­i­ty changed in 1893, when a group of Amer­i­can busi­ness­men and sug­ar planters orches­trat­ed a U.S. Marine’s armed coup d’etat of the Hawai­ian King­dom gov­ern­ment.

Five years lat­er, the U.S. appre­hend­ed the islands for strate­gic mil­i­tary use dur­ing the Span­ish-Amer­i­can War despite local resis­tance. Even then-Pres­i­dent Grover Cleve­land called the over­throw a “sub­stan­tial wrong” and vowed to restore the Hawai­ian king­dom. But the eco­nom­ic inter­ests over­pow­ered the polit­i­cal will, and Hawaii remained a U.S. colony for the fol­low­ing 60 years.

The annex­a­tion of Hawaii prof­it­ed five sug­ar­cane-man­u­fac­tur­ing com­pa­nies com­mon­ly referred to as the Big Five: Alexan­der & Bald­win, Amfac (Amer­i­can Fac­tors), Cas­tle & Cooke, C. Brew­er, and Theo H. Davies. Most of the founders of these com­pa­nies were mis­sion­ar­ies who were active­ly involved in lob­by­ing for the annex­a­tion of the Hawai­ian islands in 1898. After the takeover, the Big Five manip­u­lat­ed great polit­i­cal pow­er and influ­ence in what was then con­sid­ered the “Ter­ri­to­ry of Hawaii,” gain­ing unpar­al­leled con­trol of bank­ing, ship­ping and import­ing on the island chain. The com­pa­nies only spon­sored white repub­li­cans in gov­ern­ment, cre­at­ing an oli­garchy that threat­ened the labor force if it vot­ed against their inter­ests. The com­pa­nies’ envi­ron­men­tal prac­tices, mean­while, caused air and water pol­lu­tion and altered the bio­di­ver­si­ty of the land.

The cur­rent pres­ence of the five-biotech chem­i­cal cor­po­ra­tions in Hawaii mir­rors the polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic colo­nial­ism of the Big Five in the ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry — par­tic­u­lar­ly because Mon­san­to has become the largest employ­er on Molokai.

“There is no dif­fer­ence between the “Big Five” that actu­al­ly ruled Hawaii in the past,” said Wal­ter Ritte. “Now it’s anoth­er “Big Five,” and they’re all chem­i­cal com­pa­nies. So it’s almost like this is the same thing. It’s like déjàvu.”

Rising up

At the open­ing of this year’s leg­isla­tive ses­sion on Jan­u­ary 16, hun­dreds of farm­ers, stu­dents and res­i­dents marched to the state capi­tol for a ral­ly titled “Idle No More: We the Peo­ple.” There, agri­cul­tur­al spe­cial­ist and food sov­er­eign­ty activist Van­dana Shi­va, who trav­eled from India to Hawaii for the event, addressed the crowd.

“I see Hawaii not as a place where I come and peo­ple say, ‘Mon­san­to is the biggest employ­er,’ but peo­ple say, ‘this land, its bio­di­ver­si­ty, our cul­tur­al her­itage is our biggest employ­er,’” she said.

As she allud­ed to, a major obsta­cle fac­ing the anti-GMO move­ment is the per­cep­tion that the chem­i­cal cor­po­ra­tions pro­vide jobs that oth­er­wise might not exist — an eco­nom­ic specter that the sug­ar­cane com­pa­nies also wield­ed to their advan­tage. Anti-GMO orga­niz­ers are aware of how entrenched this pow­er is.

Field liberation trial coming up in Belgium

Next GM pota­to-tri­al: April 2nd 2013, from 8 A.M. on, Justi­tieplein in Den­der­monde. You are warm­ly invit­ed to come and sup­port the 11 activists that are resist­ing the unjust sen­tences in the ‘GM pota­to tri­al’. This time, you are not only wel­come to show your sup­port, but also to con­tribute with all your expe­ri­ence, knowl­edge…

Next GM pota­to-tri­al: April 2nd 2013, from 8 A.M. on, Justi­tieplein in Den­der­monde. You are warm­ly invit­ed to come and sup­port the 11 activists that are resist­ing the unjust sen­tences in the ‘GM pota­to tri­al’. This time, you are not only wel­come to show your sup­port, but also to con­tribute with all your expe­ri­ence, knowl­edge…

Crim­i­nal­i­sa­tion of Activism for a Sus­tain­able Agri­cul­ture

11 activists have been accused of belong­ing to a crim­i­nal gang, and were being asked to pay €200,000 dam­ages to pay for the pro-GM cam­paign! 

The accused and their defence lawyers walked out of the first tri­al en masse, the first time in Bel­gian his­to­ry.

More info at

http://www.fieldliberation.org/?lang=en

World’s Longest Treesit Campaign, Update from Bilston Glen

Yes­ter­day, peo­ple involved in the cam­paign to save Bil­ston Glen sent an update stat­ing, “We have new infor­ma­tion from the Mid­loth­i­an Coun­cil and it would seem like­ly that the road is being redi­rect­ed along a dif­fer­ent route, one that does not go through Bil­ston Glen.

Yes­ter­day, peo­ple involved in the cam­paign to save Bil­ston Glen sent an update stat­ing, “We have new infor­ma­tion from the Mid­loth­i­an Coun­cil and it would seem like­ly that the road is being redi­rect­ed along a dif­fer­ent route, one that does not go through Bil­ston Glen. We have a map of the alter­na­tive route and it makes a lot more sense than any of the plans that we had seen before. We will not know until the spring what plan has been final­ized for the road. They are also plan­ning a lot of oth­er devel­op­ment in the area so it is pos­si­ble that the glen might still be under threat even if the pro­posed devel­op­ment is not the road.

We should have a lot more infor­ma­tion in the spring. They are also con­sid­er­ing build­ing a new open cast coal mine some­where near Rosewell, so depend­ing on what is going on we may be join­ing in with that cam­paign as well. Keep in touch and we’ll let every­one know what is going on.”

The tree vil­lage is open for vis­it­ing and stay­ing. Help is always need­ed in a vari­ety of ways, from donat­ing funds and sup­plies to attend­ing Sun­day Free Cafes in the glen and par­tic­i­pat­ing in the pub­lic out­reach, edu­ca­tion and demon­stra­tions against the devel­op­ment in Mid­loth­i­an Scot­land.

Campaign History

Since June 2002 Bil­ston Glen, locat­ed near Penicuik, Scot­land about eight miles from the city of Edin­burgh,  has been occu­pied and for­ti­fied by an ever-expand­ing group of multi­na­tion­al envi­ron­men­tal activists. The Bil­ston Glen Anti-Bypass Protest Site began when a pro­pos­al to build a road through the glen was put on the table by biotech giant Bay­er. At the time, Bay­er was build­ing big dreams around com­mer­cial farm­ing of genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied foods (GMOs) in the UK. While Bay­er was dream­ing, we were schem­ing. A strong anti-GMO move­ment in the UK attacked the biotech indus­try from every angle – slash­ing crop fields and test sights, protest­ing uni­ver­si­ties fund­ing the research for fur­ther devel­op­ment, stag­ing large pub­lic demon­stra­tions out­side gro­cery stores demand­ing the label­ing of GMOs on con­sumer prod­ucts, and last but not least – attack­ing the infra­struc­ture of indus­tri­al devel­op­ment – the roads that would lead to com­mer­cial farm lands.

So far the activism expos­ing GMOs for the evils they are has worked in many parts of the world. To this day, com­mer­cial farm­ing of GMOs is ille­gal in the UK, and by Euro­pean law, food prod­ucts con­tain­ing more than .9% of a GM or GE ingre­di­ent must be labeled as con­tain­ing GMOs. How­ev­er, these vic­to­ries did not get the pro­pos­al for the road off the Mid­loth­i­an coun­cil agen­da. After Bay­er was no longer fund­ing the road, a large “indus­tri­al estate” near to the glen where Ikea and oth­er large “box” stores and pack­ag­ing facil­i­ties reside took up the bid to fund the road. The new investors meet uproars from the com­mu­ni­ty, who for many rea­sons feel that the road is need­less and are opposed to indus­tri­al devel­op­ment through the ancient wood­land. Bil­ston Glen is not only a des­ig­nat­ed “Sight of Sci­en­tif­ic Spe­cial Inter­est” (SSSI) – a con­ser­va­tion des­ig­na­tion denot­ing a pro­tect­ed area in the UK – it is also apart of the Green Belt. The Green Belt was des­ig­nat­ed as a coori­dor for wildlife in the Mid­loth­i­an area of Scot­land, it’s pur­pose is to pre­vent devel­op­ment along the belt line. With bla­tent dis­re­gard to these already pro­tect­ed areas, the local coun­cil itself became the face of the road expan­sion.

Luck­i­ly, Earth war­riors, for­est squat­ters, world trav­el­ers, Earth First!ers and the like have done an amaz­ing job at pre­vent­ing road expan­sion through Bil­ston Glen for over 10 years! The tree-sit is the one of the longest stand­ing peace and sol­i­dar­i­ty projects in the world, along side The Fasland Peace Camp, which is also locat­ed in Scot­land. Intent on block­ing any attempts to build a road through Bil­ston Glen, res­i­dents are also doing a alter­na­tive lifestyle project. Liv­ing and work­ing togeth­er, organ­is­ing our­selves and co-oper­a­tive­ly help­ing each oth­er.

EF! Winter Moot 2013: 22–24th February, near Preston

A week­end get-togeth­er for peo­ple involved in eco­log­i­cal direct action, from fight­ing open­cast coal, frack­ing, GM, nuclear pow­er to road build­ing. There’ll be dis­cus­sions and cam­paign plan­ning – with the empha­sis on the tac­tics and strate­gies we use, com­mu­ni­ty sol­i­dar­i­ty and sus­tain­able activism.

A week­end get-togeth­er for peo­ple involved in eco­log­i­cal direct action, from fight­ing open­cast coal, frack­ing, GM, nuclear pow­er to road build­ing. There’ll be dis­cus­sions and cam­paign plan­ning – with the empha­sis on the tac­tics and strate­gies we use, com­mu­ni­ty sol­i­dar­i­ty and sus­tain­able activism. This year we’ll be in Lan­cashire…

 

Update: full trans­port details and pro­gramme at link below.

Read more

USA: Protesters Blockade Monsanto Seed Facility in California

Opponents of genetically engineered foods blocked shipments and deliveries yesterday at Monsanto Co’s vegetable seed company that developed a new genetically modified sweet corn that will hit stores this fall.

The pro­test­ers, who want to remove all so-called genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied organ­isms (GMOs) from the food sup­ply, say their action is a pre­view of about five dozen oth­er events planned for coun­tries around the world next week.

They also hope to drum up sup­port for a Cal­i­for­nia bal­lot mea­sure that would require food sell­ers to label a broad range of prod­ucts, includ­ing soup, soy milk, break­fast cere­als and chips, that con­tain GMOs.

Mon­san­to and oth­er devel­op­ers of these biotech crops say they are safe. But U.S. reg­u­la­tors do not require any inde­pen­dent safe­ty tests that would put a lid on doubts raised by con­sumers and some sci­en­tif­ic and health groups.

More than 40 coun­tries around the world have some require­ments for label­ing foods con­tain­ing ingre­di­ents from genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied crops. But U.S. reg­u­la­tors have reject­ed requests by many groups for sim­i­lar label­ing rules, and as a result many Amer­i­cans do not know that they have been eat­ing GMOs for years.

