JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for ENVIROETHICS Archives


ENVIROETHICS Archives

ENVIROETHICS Archives


enviroethics@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ENVIROETHICS Home

ENVIROETHICS Home

ENVIROETHICS  1999

ENVIROETHICS 1999

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

FW: GE 2 - UNDERGROUND GROUP MAKES THIRD ATTACK ON UC DAVIS GE SITE:Fourth US Anti-GE Action This Week

From:

"Steven Bissell" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Fri, 24 Sep 1999 08:00:24 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (227 lines)

Since I started this with the post about the Frankengoat, I thought I'd
include this. I find so much wrong headed in this that I'm not sure where to
start. My overall take on this is that the GM debate has given a certain
group in society, of which I was once a member, an outlet for direct action
in what they perceive to be a moral issue over the environment. My main
problem with this is that it is far from clear that the issue is a moral
issue.

I met the only person who was sent to prison for refusing the draft in both
WWI and WWII. He tried to get sent to prison for the Korean war and for
Vietnam, but was too old by then. His politics and ethics were clear; all
war is wrong and the only moral course of action is protest which included
being willing to be sent to prison.

Most of us, IMO, would have a bit of a hard time with this attitude when it
comes to WWII. The prospect of world domination by the Nazis is usually
enough to justify taking part in a "moral" war. Some would disagree and I
really do respect that attitude. My own experience comes out of Vietnam
protest era, although I've always been more of an ecofreak than a
peacefreak.

There are a couple of things in the story below I find especially
distressing from a moral point of view.

"We believe that protecting the result of more than
three billion years of evolution is a duty to ourselves, all living beings,
and the generations to come."

This is the sort of glib statement that I have trouble with. As several
members of the list have point out to me in my justification of hunting,
just because something has been a certain way does not automatically justify
it's continued existence. I can make a strong case for intra-specific
competition as a major factor in evolution, but would be very reluctant to
use that as justification for violence.

"It would also be wise to
make some sort of a prayer, offering, or explanation to the crops whose
individual lives you will be taking in order to defend the sanctity of all
life."

Says who? And, isn't this in direct contradiction to the previous statement?
Evolution has no respect for individual lives. In fact death is as much a
selective factor in evolution as birth rate. But individuals? They are the
fodder of evolution. And, I'm troubled by the ". . .prayer, offering, or
explanation to the crops. . ." herein. This sort of pantheistic nonsense
makes the idea of this being an environmental action trivial in my mind. Are
these people on a religious mission or are they really serious about direct
action to protect environmental stability? I think there is some very muddy
thinking here and I continue to wonder what, exactly, the moral issue is
here.

Steven Bissell
http://www.du.edu/~sbissell
 What we lost with that wild, primal existence
was a way of being for which the era of
agriculture and civilization lacks counterpoise.
Human life is the poorer for it.
                             Paul Shepard


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey Francis Tufenkian (by way of genetics
<[log in to unmask]>) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 2:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: GE 2 - UNDERGROUND GROUP MAKES THIRD ATTACK ON UC DAVIS GE
SITE:Fourth US Anti-GE Action This Week


GENETIX ALERT

NEWS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: September 17, 1999 Contact: Jeffrey Tufenkian 619-584-6462


UNDERGROUND GROUP MAKES THIRD ATTACK ON UC DAVIS GE SITE:
Fourth US Anti-GE Action This Week

The underground group calling themselves "Reclaim the Seeds" made its third
attack in recent weeks on University of California-Davis (UCD) genetic
engineering (GE) crops on Wednesday or Thursday according to an anonymous
communiqué released today.
In the fourth attack against GE test sites this week in the US, concerned
citizens decontaminated approximately 7 acres of a "Frankenfood" corn
research test crop, this time belonging to Michael Freeling, a UC professor
of "maize developmental genetics."
The University of California system conducts more GE research than any
other, according to the communiqué.  "We are risking jail and injury, as
well as sacrificing time, energy and sleep, because of a profound sense of
the sacredness of life. We believe that protecting the result of more than
three billion years of evolution is a duty to ourselves, all living beings,
and the generations to come."
The heroic action by Reclaim the Seeds is part of a growing worldwide
rejection of genetically engineered (GE) crops and of the handful of
transnational corporations like Monsanto, Novartis and DuPont which are
attempting to manipulate the future of the world's agriculture and food
supply in order to bolster their own profits.  In the last year there have
been over forty acts of crop destruction in Great Britain, others in India
and at least ten such actions in the US since the spring-two in California
in late July and one each in Vermont, California and Maine in August, two in
Minnesota and three in California this month.
Details of past anti-GE actions are available at
<http://www.tao.ca/~ban/ar.htm>www.tao.ca/~ban/ar.htm.
Genetix Alert is an independent news center which works with other
above-ground, anti-genetic engineering organizations.  GA has no knowledge
of the person(s) who carryout any underground actions.  GA does not advocate
illegal acts, but seeks to explain why people destroy genetically engineered
crops and undertake other nonviolent actions aimed at resisting genetic
engineering and increasing the difficulty for entities which seek to advance
genetic engineering or its products.  GA spokespeople are available for
media interviews.

Reporters and other interested parties may contact Genetix Alert at:
phone: 619-584-6462, fax: 619-528-1449
email: [log in to unmask]
PO Box 3992, San Diego, CA 92163, USA
contact: Jeffrey Tufenkian


(communiqué and directions follow)


Directions to the site:
For media and interested individuals, the leveled plot is located in Davis
just South (behind) of the UCD Veg-Crop Field Headquarters on Hutchison Rd.,
3rd planting block South of the buildings on right, where the Southern end
of the olive tree bike path stops and just East of the University airport.
Two previous crop-pull sites of corn and sugar beets are in nearby fields as
well.


