America Confronted with Food Rationing

In lean times, biotech grains are less taboo
By Andrew Pollack
The International Herald Tribune
Monday, April 21, 2008
Soaring food prices and global grain shortages are bringing new pressures on governments, food companies and consumers to relax their longstanding resistance to genetically engineered crops.

In Japan and South Korea, some manufacturers for the first time have begun buying genetically engineered corn for use in soft drinks, snacks and other foods. Until now, to avoid consumer backlash, the companies have paid extra to buy conventionally grown corn. But with prices having tripled in two years, it has become too expensive to be so finicky.

"We cannot afford it," said a corn buyer at Kato Kagaku, a Japanese maker of corn starch and corn syrup.

In the United States, wheat growers and marketers, once hesitant about adopting biotechnology because they feared losing export sales, are now warming to it as a way to bolster supplies. Genetically modified crops contain genes from other organisms to make the plants resistance to insects, herbicides or disease. Opponents continue to worry that such crops have not been studied enough and that they might pose risks to health and the environment.

"I think it's pretty clear that price and supply concerns have people thinking a little bit differently today," said Steve Mercer, a spokesman for U.S. Wheat Associates, a federally supported cooperative that promotes American wheat abroad.

The group, which once cautioned farmers about growing biotech wheat, is working to get seed companies to restart development of genetically modified wheat and to get foreign buyers to accept it.

Even in Europe, where opposition to what the Europeans call Frankenfoods has been fiercest, some prominent government officials and business executives are calling for faster approvals of imports of genetically modified crops. They are responding in part to complaints from livestock producers, who say they might suffer a critical shortage of feed if imports are not accelerated.

In Britain, the National Beef Association, which represents cattle farmers, issued a statement this month demanding that "all resistance" to such crops "be abandoned immediately in response to shifts in world demand for food, the growing danger of global food shortages and the prospect of declining domestic animal production."

The chairman of the European Parliament's agriculture committee, Neil Parish, said that as prices rise, Europeans "may be more realistic" about genetically modified crops: "Their hearts may be on the left, but their pockets are on the right."

With food riots in some countries focusing attention on how the world will feed itself, biotechnology proponents see their chance. They argue that while genetic engineering might have been deemed unnecessary when food was abundant, it will be essential for helping the world cope with the demand for food and biofuels in the decades ahead.

Through gene splicing, the modified crops now grown — mainly canola, corn, cotton and soybeans — typically contain bacterial genes that help the plants resist insects or tolerate a herbicide that can be sprayed to kill weeds while leaving the crop unscathed. Biotechnology companies are also working on crops that might need less water or fertilizer, which could have a bigger impact on improving yield.

Certainly any new receptivity to genetically modified crops would be a boon to American exporters. The United States accounted for half the world's acreage of biotech crops last year.

But substantial amounts of corn, soy or canola are grown in Argentina, Brazil and Canada. China has developed insect-resistant rice that is awaiting regulatory approval in that country.

The pressure to re-evaluate biotech comes as prices of some staples like rice and wheat have doubled in the last few months, provoking violent protests in several countries including Cameroon, Egypt, Haiti and Thailand. Factors behind the price spikes include the diversion of crops to make biofuel, rising energy prices, growing prosperity in India and China, and droughts in some regions — including Australia, a major grain producer.

Biotechnology still certainly faces obstacles. Polls in Europe do not yet show a decisive shift in consumer sentiment, and the industry has had some recent setbacks. Since the beginning of the year France has banned the planting of genetically modified corn while Germany has enacted a law allowing for foods to be labeled as "GM free."

And a new international assessment of the future of agriculture, released last Tuesday, gave such tepid support to the role genetic engineering could play in easing hunger that biotechnology industry representatives withdrew from the project in protest. The report was a collaboration of more than 60 governments, with participation from companies and nonprofit groups, under the auspices of the World Bank and the United Nations.

Hans Herren, co-chairman of the project, said providing more fertilizer to Africa would improve output much more than genetic engineering could. "What farmers really are struggling with are water issues, soil fertility issues and market access for their products," he said.

Opponents of biotechnology say they see not so much an opportunity as opportunism by its proponents to exploit the food crisis. "Where politicians and technocrats have always wanted to push GMO's, they are jumping on this bandwagon and using this as an excuse," said Helen Holder, who coordinates the campaign against biotech foods for Friends of the Earth Europe. GMO refers to genetically modified organism.

Even Michael Mack, the chief executive of the Swiss company Syngenta, an agricultural chemical and biotechnology giant, cautioned that the industry should not use the current crisis to push its agenda.

Whatever importance biotechnology can play in the long run, food shortages are making it harder for some buyers to avoid engineered crops.

The main reason some Japanese and South Korean makers of corn starch and corn sweeteners are buying biotech corn is that they have dwindling alternatives. Their main supplier is the United States, where 75 percent of corn grown last year was genetically modified, up from 40 percent in 2003.

"We cannot get hold of non-GM corn nowadays," said Yoon Chang-gyu, director of the Korean Corn Processing Industry Association.

