U.S. says Iraqis Can Not Save Their Own Seeds

Scoop: U.S. Declares Iraqis Can Not Save Their Own Seeds

Another troubling, yet not absolutely shocking, news about the new rules forced on the newly liberated Iraqi population. The article informs that according to provisions signed by CPA Iraqi farmers are not allowed to save their seed from one year to another. Instead they are required to apply for new licenses every time and buy new seed from (surprise) Monsanto.

As part of sweeping ''economic restructuring'' implemented by the Bush Administration in Iraq, Iraqi farmers will no longer be permitted to save their seeds, which include seeds the Iraqis themselves have developed over hundreds of years. Instead, they will be forced to buy seeds from US corporations. That is because in recent years, transnational corporations have patented and now own many seed varieties originated or developed by indigenous peoples. In a short time, Iraq will be living under the new American credo:

Pay Monsanto, or starve.: http://www.vegsource.com/articles2/iraq_seeds.htm

It looks like the great friend of corporations - Paul Bremer - decided to update Iraqi intellectual law to "meet current internationally-recognized standards of protection". So rather than continuing centuries long tradition of developing and using their own seeds now that have to fall in line with rest of the "civilized world" - embrace genetically modified seeds produced by large corporations.

Iraq law Requires Seed Licenses November 13, 2004
"According to Order 81, paragraph 66 - [B], issued by L. Paul Bremer [CFR], the people in Iraq are now prohibited from saving seeds and may only plant seeds for their food from licensed, authorized U.S. distributors. The paragraph states, "Farmers shall be prohibited from re-using seeds of protected varieties or any variety mentioned in items 1 and 2 of paragraph [C] of Article 14 of this chapter."
( http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/13/2023220 )

No, we are not going "to force our form of government on others", only our form of business...

Re-posted from http://libnotes.blogspot.com

Update [2005-2-4 16:11:22 by gianik]: It was suggested in the comments bellow that the article(s) I referenced may have been incomplete. There are several more sources on this topic so I decided to add few more links, including what appears to be the primary source used for the ones I referenced. Also
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/truefood/news2.html?mode=intl&newsid=210
http://www.grain.org/articles/?id=6
http://www.rense.com/general62/seeds.htm
http://www.rense.com/general59/newiraqlawoutlaws.htm
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KHA501A.html

Although most of them seem to be identical or similar.

•  holy crap!

  recommended.

  by Tomato Observer on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:53:33 AM PDT

  •  Bug Bush... Go Vote O/T

    North Dakota Democratic Senator Kent Conrad needs some help with this poll in the Fargo Forum... which asks if Republican Gov John Hoeven can beat him in 2006...  

    Looks like Bush must have been lining up a challenger for one of our Red State Senators during his visit to Fargo yesterday...  (go vote... middle of page towards the right)

    by Prairie Logic on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 04:30:35 PM PDT

•  Definitely a recommend!

  This is so ridiculous.  We cannot force the Iraqi's to buy our seeds.  I suppose Bush thinks he can.

  by stayingpositive on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:56:29 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely recommending!!

    by Lookingforwardtothefuture on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:59:01 AM PDT

  •  exactly, which is why the problem is exaggerated

    The law against saving seeds only applies if you buy the "protected" seeds, which no one is using.
    They can't even get running water or electricity, who is gonna buy special seeds from Monsanto?  We have the same laws here in the US.  Yes, the law sucks, but it only affects "protected" seeds, not all seeds.  Furthermore, the new constitution starts a new government which rewrites all laws, even this.

    by topdog04 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 01:59:17 PM PDT

    •  is this not true then:

      Iraqi farmers will no longer be permitted to save their seeds, which include seeds the Iraqis themselves have developed over hundreds of years.

      ?

      I'd really like the answer, and you seem to know.

      by Febble on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:06:22 PM PDT

      •  It's Not True

        Please take a look at this comment down-thread.

        by NotFuzzy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:14:51 PM PDT

        •  Thanks

          should have looked below before I posted

          by Febble on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:32:00 PM PDT

    •  aoeu

      If you're a farmer and your neighboor uses GM seeds which blow onto your fields you are screwed.  You can't sell the produce, you can't save the seeds.  All you can do is buy a license.

      by TealVeal on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:15:34 PM PDT

      •  POPCORN!

        yes, that's why we plant popcorn every year, and the seed corn guy has to come out and give us $75 to cut it down.  popcorn really screws up seed corn.  if i had a plane and a monsanto corporate test field location!!!!!  if only.

        by hornrimsylvia on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 09:09:07 AM PDT

        •  Dent Sterile

          You want to mke sure not to plant dent sterile popcorn. Some popcorns will not make seed on dent corn.

          by Jim Beard on Sat Feb 19, 2005 at 01:28:36 PM PDT

    •  new government doesn't rewrite all laws

      According to Naomi Klein (Baghdad Year Zero), 40-year contracts were being signed before the election, while the US was still nominally in control, that are binding even after a new government assumes power.

      by fbb on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:19:16 PM PDT

      •  The good news is...

        I don't think this law is enforceable.  Who would enforce it?  Surely not the Iraqis.  And I doubt U.S. soldiers are going to go door-to-door searching for seed.

        by DC Pol Sci on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 08:02:31 AM PDT

•  Ah, yes,

  I hope someday Iraq can live up to be as perfect and wonderful as the US.  If they buy our seeds, it is a step in the right direction for Democracy and freedom!!!

  by Boppy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:58:07 AM PDT

•  This has been going on for years

  in the underdeveloped countries. The seeds are often hybrids so won't grow true the second year and are worthless to the farmer forcing him into debt to buy seeds not developed for his climate.   They may be bioengineered seed (such as that with BT that also kills monarche butterflies)including corn which contaminates native seed. Its a huge mess. There are organizations which collect and maintain that seed. I hope some have been to Iraq.

  by pacificcoaster on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:58:58 AM PDT

  •  Saving seeds

    Since the US gov't people can't leave their protected compound and the military have their hands full, exectly who is going to enforce the law that prohibits using your own saved seed?  I wouldn't want to be the Monsanto sales rep in Anbar Province.

    Realistically, the new Shi'ite government (latest results show them getting 70% of the vote to 12% for Allawi's people) will just give the boot to most of Bremer's laws.  And who is going to enforce Bremer's laws when the Iraqis tell us to leave?

    This dark underside of the so-called "green revolution," which was mostly green for the big fertilizer and seed companies, should be a world-wide scandal.  Everyone who knows how should participate in the propagation and saving of heirloom seeds.  There are lots of good on-line sed companies.  Food gardening is just one more small revolutionary act that will deny Big Food some of their profits.  If you can't, at least shop Farmers' markets.