Reclaim the Seeds Communiqué, September 16, 1999

-------------------------------------------------
It's harvest time in California. The anti-genetix, pro-organic nighttime
gardeners known as Reclaim the Seeds leveled yet another of UC Professor
Michael Freeling's genetic-engineering research corn plots early this
morning in Davis. This incident builds on three prior visits in Berkeley,
including a decontamination just two evenings ago. Freeling is known for his
corporate-driven biotechnology research.  Having worked in the past for
Zeneca, he is the first recipient of a grant from the Novartis Agricultural
Discovery Institute
(<http://plantbio.berkeley.edu/~freeling/docs/5-99genome.html>http://plantb
io.berkeley.edu/~freeling/docs/5-99genome.html), part of a $25
million "strategic alliance" between UC-Berkeley and Novartis. He also holds
a permit from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to make GE tests on corn.
The director of the UCD biotechnology program, Martina McGloughlin, parrots
one of the standard industry defenses of their agenda: that GE is just a
next step in cross-breeding, which farmers have done since time immemorial.
Yet it doesn't take a rocket scientist (or honest plant geneticist) to
realize that there is a qualitative difference between the addition of
genetic code from a fish, pig, pesticide or virus to that of a plant in
secret laboratories, and the honorable work of farmers cultivating special
varieties in their fields over
generations.  Furthermore, McGloughlin states that GE food is safe and
accepted by consumers. Yet a few hours on the Internet proves the opposite.
GE crops have been linked to genetic pollution, creation of new viruses and
bacteria, damage to beneficial insects, increased pesticide use and the
creation of "superpests."  According to research released earlier this year,
GE potatoes were shown to damage vital organs and compromise the immune
systems of rats.  In studies conducted at Cornell University and Iowa State
University this year, pollen released from GE corn was found lethal to
Monarch butterflies. And as for the claim of acceptance by consumers, the
widespread crop destruction, protests, lawsuits, and governmental action
around the world against GE food suggests a different conclusion.  Experts
from UC assured us that nuclear power was safe, but experience proved
different. Experts from universities, government agencies, and industry
groups also assured us that clear-cutting, strip-mining, drift-netting,
factory-farming, and animal testing was safe, and to leave the debate to the
experts. To hear more experts from UC claim that GE is safe without any
oversight, environmental assessments, input or public disclosure does not
give one much reassurance.  While global resistance to GE is growing leaps
and bounds, people living in the U.S. have been slow to respond.
Regrettable, considering that U.S.-based corporations and government trade
policies power the GE engine. The San Francisco Bay Area is the belly of the
genetix beast as it were, serving as the hub of biotech research in North
America (and if the industry is to be believed the world). The University of
California system conducts more research on genetically-modified organisms
than any other. Therefore, we of Reclaim The Seeds feel a responsibility to
muster as much strength and determination as possible to rid the planet of
this ecological, economic, and social disaster.  Many thanks to our comrades
in other countries for the inspiration to join them in nonviolent direct
action. This event is dedicated to our domestic comrades: the "Seeds of
Resistance" in Maine; the "Bolt Weevils" in Minnesota; the "Cropatisas,"
"Lodi Loppers" and "California Croppers" in our neck of the woods; and the
mysterious Monarch butterflies of Vermont, who pulled up fields of GE corn
late one night with no help from we humans.  Special Section: How to DIY (Do
It Yourself) In a true example of appropriate technology, Reclaim the Seeds
has developed through hours of research and testing a new-and-improved
method for GE corn-culling. Only by using this method were we able to level
many thousands of plants in just a few hours. Reclaimers use long metal
poles (tomato poles are good) to plough through and push over the corn, two
rows at a time on a parallel path along the rows. The devices, dubbed
"California Corn Cutters," are held out in front of the responsible
individual and propelled by forward motion. The corn, once snapped down
toward the horizon, has been terminated  (see next paragraph).  An
additional technique has been to stand to the inside of one or two rows;
turn perpendicular to the row(s) facing a clearing; and flatten over
sections of approx. 8-16 corn plants at one time with poles so that the corn
lies at right angles to the rows. We recommend leaving several rows of corn
on the perimeter as a visual buffer against security guards until work in
the core is finished, then flatten the outside rows and retire for the
night.... or day. A cheeky team could getaway with this during daylight
after proper scouting. We are risking jail and injury, as well as
sacrificing time, energy and sleep, because of a profound sense of the
sacredness of life. We believe that protecting the result of more than three
billion years of evolution is a duty to ourselves, all living beings, and
the generations to come. So the act of taking the life of a plant is
serious, and one we don't take it lightly. Were it not for the desperate
urgency of the situation, the massive resources of the biotech industry, and
the secrecy under which these tests are conducted, than perhaps we wouldn't
have to take this course of action.  Before anyone embarks on such a course,
we believe it important to think through the moral dimensions of
crop-pulling, and come into it with a strong heart. It would also be wise to
make some sort of a prayer, offering, or explanation to the crops whose
individual lives you will be taking in order to defend the sanctity of all
life.


###



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
May 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
September 2016
August 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
October 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
July 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
October 2008
September 2008
July 2008
June 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
October 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager