Mark of the Beast: Obama’s latest Monsanto pick, Elena Kagan

Monsanto goon Elena Kagan

By Rady Ananda


First, we spit out our coffee over President Obama’s appointments of former Monsanto goon Michael Taylor as Food Safety [sic] Czar and ‘biotech governor of the year’ Tom Vilsack as Secretary of Agriculture.  Then, we choked on our grits when he made Monsanto lobbyist, Islam Siddiqui, the US Ag Trade Representative.  Now, the real food movement has completely lost its appetite with Obama’s nomination of Monsanto defender, Elena Kagan, to the US Supreme Court.
In December 2009, in her capacity as Solicitor General, Kagan intervened in the first case on which SCOTUS will rule involving genetically modified crops, Monsanto v Geertson Seed. She defended Monsanto’s fight to contaminate the environment with its GM alfalfa, not the American people’s right to safe feed and a protected environment.
The lower court ruled that “contamination of organic and conventional alfalfa crops with the genetically engineered gene has occurred and defendants acknowledge as much. Such contamination is irreparable environmental harm.”

Michael Taylor

That other fields, not those of Geertson Seed, et al., had been contaminated does not bother Kagan. “The district court failed to find either that respondents had suffered or were likely to suffer irreparable harm…”

This flies in the face of reality. The biotech industry has admitted it cannot prevent contamination of natural fields. When Bayer CropScience contaminated nearly a third of the US rice supply with its GM version, its defense lawyers told jurors that “Bayer’s containment protocols were equal to or exceeded industry standards when the test rice escaped into the general supplies.”

Tom Vilsack

If the best containment protocols don’t work, then contamination cannot be prevented. That is clearly an indication that natural crop farmers are “likely to suffer irreparable harm.”

Geertson Seed explains some basic facts about alfalfa and GM contamination:

“Alfalfa is not just a prolific field crop, but feral alfalfa and weedy alfalfa is commonly found beyond the fields by roadways, irrigation canals, backyards and beyond….

“Contamination of conventional alfalfa from genetically engineered alfalfa is a major concern. The primary mode of contamination is from the movement of pollen by bees from plant to plant. Alfalfa is pollinated by many different bees and other insects that fly long distances. Sudden wind gusts like those associated with summer thunder storms can carry pollinators over greater distances. When a pollinator visits an alfalfa plant that has the Roundup Ready (RR) gene inserted, it will pick up the pollen that contains the RR gene and carry it to a distant conventional alfalfa plant. If that pollen fertilizes the blossom of the conventional plant, the resulting seed will contain the RR gene.”

Islam Siddiqui

This contamination becomes especially important because contaminated alfalfa will continue to sprout for years: “The seed produced by alfalfa can have 50% or more dormant seed [which] can lay dormant in the soil for many years.”

Glyphosate is one of the most toxic herbicides in use today. Monsanto’s trade name for it is Roundup. Geertson Seed explains that:

“Roundup Ready alfalfa will have a selective advantage over non GE alfalfa and will become the dominant weed variety. In turn, the weedy Roundup Ready alfalfa will be difficult to kill and will become a source of pollen and seed that will contaminate other feral plants and conventional alfalfa seed fields in the area. In a few years, it will be extremely difficult to avoid contamination from GE alfalfa.”

Worse, researchers at the University of Caen found that Monsanto’s particular formulations of glyphosate in Roundup “actually amplified glyphosate’s toxic effects,” which include human cell death.

Kagan seems to believe that the biotech industry’s inability to prevent contamination is not an issue for farmers, the environment or we the people. Her repugnance toward our human right to reject the deployment of genetically engineered crops comports with corporate views.

She earns the M on her forehead, joining Justice Clarence Thomas, a former Monsanto lawyer who corruptly refused to recuse himself from Monsanto v Geertson Seed.


10 responses to “Mark of the Beast: Obama’s latest Monsanto pick, Elena Kagan




    WHY haven’t the USDA and the EPA tested the farm fields and/or farmers “CROPS” when Salmonella and/or E coli has been found?

    WHY haven’t the USDA and the EPA checked to see if any of the crops have had bio-control products used on them?

    *Biopesticides, Biofungicides and Bioinsecticides that are manufactured and used on farmer’s crops are LIVING microorganisms (bacteria and/or fungi).

    ARE any of these bio-control “products” contaminated?

    WHY does the USDA and the EPA allow Biopesticides, Biofungicides and Bioinsecticides to be MANUFACTURED IN MEXICO and USED on American crops and for insect control?