     

    by Mimikatz on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:51:43 AM PDT

    •  Precisely

      So some rapacious capitalist pig tells you to do something.  So what?

      Bugger off.  They'll be laughing as they save the seeds anyway--just who the hell is going to enforce it?

      Iraqi security forces?  Right.

      by paradox on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:43:30 AM PDT

      •  Wait until the first crop.

        Wait until the new Iraqi gub'ment finds a field full of seed that wasn't purchased from Monsanto... and razes the field.

        That's a warm capitalist hello from the Presidon't & company if there ever was one...

        by zeitshabba on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:07:33 AM PDT

        •  wait till the farmer whose crop was razed.......

          having lost his crop, and his family starving to death, decides that it's finally time to join the resistance.

          The next time the government forces (or the Americans) come by to raze the crops (or for anything else), the farmer, his family and his neighbors have thoroughly booby-trapped the road, armed themselves to the teeth, and are patiently awaiting their opportunity to get some of that sweet, sweet nectar of revenge.

          Let's just say I personally wouldn't want to be in the first military truck heading down that road.

          by burritoboy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:17:59 AM PDT

          •  We already headed down that road in 2003

            US Soldiers Bulldoze Farmers' Crops
            Americans accused of brutal 'punishment' tactics against villagers

            US soldiers driving bulldozers, with jazz blaring from loudspeakers, have uprooted ancient groves of date palms as well as orange and lemon trees in central Iraq as part of a new policy of collective punishment of farmers who do not give information about guerrillas attacking US troops.

            The stumps of palm trees, some 70 years old, protrude from the brown earth scoured by the bulldozers beside the road at Dhuluaya, a small town 50 miles north of Baghdad. Local women were yesterday busily bundling together the branches of the uprooted orange and lemon trees and carrying then back to their homes for firewood...

            by Olds88 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:00:34 PM PDT

        •  This would be the event that...

          would set off something on the order of Khartoum, circa 1884-1885.

          Everyone with an AK, C4, or an RPG-7 would come out of the woodwork.

          by rgilly on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:18:18 AM PDT

          •  I hear Monsanto is looking for Sales Reps.in Iraq

            They are looking for people to not only represent their exciting new line of GM seeds for 2005 but to also help the Iraqi farmers dispose of their seeds in the most environmentally friendly way possible.  There is a possibility of appearing in a commercial co-sponsored by Shell.  Apparently Arabic language skills aren't even necessary but they are insisting that any potential candidates prove they are under 4.6 seconds in the 40 yard dash...

            by SoLeft on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:19:12 PM PDT

    •  this really is capitalism gone crazy!!

      by mattes on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:03:27 PM PDT

  •  yep years and years

    Europe took a stand to prevent GM food stuffs entering the market to prevent just this type of takeover of the means of production by US corporations.
    This in turn stemmed the adoption by the developing world because they would have no market and pre-empted the future blackmailing for political gain "vote this way or starve" type of shenannigans.

    The frame should be seeds that are denied the means of reproduction are an abomination before God :o)

    by UniC on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:13:24 AM PDT

    •  Green Revolution all over again

      The sad thing is that the corporations that produce the seed, fertilizer and pesticides that are required to grow crops succesfully from these seeds claim that they yield more food than traditional seeds. While this is true under laboratory conditions, in the real world, poor farmers aren't able to afford all the required, chem-based fertilizers to make it work, and wind up borrowing money to pay for what they can afford, which in turn produces lower crop yields = less profit in the market = increased borrowing to pay for next years crop = increased debt burden on the lower classes of society.

      I've seen this happen in Peru, where rural farmers were pulling thier hair out because half of thier crop yielded beatiful looking potatos (or is it potatoes?) and the other half of the crop was completely ruined-infested and unable to sell in local markets. However, they were unable to revert to their old ways of growing crops since local seedbanks were stripped of traditional, locally conditioned seeds, and had been replaced by the hybrid. Rural farmers had no choice but to continue on their vicious cycle of debt and impoverishment.

      All so our corps could earn more money. Another case of markets not benefiting the whole.

      by erik4victory04 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:55:36 AM PDT

•  Should we build a Wal-mart in Iraq, too?

  by Lookingforwardtothefuture on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:59:32 AM PDT

  •  Duh.

    Of course we should--and no garden-variety Wal-Mart, either: supersize that sucker.

    I'm not going to troll-rate you, but you should really be careful. The fact that you've even posed this as a question belies a deep hatred of freedom, America, democracy, liberty, and freedom (again, for good measure).

    What's good for Wal-Mart is good for America. What's good for America is good for Iraq. What's good for Iraq is good for freedom. Blah, blah, blah.

    Oh. And just to keep this comment from being entirely devoid of content, anyone who has not read Naomi Klein's various articles about privatizing Iraq, I cannot recommend them highly enough. Look through these google hits for the articles and blog posts commenting on them.

    by abw on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:41:25 AM PDT

    •  off topic

      I dearly love that Springsteen song.  Nice to see it in your sig....

      by vinifera on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:06:39 AM PDT

      •  Thanks

        I was considering changing the sig today. You just talked me out of it. Song makes me cry every time. It's just tragic that things have gotten this bad.

        by abw on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:30:13 AM PDT

    •  Not Only Are You a Terrorist . . .

      . . . I betcher a sodomite, too!

      by proudtinfoilhat on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:33:12 AM PDT

  •  according to my Mom

    Know why there's no Wal-Marts in Iraq?
    Because it's full of Targets.
    

    by sayitaintso on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:05:57 AM PDT

    •  Oh, that's a keeper!

      Hahaha... Man, I'm going to remember that one.

      by Canadian Reader on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:09:16 AM PDT

    •  There must be lots of Wal-Marts

      in Afghanistan, then.

      I seem to recall our leaders complaining about no Targets there...

      by ppluto on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:31:00 PM PDT

•  previous diary

  Previous diary

  by nio on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:00:01 AM PDT

•  Glad

  you bring this up. I have seen this before, there where articles since last summer, but no one seemed to have been interessted. This is absolutely discusting.

  by fran1 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:01:06 AM PDT

  •  Link

    Here the link to a Iraqi website (free Iraq) with a collection of articles on this topic. The rest is worth reading too.

    For the record: "U.S. declares Iraqis can not save their own seeds"

    by fran1 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:15:27 AM PDT

•  This and other reasons why we are hated

  Bremer's "occupation" government has a whole slew of evil things designed make the Iraqis hate us.  I think one of the most outrageous is that while Bremer undid all the state controlled restrictions imposed by Saddam, he decided that Saddam's ban on trade unions and collective bargining was just fine.  The only restriction left on their economy was one put in place by a dictator?!  How American is that?

  by carlton858 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:04:55 AM PDT

  •  Yeah...

