83 votes

Attention Californians: David vs. Monsanto Documentary

Watch it now:



Californians can view this documentary and learn about GMOs and the intimidation Monsanto is wielding over farmers before voting (YES hopefully) on Prop 37.Dr. Joseph Mercola is being attacked and smeared in negative ad mailers, but he posted the documentary link so people can view it for free before that privilege expires on November 10, 2012.

Percy Schmeiser, a feisty and savvy farmer, battled with Monsanto. In the process he has brought to light not only Monsanto’s attempt to control the food supply, but the pitfalls of any company being allowed to have the right to put a patent on higher life forms including birds, fish and human beings.

29:40 minutes in, Percy explains the damage seen from GMOs. He says GMOs are not based on proven science. “We do not want any more GMOs.”… “The corporations want total control of the seed supply which will then give them total control of the food supply. That’s what GMOs are all about; not more food to feed a hungry world but control of the seed supply.”

The second half of the documentary addresses the quality, technology and science associated with GMOs.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

FORCED to eat GMO ? lol where

FORCED to eat GMO ? lol where in jails? you should say CHOOSE to eat. No one should be forced to label products. when its forced its no longer free market. people should only choose to label but not lie about the contents.

░░░░░███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ----------------O

But should libertarians

But should libertarians support tobacco labeling?

Most of us oppose that.

Also, India, Russia and the EU aren't really places to look up to. Take a look at the Indian Constitution, or the EU Bill of Rights...

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

Such a dishonest argument

Do you know why India kicked out Monsanto? After monopolizing the cotton crop, they raised the price of seed 5,000 per cent. India has had more than 250,000 farmer suicides as result of Monsanto's monopoly. So I'm supposed to disregard India's experience because the Indian Constitution isn't something to "look up to"? Livestock in India will eat cotton. They completely avoid the GE cotton.

Thanks for posting the video

since I see the Mercola site is now under maintenance.

46:00 minutes: The idea that we cannot recall a life form after it is artificially introduced is scary. And since a “terminator (suicide) gene” can stop the plant from reseeding, that forces farmers to keep buying Monsanto seeds. That is so not right especially when that same gene infiltrates other nonGMO crops and kills their ability to regerminate. It not only defies a free market system enabling farmers to choose for themselves, but it defies the laws of nature via a forced suicide threat to life forms which I find morally reprehensible.

Well Said!

Let's see the anti-label people here argue that!


Yeah, because Monsanto are

Yeah, because Monsanto are the only people and always will be the only people to ever sell any type of GMO in California.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

Labeling GMOs is a way of protecting

personal property (your body). No one has the right to damage or harm another's personal property.

I do think however, the free market is working to a degree. My supermarket is offering more and more organic and non-gmo than ever before.

Labeling tobacco is a way of

Labeling tobacco is a way of protecting personal property (your body). No one has the right to damage or harm another's personal property. Yet pretty much everyone here opposes that and I would say I agree with that if only because labeling is a waste of money and it's forcing something upon businesses.

Oh wait, tobacco isn't harmful for you, the NWO only label it because they don't want you to know it's positive health effects, while the NWO's GMOs will kill you!

Some of you guys are so opposed to the status-quo you come off as crazy. You're classic hipsters. Some of you are so crazy you think anything that society accepts is inherently untrue.

Also, complain all you want about your personal hate for Monsanto, but Monsanto isn't the only business Prop 37 will affect. It affects anyone who wants to sell GMOs. What if I know a guy who knows a guy who can get me GMO seeds? What if I then grow these seeds? What if I then try to sell the GMO plant without labeling it? You think it's alright for big government and come and lock me up just because I tried to sell a plant - aren't we also arguing that people should be able to grow and sell marijuana, coca or opium without having the authorities come after us? You say in this case, the buyer is aware they are buying marijuana. That is true, but they aren't aware of what I could have spiked it with...the same goes for the sale of pretty much anything someone can consume. Should be label every product that anyone can consume?

Funny how some of the same morons ranting on here about how big government labeling will save us are accusing people like Rand Paul of being fake libertarians. You are the fakes. No one who supports Prop 37 is a genuine libertarian. Many of you are using the utilitarian position - it's not ideal but it's the best for everyone - is that not compromising your position? And people here really hate the word compromise... If you genuinely oppose Monsanto, you should be backing patent reform, rather than this insane idea.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

I heard

that Monsanto patented the word "organic" and someone made it a law that "organic" food only has to be PARTIALLY natural in order to be put up for sale as organic. Now if you want real food it has to say "natural" on the label. They are evil evil evil!


Yeah Really!

That is exactly the way I feel. Are all these people bashing prop 37 bought out by Monsanto or what? More divide and conquer? Just like with the farmers turning on each other? It's US or THEM. Which is it people? Freedom to eat what you want or being FORCED to eat what the evil corporations say? WHICH? Hmmmmmmm


I hope you are not suggesting

I hope you are not suggesting that I'm bought by Monsanto. Them's fightin' words.

Just Seems

like everyone here that is against labeling is pretty much taking sides with Monsanto since THEY are the ones that don't want it the most. Labeling is the only way we have to fight them and it would hurt them badly because people would stop buying stuff that has their garbage in it and then the grocery companies would stop stocking their crap and the companies that put gmo's in their products would quit doing that and start using real food instead. That would hit Monsanto where it hurts. Isn't THAT the free market at work?


Are government mandated

Are government mandated warning labels the only way people can find out if a food is good for them, or is at least what they think is? Do you really think that someone that buys all of their food from a supermarket chain will look at the label on the bag of cheese puffs and not buy them because a government mandated warning label says they contain GMOs? Will a government mandated warning label cause a person who does not care what he eats to suddenly care? As long as he is not claiming to be helpless (which in most cases is just laziness, plain and simple), doesn't a person who does care already have plenty of avenues available to him to make sure that what he puts in his body is real food? It seems that, in classic statist form, you are demanding that "somebody needs to do something", just as long as it's not you.

Michael Nystrom's picture

A minute and a half in...

Judge rules that if a neighboring farmers' seeds are contaminated against the wishes of the farmer, the farmer is liable. The farmer's seeds immediately become the property of Monsanto. And the farmer cannot plant those seeds. Through no fault of his own.

Again, we see the State has its fingers all over this, creating the problem in the first place.

So just how is the "free market" supposed to solve that problem?

He's the man.
Michael Nystrom's picture

Two minutes in ...

ALL of this farmer's profit for his ENTIRE crop goes to Monsanto.

This is not a 'free market' problem.

He's the man.
Michael Nystrom's picture

Fifteen minutes in, and what is clear

is that the law of unintended consequences (and let us not forget that it is a law) is going to come back and bite so hard on these GMO crops. Every year, the chemicals need to get stronger because the super weeds get stronger ... monocrops ... yields going down ... suicide seeds ... Monsanto has complete control over the farmer ... the farmer is completely gagged by contract, and cannot ever sue.

The farmer contracts all of his rights away - voluntarily in the case of those who sign on with Monsanto, but involuntarily in the event his farm is contaminated accidentally. "Monsanto has more power than any government."

All this makes perfectly clear why Ralph Nader calls corporations "private tyrannies."

Can someone tell me how you fight this in the "free market?"

He's the man.

"Can someone tell me how you

"Can someone tell me how you fight this in the "free market?""

This exact question is used as an excuse for tyranny in regard to every topic known to man. It is why liberty never prevails.

I Said it above

Label the products and the public will stop buying them because they don't like being poisoned. If the products quit selling, the stores will stop stocking them. If the stores stop stocking them the food companies will quit using gmo crap in their products. If they stop using gmo's because they can't sell them then Monsanto goes down. They label the ingredients, why not gmo? Oh yeah, because NO ONE WOULD BUY THEM! DUH! What is so hard to understand about that?


