Thread: GMO crops

On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 08:01:33 -0500, Bull <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Someone on Facebook posted a link to this article:
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...lifeandhealth4
>
>> This was my reply:
>---------------------------------------
>> I think that Roundup resistant GMO crops are generally a good thing.
>> THe only thing that I object to is a company putting those genes out
>> into the environment, then telling farmers whose crops are infected by
>> those genes that they can't plant THEIR OWN SEEDS because they contain
>> proprietary genes. The small farmer did not ASK to have his/her
>> plants be pollinated by the Roundup Ready genes. That's like a guy
>> raping a woman, then telling her that she has to have an abortion
>> because she has no right to his genetic material. That constitutes a
>> taking of the property rights of the farmer who did nothing to
>> intentionally *take* the GMO company's technology. I invite anyone to
>> make a good argument either against responsible GMO agiculture OR for
>> a GMO company to restrict a farmer from using his/her own seed that
>> was contaminated--for better or worse--without the farmer's consent.
>> I don't expect anyone to take me on from either side--or should I say
>> either extreme?--because I can easily shoot down their arguments.
>-----------------------------------------
>
>>Comments?
>
>> --Bryan
>
> Roundup?
>
>http://blog.farmaid.org/2010/05/weed...t-roundup.html
>
>I won't use it. Rather have the weeds. I also avoid any known GMO
>crops. I don't think that can be done if you eat corn. Growing my own
>without chemical enhancement. Unfortunately all fruit and produce with
>the little organic stickers don't test very well for lack of chemicals.
>We buy it anyway. Less chemicals can't hurt you. I keep hearing the
>argument that organics don't taste better.. DUH. Some actually may not
>taste as good as conventionally grown products. Local is my favorite.
>Many local growers that we buy from don't use chemicals mainly because
>of the cost. Others are old hippy earth friendly folks that just don't
>believe in a "better world through chemistry".
>
>BULL

Not Bryan though!! He is all about eschewing a proper and correctly
balanced natural diet and relying instead on chemically purified or
synthezized majic molecules, enriching the completely unregulated food
supplements market!

And he would jump on and espouse anything that would get him what HE
wants in a heartbeat! That is Bryan's forst priority: himself. If
someone would genetically engineer chicken wing tips, Bryan would be
their first customer!

John Kuthe...

Bull <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Roundup?
>
> http://blog.farmaid.org/2010/05/weed...t-roundup.html
>
> I won't use it. Rather have the weeds. I also avoid any known GMO
> crops. I don't think that can be done if you eat corn. Growing my own
> without chemical enhancement. Unfortunately all fruit and produce with
> the little organic stickers don't test very well for lack of
> chemicals. We buy it anyway. Less chemicals can't hurt you. I keep
> hearing the argument that organics don't taste better.. DUH. Some
> actually may not taste as good as conventionally grown products.
> Local is my favorite. Many local growers that we buy from don't use
> chemicals mainly because of the cost. Others are old hippy earth
> friendly folks that just don't believe in a "better world through
> chemistry".
>
> BULL

Given the fact that a lot of organic produce is old, having followed long
supply chains from distant lands like China, you can't presume produce
labeled "organic" is automatically a quality product. Whole Foods is a good
example of a retailer which attracts customers with the promise of lots of
organic foods, but isn't necessarily selling fresh healthy produce.

It's certainly fair to suspect the organic claim on any produce from China.
After the episodes of poisonous ingredients in Chinese products such as
toys, milk, and pet food, it's frankly foolish to take their word for it,
nor do I trust greedy retailers like WF to exercise the necessary due
diligence on my behalf.

I agree completely that local is best. I'd rather buy produce from a local
grower who is not strictly organic (by FDA standards) that foods with an
official organic label which are over the hill and close to spoiling due to
age and handling. Local foods don't have to be grown from varieties
developed mostly to suit long supply chains, so you stand a better chance of
getting flavorful and nutritious produce.

MartyB

On Apr 4, 8:15*am, John Kuthe <JohnKu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 08:01:33 -0500, Bull <b...@bluemail.net> wrote:
> >> Someone on Facebook posted a link to this article:
> >>http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...lifeandhealth4
>
> >> This was my reply:
> >---------------------------------------
> >> I think that Roundup resistant GMO crops are generally a good thing.
> >> THe only thing that I object to is a company putting those genes out
> >> into the environment, then telling farmers whose crops are infected by
> >> those genes that they can't plant THEIR OWN SEEDS because they contain
> >> proprietary genes. *The small farmer did not ASK to have his/her
> >> plants be pollinated by the Roundup Ready genes. *That's like a guy
> >> raping a woman, then telling her that she has to have an abortion
> >> because she has no right to his genetic material. *That constitutes a
> >> taking of the property rights of the farmer who did nothing to
> >> intentionally *take* the GMO company's technology. *I invite anyone to
> >> make a good argument either against responsible GMO agiculture OR for
> >> a GMO company to restrict a farmer from using his/her own seed that
> >> was contaminated--for better or worse--without the farmer's consent.
> >> I don't expect anyone to take me on from either side--or should I say
> >> either extreme?--because I can easily shoot down their arguments.
> >-----------------------------------------
>
> >>Comments?
>
> >> --Bryan
>
> > Roundup?
>
> >http://blog.farmaid.org/2010/05/weed...t-roundup.html
>
> >I won't use it. *Rather have the weeds. *I also avoid any known GMO
> >crops. *I don't think that can be done if you eat corn. Growing my own
> >without chemical enhancement. Unfortunately all fruit and produce with
> >the little organic stickers don't test very well for lack of chemicals.
> >We buy it anyway. *Less chemicals can't hurt you. *I keep hearing the
> >argument that organics don't taste better.. DUH. *Some actually may not
> >taste as good as conventionally grown products. *Local is my favorite.
> >Many local growers that we buy from don't use chemicals mainly because
> >of the cost. *Others are old hippy earth friendly folks that just don't
> >believe in a "better world through chemistry".
>
> >BULL
>
> Not Bryan though!! He is all about eschewing a proper and correctly
> balanced natural diet and relying instead on chemically purified or
> synthezized majic molecules, enriching the completely unregulated food
> supplements market!
>
> And he would jump on and espouse anything that would get him what HE
> wants in a heartbeat! That is Bryan's forst priority: himself. If
> someone would genetically engineer chicken wing tips, Bryan would be
> their first customer!

One of us appears to have had an unhappy morning. I'm glad it wasn't
me.
>
> John Kuthe...

--Bryan

On Apr 4, 5:27*pm, Bryan <bryangsimm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 8:15*am, John Kuthe <JohnKu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 08:01:33 -0500, Bull <b...@bluemail.net> wrote:
> > >> Someone on Facebook posted a link to this article:
> > >>http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...lifeandhealth4
>
> > >> This was my reply:
> > >---------------------------------------
> > >> I think that Roundup resistant GMO crops are generally a good thing.
> > >> THe only thing that I object to is a company putting those genes out
> > >> into the environment, then telling farmers whose crops are infected by
> > >> those genes that they can't plant THEIR OWN SEEDS because they contain
> > >> proprietary genes. *The small farmer did not ASK to have his/her
> > >> plants be pollinated by the Roundup Ready genes. *That's like a guy
> > >> raping a woman, then telling her that she has to have an abortion
> > >> because she has no right to his genetic material. *That constitutes a
> > >> taking of the property rights of the farmer who did nothing to
> > >> intentionally *take* the GMO company's technology. *I invite anyone to
> > >> make a good argument either against responsible GMO agiculture OR for
> > >> a GMO company to restrict a farmer from using his/her own seed that
> > >> was contaminated--for better or worse--without the farmer's consent.
> > >> I don't expect anyone to take me on from either side--or should I say
> > >> either extreme?--because I can easily shoot down their arguments.
> > >-----------------------------------------
>
> > >>Comments?
>
> > >> --Bryan
>
> > > Roundup?
>
> > >http://blog.farmaid.org/2010/05/weed...t-roundup.html
>
> > >I won't use it. *Rather have the weeds. *I also avoid any known GMO
> > >crops. *I don't think that can be done if you eat corn. Growing my own
> > >without chemical enhancement. Unfortunately all fruit and produce with
> > >the little organic stickers don't test very well for lack of chemicals..
> > >We buy it anyway. *Less chemicals can't hurt you. *I keep hearing the
> > >argument that organics don't taste better.. DUH. *Some actually may not
> > >taste as good as conventionally grown products. *Local is my favorite.
> > >Many local growers that we buy from don't use chemicals mainly because
> > >of the cost. *Others are old hippy earth friendly folks that just don't
> > >believe in a "better world through chemistry".
>
> > >BULL
>
> > Not Bryan though!! He is all about eschewing a proper and correctly
> > balanced natural diet and relying instead on chemically purified or
> > synthezized majic molecules, enriching the completely unregulated food
> > supplements market!
>
> > And he would jump on and espouse anything that would get him what HE
> > wants in a heartbeat! That is Bryan's forst priority: himself. If
> > someone would genetically engineer chicken wing tips, Bryan would be
> > their first customer!
>
> One of us appears to have had an unhappy morning. *I'm glad it wasn't
> me.
>
Oh, and as far as the wing tips, I found a source, and I got the email
this very morning. He might kind of gouge me on the price, but he
delivers to a part of Illinois that is so close, our metropolitan
public transit system goes there. This might disappoint John, but not
only are they not genetically engineered, they are certified organic.
That's especially good because my nephew is also interested in them,
and he pretty much only eats organic chicken--though he did say he'd
make an exception for wing tips.
After I buy from the guy a few times, I'm going to take it to the next
level, and ask to buy skins too. Nothing against pork skins, but I
like the flavor of chicken skins even more. The skins should be
pretty cheap, since no one considers them to be delicacies. They are
just this side of being chicken byproduct. They are a commodity
though, sold in lots as large as 60 metric tons minimum order.
>
> > John Kuthe...
>
> --Bryan

--Bryan

On Apr 4, 8:59*am, "Nunya Bidnits" <nunyabidn...@eternal-
september.invalid> wrote:
>
> I agree completely that local is best. I'd rather buy produce from a local
> grower who is not strictly organic (by FDA standards) that foods with an
> official organic label which are over the hill and close to spoiling due to
> age and handling. Local foods don't have to be grown from varieties
> developed mostly to suit long supply chains, so you stand a better chanceof
> getting flavorful and nutritious produce.

I think that organic is fine for those who are sticklers, but merely
pesticide free seems just as good to me. I fertilize with compost,
and we compost almost all non-animal food waste, but I also use non-
organic fertilizer in small amounts. I love growing veggies.
>
> MartyB

--Bryan

On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 17:26:10 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
<[email protected]> wrote:
....
>Oh, and as far as the wing tips, I found a source, and I got the email
>this very morning. He might kind of gouge me on the price, but he
>delivers to a part of Illinois that is so close, our metropolitan
>public transit system goes there. This might disappoint John, but not
>only are they not genetically engineered, they are certified organic.
>That's especially good because my nephew is also interested in them,
>and he pretty much only eats organic chicken--though he did say he'd
>make an exception for wing tips.
>After I buy from the guy a few times, I'm going to take it to the next
>level, and ask to buy skins too. Nothing against pork skins, but I
>like the flavor of chicken skins even more. The skins should be
>pretty cheap, since no one considers them to be delicacies. They are
>just this side of being chicken byproduct. They are a commodity
>though, sold in lots as large as 60 metric tons minimum order.
>
>--Bryan

I'm sure you and your nephew will be very happy with them. Garbage
food as far as I and many others are concerned. Gustatory masturbation
with the leavings of a good meal, it sounds like to me!

PS: did you ever find out for me where your nephew gets EVOO for
$20/gal, up on The Hill? I sent him a Facebook message but he has not
yet responded.


John Kuthe...

Bull wrote:
>> Someone on Facebook posted a link to this article:
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...lifeandhealth4
>
>> This was my reply:
> ---------------------------------------
>> I think that Roundup resistant GMO crops are generally a good thing.
>> THe only thing that I object to is a company putting those genes out
>> into the environment, then telling farmers whose crops are infected by
>> those genes that they can't plant THEIR OWN SEEDS because they contain
>> proprietary genes. The small farmer did not ASK to have his/her
>> plants be pollinated by the Roundup Ready genes. That's like a guy
>> raping a woman, then telling her that she has to have an abortion
>> because she has no right to his genetic material. That constitutes a
>> taking of the property rights of the farmer who did nothing to
>> intentionally *take* the GMO company's technology. I invite anyone to
>> make a good argument either against responsible GMO agiculture OR for
>> a GMO company to restrict a farmer from using his/her own seed that
>> was contaminated--for better or worse--without the farmer's consent.
>> I don't expect anyone to take me on from either side--or should I say
>> either extreme?--because I can easily shoot down their arguments.
> -----------------------------------------
>
>> Comments?
>
>> --Bryan
>
> Roundup?
>
> http://blog.farmaid.org/2010/05/weed...t-roundup.html
>
> I won't use it. Rather have the weeds. I also avoid any known GMO
> crops. I don't think that can be done if you eat corn. Growing my own
> without chemical enhancement. Unfortunately all fruit and produce with
> the little organic stickers don't test very well for lack of chemicals.
> We buy it anyway. Less chemicals can't hurt you. I keep hearing the
> argument that organics don't taste better.. DUH. Some actually may not
> taste as good as conventionally grown products. Local is my favorite.
> Many local growers that we buy from don't use chemicals mainly because
> of the cost. Others are old hippy earth friendly folks that just don't
> believe in a "better world through chemistry".
>
> BULL

I agree on all counts. I was pleased to see today that my little
ramshackle farmstand shows signs of opening.

--
Jean B.

John Kuthe wrote:

> >After I buy from the guy a few times, I'm going to take it to the next
> >level, and ask to buy skins too. Nothing against pork skins, but I
> >like the flavor of chicken skins even more. The skins should be
> >pretty cheap, since no one considers them to be delicacies. They are
> >just this side of being chicken byproduct. They are a commodity
> >though, sold in lots as large as 60 metric tons minimum order.

> I'm sure you and your nephew will be very happy with them. Garbage
> food as far as I and many others are concerned. Gustatory masturbation
> with the leavings of a good meal, it sounds like to me!

I consider chicken skin a delicacy. Occasionally I spot a package of
skins in the market and I snap it up. You get two ingredients from it
-- cracklings and schmaltz. (Sorry, Bryan, but animal fat is
delicious!

On Apr 5, 6:07*am, George M. Middius <glanb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> John Kuthe wrote:
> > >After I buy from the guy a few times, I'm going to take it to the next
> > >level, and ask to buy skins too. *Nothing against pork skins, but I
> > >like the flavor of chicken skins even more. *The skins should be
> > >pretty cheap, since no one considers them to be delicacies. *They are
> > >just this side of being chicken byproduct. *They are a commodity
> > >though, sold in lots as large as 60 metric tons minimum order.
> > I'm sure you and your nephew will be very happy with them. Garbage
> > food as far as I and many others are concerned. Gustatory masturbation
> > with the leavings of a good meal, it sounds like to me!
>
> I consider chicken skin a delicacy. *Occasionally I spot a package of
> skins in the market and I snap it up. You get two ingredients from it
> -- cracklings and schmaltz. (Sorry, Bryan, but animal fat is
> delicious!

Animal fat is the least of my worries. You are a lucky person to live
in an area where they sell the skins retail. What city do you live
in? Hey, did you notice that John came out against masturbation? I
don't think even Santorum went that far.

--Bryan

In article
<[email protected]>,
Bryan <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hey, did you notice that John came out against masturbation? I
> don't think even Santorum went that far.

Ahahaha -- Ricky is a heavy breeder. Probably doesn't have time for it.
John has plenty of time on his hand.

BULL

Bryan wrote:

> > I consider chicken skin a delicacy. *Occasionally I spot a package of
> > skins in the market and I snap it up. You get two ingredients from it
> > -- cracklings and schmaltz. (Sorry, Bryan, but animal fat is
> > delicious!
>
> Animal fat is the least of my worries. You are a lucky person to live
> in an area where they sell the skins retail. What city do you live in?

I live in Arlington VA, but finding skins is a rarity. Nowadays, they
mostly pull the skin off the meat at the packing plant.

> Hey, did you notice that John came out against masturbation? I
> don't think even Santorum went that far.

John who? Mccain?

On Apr 5, 9:14*am, George M. Middius <glanb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bryan wrote:
> > > I consider chicken skin a delicacy. *Occasionally I spot a package of
> > > skins in the market and I snap it up. You get two ingredients from it
> > > -- cracklings and schmaltz. (Sorry, Bryan, but animal fat is
> > > delicious!
>
> > Animal fat is the least of my worries. *You are a lucky person to live
> > in an area where they sell the skins retail. *What city do you live in?
>
> I live in Arlington VA, but finding skins is a rarity. Nowadays, they
> mostly pull the skin off the meat at the packing plant.

Once I have bought the wing tips twice from the farmer, I'm going to
ask for skins. Organic, pastured chicken skins.
>
> > Hey, did you notice that John came out against masturbation? *I
> > don't think even Santorum went that far.
>
> John who? Mccain?

Why, Mr. Kuthe of course. Referring to my snacking on wing tips as,
"Gustatory masturbation," implies that there is something wrong with
masturbation. Perhaps his snottiness toward me is rooted in wanker's
guilt.

--Bryan

On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 07:49:31 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Apr 5, 9:14*am, George M. Middius <glanb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bryan wrote:
....
>> > Hey, did you notice that John came out against masturbation? *I
>> > don't think even Santorum went that far.

Carefully culled out one word from it's context:

"Gustatory masturbation with the leavings of a good meal..."

was my whiole quote referring to your chewing on fried chicken wing
tips, which is exactly what it is, for YOU!


>>
>> John who? Mccain?
>
>Why, Mr. Kuthe of course. Referring to my snacking on wing tips as,
>"Gustatory masturbation," implies that there is something wrong with
>masturbation. Perhaps his snottiness toward me is rooted in wanker's
>guilt.

Oh NOW you re-added part of that non-quoted reference to what I had
said/typed!

And your even inferring that I have "wanker's guilt" is as laughable
as Sheldon's preoccupation with any homosexuality in either of us or
between us! ;-)

John Kuthe...

On Apr 5, 4:24*pm, John Kuthe <JohnKu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 14:13:01 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <bryangsimm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 5, 3:00*pm, John Kuthe <JohnKu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 14:57:18 -0500, John Kuthe <JohnKu...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 07:49:31 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> >> ><bryangsimm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> And Bryan, are you purposefully ignoring my now repeated at least
> >> twice request for where you nephew gets EVOO for $20 a gallon?
>
> >Yes. *Why would I do you any favors?
>
> >> John Kuthe...
>
> >--Bryan
>
> You ARE an asshole!
>
When I insult people, I don't expect them to do me favors afterward.
>
> John Kuthe...

--Bryan

On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 14:43:14 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
<[email protected]> wrote:
....
>When I insult people, I don't expect them to do me favors afterward.
>
>--Bryan

It's always all been about YOU!

Hope you very happy wirth yourself! And I know you are. ;-)

John Kuthe...

"Jean B." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
> Bull wrote:
>>> Someone on Facebook posted a link to this article:
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...lifeandhealth4
>>
>>> This was my reply:
>> ---------------------------------------
>>> I think that Roundup resistant GMO crops are generally a good thing.
>>> THe only thing that I object to is a company putting those genes out
>>> into the environment, then telling farmers whose crops are infected by
>>> those genes that they can't plant THEIR OWN SEEDS because they contain
>>> proprietary genes. The small farmer did not ASK to have his/her
>>> plants be pollinated by the Roundup Ready genes. That's like a guy
>>> raping a woman, then telling her that she has to have an abortion
>>> because she has no right to his genetic material. That constitutes a
>>> taking of the property rights of the farmer who did nothing to
>>> intentionally *take* the GMO company's technology. I invite anyone to
>>> make a good argument either against responsible GMO agiculture OR for
>>> a GMO company to restrict a farmer from using his/her own seed that
>>> was contaminated--for better or worse--without the farmer's consent.
>>> I don't expect anyone to take me on from either side--or should I say
>>> either extreme?--because I can easily shoot down their arguments.
>> -----------------------------------------
>>
>>> Comments?
>>
>>> --Bryan
>>
>> Roundup?
>>
>> http://blog.farmaid.org/2010/05/weed...t-roundup.html
>>
>> I won't use it. Rather have the weeds. I also avoid any known GMO
>> crops. I don't think that can be done if you eat corn. Growing my own
>> without chemical enhancement. Unfortunately all fruit and produce with
>> the little organic stickers don't test very well for lack of chemicals.
>> We buy it anyway. Less chemicals can't hurt you. I keep hearing the
>> argument that organics don't taste better.. DUH. Some actually may not
>> taste as good as conventionally grown products. Local is my favorite.
>> Many local growers that we buy from don't use chemicals mainly because of
>> the cost. Others are old hippy earth friendly folks that just don't
>> believe in a "better world through chemistry". BULL
>
> I agree on all counts. I was pleased to see today that my little
> ramshackle farmstand shows signs of opening.
>


AND fighting back in Western Australia
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/art...test-news.html

An organic farmer is suing because his crop was contaminated by GMO crop
grown nearby.

Mike

On 2012-04-07, Bloke Down The Pub <[email protected]> wrote:

> An organic farmer is suing because his crop was contaminated by GMO crop
> grown nearby.

About damn time!

I realize almost everyone sees fighting Monsanto as a lost cause, they
being so huge and leveraged, $$$-wise. But, it has to begin
somewhere. Good on ya', mate, fer having a pair. I only hope some
Yank has a pair, too (pun intended).

nb

--
vi --the heart of evil!

On Saturday, April 7, 2012 9:10:17 AM UTC-6, notbob wrote:
> On 2012-04-07, Bloke Down The Pub <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > An organic farmer is suing because his crop was contaminated by GMO crop
> > grown nearby.
>
> About damn time!
>
> I realize almost everyone sees fighting Monsanto as a lost cause, they
> being so huge and leveraged, $$$-wise. But, it has to begin
> somewhere. Good on ya', mate, fer having a pair. I only hope some
> Yank has a pair, too (pun intended).
>
> nb
>
> --
> vi --the heart of evil!

The best way to fight Monsanto...QUIT buying their products whether they be seeds or herbicides. They are an evil corporation IMHO and are doing irreparable harm in many areas of the world.

On Apr 7, 10:16*am, Roy <wila...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, April 7, 2012 9:10:17 AM UTC-6, notbob wrote:
> > On 2012-04-07, Bloke Down The Pub <cabl...@xxxx.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > An organic farmer is suing because his crop was contaminated by GMO crop
> > > grown nearby.
>
> > About damn time!
>
> > I realize almost everyone sees fighting Monsanto as a lost cause, they
> > being so huge and leveraged, $$$-wise. *But, it has to begin
> > somewhere. *Good on ya', mate, fer having a pair. *I only hope some
> > Yank has a pair, too (pun intended). *
>
> > nb
>
> > --
> > vi --the heart of evil!
>
> The best way to fight Monsanto...QUIT buying their products whether they be seeds or herbicides. They are an evil corporation IMHO and are doing irreparable harm in many areas of the world.

Many of us here have the luxury of buying organic, pesticide-free
whatever, but pretty much everyone who posts here has access to
adequate calories. Many believe that the only way to increase food
production to feed growing populations is through GMOs. Sure, you can
say that those impoverished folks should quit having so many babies,
and I think that should be encouraged too, but a child can't be blamed
because his or her parents bred like rodents. Monsanto is neither
moral or immoral. It is a publicly held corporation, so it is
amoral. It exists only to benefit its stockholders. I stand by my
original post.

--Bryan