9 votes

Wal-Mart Selling GMO Corn Without Labeling It so

Published on Aug 5, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel

Most of the genetically-modified (GM) corn products forced on American consumers today are hidden in processed foods in the form of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), corn oil, corn starch, and various other corn-based additives.

But soon to be available at a Walmart near you is Monsanto's Bt sweet corn, the agri-giant's first ever GM corn product made available to consumers as whole ears right on the cob in the produce section-- and like with all other GMOs, neither Walmart nor Monsanto has any intention of labeling this new "Frankencorn."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfISCZLXyBI&feature=player_de...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Unless the corn is labeled "Certified Organic", then any corn

you purchase at any store is GMO modified. I stopped eating corn a few years ago and only purchase the frozen or canned organic corn. You can even taste the difference. Same hold true for all other veggies, too.

Why make a big deal over Walmart and not over the fact that it is difficult and expensive to buy healthy vegetables anywhere?

don't eat it.

they aren't forcing food down our throats, yet...

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

MonSatan's Birth Control Corn

Side effects include Sterility, and organ failure.

Guns don't kill people, Monsanto does.

____

"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

remove this comment please.

(Please remove - posted in wrong place)

The should be prosecuted

They should be prosecuted for Fraud. They are selling imitation corn as the real thing. That is fraud.

Many so called libertarians here think it is only fraud if they label it natural when it is in fact GMO. But the truth is that NATURAL is the default and if you introduce GMO without revealing it isn't natural is fraud in itself. Non labeling is fraud and those of you who are against labeling are intellectually dishonest corporate shills.

Take it to Court

Sue them. I think you do have a fraud case, but that does not require there to be a national labeling law, simply a court system that recognizes the fraud.

Of course, they will go into court and say they've complied with all the labeling laws, but you just need juries that know better.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

Oh yes that sounds like a good idea.

I have a couple of bucks saved up. I can spend it suing a multimillion dollar corporation. And with our oh so reliable and honest judicial system I will surely win and wont have to worry about the corporations that lobby and run our government selling fake goods any more.

At least the lawyers will be happy.

He doesn't have a case

Anothernobody doesn't understand the basics of genetics or molecular biology. He is more interested in spreading his hate of corporations than seeking truth. Look through his comment history.

Another corporate shill

I'm not surprised to see you supporting the very entities that are destroying our freedoms. I'm not surprised that you support the supposed "rights" of these man made entities over the natural rights of real people.

I'm supporting science

In the face of anti-intellectualism and sensationalism. This isn't about Monsanto.

Really?

You say above "Non labeling is fraud and those of you who are against labeling are intellectually dishonest corporate shills."

Really? Unless someone supports using government force against a producer to compel the producer to label a product they produce that someone is a corporate shill? To put it another way, unless someone supports the notion that the largest most powerful corporation in the world uses force to make other lesser corporations and people behave in some way, that someone is advancing the interests of a corporation as opposed to the interests of society?

It is the responsibility of the consumer to know what they are buying, and the responsibility of the seller to represent what they are selling accurately and honestly. If it isn't labeled, making an assumption that a product is one thing or another is just that; an assumption. You can't claim ignorance as a basis for a claim, and claiming your own ignorance as the basis for a request for someone else to use force against others is just, well, ignorant.

I'm not a corporate shill, and I don't support the use of force against manufacturers and/or producers who refuse to label. I simply won't buy products which I'm not comfortable buying.

Yes really

Good luck identifying what you are buying when there is not disclosure and they can say what they want. Shill.

an you imagine a farmers market

Where each small farmer had to lable each piece of fruit? They would have to purchase all the supplys to lable and extra hands to do the labeling, come under inspections just for the lable.

Many farmers at the farmer's markets are so small, they could not afford to lable each piece of fruit, so in many ways, this labling would undermine the small farmer.

Buy organic, and that solves YOUR personal choice to not buy GMO.

Yes, if they make THEIR choice to sell

If THEY make the CHOICE to sell produce that is not natural and has been tampered with yes by all means. Why should the farmer who has not gone against what is natural have to foot the bill for someone elses DECISION to introduce fake produce?

And as I said. Selling a tomato that isn't really a tomato is fraud. And a tomato with fish genes spliced in is not a real tomato.

It's like buying gold from the gold bullion section of Ebay and finding out it is fools gold. It wasn't labeled as fools gold but it was in the gold bullion section. It looks like gold and feels like gold but it isn't gold. Are you saying that it has to be labeled as real gold before it is fraud. Isn't the fact that it is being sold in the gold bullion section automatically make it fraud.

This is no different. And those who sell real tomatoes should not have to foot the bill to cover the ass of those who aren't. They made the decision and they should have to pay.

