December 14, 2017
Business Latest News | Poll Questions | Republican Tax Bill | Roy Moore | Susan Collins

Comments for: Maine farmers get second chance in court against giant Monsanto

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    Good Luck!!! I would like to see Monsanto hit the dust

    • Anonymous

      Usually we don’t have anything upon which to agree… well, on this… 100% agreement…

      • Anonymous

        I agree, rare common ground with the red button. But i liked it.

  • Anonymous

    Now that the appeals court date has been set, Gerritsen is busy
    reestablishing the Farmer Travel Fund, which will help fund farmers’
    ability to take time away from their farms to attend the oral arguments
    in Washington, D.C.

    Too funny…..

    Also, the drift thing is a farce. If you’re a farmer and use Mosanto’s seed to plant your crop you are not supposed to use those crops in the fall for new seeds the following spring. But these farmers use the seeds and claim drift.

    Also, if i am next to an organic farmer farming conventionally, why is it I am the bad guy? i am supposedly threatening his lively hood? Because of drift? He is threatening my lively hood because of his practices. I have to limit the planting of my ground because of “buffers”. bunch of B.S. Organic farming is a marketing ploy. That’s it. more power to those farmers, but do not tel me i am the problem.

    • Anonymous

      Monsanto ADMITS that drift is an issue, but denies they will sue under that circumstance. If so, why not put it in writing? The fact is that they have sued over drift…

      http://www.percyschmeiser.com/conflict.htm

      Seems like you’re a bit biased by your neighbor situation.

    • Anonymous

      Sorry my friend, you are the problem.

      You have absolutely no human right to tresspass on another’s property and that is exactly what you are advocating with your reckless practices that admittedly contaminates neighboring landowner’s properties

      • Anonymous

        I agree with you on this one Jack

    • Scott Harriman

      If your pigs get loose and destroy my organic corn crop that is your responsibility.

      If your transgenic corn gets loose and destroys my organic corn crop that is also your responsibility.

      • Anonymous

        You should be responsible for your hatch of corn borers then, and pay market value for my corn.

        • Anonymous

          There’s so much poison on your crop that nothing could survive on it.

    • Anonymous

      I don’t think it’s wise to let one company control the food source.
      If you destroy the ability of seeds to produce food you’ve also taken away the right and responsibility for people to feed themselves.
      If monsanto was able to destroy the heirloom seeds it seems reasonable to think a day will come when few people can afford to buy their seeds.

    • Anonymous

      Your moniker says it all, silly, and yes, you are the problem.

  • mireeldo moccacio

    Monsanto=genetically modified food=cancer.

    • Anonymous

      Monsanto seed feeds a lot of the world which would otherwise go hungry. No, I’m not supporting their lawsuits but I will say this, the story here is very one sided. If farmers are being sued for having Monsanto seed inadvertently in their fields why don’t they sue back for Monsanto not showing due diligence in keeping their seed contained and out of the farmers fields? Huh, why not? This all sounds made up. Monsanto hasn’t successfully sued anyone for this issue. The organic people are just pushing the case to discredit a corporation which has not done them any harm other than to operate from a different business ideal.

      • Anonymous

        Please get your facts straight. Giving you the benefit of the doubt.. here’s some facts about Monsanto going after contaminated farmers/farms. Its expensive to sue Monsanto.. and risky. If there was justice, the feds would go after them using RICO.

        http://www.percyschmeiser.com/conflict.htm

      • Scott Harriman

        Monsanto has actually done much harm to organic farmers by contaminating their crops with transgenic material, which is not allowed in organic production.

      • Anonymous

        Spot on. Vast majority of the organic claims is voo doo and cult like. It’s done for the marketing of organic products. They’ll trot out all kinds of studies from Cornocoppia, and other groups, which are lobbying organizations for the organic crowd.

        • Anonymous

          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
          Monsanto troll

        • Anonymous

          This is NOT restricted to the “Organic Crowd” . Have you Ever used Fake Sugar? Suggest you bone up on Monsanto via Google. It should open you to a whole new world. Monsanto should not be trusted/

      • Anonymous

        Monsanto has sued and threatened to sue many farmers, while forcing those farmers that are forced, yes, forced, to use their seed to sign legally binding non-disclosures. The farmers that lost or were intimidated into settling effectively turned over the rights to their own seed stock to Monsanto. You are factually wrong in just about everything you have said in your comment.

        This documentary covers the travails of one farmer’s plight trying to fight this behemoth:

        http://thoughtmaybe.com/david-vs-monsanto/

        Monsanto’s suit against Oakhurst Diary, which ended in settlement, is another example of Monsanto’s attempts to force untested GMO technology on the American public. It just backed a successful campaign in CA, spending millions, to prevent genetically modified foods from being labelled with consumer information allowing the buyer to decide for themselves whether to feed their children and families with un-tested GMO products.

        Kaiser Permanente, as an insurance provider, is warning their customers to avoid GMO products as un-tested. The reasons are CLEAR… they are un-tested, and most of the advanced world rejects these products or requires labelling. In the US, corporate interests don’t even allow the public at large the ability to KNOW which foods they are eating have been genetically manipulated, introducing foreign proteins and DNA sequences into the US public’s food supply.

        It is with significant concern that many people see parallel trends in the data when looking at when GMO products first appeared in the US, and the rise of unusual cancers, obesity, diabetes, allergies, and other diet related diseases and conditions. Correlation doesn’t prove causation, but any thinking person would be remiss to pass over the parallel trends as coincidental, especially when these products have NOT BEEN TESTED under long term, double-blind, controlled experimental conditions. This is, in fact, an enormous uncontrolled human experiment that has introduced foreign dna sequences and proteins into the American diet, and THEN requires the individual TO PROVE HARM rather than the industry being required TO PROVE SAFETY.

        This TED talk explains some of the rationale behind a business model that is making a killing for some, while pretty much killing (literally) others….

        http://sdemetri.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/when-a-very-profitable-business-model-doesnt-make-sense-big-food/

        Your shilling for this industry is the farthest thing from DUE DILIGENCE.

      • Anonymous

        Made up? Genetically CHANGED foods make our bodies react differently to the foods. It changes our metabolism. Jeez seeds blow in the wind and birds carry them every where. Did you go to school?

  • Anonymous

    Anytime I hear the word, Monsanto, I cringe. If you think that this corporation is AOK, then you should read their history of all the places around the world where they have set up shop. It is not a good report and should be taken seriously in the USA. Time to wake up and see the truth about a very greedy corporation. I would NOT trust them.

  • Anonymous

    Go Jim go! Does Monsanto Dream of Electric Sheep? You bet they do!

  • Anonymous

    <<>> So why is Monsanto fighting the lawsuit? Given their policy statement it sounds like they would agree to a permanent injunction against claiming violation of their patent rights.

  • Anonymous

    This is like Berts Hamburger suing McDonalds. Berts had way better hamburgers but in no way could compete on a global level against Big Mac.

  • Anonymous

    I do not think I have ever read a story that painted Monsanto in a positive light. Ever.

  • Anonymous

    Where is Erin Brockevich when you need her? This sounds like her type of case. I wish the farmer’s luck in their pursuit for justice. I think it’s pretty clear that they wouldn’t be going to these lengths if there wasn’t any merit to it. Shame on the judge who dismissed it without a trial.

    • Anonymous

      Montsano has a lot of money

    • Anonymous

      Erin led the way for us all to take notice and take a stand. You do not need to be a farmer to take a stand along side them against Monsanto. If you enjoy eating clean food, then join this FIGHT. Call your representatives and write letters.

  • fruitfarmer

    The company that brought you DDT, Agent Orange, Aspartame, bovine growth hormone and PCB’s now wants you to trust them, right…

  • Anonymous

    Here is more info on the movement to prevent Monsanto from dictating its for-profit whims on the food supply of the US.

    http://www.organicconsumers.org/bytes/ob356.htm

    Apart from Jim Gerritsen’s fight to protect his and many, many other farms threatened by Monsanto’s un-contained genetic technology, and Monsanto’s claims of theft and copyright infringement against those farmers that find Monsanto’s technology in their fields without having planted it themselves, the fact is Monsanto is fighting tooth and nail to prevent labeling of transgenic products so the public can know that they are eating potentially dangerous, un-tested, genetically modified foods. Proof of harm falls on the individual, the least able to fight against a behemoth like Monsanto, instead of the industry proving SAFETY and bearing the cost of that proof. This is the tobacco fight all over again.