At the protest on Wednes­day, about a dozen peo­ple orga­nized by a net­work of anti-GMO activists called Occu­py Mon­san­to stopped trucks from enter­ing or leav­ing Monsanto’s Oxnard, Cal­i­for­nia-based Sem­in­is for near­ly six hours.

The activists, some dressed in bio­haz­ard suits, blocked truck entrances with cars and chained them­selves to the vehi­cles.

Police arrest­ed nine of the pro­test­ers and charged them with tres­pass­ing, orga­niz­ers said.

Sem­in­is’ biotech sweet corn is one of the newest GMO crop prod­ucts to make it to mar­ket. The corn was altered genet­i­cal­ly to with­stand dous­ings of a com­mon weed­killer and to ward off cer­tain pests.

“We deserve to know what we are eat­ing and we should put GMO crops back in the lab and off the kitchen table,” pro­test­er Rica Madrid said.

Occu­py Mon­san­to is not affil­i­at­ed with the back­ers of a Cal­i­for­nia pro­pos­al to label foods that are made with crops or from ani­mals that have had their genet­ic make­up altered in the lab­o­ra­to­ry.

Mon­san­to did not direct­ly address Wednesday’s events but said the company’s work helped improve farm pro­duc­tiv­i­ty and food qual­i­ty.

“We respect each individual’s right to express their point of view on these top­ics,” Thomas Helsch­er, a Mon­san­to spokesman, said of the Sem­in­is protest.

DIFFERENT VIEW IN EUROPE

GMOs are deeply unpop­u­lar in Europe and many oth­er coun­tries, but they even­tu­al­ly came to dom­i­nate key crops in the Unit­ed States after Mon­san­to in 1996 intro­duced a soy­bean genet­i­cal­ly altered to tol­er­ate Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer.

Using genes from oth­er species, Mon­san­to and rivals includ­ing DuPont and Dow Chem­i­cal have since intro­duced an array of genet­i­cal­ly altered crop vari­eties.

The most pop­u­lar genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered crops in the Unit­ed States include corn, soy­beans, sug­ar beets and canola – sta­ple ingre­di­ents in a wide array of pop­u­lar pack­aged foods.

Pro­po­nents of GM crops say they make farm­ing more effi­cient by mak­ing plants resis­tant to pes­ti­cides, pests and harsh grow­ing con­di­tions, such as drought. They say genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied crops are no dif­fer­ent from con­ven­tion­al types and that increas­ing demand for food, bio­fu­els and live­stock feed can only be met with help from the biotech indus­try that Mon­san­to dom­i­nates.

Crit­ics say GM crops have not always lived up to their promise and that the ben­e­fits to farm­ers do not out­weigh myr­i­ad risks to human and ani­mal health and to the envi­ron­ment.

Assess­ing such risks is dif­fi­cult in the Unit­ed States. The gov­ern­ment does not require GMO crops to under­go inde­pen­dent safe­ty test­ing before they are approved, and it does not require label­ing for GMO con­tent which makes it next to impos­si­ble to track any links to human health prob­lems.

The World Health Orga­ni­za­tion says “indi­vid­ual GM foods and their safe­ty should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.”

Recent­ly, some U.S. sci­en­tists have raised alarm bells over what they see as poten­tial­ly dan­ger­ous impli­ca­tions from overuse of GMO crops.

Among the con­cerns is the fact that the rapid adop­tion by U.S. farm­ers of genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered corn, soy­beans and cot­ton has pro­mot­ed increased use of her­bi­cides, which crit­ics say has trig­gered an epi­dem­ic of her­bi­cide-resis­tant weeds and more chem­i­cal residues in foods.

This week, the Cen­ter for Food Safe­ty vowed to sue the U.S. gov­ern­ment if it approves a new type of genet­i­cal­ly altered corn devel­oped by Dow.