"Label the products and the

"Label the products and the public will stop buying them because they don't like being poisoned."

What about the public not buying products -because they aren't labelled-? If the market can demand that foods not contain poisons, it can just as easily demand that foods be labelled... without the need for preemptive regulation.

So is government regulation by definition anti-free market?

Ron Paul says he wants to put the regulations on the Federal Reserve. Open it up, see what their doing. I want to put the regulations on the FDA. How come Michael Taylor goes from Monsanto legal council to FDA head? Why is Monsanto allowed to falsify science and get special treatment at FDA? Why are they allowed pass their products off as something they are not? How are they entitled to the profits of your crop, if pollen from their patented life forms contaminates it? There is a healthly, but perhaps simplistic, idea of regulation here. Regulation is appropriate if it keeps cabals from running monopolies.

The Federal Reserve and the

The Federal Reserve and the FDA are government entities (or pretend to be) and are limited by The Constitution. Regulation of private entities is an entirely different ballgame. If Monsanto is getting special treatment from the FDA, the FDA should be your target. Monsanto isn't the threat it is because it is Monsanto. Instead, it is a threat because of government favoritism. Deal with the government problem, not the symptom.


They aren't saying MONSANTO has to label, they are saying the FOOD COMPANIES need to label. Who regulates that? State or federal? Is California wants safe food to eat more power to them.


Okay, let me reword that: The

Okay, let me reword that:

The food companies aren't the threat they are because they are food companies. Instead, they are a threat because of government favoritism. Deal with the government problem, not the symptom.

Michael Nystrom's picture

32 minutes in

What is also clear:

Corporations are a different species. A different race living among us. Yes, they are composed of people, but they are not people. Buildings are made of bricks, but buildings are not bricks. They have different properties.

People behave differently in groups. Corporations are, in effect, mobs. Everyone knows how a mob behaves. They're bloodthirsty. Corporations are bloodthirsty for money. For control. They are collectivist organizations. They are immortal. They have no soul. They are single minded in their pursuit.

A single human being doesn't stand a chance against one.

Corporations are zombies. No wonder zombies are so popular. They are a metaphor for the world we live in.

He's the man.

Oh, come on Mike. You know

Oh, come on Mike. You know why corporations exist and not all companies are run exactly the same, because the boards of directors are filled with individuals. Yes, the responsibility of every company is to provide value to their shareholders, yet I don't view that as a negative. If companies do harm, there are liability issues that still must be faced.

The problem of corporatism is there are certain companies that receive favorable treatment in government and exert undue influence to have laws written in their favor.

Not all companies are bad.

Nearly everything we use and rely on has been created by a company of some kind, even if they are just sole proprietorships.

Thnx Velveeta, you saved me a post..

About the difference between corporatism and free market enterprise, between political vs. free market entrepreneurs.

And very well put, b.t.w.



That was a great post, so well put.


The law is so important

"A single human being doesn't stand a chance against one."

Percy's $600 win is so rich. They blinked. Oop, we're not going to win this one, let's settle. He beat 'em at their own game. It's as if he thinks he's a country doctor fighting the military industrial complex.

Love that, "Buildings are made of bricks, but buildings aren't bricks."

It is through the force of

It is through the force of government that these monopolies are put into place and maintained. Why would anyone in their right mind want to give that mafia any more power?

How Come

you have to have the LINK to view this video on youtube? How come there are NO comments on the page after over 6000 views when the views aren't disabled? WTF? How come people here think California doesn't have the right to know what they are eating? They have ingredients on the labels of stuff, they have the breakdown of fats, what food additives are there, what preservatives are there, whether or not they are organic, but you don't think we should be able to see if they are GMO's? I am beginning to think people on Daily Paul are losing it! People here seem to be becoming RADICAL over stuff.