Hi Again,

Yes, OpenOffice handled it just fine:

The European policy and market on GMOs
SAARC Rice Expo
Mumbai, 8th December 2004
Eric Gall
Political Advisor
Greenpeace European Unit
Rue Belliard 199
Brussels, Belgium
Overview
GMOs need to be authorised to be imported
Authorised GMOs must be labelled
Strong consumer rejection of GMOs
Non-GM market
Ongoing political controversy
The EU Authorisation system
Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release of GMOs in the environment
Regulation 1829/2003 on GM Food and Feed
EU-wide approval, maximum 10 years
Complex case by case risk assessment involving 25 Member States and the European Commission

The EU Authorisation system
Precautionary principle
Long-term and cumulative toxic effects on health
Immediate or delayed, direct or indirect, long -term and cumulative effects on the environment
Moratorium in 1999
National bans (« safeguards clauses »)
No tolerance for unapproved GMOs (0%)
Labelling and Traceability of GMOs
Regulation 1830/2003 on Traceability and Labelling of GMOs (18th April 2004)
Broader scope of labelling : living GMOs but also to GMOs containing or consisting of or derived from an ingredient which contains more than 0.9% of GMO (oil, starch, sugar, glucose, alcohol, etc.), irrespective of whether they can be detected in the final product or not, both for food and feed
Detection methods must be provided by the producer of the GMO, and be validated by the EU
Labelling and Traceability of GMOs
Documentation requirements are set up in order to enable the monitoring of GMOs, their traceability along the food chain, the withdrawal of GM products in case a problem is identified for the environment or human health, food and feed labelling for consumer information
Exporters must disclose the precise list of GMOs contained in the shipment
GMOs in a shipment or in products must be identified by their Unique Identifier Code, attributed according to the system developed by the OECD

Labelling and Traceability of GMOs
These documents must be transmitted from operator to operator all along the production chain
Operators have to keep the record of the transactions for 5 years
Adventitious (accidental) presence of approved GMOs up to 0,9% per ingredient exempts the products from the labelling requirements. The operator must prove he has taken all appropriate steps to avoid such contamination
Controls by national authorities of Member States
European Network of Laboratories http://gmoinfo.jrc.int
Market Situation
The EU, with its 455 million consumers, is one of the biggest food markets in the world in terms of value.
Estimated food and drink sales in the enlarged European Union, Switzerland and Norway in 2002 reached the amount of 1,069,010 million Euros
Complete non-GM market for food products
Increasing non-GM demand for feed products

Retailers’ policies
14 of the 30 top European retailers have a policy of not selling, under their own brand name, any products that would need to be labelled as “genetically modified” in all their European markets (Carrefour, Auchan, Sainsbury´s, Safeway, Marks & Spencer, Coop Switzerland, Coop Italy, Migros, Big Food Group, Somerfield, Morrisons, Kesko, Boots, Coop UK)
A further 7 companies (Tesco, Rewe, Metro Group, Casino, Edeka, Lidl, Tengelmann) have given a non-GM-commitment for their own-brand products in their main European markets
Retailers’ policies
The combined European grocery sales in 2003 of the companies with a non-GM policy in place and companies committed to achieving a non-GM standard, amounted to more than EUR 322,000 million.
This is 64% or nearly two-thirds of the grocery sales of the 30 top retailers in Europe.
Food and Drink producers’ policies
Food and Drink producers policies: 22 of the 30 most important companies have given a non-GM commitment throughout the enlarged European Union including Nestlé, Unilever, Coca-Cola, Diageo, Kraft Foods (Altria), Masterfoods (Mars), Heineken, Barilla, Carlsberg, Arla Foods, Dr. Oetker, InBev (Interbrew), Heinz, Chiquita, Cirio del Monte, Orkla, Ferrero, Northern Foods, Eckes Granini, Bonduelle, Kellogg and McCain
13 companies have given a global company-wide non-GMO commitment (Diageo, Heineken, Barilla, Carlsberg, Arla Foods, Dr. Oetker, Chiquita, Cirio del Monte, Orkla, Ferrero, Northern Foods, Eckes Granini, Bonduelle)

Public Opinion
In 2001, 70.6% of European consumers did not want GMOs in their food, 94% wanted to have the choice to eat it or not (Sondage n° 55.2 réalisé par Eurobaromètre dans tous les Etats membres de l’Union Européenne en mai et juin 2001, étude « Europeans, Science and Technology » diffusée en décembre 2001)
http://europa.eu.int/comm/rese.....report.pdf
In Europe, in 2002, more than 65% of Europeans said they would not buy GMOs, even if they were less expensive than conventional products http://europa.eu.int/comm/publ.....177_en.pdf.
Public opinion
In 2003, 83% of British and 81% of Germans said they were against GMOs http://www.dw-world.de/german/.....06,00.html http://www.i-sis.org.uk/PublicSayNo.php
in 2004, 76% of French declared they were against GMOs and 80% thought that farmers should not grow GMOs http://www.tns-sofres.com/etud.....bous_r.htm.

Public Opinion
In 2003, 89% of Americans thought that the US Food and Drug Administration should not introduce GMOs into the environment or in the food chain if it has not been proven they are safe http://pewagbiotech.org/research/2003update/3.php
In 2001, 88% of Mexicans consumers asked that GMOs be labelled; in 2002, 87% of Chinese and 80% of Japanese consumers wished the same http://archive.greenpeace.org/.....zilmex.htm http://www.gene.ch/gentech/2002/Jul/msg00075.html
http://www.gene.ch/gentech/2002/Jul/msg00075.html
Governmental attitudes
EU Commission lifted the moratorium on GMOs in May 2004 with approval of Bt11 sweet maize for import, despite lack of support from governments and scientific concerns
Syngenta announced that they would not market the maize in Europe
Governmental attitudes
29th November 2004 vote of governments on safeguard clauses : 12 out of 25 MS voted against the lifting (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Cyprus, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Poland); 10 countries abstained (Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Spain, Sweden, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia, Slovenia); 3 voted in favor of the lifting (Netherlands, Portugal, UK)
No GM Rice allowed in the EU
Only one application for the import and processing of Bayer’s LL Rice 62
9 MS out of 15 raised objections to the authorisation in April 2004 (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and Spain) for fear of adverse health effects and outcrossing
Rice producers worried about contamination in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece and France
Contamination controversy
No cultivation, « co-existence », seed contamination
National laws to protect conventional and organic agriculture from contamination
E.g. Germany: a “joint and several liability” compensation scheme which compensates conventional and organic farmers if cross-contamination through GMOs causes economic damage
GMO-free Regions across Europe
Conclusion
No tolerance for unapproved GMOs
Mandatory Labelling and Traceability
Strong consumer rejection followed by European retailers and companies
No Market for GMOs
Contamination controversy, GMO-free zones movement and liability laws

I see that there are retailers in Europe that have not banned GM foods from their shelves. That's not good! They are harming their customers. It's an evil thing to do for private profit or any profit. In fact, it's no profit at all but rather a liability. In Christian terms, it's a sin. There's no doubt about it.

Peace,

Tom Usher

Now something a little bit offtopic. There are some forums where aromatherapist or other kind of therapists swap their professional services for free.

"Lieber den Spatz in der Hand als die Taube auf dem Dach."

A sparrow in the hand is dearer than a dove on the roof. Is that right?

It's like, "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

That was in your earlier comment that was sent to spam by the anti-spam program. It was the same as many other comments on the Internet, so I didn't keep it.

If you would like to translate my post into German and put a link to it in a comment here, that would be fine.

I'm sorry I didn't understand your first comment that was deleted.

Thank you for reading the post and for taking the time and making the effort to comment again.

I look forward to seeing your translation.

May God bless you.

Tom Usher

Hi,

Lots of blog owners block commercial sites. I don't unless the comment has nothing to say or is too offensive. I don't have a problem with your selling aromatherapy in this capitalistic world.

I'd like to see giving-and-sharing (no-charge) aromatherapy as part of the Christian Commons though along with caring about light, color, sound, massage, and all the rest of the sensory inputs.

There's nothing wrong with any of it if it's done with the right spirit in mind and heart (harmless and truly ultimately beneficial).

Thanks for the links. The first is a Power Point presentation, is it not? I have Open Office that I believe will handle it. I have too much on my plate (too many windows open just now). I'll try to remember to come back to it though after I've finished my general news reading.

Blessings,

Tom Usher

Thank you for approving my comments and sorry for my poor english...

Back to the subject. I found an interesting presentation about "The European policy and market on GMOs" that shows clearly that especially european citizens are against introduction of GMO foods into food chain and our environment. You can check this at http://www.gmo-free-regions.or.....et_one.ppt

Moreover, http://genet.iskra.net/ is a web site with purpose to protect europe from GMO. Unfortunately it has a few broken links but it suggests some good actions that everyone can take against gmo (http://genet.iskra.net/en/what_can_you_do)

Hello Again,

Whenever a commentator's valid comment is sent to the spam database, I try to remember to let the commentator know that so he or she may possibly avoid sites that are refusing to approve submitted and valid comments. Some sites may be marking such comments as spam for no good reason but rather to be spiteful. Both of your comments submitted on the RLCC site went to spam. I had to de-spam them. That helps to retrain the shared database but might not be enough to clean up the spiteful or careless acts of others.

Now to the subject at hand, thank you for checking some more. I was working from memory, and sometimes the original info can be in error too. It's good to have some double coverage.

I believe that now is the time for Europeans to really push hard to keep out GMOs. The U.S. is in a much weakened position right now what with the loss of credibility over the wars, banking, and so many other things. There is no way that Europe should just trust the U.S. corporations that GM foods are safe.

Spread the word over there as much as you are able. Network with others in EU-member states. Get them to come together as Europeans against U.S. GMOs.

You need a huge grassroots push-back in every country over there.

GM is going to get a real going over (reexamination) over here once the Democrats get settled in as the party nearly controlling every branch of the U.S. government. If the push-back (non-violent of course) is strong in Europe at the same time, it will have a much larger impact.

Thanks for coming back with your comment. Make it a habit.

It may seem strange to some that a Christian would be taking this approach, but the truth is that GMOs have come out from selfishness and darkness for private gain from the greater loss for the many. There is nothing inconsistent about what I've written here with the teaching of Jesus. I will say though that regardless of what the selfish, greedy ones do, God still has the power to set everything right again. The evil ones can do nothing that God can't undo.

God bless,

Tom Usher

I did a quick search and I found that you were right. Generally European Governements are against imports of GMO, but lately there has been a debate in order to decide if GMO foods are good for people or dangerous.

Obviously, companies are forcing the European Commission to accept GMO foods and it seems that they will managed that. I read that this months E.C. allowed GM soya from Bayer CorpScience.

Unfortunately, we will lose this fight...

Here's an article that ties in with your comment:

Albino Africans live in fear after witch-doctor butchery

One rightly abhors what is being done to the albinos. At the same time, one rightly wants the recessive gene not to be passed on. Coercion against albinos though is not the answer.

There are people who forgo having offspring for the unselfish reason that they don't want to take the risk of continuing disease.

There's a spiritual place (a state of heart) though where God can help us all to overcome everything.

God bless,

Tom Usher

Hello Again, Scarlett,

First of all, you say you're a Christian. You believe you are a Christian. I don't doubt that you believe that. To be a Christian, I trust you agree that you must agree with Jesus.

Now, if Jesus said fornication is a sin (which he did) and if married people at the time Jesus walked the Earth were only recognized as being male and female couples (which was the case), then you must acknowledge that Jesus was saying that homosexual sex was a sin. Fornication is sex out of wedlock.

How can what was sin when Jesus walked the Earth and indicated was sin suddenly not be sin anymore? Was Jesus unaware of effeminate boys?

There is though relative sin. Jesus made that clear when he said that Pontius Pilate didn't have the greater sin in Jesus's being condemned to the cross. There are other examples of the relativity of sin such as the number of stripes one will received depending upon how much one knew one was sinning. In other words, Jesus is saying that God knows about mitigating circumstances. What gets thrown into the Lake of Fire forever? Unmitigated evil as only God can define it gets that treatment. All others are turned loose of Satan's hold by God, whether Satan likes it or not.

Now, the homosexuals are clamoring to be recognized as married every bit as much as male/female couples. Would that change everything vis-à-vis Jesus's position? No it wouldn't. It is sin not just because it's fornication. It is sin because it harms all who participate, willing or not. It is an act that harms. It is a selfish thing to harm others and the self for the sake of sexual stimulation, release, and fleeting satisfaction/gratification.

As for being born a certain way, when someone is born with a genetic defect, humanity (in its best spirit) does what it can to alleviate the harmful symptoms and to affect a cure. It does not bless the disease. It blesses the person so that the person might be healed if... (Depends upon the individual, larger society, and God's plan and thresholds)

If geneticists discover a biological marker for murderers, will we accept murder? Jesus said that we are not to resist evil. Jesus resisted temptation. Therefore, "resist" is contextual. This may seem like disjointed talk, but it isn't. I'm simply saying that all is not as it first appears.

Men married to women are divorcing them to have sex with men in openly homosexual relationships. That's adultery at best. Is their infidelity sanctioned just because some homosexuals claim that homosexuality is not a choice?

What in Christianity isn't ultimately a choice? There is a raging debate about sick people and whether their lack of faith is the cause of their continuing disease. Frankly, their diseases are humanities diseases.

Personally, I have no doubt that the individual who can get himself or herself in the right spiritual position regarding God can do the "greater things" of which Jesus has spoken. I also believe that Jesus's power from God was diminished in areas where the general level of faith was low. The Gospels said how amazed Jesus was about it — about the lack of faith and lack of healing.

Well, how much more does one person today have to overcome to be healed? The whole of humanity isn't making it easier. Just look at the "proud" Atheists thumping their chest.

There is predisposition. There is, however, overcoming and changing. Is it human nature to murder? Should we just be resigned to wars? Is it human nature to be greedy? Should we just be resigned to the Wall Street sharks? Are people born pedophiles? What is a homosexual boy who just never stops wanting boys as he grows older? What is predisposition exactly in regards to the evil spirit? Is it generational punishment?

The Bible speaks of two different Gods, at least regarding the ability of the people at the time to comprehend on account of the hardness of their hearts. Moses gave them one law, and Jesus gave them another. It doesn't mean that God suddenly came to understand more. It means Jesus was given to challenge the people to soften more.

Are the homosexuals willing to soften enough to be healed of their desire that causes harm?

What are we to do as individuals? Are we to aim as high as we can, or are we to give up?

There is plenty more to say on this, but how much does anyone need to hear?

As for being "born that way," no one knows that. People may say that there was never a time that they can remember this, that, or the other; but, that doesn't necessarily mean that something wasn't going on after conception or after birth. Even if there is a homosexual gene, it doesn't mean that it's a good lifestyle. Genetics at conception isn't the end-all-be-all. It's just a snapshot that the spirit can overcome. The spirit is over all matter. Humanity is just retarding it (spirit) for selfish reasons.

There is no such thing as a homosexual who must have sex. No one has to harm anyone for sexual release. People just cave into that temptation and then make all manner of excuses not to get the claws of addiction out of their hearts.

People can stop being greedy. They can stop being violent. They can give up pornography. They stop using tobacco. The list goes on and on until Christlikeness. If you don't believe that, how can you believe in Jesus? Are you going to fall for scientism?

I want to say that I'm not condemning homosexuals. That's not my place. As Jesus said, who made me judge? I don't want to be condemned, so why would I condemn them? I've done plenty wrong in my life, and I make mistakes everyday. What standard can I meet? If I judge and condemn them to Hell, God's going to show me my hypocrisy for not living up wherever I'm not living up to the standard. That's why coercion is out. It's off the table. I only want the harm to stop. I want the "in utero" errors to stop and for those who suffer from them to be healed.

I believe in the power of God. The trouble is, so many people don't that they are blocking the power. God won't heal those who don't believe. We're all interconnected and interdependent too to a degree. There is a point, though, at which there is separation, only most people give up before that happens. It's why Jesus says to persevere to the end. It separates the wheat from the chaff. I'm tired of being chaff. I want to have learned my lesson.

As for the one born blind, remember that Jesus by God can heal those who are born blind. Jesus did that in fact as recorded in the Gospel. When Jesus and God did that, God wasn't holding the birth defect against the blind one. This point may be difficult to connect with how you believe you were making the analogy, but it is connected.

Do you really believe in accidents of birth? I don't. I don't believe anything happens without a reason. I don't buy into "chaos" or "random" or "chance" as those of so-called science use the terms. Those are just terms used out of ignorance. I do know that Jesus use the term risk. Jesus though didn't claim to know everything. He isn't recorded anywhere that we have stating that God doesn't know everything, including the complete future. I believe God does know the complete future. I do not think that's irreconcilable with free will any more than I believe that waves and particles are impossible as the quantum physicists have apprehended them.

You wrote in your comment the following:

I would like to see those people allowed to have loving, monogamous relationships. But, those who are bisexual or choose to be homosexual for whatever reason, their actions should be condemned and should be unacceptable.

How are you able to differentiate? If you allow for the one, how can you disallow the other? Also, how can you call a harmful relationship loving? I can't. I don't see Jesus doing it anywhere.

God allowed Jesus to go to the cross. It pleased God. It displeased God.

Well, it pleased God that Jesus was that loving of his friends. That was what was atoning. Jesus showed Satan wrong. Satan's the one who says people can't change — that they are all fit for the fire.

May God bless the homosexuals to heal,

Tom Usher

Hi again Samira,

If you feel comfortable enough, would you tell us whether or not you're in Afghanistan? If you don't feel safe saying it, we'll understand though.

Afghanistan is in deep trouble. The U.S. hasn't done Afghanistan any favor by invading either. The people in charge of America don't care to treat others as equally valuable. They believe that the American hierarchy is God-ordained rather than tenants who murdered the landlord's son when he came to collect. I'm referring to Jesus.

But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. (Matthew 21:38)

The neocons falsely claim they are making the world safe for democracy. They are though spreading empire (The New American Century that is already over).

The Taliban is being reactive to poor communication (and violent attacks) — those who seek to seize on their inheritance &mdash their raw materials, etc., in the name of defeating radical, fundamentalist Islam. They aren't being challenged intellectually. That's what ought to happen though. The Islam leaders of the Taliban need to sit down with real Christians and go through the Qur'an and the Gospels to have an open and frank discussion about what is truly best (what God wants).

Anyone afraid to do that lacks the courage of his convictions.

God bless,

Tom Usher

Hello,

Welcome from Greece! Let me get this out of the way first. I love Greek food! Okay. I'm usually not what is called silly (a misnomer; should never have become a pejorative) in my comments, and I don't really intend to be here. It's just that it would probably come across as I'm trying to be sort of funny by emoting that way. Frankly, Greek food and what is generally termed Mediterranean food here in the U.S. is very healthy and delicious, as you are no doubt aware living in Greece yourself and being Greek perhaps.

When I lived in Phoenix, Arizona, (where John McCain lives; Yes, I've met him) I would go to a little restaurant on Bethany Home Road and 16th Street I think it was/or is. The place is/was called the Mediterranean. Well, I would always order the vegetarian plate. I could have eaten two each time.

Now, about GMO and Europe, I have read that same thing that Europe doesn't allow it in the stores. However, I've read contradictory stories about how Europe is allowing GMO in from the U.S. and is planting GM crops in Europe. It is my understanding that the French are nearly up in arms about it.

The good news though is that the recent financial collapse is giving Europe an opportunity to better stand up to the U.S. America shot itself in both feet electing George W. Bush and his neocon handlers. Now though, America is in a greatly weakened position on all fronts — even militarily (although I certainly don't advise anyone to test American brinkmanship, including under Obama — he has way too many neocons in his ears — one is too many).

Anyway, while Europe is going about the intelligent business of making real friends of Russia and setting down clearly needed rules to keep the mundane worldly ones from killing all the saints even with their insane economic abortions, it should firm up its stand against GM foods. It should put tariffs on American goods of all kinds until America backs off harming the health of the planet. It should take the lead, since the U.S., with the exception of pockets in California and a few other places, doesn't seem willing to rein in selfishness for the good of all — for the general welfare as called for by the Preamble to our U.S. Constitution. — something the Wall Streeters regularly trash.

Don't get me wrong here. The moves I'm suggesting are not good enough. They aren't even close. They are only better than not.

I'm not for coercive democracy. I'm for convincing people to do things together voluntarily. It's a really hard sell though. I haven't had a taker here in the U.S. yet. I'm heartened though that there are apparently many Christian communists in Greece. My hope is that many of them can come to understand how Marx (violent and Godless) and Jesus (pacifistic) are incompatible. If they can do that,