    WHY does the EPA Form 8570-6 say?:

    “After fermentation and prior to further processing, each batch must be tested for the following microbial contaminants and have levels below those listed”:

    •”E. coli Coliform Bacteria”

    Wikipedia Definition:
    The term biopesticide is often used for microbial biological control agents that are applied in a similar manner to chemical pesticides. Commonly these are microbial biological insecticides, but there are also examples of fungal control agents, including Trichoderma spp. and Ampelomyces quisqualis (a control agent for grape powdery mildew). Bacillus subtilis are used to control plant pathogens. Weeds and rodents have also been controlled with microbial agents.

    NRCAN Definition:
    Biopesticides are products containing “natural” [EMPHASIS ADDED] organisms, or their genes or metabolites, that are used to protect vegetation against damaging pests Biopesticides are viewed as an attractive alternative to chemical pesticides because they attack specific pest targets and are more efficient than chemical pesticides. One example, Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki, or Btk, is the most widely used biological control agent in forestry.

    EPA Definition

    Biopesticides are certain types of pesticides derived from such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain minerals. For example, canola oil and baking soda have pesticidal applications and are considered biopesticides. Biopesticides fall into three major classes:
    1. Microbial pesticides consist of a microorganism (e.g. a bacterium, fungus, virus or protozoan) as the active ingredient. Microbial pesticides can control many different kinds of pests, although each separate active ingredient is relatively specific for its target pest[s].


    *food illness; ALMONDS – salmonella
    *food illness; CANTALOUPES – salmonella
    *food illness; CEREAL CROPS – salmonella
    *food illness; LETTUCE – salmonella
    *food illness; PEANUTS – salmonella
    *food illness; PEPPERS – salmonella
    *food illness; PISTACHIO NUTS – salmonella
    *food illness; SESAME (oil Crop) – salmonella
    *food illness; SPINACH – salmonella AND e. coli
    *food illness; TOMATOES – salmonella

    The above DOES NOT take into account – ANIMAL FEED

    • thx for the comment, st.

      biological control is preferable to chemical and GM technologies because these organisms evolved along with the “pest” and do not destroy the environment…. or if they do reach ‘outbreak’ stage, they also eventually reach their carrying capacity and naturally die out. this is the way nature works.

      Salmonella and e.coli contamination usually occurs in food processing plants, slaughtehouses, or on CAFOs – concentrated animal feeding operations. Not in the field.

      control of salmonella and e coli is usually done at the plant thru hygeine and application of phage therapies. this is where it gets dicey. some of these biological controls are genetically modified, and, as science is beginning to show, GM technologies can be dangerous.

      the. control after a product is purchased requires thoroughly washing your vegetables and thoroughly cooking your meat.

      the best choice, imo, is to purchase your food directly from small farms or at farmers markets, rather than buying factory food.

  2. Are you saying that bio-control products DO NOT become contaminated?

    I wish to direct your attention to a document, sent to a company which manufactures bio-control products; by the EPA. This four page document clearly shows definite problems with fermentation batches the EPA had received, quality control issues, storage stability issues, manufacturing issues, pathogenicity, toxicity and mortality :

    *The submitted manufacturing processed did not have sufficient quality control fermentation batches.

    *Data required

    •Data for the 12 month storage stability of the end-use product has not been submitted.

    •Additional data described in the December 12, 1999 review and March 8 2000 letter are required to upgrade submitted process, MRID# 44519-04 to acceptable. This includes:

    •1) A formal submission that clearly describes new quality control steps taken to assure the consistent CFU/g values and limit microbial impurities in the Technical Powder.

    •2) A 5 batch analysis of Technical Powder produced from cell cultures with latest QC.

    •3) Raw data for the above mentioned 5 batch analyses.

    Ecological Effects Data Required

    •A 21 day Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate Study must be performed. Attenuated and filter sterilized controls should be used in the test. Test lab should attempt to determine cause of death and whether pathogenicity involved.

    •[Shrimp] Required due to report of disease in terrestrial amphipod crustacean associated with B. subtilis infection. Protocol must be submitted before initiating study.

    •QST Technical was shown to cause mortality to parasitic Hymenoptera. MRID 44619-14 is graded supplemental. Potential pathogenicity was not investigated.

    •[HONEY BEE] All test concentrations showed treatment related mortality. MRID 4456519-17 is supplemental due to the short test duration and the lack of a determination as to whether mortality was due to toxicity only or whether pathogenicity contributed.

    [please decrease your screen size when viewing this document]

    Click to access conditional_registration_aq_qst_713_2000_copy.pdf

  3. Yes Rady.

    It is for this reason that I am SO SHOCKED that the U.S. doesn’t stop this.

    How many more people have to get sick OR die because it is our government who started this mess with bio-control products in the first place.

    Some of the LIVING microorganisms used in these products are genetically altered or genetically modified (it is hard to say how much they are modified or altered because the biotech companies claim “trade secrets”, “proprietary information and “confidential information”. I do know that the percentage rate of the “active ingredient” is relatively low [as little as .07%] in comparison to the “inert ingredients” (biotech product manufactures DON’T HAVE TO DISCLOSE what is in the “inert ingredient”).

    It is true that there is contamination from under-cooked meat and food that has not been refrigerated… However, have you ever seen, or heard of so many cases of salmonella and e coli from food that are grown in farm fields before? I haven’t.

    It is my belief the U.S. DOES NOT want the connections of salmonella and e. coli to bio-pesticides; bio-fungicides; bio-insecticides products, is because it WAS the United States WHO STARTED using LIVING bacteria and fungus against plant diseases and insect control. In fact, countless patents reveal the “inventor” as being with the ‘USDA”.

    Numerous biocontrol patents state: “a mutant”; “mutants thereof”; “strain or a combination thereof”; “further comprising another antibiotic-producing bacterial strain and/or a chemical pesticide”. I QUESTION WHY THE WORD “CHEMICAL PESTICIDE” IS USED WHEN IT IS BELIEVED THAT BIOCONTROL PRODUCTS ARE “NATURAL”. This makes no sense to me.

    And then there is the problem with the microorganisms; (bacteria; fungi) being “discovered” in foreign countries. Some of these “discoveries” have NEVER BEEN identified before. So it is alright that we put “newly discovered” microorganisms on crops?

    I also question what happens to our own ecological system when “foreign pathogens” enter them?

    As I said, this has to stop before there is no safe food left to eat.

    • st.I agree gm mod bacteriums must be stopped, however horse poop is a bio fertiliser, yes it also would contain some bacteria, and some viruses to, humanity has been using Natural poop and doing fine after a light rinse and cook, for mellenia.
      using feedlot manures and effluent pumped subsoil is a daft idea, needs to be composted or pre digested, prferably in a methane digester. better use!

      If you get too precious you will end up with Dirt, not soil.
      we have to use organic manures to save the soil biota. healthy soils keep the bad guys in check..
      again most of the contamination comes from massive plants combining many many harvests and many people handling them, massive amount of contamination sources..
      heres a case.
      an aussie OJ maker ended u shut down after e coli in juice unpasteurised.
      so why?
      well the oranges of ONE grower were stored where birds etc could, and did poop.
      as a huge amount of growers fruit was combined it was hard to track.
      also the new trend to juice the whole fruit skins and all, then enabled contamination even after washing occured.
      sometimes it happens.
      small local and lower tech is the way to go, I feel.

        • no worries:-)
          and I got sidetracked..
          Kagan, another ohbummer plant.
          ties to far too many nasties like goldbags sux, mon, and others that arent to be trusted.
          she believes in internet control and even seems to think its ok to burn books.
          she is NOT a good person to be getting such power. to misuse.

  4. Yes, I agree with you, manure has been used in gardens and farm fields FOREVER. Intentionally and unintentionally.

    But, we’ve NEVER seen the vast amount of e-coli and salmonella related illnesses to field crops before the use of biopesticides, biofungicides, bioinsecticide etc.

  5. Ironically, on the same day the New York Times article, “Safety Rules Can’t Keep Up With Biotech Industry” broke, the scientific watchdog group, The Council for Responsible Genetics-GeneWatch Magazine submitted the electronic version of the print subscription; March-April 2010 issue titled, “BioLab Safety”.

    The Editor of GeneWatch, Sam Anderson stated in the Editorial Section, ” This may be one of the most important GeneWatch issue in recent memory”.

    The electronic version of GeneWatch magazine; BioLab Safety is available free online at This 28 page electronic version can be read as you would a “printed” magazine issue.

    March-April 2010 issue; “BioLab Safety” articles:

    A Cruel and Unusual Corporation
    By Ralph Nader
    A Roach in the Kitchen
    By CRG staff – interview with Becky McClain
    Commentary: GM Crops
    By Eric Hoffman
    Dedication: Tony Mazzocchi
    By Jeremy Gruber
    Give Them an Inch…
    By Michael Siciliano
    One Bug, One Drug
    By Lynn Klotz, Edward Sylvester
    The Lab in My Backyard
    By Beth Willis
    Teatime in the Lab
    By Sam Anderson
    Book Review: Breeding Bio Insecurity and Germs Gone Wild
    By Andrew Thibedeau
    Flushing It Down the Rabbit Hole
    By Andrew Thibedeau
    Topic: Genetic Discrimination
    By Jeremy Gruber
    Topic: Forensic DNA Databanks
    By CRG Staff
    The Case of Dr. Malcolm Casadaban
    By CRG Staff

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s