    Trends showing cancer and disease increasing in the American public coincide with the introduction of GMO products in the food supply. Childhood allergies, some severe and life threatening, have increased at the same rate as GMO foods appearing in their diets. Transgenic manipulation introduce foreign, that is, cross-species, or hamster or bacterial, dna sequences and proteins not normally found in human beings. Yet, NO LONG TERM testing is done by Monsanto or food processors to ascertain the safety of this technology over the long term. NO ONE knows if this is safe to do. The individual has the burden of proof if they believe they have been harmed. Correlation doesn’t prove causation, but the parallel trends in these two data sets is good reason to suspect something is going on, and TO DO THE TESTING…

    This TED talk is a 20 minute eyeopener. It shows how a business model that makes WONDERFUL sense if you are looking to make a killing, but ought to shock anyone wondering AT WHAT PRICE to the people eating the foods being produced…

    http://sdemetri.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/when-a-very-profitable-business-model-doesnt-make-sense-big-food/

  • Anonymous

    I beg everyone who has a garden, or uses fake sugar sweeteners, to please Google Monsanto and read the evil side. It is Alarming. Read the History of this money sucking corp. and take that info. to court. Very Alarming.

  • Anonymous

    Oakhurst beat Monsanto so can the rest of us.

  • Anonymous

    Oakhurst stopped them and so can we.

  • Anonymous

    Just their sweet corn seed would save millions in pesticide expenses, these old hippies who are against them need to take a botany class. Less pesticide = more bees.

    • Anonymous

      But it’s not less pesticides. When Monsanto produces Roundup ready GMO seeds, more pesticides can be used not less.

    • Anonymous

      Jim Gerritsen was never a hippie. He is one of the hardest working farmers, if not people, in this state. He carved his farm from wilderness and rocky pasture. He has brought needed jobs to his community. He is technologically innovative and deeply committed to sustainable agriculture and the land. He knows more about botany and plant biology than most farmers. He is not seeking special treatment. He is helping fight against a company whose goal appears to be to monopolize agriculture worldwide.

  • Anonymous

    So much misinfo in these comments, its hard to know where to begin. Monsanto is not after Gerritson. They would be if he was a thief and planted GSO products without paying the trait fee. I use GSO, it means genitcally superior organisms. Again,they are not going after him and his pals unless they dont pay the fee. This bunch operates by the rule, whats mine is mine, and whats yours is mine as well. They have zero rights to dictate what other farms in Maine plant for crops. He would howl like a dog with a sore paw if the commercial farms around him said he couldnt plant potatoes, because he cant control late blight outbreaks. Same deal.
    There are very little GSO crops planted around him, canola and maybe some sweet corn. What right does he have to dictate what I can grow in S Maine? NONE, which is why the first judge told him and his gang to go home. All of you who hate Monsanto, please look at what you are wearing. 95% of cotton is GSO cotton. The ink in your pens is probably soy based, which is GSO soybeans. 80% of all sweetcorn is GSO
    GSO products are everywhere and growing thank the scientists who are not modern day Luddites marching to town to destroy others way of life
    The Monsanto lawsuit with Oakhurst was about rBST, a naturally occuring hormone found in milk. Absoulutly nothing to do with GSO products. They lost the suit no question. It was and still is a marketing tactic employed by Oakhurst.
    GSO is here to stay, live in your cave without fire if you must, leave the rest of us to embrace new technology.

    • Anonymous

      One place to start with the misinformation is with your comment. Monsanto is not after Gerritsen… Monsanto is after any farmer and their crops that show signs of being cross-contaminated with their transgenic products. They will threaten to sue and actually sue farmers whose crops are contaminated through no fault of their own with Monsanto’s transgenic products. Monsanto will also require the farmer to destroy their seed stock from previous plantings, even if that seed stock represents a lifetime of careful cultivation, as was the case with the Canadian farmer mentioned at least twice in comments below. Gerritsen and his companions in the case seek protection from Monsanto’s phalanx of lawyers and the millions of dollars in reserve Monsanto employes to effectively contaminate organic farmer’s non-transgenic crops. It is reported that the Canadian canola crop has been completely contaminated with transgenic technology, that is, entirely contaminated with genetically engineered dna sequences either from Monsanto or other companies that use the same methods to manipulate the plant.

      Monsanto’s products are only thought of as “superior” in the minds of Monsanto marketers and folks like you that shill for these UN-TESTED transgenic products. There is nothing conferring inherently superior qualities. In fact, some transgenic products have been showing signs of failure at their original purpose, pest-resistance for example.

      rBST is recombinant bovine (cow) somatropin, which takes a bovine gene for a growth hormone from bovine DNA from which to replicate the dna sequence in large quantities. Through recombinant techniques that may utilize a hamster, mouse, or bacterial host in which to grow clones of the dna sequence technicians can greatly multiply the gene of interest and produce the hormone of interest. The final product is an artificial growth hormone used to boost milk production. It results in a transgenic product for human consumption.

      There most certainly is fire in my cave, and your misinformation to the contrary is not only uninformed but arrogant and inaccurate. By seeking to patent and sequester the world’s stock of seed for a number of staple food crops FOR PROFIT and MARKET SHARE in a just world might rise to the level of a crime against humanity. When the world’s large multinationals try to financialize, own, and profit from the means of food production, the rights to publicly-owned natural resources like ground water, and can pollute the air with impunity we’ve got a problem.

      Organic farmers at minimum have a right to their crops NOT being contaminated with transgenic crops, or from Monsanto threats of litigation.

      • Anonymous

        If YOU dont want to plant GMO products on your land, then dont. As long as I follow the law, I can and will buy and plant GMO products. YOU dont have any say in what I do with my crops. NONE. Of all the fields I plant feed corn into, its dozens, there are zero requests to not plant GMO corn as an abutter. Its not an issue in anyones minds except a vocal minority. If I save seed that has the GMO traits, and not pay the fee, I would expect to be sued by Monsanto if caught. Thats called theft. Go ahead and keep trying to smash the cotton gins in town like the LUddites did, the rest of us are enjoying the success of modern technology, and will pass you by.

        • Anonymous

          If the transgenic traits of your corn drift into an abutter’s crop and show up there, it is not theft if your abutter did not plant their crop with transgenic seed. It is contamination by migration of the genetic trait and costly damage to the abutter especially if they deliberately develop and promote transgenic-free products. Monsanto has no right to sue that person for theft, especially if there is no evidence any theft occurred. That is what the suit is about. Organic farmers have a right to NOT have their crops contaminated with transgenic traits. If you don’t take steps to prevent that contamination, in my world, you would be held responsible for the damage done, just as a polluter would be held responsible for contaminating a clean water source.

          The public has a right to know when they are eating transgenic crops, especially as the rates of cancer and other diseases and conditions track very closely with the introduction of transgenic products. Europe has been sensible placing proof of safety on the manufacturer’s balance sheet, instead of requiring the least able in the food chain to provide proof of harm. Nothing Luddite about common sense.

  • monsanto is a beast,they want to control the worlds food supply,what they do is plant gmo crops near regular ones once they cross pollinate monsanto steps in and says thats copyreight infringement and are awarded peoples farms their life savings,this is a very real threat to our food chain.i myself have stopped eating corn because you dont know if its gmo or not and chances are pretty high its frankenfood which has been shown to cause cancer,just google tumors in lab rats fed monsanto corn.

  • Anonymous

    GADS!

    I sure do love a good faery tale.

    The reason organic farmers are against GMOs is because it is a real threat to their livelyhoods.

    Not because of cross contamination, but because eventually GMOs will be raised without pesticides for much less expense to the consumer.

    Consider the GMO sweet corn that needs no insecticide to control ear worm or corn borer.

    The organic version is usually worm infested or at the very least trimmed to remove the infestation.

    The conventional version is sprayed with Sevin insecticide as little as three days before being picked and sold.

    It’s not a tough choice for me as I’m not a big fan of boiled worms.

    Potatoes grown with a gene that produces a natural pesticide lowered pesticide use by 75%, but the organic chicken littles made such a fuss that Monsanto abandoned the potato program.
    Funny thing about that natural pesticide was that it is a key insecticide allowed by MOFGA and USDA organic standards called Bacillus Thuringiensus

    Organic products are simply good marketing with unsubstantiaed claims that sucker people into paying up to three times more for produce of no of better quality.

    Monsanto and other leading agribusiness companies are one of the key factors in this earth being able to support nearly seven billion souls.

You may also like