Not labeling a product is far different than...

...labeling which is not truthful or inaccurate. The former is not fraud while the latter is.

Does calling people names make you feel empowered or something? Or are you simply attempting to be inflammatory? My guess is both are true, and that the phrase 'corporate shill' means something far different than you think it does.

I didn't know that

so I can sell you a horse but deliver a mule and that is ok. That's good to know.

I will look it up

But just for the record I am under the impression it is someone who supports corporations or advances the cause of corporations.

I don't think corporations should exist at all. They are man made, never die and are the biggest threat to our freedom.

I agree that corporations should not exist.

Corporations are legal fictions created by government. The government itself is a legal fiction. These legal fictions were created for one purpose only; to shield individuals from responsibility and liability for the actions they take in the name of the corporation.

Calling people corporate shills who don't support using one corporation against other corporations doesn't make any sense. One can never support furthering the interests of society over the interests of a corporation by calling for a corporation to do something to another corporation.

Ok. I'm glad

I'm glad we agree on something. I retract my corporate shill remark.

Monsanto's lobbyists need

hung. Them and so many other lobbyists.

Oh, brother!

It's the Frankenstein Complex all over again!

If there were something wrong with the genetics of the corn, it wouldn't even grow in the first place!

Farmers have been "genetically modifying" corn (and almost every other crop) for decades! They've been calling them "hybrids."

Sheesh!

Freedom is my Worship Word!

Get a clue!

Your so dumb it hurt my head! Get a clue, there is a world of difference between 'Hybrids" and genetically modifying food.

Here is a link to a movie that will explain it all to you, don't worry they use small words and go slow so you will be able to keep up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhHbm_Z_pW8

Monsanto is EVIL and should be but down!

Boy are you ignorant

You cannot cross breed corn with humans or tomato with fish or any other animal. GMO is not the same as hybrid where it is just a matter of cross pollination and/or breeding. When you buy a tomato that is spliced with fish genes then it is no longer a tomato and they should not be able to call it or especially sell it as a tomato.

For you to claim it is the same only makes your ignorance shine through.

LOL you should't be calling anyone ignorant

You don't even realize that your genetic code has more genes for viruses than it does human. By your own logic you should not be able to call yourself a human. Based on your comments you seem to think that there are cut and dry differences between kingdoms and phylums and species according to the genetic code, but that is not how it works. There is a lot of overlap and the classification system is arbitrary to an extent. Your fish-tomatoe analogy is a dishonest strawman that demonstrates that you do not understand molecular biology. A tomatoe plant that codez for a gene that is also found in fish does not mean it is not a tomatoe. You are promoting antiscience.

But hey keep giving the DailyPaul science lessons. Keep fear mongering and insulting the peole who don' t share your snt-intellectual superstitions. Don't bother proving me wrong.

Wow you just refuse

to stop advertising your ignorance. Just like your erroneous belief in evolution because of similarities in monkey and human DNA strands. But monkeys are not human. Wow how hard is that to understand monkeys are not humans. Just because similar gene sequences can be found in different species doesn't mean what you claim.

No where in nature are a fish and a tomato going to interbreed to form some new hybrid. You need to lay off the heavy drugs and then perhaps you can cognate on a higher level.

You don't accept the theory of evolution?

That helps explain your primitive understanding of basic scientific principles.

And what is a "heavy drug?" Does gravity act on some drugs differently than others?

Please stop spreading your anti-science agenda. You aren't even using scientific terms correctly.

Oh me. You is so smarts.

Me not say scientific terms any more. Me go back to the trees with other crap flingers. Oh, me see you already there. Ooh ooh aah aah.

That about sums up my thoughts of you.

Cross pollination

is much older than decades, and while it is a kind of "genetic modification", it's a different process than gene "splicing", which is a misleading term. It's more like gene smashing. The industry's legal and marketing strategy is to say their products are "substantially equivalent", to avoid regulation, yet different enough that they can own the organisms through patents, and control the lifeform in perpetuity. Cross breeders of the 19th century were in many ways more careful and precise "modifiers", but they worked with natural processes. A tomato can't breed with a fish, or a goat with a spider, yet these new kinds of "hybrids" have made it to market as a cold tolerant tomato, and kevlar made from spider webs grown in goats milk. Also, plants can be viable, but poisonous or dangerous to humans. It doesn't necessarily die if it's dangerous.

Yes, but

Nows its plant x animal not plant to plant.

Your DNA (and all other humans) is riddled with viral DNA

Does this make you less human and less natural?

Nature genetically modifies organisms in ways we are only beginning to discover. Where do you think we got the idea and ability?