    I don't think we will have to worry too much about this issue.  Something tells me that Sistani and his followers, who look like will be in charge of the place will NOT stand for this.

    If the Bush Administration forces the issue then the so called democracy they brought to Iraq will be exposed for the travishamocracy that it stinks like.

    by Cathan on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:44:33 PM PDT

•  At first I thought...

  ...this would be about a sperm bank.  ;-)  

  Kidding aside, we often cite the oil in Iraq, but your diary makes me wonder how many other ways they've found to force the Iraqis to use US corporations in the rebuilding of their country.

  Recommended

  by BarbinMD on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:11:49 AM PDT

  •  Just wait

    Just you wait. If they can patent corn seed, there's no reason they can't patent human, errm, seed. I won't be surprised at all if in 50 years, all new parents need to pay licensing fees to the owners of "their" kid's DNA, and think it's normal.

    by zyx zyx on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:30:04 PM PDT

  •  Sperm bank

    It's hard work to prevent cereal onanism, but someone has to do it.

    by MarkInSanFran on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:32:19 PM PDT

•  Kos- FRONT PAGE this sucker

  
  This is a HUGE issue--

  And if Dems want to find a way to communicate to red-state rural areas- here ya go:

  Monsanto and others have been pushing farmers to not save seeds, buy terminator (no seeds) crops and buy crops not suited to a geographic area.  

  It is wasteful, evil, it drives farmers into debt, its meddling with nature- you could work up a lather going after this one and have red staters nodding in agreement.

  by jgkojak on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:14:25 AM PDT

  •  I agree - FRONT PAGE IT

    Bush/Cheney 1984:

    "Freedom" is U.S. privatization

    War is peace.

    Ignorance is strength.

    by Republic Not Empire on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:14:07 AM PDT

    •  This is beyond privatization

      This is, for lack of a better term, Sharecropping, 21st Century Style.

      Here is an idea:

      Lets have some "guest workers" come work the farm, planted with Monsanto terminator seeds (which cannot be replanted).  Coporation that owns the land gets rich.  Guest Workers make pennies.  The family farmer that used to own the land lives in a duplex and dad works at Home Depot.

      THAT is what they are doing to rural America.

      The first Democrat who can talk this issue up wins the next election (imagine if Harry Truman were asked to talk about this issue?)

      PS  This is why I liked Dean- I actually think he could have gone into Missouri and railed against terminator seeds and been listened to.
      

      by jgkojak on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:35:32 AM PDT

•  Even beyond this

  Virtually all new things in Iraq have to come from American suppliers in one way or another.  Part of our wonderful reconstruction of Iraq.

  Ignore the fact they could probably do these cheaper and more effectively themsleves, forget the fact that companies form other countries would be able to help more effectively and in a less costly manner.

  All of this is part of the reason the insurgency has support in the civilian population.

  And remember, many of the Iraqis voted because they thought it would get rid of the Americans the quickest.

  by JAPA21 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:18:05 AM PDT

  •  nauseating

    It must be nauseating to live in your own country, get bombed to hell for decades, be occupied by arrogant ditto-heads, and then experience culture shock and disenfranchisement as the very identity of your entire culture is swept away as it is privatized to Halliburton, BushCo, etc.

    by nika7k on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:56:22 AM PDT

    •  Ah, the real reason for war

      It's a whole new twist on destroying the country to save it - destroying it to let corps make money rebuilding it. By this logic, destroying the WTC was a good economic plan...They're sick people.

      Vice harms the doer ~ Socrates

      by kdub on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 05:02:41 AM PDT

      •  Read this book

        Read "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins, published by Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. of San Francisco.  He tells of his experiences working for U.S. interests.  His job was to bankrupt developing countries and make a very few corps rich in the process.

        This whole seed thing is sickening, abroad and at home.  Monsanto routinely goes after family farmers in court and forces them to pay royalties after their own fields are contaminated from nearby Monsanto fields.  They financially ruin these small farmers in court.

        I think corporate farming is a winning issue for the Dems in rural areas.  

        by RuralLiberal on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 06:45:10 AM PDT

        •  Big Genetic Scientist is Watching You

          Thanks for the suggestion. I'll check it out.

          I think corporate farming is a winning issue for the Dems in rural areas.

          Right on. It's hard to imagine people who depend for their livelihood on farming would support such an enforced loss of self sufficiency.

          Vice harms the doer ~ Socrates

          by kdub on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 07:54:21 AM PDT

        •  If people voted in their own self-interest...

          .... we would not have this problem of the persistance of the republican mindset and party.

          Its like anti-altruism to go along with the anti-intellectualism.  

          Do-gooders are made to look untrustworthy because altruism must be motivated by something that is hidden, unclear and thus sinister (the guilty are best at imagining other's sins), especially altruistic behavior that doesnt result in profit.  (I am sure I am not saying anything you havent heard or thought).

          Because progessives shut down the LEGAL use of the terminator gene, and just as the BushCo Admin coddles Microsoft, the administration pushes the conditions of Monsanto seed use on the "client country" (read colonial saps).  

          I bet we could find hundreds of other ways they are hard-wiring dependence on US companies.  The use of genetics is especially nasty but at least Monsanto can not use the terminator gene in this case.
          

          by nika7k on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 04:03:10 PM PDT

•  No surprise from Bremer

  When the neo-cons think about spreading freedom, they don't mean democracy, they mean free market anarchy.

  Their biggest beef with Saddam wasn't killing 60,000 Kurds in the 80s. It's the fact that he had public institutions with corruption and waste.

  They don't want to bring Democracy to Iraq. They don't even care about letting Iraqis open small businesses. They want to bring WalMart to Iraq. They want to bring McDonald's to Iraq. They want to bring MTV to Iraq.

  And they want to privatize EVERYTHING. Because with a religious zeal, they believe that will lead to the highest possibile quality of life.

  by danthrax on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:19:06 AM PDT

  •  Do you believe that?

    And they want to privatize EVERYTHING. Because with a religious zeal, they believe that will lead to the highest possibile quality of life.

    They want to privatize everything because it is the only way to gain Absolute Power over a population.  "You can do what you want, but if you disobey me, no food, no water, no clothing, no shelter, and we'll come around and beat you up from time to time..."

    by ultrageek on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:27:11 AM PDT

    •  I don't think they see it as selfish though

      They see greed as good, part of the greater good. Because the people who own the water, the clothing, the shelter, the food are so greedy, they'll try to compete with the other peopel who own the water, the clothing, the shelter, the food, to achieve the highest quality.

