"Moosh:]" wrote:
On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 21:03:33 -0700, Walter Epp
posted:

"Gordon Couger" wrote:
In the greenest
part of the country a vote on and anti GM law lost 3 to 1. We have some

That result was bought with over $6 per vote of out of state money
spent on a blitz of deception and scare tactics.

For instance? Show too where it is wrong please.

http://www.voteyeson27.com/Counterpoints1.pdf
This does not mention the possibility that labeling could increase jobs,
reduce costs of selling overseas, and make Oregon more competitive.
As Consumers Union points out in its letter supporting labeling, "Europe,
Japan, South Korea, China, Australia and New Zealand all have mandatory
labeling requirements, and a labeling law in Oregon would put the state in
a good position to sell products in those markets."

The best genetically modified democracy money can buy.

That's nearly as good as "Frankenfoods".

That law was not anti-gm, it only required that the consumer be allowed
to know what they're getting so there could be a free market.

Garbage. So that your lying scare campaigns could take effect.

Freedom is by definition the ability to make choices.

Only if you know and understand the facts.

Without labelling the consumer is denied knowing the facts.

You lot have gone out of your way to spread lies.

Show me which statement I have made that's a lie and why.

If there's no labeling, there's no choice, if there's no choice, there's
no freedom. To call this a free market is a fraud - it's a rigged market.

Then tell the truth. If there are scary lies promulgated, there can be
no informed choice, whatever information is given on a label.

And when biotech companies are censoring troubling information
there can be no informed choice.

Their opposition to labelling shows that genetic engineering proponents
don't believe their own propaganda.

Their opposition to labelling is due to gross ignorance of the general
public

Lack of labelling keeps the public in the dark.
--
delete N0SPAAM to reply by email