      You can't seperate the greed from the greater good, for them. I really do believe that they believe that. You need to talk to some of the intellectual neo-conservatives who might not be filthy rich, but are thankful that there are more billionaires in America than ever. They think that's good for everybody.

      by danthrax on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:39:50 AM PDT

      •  Well put..

        Today's bush-capitalism preaches that corporate self-interest will reduce prices.  On occasion this may be true - price wars - so long as there's competition, but the subsequent effect is monopolism (in this case of manufactured seed varieties), which requires a statutory and regulatory infrastructure to ensure that monopolies are policed.  Monopolies, of course, permit prices to be jacked up to maximum levels.  (Monsanto already has a monopoly on the genetic architecture of its Franken-seeds).

        NB: I'm no economist, this just seems self-evident.  If the above is faulty, please do correct me!

        by Bob Love on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:10:00 PM PDT

  •  they don't believe this

    they believe it will lead to the highest profits for themselves. they are not interested in competition, but monopoly. their first act in iraq was to put iraq back in OPEC.

    by heterodoxy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:50:36 AM PDT

    •  Multinational greed

      Multinational competition.

      I do think they believe it's for the greater good. Not all of them, but some of them. Wolfiwitz, for sure.

      But the actual CEOs and what not? They could care less.

      There are people who really think more profit is better for the greater good, that the company is doing something right and deserves to be rewarded, and that effect trickles down to all societies it touches.

      by danthrax on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:00:57 AM PDT

    •  When wasn't Iraq in OPEC?

      I doubt they want Iraq in OPEC, but there isn't much they can do about that. They will want to destroy the Iraq state oil company, SOMO, but they can't do so publicly. The first cries of "invade Iraq" probably happened when the Baathists nationalized the oil  companies in the early '70s.

      The CPA did put Iraqi oil trade back on the dollar last year. Saddam switched Iraqi oil to the Euro during the Oil-for-Food sanctions. It was seen as a spiteful decision that would cost Iraq money at the time, but holding Euros turned out to be a good idea. Now that OPEC and everyone else is quietly divesting from the dollar, the CPA decided it was in Iraq's best interest to get back into a sinking foreign currency.

      by Olds88 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 08:52:41 PM PDT

  •  I prefer to call it

    they mean free market anarchy.

    corporate colonialism --- a pretty old concept, actually.

    by Doug in SF on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:47:32 AM PDT

  •  not quite

    A state imposed monopoly (or, more accurately, oligopoly) can not be accurately described as "free market anarchy". There's nothing anarchistic about fascism, and this is definitely not "the free market" at work. The Iraqi's "market" choices are being restricted by force of arms.

    by bradspangler on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:29:27 AM PDT

  •  Not a free market

    What you describe is not a free market, it's a state-sponsored oligopoly similar to what we have in some respects in the states. In a free market, the farmers would be able to buy whatever seeds they wanted from whoever was willing to sell to them. In this case, you have the government enforcing laws that protect Monsanto from competition, and restrict the consumer (the farmer) from even enjoying full rights of ownership of the goods which he has bought.

    by zyx zyx on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:40:36 PM PDT

•  No surprise

  and everyone should read this site:

  http://www.percyschmeiser.com

  by a Canadian farmer who got screwed over the exact same issue.

  by clyde on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:21:49 AM PDT

•  Wait till they have to buy their water

  This is terrible, but it's happening all over the place.  Privatizing water and seed supplies is the beginning of complete domination.

  Do what I say or starve.  Mwwaaahahahahahah!

  by ultrageek on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:24:53 AM PDT

  •  They have to buy their water now...

    http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

    by pawlr on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:03:39 AM PDT

  •  Coming to a country near you

    The time may be now to enshrine in our state and federal constitutions the right to potable water via public utility.  I'm not a specialist, but I get the feeling you'd get a rise out of some pretty powerful interests who now operate behind the K Street Curtain.

    by Mogolori on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:03:07 PM PDT

•  This sounds like story I heard about China

  after the Communists took over. Sorry, I heard this a long time ago, and must rely on my memory--I don't know where to find a link. I can't vouch for its truth.

  Everything was supposed to be controlled centrally by the Communist Party. So after the harvest appointed groups went around collecting all the rice seeds to be stored together and then re-distributed to the "People" on party principles (probably depending on how well the particular "People" toed the party line.

  Anyway, it turned out that the city boys sent into the country didn't understand that each locality had developed seed to suit its environment. They mixed all the seed together in warehouses. The next growing season was a terrible failure and many starved.

  Will Monsanto offer the wide variety needed to assure a successful harvest? Funny how the extremes of economic systems, rabid Communism and rabid Capitalism meet to create the same kind of disasters.

  Corporate values--it's worthless if you can't sell it.  

  by Cowalker on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:26:08 AM PDT

  •  Monsanto's success

    Monsanto isn't interested in a successful harvest, especially if they have a law that guarantees future purchases.  Successful harvest, who needs it?  A failed wheat or corn harvest by Iraqi farmers is just another opportunity for the U.S. to screw them.  No wheat, no problem--we'll sell you some.

    by hazey on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:44:34 AM PDT

  •  So much for helping Iraqis.

    Let's make a big stink about this. It's an ugly fact that won't fit into their love-and-democracy window dressing.

    How many American farmers would tolerate this, if it were done to them?

    by jbeach on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:33:34 AM PDT

    •  It IS being done to them...

      and at least one diary was written about it almost a month ago.
      Scary stuff.

      by Donna in Rome on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:28:09 PM PDT

•  thanks

  Hey, in my environmentalism and justice class we just read about this, the "termination genes" they shove into seeds, I'll have to bring this article in.  Thanks.

  by albertocaiero on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:26:27 AM PDT

  •  yes

    try germinating a watermelon seed and you will see it.

    by heterodoxy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:46:51 AM PDT

  •  Do you have some basic info on this?

    This is very interesting...do you have a place to start learning about this type of thing?

    by joejoejoe on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 06:39:03 PM PDT

•  This Is Fucked Up

  The farmers in India have been fighting this battle against Monsanto for years.

  I hope the Iraqis blow off Monsanto and save their seeds anyway.  It would be a tragedy of titanic and criminal proportions if all that foodcrop genetic diversity were lost.

  by Dean Nut on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:41:07 AM PDT

  •  Iraqi Insurgetnt Farmer

    killed while smuggling heritage seed.  It was said that the terrorist farmer's truck was packed with as much as three hundred pounds of non Monsanto seed.  American officials say this is a significant victory in the war on non-GMO seeds.  

    In other news, Michael Jackson is on trial for this week for killing Robert Blake's estranged kidnapped Utah daughter who was found beaten to death with Kobe Byrant's wife's ring.

    by lapin on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:58:41 AM PDT

    •  In other news...

      In other news, Michael Jackson is on trial for this week for killing Robert Blake's estranged kidnapped Utah daughter who was found beaten to death with Kobe Byrant's wife's ring.
      

      (snot-bubble)

      THAT was fucking funny.

      Mitch Gore

      Wanna win in '08...?

      Put your money where your mouth is.

      by Lestatdelc on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 06:40:42 PM PDT

  •  That's the real thing

    that centrally gets me in all of this.

    We're setting ourselves up for major agricultural catastrophe. Basic thing anyone who's ever taken freshman Bio should know: Monoculture BAD. Genetic diversity GOOD.

    There are plenty of other problems with the way agribusiness shit has been going, but that seems to me to be the one any seventh grader should be able to grasp.

    This is our worldwide food supply we're letting them fuck with to increase their profits... and I suspect we're going to pay pretty big for this stuff somewhere down the road.

    A great irony here is that they're fucking with this stuff in one of the birthplaces of agriculture. grrrr. I hope the Iraqis manage to tell Monsanto to go to hell. Farming freely shouldn't have to be a form of guerrilla warfare.

    Sorry, ag issues just get me all frothing at the mouth. I guess I'm probably pretty rare in that. ;)

    by Spit on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:02:04 AM PDT

•  I hate this issue

  Why is it that corporate giants such as Monsanto are allowed to sue when someone replants? On its face it seems like an extremely stupid idea, with further digging it seems semi-rational, then on a once further glance it comes off as downright evil.

  The altruistic/protection impetus for this 'rule' was so that corporate/insanely large farms wouldn't be able to run around the 'royalty' payments to the developers of the seed [Monsanto, Novartis]. At that point it makes sense, as a corporate/large farm could systematically cull enough seed to never have to buy again, as well as the threat of that farm selling it's excess seed to others, therefore 'defrauding' the original seller [Monsanto, Novartis] of their 'legally due' reward.

  You may have noticed the quotes around specific terms. They are there for good reason...it is where the downright evil comes in. The actual 'legal justification' behind this rule lies in genetic copyrighting.  Since the seed in question is GM [genetically modified], it is protected under copyright by an interesting twist of intellectual property law. Genetically altered and transgenic material (material `built` in a laboratory) and in some places NEWLY DISCOVERED NATURALLY OCCURRING SPECIES, are what this covers.

  Now, as you can see, this puts Monsanto et al into the same category as BigPharma. Despite the rhetoric, they are still faceless corporations with no love for anything except the almighty dollar [soon to be almighty Euro?], so the 'accidental' extension of this 'protection' from corporate/large farms is just one more way to squeeze blood from a turnip and gain a monopoly on tier one of the worlds food supply.

  So there it is! Step one in BushCo's plan for freedom: Corporate Food Control.

  Enjoy, Iraq.

  by Clever on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:42:58 AM PDT

  •  You're on the right track...

    But the implications of what you are talking about extend far beyond what you've mentioned in this post.

    Anyone who has studied modern history and capitalist history should be familiar with the enclosure laws used in England to turn common, culturally shared land and literally fence the peseants out in order to use the privatized public space to graze sheep for wool. The obvious upshot, beyond outright stealing the land, was that the end of former peseant rights helped to compell those peseants into the market.

    The new-enclosure movement based on multi-national corporations such as Monsanto going into areas of the global South and privatizing the fruits of the local cultural knowlege of farming and then forcing the farmers to buy seeds they had developed themselves on a yearly liscencing basis works quite similarly in marketizing farming and food production in the global South.

    by Radically Bitter on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:10:08 PM PDT

•  UFB!

  un-fucking-believable!

  where is the RWCM on this?

  by heterodoxy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:45:19 AM PDT

  •  Enjoying a GM Bio-Burger . . . .

    at [insert name of giant US Agri-corporation fastfood outlet] across the street.

    If your nipples glow, our patent is working!

    by chrississippi on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:07:12 PM PDT

    •  If you really want to enjoy your

      fast food burger, read "Fast Food Nation" and "Food Politics". Both are  eye openers as to how much corporate America controls our food.  BTW, we did the same thing with introducing formula into third world countries promoting it as better than breast milk. Then babies started dying from contaminated water used to mix the formula or unclean conditions. There was a huge outcry and I believe the policies were modified.

      by pacificcoaster on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:23:22 PM PDT

      •  Francis Moore Lappe

        has been on this topic for a long time also.  Good background reading is "Diet for a Small Planet".

        Site link for Francis Moore Lappe:
        http://www.smallplanetinstitute.org/

        An interesting document collection that's kind of obscure:
        http://www.soilandhealth.org/

        In my own life I adopted vegetarianism several years ago to stop my own contribution to the meat based agriculture industry.  Alot of the corporatism of agriculture revolves around feed for livestock -- being non-meat centric would definitely pull them down a few notches.

        To pacificcoaster - sounds like titles I'd like, who are the authors if you have them?

        Thanks
        

        by neverlosehope on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 10:12:21 AM PDT

•  Absolutely a vital issue

  though certainly not as, you know, a particularly sexy issue or whatever.

  Wondering why the developing world hates us or doesn't trust us? We've been pulling this shit for a long time. We've pulled it on our own farmers, and we've spent years now trying our asses off to bring the developing world into the deal, because, after all, what's good for Monsanto is good for the nation, right?

  Thanks for posting this, and I hope some of y'all are willing to do some real thinking and working on this sort of stuff; agricultural issues both in Iraq and here at home are deeply, deeply important, and tend to get ignored for "sexier" issues. But if we don't start paying attention, we're going to end up letting farming die as a way of life, and having few alternatives to factory-style monoculture corporate (and usually less healthy, btw) produce. That's already happening to a large degree in this country; if we keep it up, it's going to be a global problem.

  by Spit on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:52:18 AM PDT

  •  Kille the terminators?

    It would be interesting if some nefarious group, say, the ELF, developed a genetic variant of a common weed - say, thistle - that carried and distributed in its pollen an allele, gene or gene set that would disable Monsanto's termination genes.

    Even more interesting if it got out of control and into the ecosystem.

    Escept that I hate invasive species.  

    by Bob Love on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:17:23 PM PDT

•  Dumb question?

  Uhm, does anyone know specifically what varieties are mentioned in article 14?

  "Farmers shall be prohibited from re-using seeds of protected varieties or any variety mentioned in items 1 and 2 of paragraph [C] of Article 14 of this chapter."

  It is not in the CPA PDF, it appears to be in the Patent and Industrial Designs Laws and Regulations (No. 65 of 1970).  Any patent folks out there have a copy of this?  I can't find it online.

  If they are just talking about Roundup-Ready crops, then farmers should still be able to plant their own non-GM seeds, no?
  

  by Primordial Ooze on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:57:08 AM PDT

  •  I Was Just Looking For This Too

    If the point is that farmers can't save seed from PATENTED varieties supplied to them as part of the reconstruction, then I can understand that.  And being a lawyer, I would read what is available - specifically the reference to a list of varieties -- as suggesting that this is the case.  

    If this DOES mean that farmers cannot keep and sow seeds bred by their forefathers for generations, then that is environmentally and economically stupid, as well as greedy and reprehensible.  But precisly BECAUSE it would be so stupid I tend to doubt that this is what is meant.

    by NotFuzzy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:05:38 AM PDT

    •  PLEASE UPDATE DIARY - MISINFORMATION!!!

      If you go to the "primary" source here you get a more nuanced look.  The diary writer linked on secondary and incomplete translations of that material.

      Pointedly, the thing that these guys have pointed out is true: farmers are not prohibited from replanting their own seeds.  They are only prohibited from replanting seeds that come from corporations.

      Specifically, I think the quote from the slashdot post is wrong:

      people in Iraq are now prohibited from saving seeds and may only plant seeds for their food from licensed, authorized U.S. distributors.

      There is nothing in the original source material that says that they "may only plant seeds for their food from licensed, authorized U.S. distributors".

      What it does say is that Iraqi seeds which don't come from corporations do not qualify for the same property protections, because they are not "new, distinct, uniform and stable."

      Please check your stuff before you make overblown claims.

      Don't get me wrong.  This is still insidious corporate colonization of a country.  It means that if people do replant seeds, they mix into the seedline, and another farmer buys the seeds from his neighbor, monsanto can still nail him.  If wind blows pollen and the GE crop "infects" his field, they can still nail him. In other, safer countries like Canada, at least, fuckers have police that enter into private property, test your crop, and nail you if their genes are there.  Some guy in Canada got sued for having round-up ready corn when it had been contaminated by the wind.  He lost and had to pay Monsanto royalties, even though he wasn't using round-up and thus the genes weren't doing him any good!

      peace out.
      

      by MediaRevolution on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:47:39 AM PDT

      •  oops

        I wish I'd been nicer about correcting the error.  Things happen, and I've done it before.  I still think the diary should be updated to correct misinformation, but my post had misinformation of its own!!

        In other, safer countries like Canada, at least, fuckers have police that enter into private property, test your crop, and nail you if their genes are there.  Some guy in Canada got sued for having round-up ready corn when it had been contaminated by the wind.  He lost and had to pay Monsanto royalties, even though he wasn't using round-up and thus the genes weren't doing him any good!
        

        I found the court ruling against this farmer here (WARNING, 31 page PDF).  The monsanto agents took samples from "public road allowances" by two of his fields.  They then tested his seed under court order.  So it's not like they just marched onto the middle of his land.  They were technically on public land.  And he was using round-up on at least some of his crop. And, according to a number of measurements, his seeds were over 95% round-up ready, which makes it unlikely that it was just wind-blown pollen that made them so.

        Anyway, just strengthens the lesson that we gotta be more careful on the facts.

        peace out again.
        

        by MediaRevolution on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:10:37 AM PDT

        •  I think the protected varieties language

          is an attempt to create a legal presumption:
          I.E.- Some farmers delibrately "steal" genes by hybridizing with IP protected crops.  Therefore it is reasonable (hah) to create a legal presumption that genetically blended crops are violations of IP rights.  Thus all crops that are blended are subject to licencing and etc.  From there it is not too far a leap to say that sertain crops are either so subject to open air pollenization, or are so frequently "stolen" that any planting is presumably a violation (or attempt to) violate someone's property interests.
          Sometimes a rose is just a rose, sometimes it is an instrument of crime.
          MONSANTO SUCKS!! IS YOUR STATE'S FARM BUREAU A SHILL FOR MONSANTO?  MAKE IT AN ISSUE IN LOCAL ELECTIONS!

          by Myrkury on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 03:14:27 PM PDT

      •  IANAL

        but I was an Ag.Eng.

        from page 15 of the pdf:

        The breeder: The person who bred, discovered or developed a new variety, or the legal successor to such person.

        from page 16:

        One of the requirements for registerability-

        If such materials are distinctive so that the variety differs clearly from any other variety whose existence is a matter common knowledge at the time of filing the application, considering that any filing of an application for the granting of plant variety protection or for the entering of another variety in an official register of varieties, in any country, shall be deemed to render that other variety a matter of common knowledge from the date of the application, provided that the <> application leads to the granting of the right or to the entering of the said other variety in the Register, as the case may be; ...

        It seems to me that nothing disqualifies me (or a biotech legal construct) from waltzing into Iraq, finding their plants have slight distinctions, registering them, and charging farmers for their use.

        by hotspur on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:14:02 AM PDT

        •  That Would Mean That Only White Westerners

          can "discover" things -- sort of like Christopher Columbus...

          I think the indigenous Iraqi farmers have already both "discovered" and "developed" their native species.

          by NotFuzzy on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:36:47 AM PDT

        •  True

          But if you extend the "legal successor to such person" to include the descendants of the indigenous peoples of Mexico (for maize/corn), China, North America, and India (for rice), Armenia (wheat), and so on, the "or" appears to open the door to a legal challenge to Monsanto's legal ownership of the organisms that serve as vectors for their GM genes.  Gee, might there have been cuneiform tablets in Baghdad's museums that discussed agriculture, and the development thousands of years ago of new grains?  Those might be valuable in a class-action suit, but alas, looting happens.    

          Moreover, the US government's agricultural subsidies (which largely wind up in the hands of Monsanto) help destroy the ability of small farmers everywhere to feed themselves and remain independent.  So much for exporting freedom.  

          Go to http://www.grain.org/seedling/?id=292 for more on the diminishing food independence of Latin America.   Grain.org is a great resource for further information about the history of this issue in general, and its continued importance worldwide.

          by GRCambridge on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:18:16 PM PDT

      •  Please check the Update in the diary

        Looks like I am being accused of misinformation. That doesn't feel nice. However, as you can see I am mainly referencing articles that I recently discovered and not rendering any legal opinion. The Title itself echoes the original articles, not my conclusion. We may have a discussion or disagreement about the details, but there are bigger conceptual issues (like pushing GM food on behalf Monsanto, or deciding what is best for others, and so on). If the post appears very misleading to anyone I would like to offer my apologies.

        by gianik on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 02:57:31 PM PDT

        •  If you are ,

          just take it on the chin, and we will kiss the boo-boos later. I am so glad to see this this community getting their teeth into this issue!
          Have a 4, dammit.

          by emmasnacker on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 03:24:08 PM PDT

  •  I may have answered my own question

    But I'm more confused than before.

    Written in massively intricate legalese, Order 81 directs the reader at Article 14, paragraph 2 [C] to paragraph [B] of Article 4, which states any variety that is different from any other known variety may be registered in any country and become a protected variety of seed - thus defaulting it into the "protected class" of seeds and prohibiting the Iraqis from reusing them the following season. Every year, the Iraqis must destroy any seed they have, and repurchase seeds from an authorized supplier, or face fines, penalties and/or jail time.

    Does this mean anything that could be protected (i.e. anything) is considered protected?  If so, this is absolutely as bad as the headlines, and is wrong, protectionist, immoral, evil, etc...

    How can we have the gall to impose on the FERTILE CRESCENT, the BIRTHPLACE OF AGRICULTURE, this monstrosity of a power play under the guise of development?

    by Primordial Ooze on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:05:39 AM PDT

    •  imho

      Protected crops refers to patented crops, i.e. Roundup-Ready, BT or other modified crops that the producing company holds a patent on.
      There's no law that I'm aware of that would allow someone to patent nonspecific/ancient  crop lines.
      

      by folgers on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 04:21:55 PM PDT

•  Great catch.

  Remember, there is nothing too disgusting for chimp_junta to have a hand in it. There is nothing they will stop at to steal from entire populations where they can. Social Security is the giant seed_farm in America right now.

  We will all have to buy our Social Security from a chimp_junta appointed financial adviser in the proposed future.

  "If you're 55 or older you are not in any trouble" _Bush in his SOTU

  But if you are 54 or younger, it will all hit the fan. Hang on to that seed money, sparky.

  And not a day goes by, not an hour passes, that bush&co are not plotting ways to get their hands on any consumer protection and shred it. Sad, but true.
  Nasty Letters <--my little blog

  by HiFlyer on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:01:20 AM PDT

  •  No joke, that...

    ...and my husband is 53.

    He is screwed.

    by Kitsap River on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 07:47:44 PM PDT

•  monsanto is one of the most powerful

  forces in the world today.

  They are crushing academic freedom at places like Cal-Berkeley, criticism of Monsanto has landed a SUNY-Buffalo art professor in jail after a truly horrid FBI investigation.

  Opposing Monsanto is probably one of the greatest offenses imaginable in the US (and now the world).

  Corporate government indeed.

  by upstate NY on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:03:19 AM PDT

•  Thanks for this...

  I mean, this is an absolute atrocity.  One more step toward less biodiversity and less sustainability.  How much you wanna bet the Monsanto seeds are susceptible to some endemic bug leading to some massive crop die-out?

  by osf on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:19:37 AM PDT

•  You can find all

  of Bremmer's 100 Orders here. Each one is available for download as a pdf.

  Cheers

  by Spud1 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:20:34 AM PDT

  •  p.s.

    I think that this Order applies only to patented seeds, i.e. GM seeds. As I understand it, American farmers are under the same restrictions.

    by Spud1 on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:23:01 AM PDT

•  Troll-rate me

  But I'd actually pay good money to have the CEO of Monsanto being beheaded on some Zarqawi snuff jihadi video. OK, I take it back. These criminal scum deserve something even worse. I should ask Gonzales for suggestions.

  I can't wait to see them trying to enforce that on the Iraqis, particularly with the tens of thousands of troops that do nothing except sunbathe and play beach volley and which could be put to good use policing these wacky hajji peasants. (/sarcasm)
  

  by Clueless Joe on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:21:34 AM PDT

•  I can't wait till a Monsanto cop shows up

  in an Iraqi field and demands payment for saved seed. He will likely get his ass shot off.

  This will never work. It's laughable.

  by greendem on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:27:15 AM PDT

  •  It's not that...

    ...it's that the seeds Monsato sells will not be replantable, so farmers have to keep going back to the company for their seeds.  Here's the passage from one of my environmentalism texts, Southern Exposure by Barbara P. Thomas-Slayter:

    Companies such as Monsanto, a leading producer of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), claim that genetically engineered foods are safe and environmentally friendly, reduce the need for chemicals in agriculture while still helping to feed the world's hungry.  Furthermore, Monsanto's latest genetic technique, Technology Protection System (TPS) - labeled "terminator technology" or the suicide seed by its opponents - offers the prospect of opening worldwide seed markets to the sale of seeds by Monsanto and other large corporations.  The Technology Protection System would prevent the germination of seeds from genetically improved plants after one or two years.  The use of the terminator gene would mean that seeds harvested at the end of a growing season could not be saved and replanted the following year as farmers around the world currently do.  Monsanto believes that TPS is needed to make sure the yields on agricultural lands are as high as they can be.  With biotechnology, they claim that there is the right genetic information in the plant at the outset, fewer pesticides are wasted in the soil from spraying, and productivity is increased.

    However, several public interest groups paint a different picture...If current trends continue, Friends of the Earth and other organizations warn that farmers will be perpetually dependent on Monsanto's seeds, using the TPS technique and chemicals for survival.  According to the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the TT technique for preventing plants from producing viable seeds could have significant implications for farming systems, biodiversity, and food security in developing countries.  Farmers would have to abandon the age-old practice of using this year's seeds for next year's harvest.

    Sorry, I don't know how to do the big block of text thing.

    by albertocaiero on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:44:07 AM PDT

    •  sorry, that's not true

      the seeds Monsato sells will not be replantable, so farmers have to keep going back to the company for their seeds.

      There are no terminator seeds here.  That technology exists, but as far as I know it has not been used anywhere, because of public outcry.

      No, these seeds CAN be replanted, it is that they are prohibited from being replanted.  Monsanto "police" exist.  (See 31 page pdf of court ruling against Percy Schmeiser).  They tested seed along the road in a public easements boardering two of his fields, and then under court order took samples from his seed.

      by MediaRevolution on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:01:59 AM PDT

      •  Thanks

        for the correction, got excited because we'd just read about it...they really haven't been used anywhere?

        by albertocaiero on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:10:58 AM PDT

        •  Monsanto said it would never market it

          See this 1999 BBC article.  It was the top of the list when i googled terminator gene.

          by MediaRevolution on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 11:25:26 AM PDT

      •  Hybrids aren't stable

        Is the problem, if you save seeds from a hybrid crop you will eventually get a return to the constituent varieties and weak off line hybrids.  In other words, a shitty ass crop.

        by Myrkury on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 03:17:53 PM PDT

•  In addition to everything else...

  this is a gross violation of international law.  Occupying powers aren't allowed to just rewrite the legal systems of invaded countries to suit their own corporate interests.  Of course, they're also not generally allowed to invade said countries to suit their own corporate interests.

  by libdevil on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:31:08 AM PDT

  •  Inter-what?

    Your quaint, obsolete comment confuses and perplexes me.  I don't understand.

    What I do understand is that if you attack some other country, unprovoked, and the people or government of that country cause damage to your equipment or lifestyle as a result, you are entitled to all the natural resources and future production of that country.

    Unfrozen caveman lawyer

    by GRCambridge on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 12:30:46 PM PDT

  •  That's why "elections" are so important

    We need the newly selected government to rubberstamp Bremer's edicts to make them permanent.

    by ineedalife on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 06:43:17 PM PDT

•  The good news about this

  is that this law will be widely  violated and unenforceable. As a result, Monsanto may lose control of their seed patents.

  The bad news, all the seed will be GM, relased on the world in one big Frankenstein experimetn.
  

  by DyspepTex on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:39:35 AM PDT

•  Thanks for the Diary,

  although, the subject makes me want to puke.  The bastards have a vice grip on everything humanity needs to survive.  WATER will be the next thing in the US.  Truly insidious shit.  Really frightening is that water, food, shelter and energy, are such boring mundane subjects to people, that many never give a thought to the fact that very few, a handful of BASTARDS, are in control of these things.

  Monsanto has been vicious in it's control of food sources.  I wish people and state and local governments, would wake up and dump the stock they own in Vulture companies.  Too many people have their money invested in companies, they don't even know they're invested in.  We also need to start outing the Directors of these companies, especially since they receive obscene amounts of money as Directors and enjoy so many benefits via their association with the 'movers and shakers' of society.

  by DianeL on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:39:46 AM PDT

  •  I'll take this opportunity

    to ask people NOT to buy bottled water.  I live in Los Angeles and recently read an article in the Times magazine about a local mountain community (Idlywild) in which someone bought a place near a creek, and then allowed a bottling company to truck out water at all hours of the day and night, until the creek actually died.  This is not a unique story.  Coke has bottling plants settled right next to communities (e.g., in India) that have no access to water because Coke has taken it all.  People in those communities have to walk miles with containers on their heads to hydrate their families.  Forget about the plants, there's no water for them.  When the fast food place asks if you'd like a drink with your order, the answer is no!  Buy a good water bottle or two and fill 'em up at home.

    Thanks for listening :-)

    by Lisa on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:04:44 PM PDT

•  Bush's Agriculture Sec. was a Monsanto Lobbiest

  George W. Bush's Cabinet: Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman
  http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet/cabinet.veneman.asp

  by stirringstill on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:41:55 AM PDT

•  Grain had an article about this in October

  World Food Day: Iraqi farmers aren't celebrating

  A new report [1] by GRAIN and Focus on the Global South has found that new legislation in Iraq has been carefully put in place by the US that prevents farmers from saving their seeds and effectively hands over the seed market to transnational corporations. This is a disastrous turn of events for Iraqi farmers, biodiversity and the country's food security. While political sovereignty remains an illusion, food sovereignty for the Iraqi people has been made near impossible by these new regulations.

  This is a scandle.

  I'm so glad to see this posted here; I posted about this on my site (ThisCenturySucks) back in November, but having it posted here means people will actually read about it.

  This is proof positive that the war was not about Liberty (that WMD bit really didn't pan out), but about profit.  It is the 21st century version of plundering.  

  Give a man some bread and he eats for a day
  Teach him to farm and he eats for the rest of his life
  Take from him the right to save seeds and he has to phone Monsanto for the rest of his life

  by centurysux on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:44:24 AM PDT

•  This is bullshit!

  They do the same thing in the US and it is wrong on so many levels. Fight back and buy your seeds here:

  http://www.seedsofchange.com/

  Our Mission
  In 1989, we at Seeds of Change started with a simple mission: to help preserve biodiversity and promote sustainable, organic agriculture. We sought to do this by cultivating and disseminating an extensive range of open-pollinated, organically grown, heirloom and traditional vegetable, flower and herb seeds. This is still our mission.

  We seek out traditional varieties from the Americas and treasured heirlooms from abroad, many of which are in danger of being lost due to the rapid consolidation within the seed industry and the decline of indigenous agriculture and seed-saving knowledge.

  Read on here:

  http://www.seedsofchange.com/about/default.asp

  Support sustainable agriculture and eat vegetables that taste better! Fight the corporate BS!

  by plk on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:52:04 AM PDT

  •  Use free seeds or become a slave

    It really is that simple.  Remmeber the story of Joseph from the Bible, and how the Israelites came into Egypt and, eventually bondage?  It was because they became dependant on Pharoh for food.
    I don't particularly subscribe to this theory, but many historians will point to control over seed distribution as the basis for primitive egalitarian communities developing into feudal models.
    If you have a monopoly on food you are king, that simple.

    by Myrkury on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 03:24:10 PM PDT

  •  Seeds of Change

    is great. They encourage you to save your own seeds! Let's send some it Iraq.

    -5.88, -6.82

    by Debby on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 09:54:07 PM PDT

    •  They encourage,

      and I do it. I also have veggies that self seed into the garden. They are from seed packs I bought from them years ago.

      by plk on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 01:52:43 AM PDT

      •  Good for you!

        Unfortunately, I'm not so good at getting the plants to grow in the first place. I'm almost ashamed to buy their seeds, knowing my pathetic skills. Still, I really want to plant a garden this year (and DD has signed up for 4-H--yeehaw!) what with the plummeting dollar and all. We may need it!

        -5.88, -6.82

        by Debby on Sat Feb 05, 2005 at 02:12:06 PM PDT

•  So is the US Army

  Now going to be the seed police? Who the hell is going to enforce this rule, with everything else going on over there?

  If you're a subsistence farmer struggling to survive in a war zone, you're not likely to put maintaining your "seed license" at the top of your priority list. You're also not likely to respond well when someone tells you that you must buy the required seeds. This is the kind of thing that creates ARMED INSURGENTS among people who might not otherwise be inclined to participate.

  Also, the requirement to buy seed is only half of the loop. The setup is likely to be that oil is sold at ridiculously low prices to Exxon by the Iraqi puppet government and then that money is used to buy seeds from Monsanto. Presto! None of the money actually touches Iraqi hands.

  by sba on