But the tightening global supply has made it harder to get nonengineered corn from elsewhere. And as corn prices soar, millers and food companies are less able to pay the surcharge to keep nonengineered corn separate from biotech varieties. The surcharge itself has been rising.

Yoon said non-engineered corn cost Korean millers about $450 a metric ton, up from $143 in 2006. Genetically engineered corn costs about $350 a ton.

In Europe, livestock producers say that regulations on genetically modified crops could choke feed supplies at a time when they are already reeling from higher prices. Even after a new genetically engineered variety is approved for growing in the United States, it might take several years for Europe to approve it for import.

Moreover, European rules require an entire shipment of grain to be turned back if it contains even a trace of an unapproved variety. Such a problem last year disrupted exports of corn gluten, a feed product, from the United States to Europe.

Feed makers and livestock producers want faster approvals and a relaxation of the rules to allow for trace amounts of unapproved varieties in shipments.

Even in the United States, where genetically engineered food has been generally accepted, the wheat industry has had to rethink its reluctance to accept biotech varieties.

Because about half of America's wheat crop is exported, farmers and processors feared foreign buyers would reject their products. Facing resistance from American farmers, Monsanto in 2004 suspended development of what would have been the first genetically modified wheat.

But some farmers and millers now say that the lack of genetically engineered wheat has made growing the grain less attractive than growing corn or soybeans. That has, in turn, contributed to shrinking supplies and rising prices for wheat.

Milling & Baking News, an influential trade newspaper in Kansas City, Missouri, said in an editorial that companies that used wheat were now paying the price for their own "hesitancy, if not outright opposition" to biotechnology.
www.iht.com

We have not seen any shortages in Colorado. All the stores are filled and the Sams and Costco have lots also.

However, now that Glenn Beck puts it on TV all the stores will be cleaned out. Just like Oprah one time she had a food show and the next day you could not find any of the ingredients in any of the stores. A few days later everything was back to normal.

The U.S. needs to make sure we have food enough for our people and sell the excess. Heck it is time we make sure we are ok. Like my old Mama says, "If you don't take care of yourself you can't take care of anyone else."

The world depends on our "bread basket" and we had better make sure it is producing.

If you buy stuff at one of these "membership" clubs you can bet they know exactly what you purchased and when you purchased it. They know where to go to get their rice back. Be carefull. Also watch these member cards from your local grocery store.

Gexydaf wrote: Good post, Evergreen

Thanks Gexydaf. I know what you mean. I'm posting below because of the reference to a 1974 UN Security Council study, adopted as official policy in November 1975 by President Gerald Ford, NSSM 200 outlining a covert plan to reduce population growth in those countries through birth control, and also, implicitly, war and famine. Brent Scowcroft, who had by then replaced Kissinger as national security adviser (the same post Scowcroft was to hold in the Bush administration), was put in charge of implementing the plan. CIA Director George Bush was ordered to assist Scowcroft, as were the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture. This is pretty scary stuff. Would someone research NSSM 200. D

Food Shortages Or Globalist Depopulation Agenda?
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
April 21, 2008Posted By admin On April 21, 2008 @ 4:44 pm

In an article posted on the Hindustan Times website, N. Chandra Mohan cites Mark Thirwell, Director of the International Economy Program at the Lowy Institute for International Policy in Sydney, Australia. “This is not the first time in modern economic history that the Malthusian spectre of global food shortages has stalked the world economy," writes Thirwell. “Surges in food prices in the 1970s and then again in the mid-1990s both prompted warnings that agricultural capacity was failing to keep pace with a growing world population. Each time the prices jumped, it proved to be temporary as supply responded.” Mr. Mohan believes, this time around, there will be no supply ready to respond. He links this dire situation to "policy neglect of agriculture" and "climate and environmental degradation."

In addition to "climate change," Mohan blames the failures of capitalism — described as "supply-side responses" to market forces — and the "absence of technological breakthroughs in terms of higher yields from new varieties of paddy, wheat and maize." In other words, the current food shortages around the world are the result of corporate ineptitude and due to the vagaries of weather, supposedly exacerbated by man-made "climate change."

Is it possible the current food crisis is part of an intentional plan, indeed Malthusian, as Thirwell writes? Is it possible supposedly man-made "climate change" and the "food crisis" are components of a sinister depopulation agenda designed to cull the herd down to a manageable level, as proclaimed on the mysterious Georgia Guidestones? ("Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.")

In order to understand how these twin menaces — increasingly hyped by the corporate media — may indeed be part of a depopulation agenda, we repost here an article by Joseph Brewda, originally published in the Executive Intelligence Review:

Kissinger’s 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide


On Dec. 10, 1974, the U.S. National Security Council under Henry Kissinger completed a classified 200-page study, "National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests." The study falsely claimed that population growth in the so-called Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs) was a grave threat to U.S. national security. Adopted as official policy in November 1975 by President Gerald Ford, NSSM 200 outlined a covert plan to reduce population growth in those countries through birth control, and also, implicitly, war and famine. Brent Scowcroft, who had by then replaced Kissinger as national security adviser (the same post Scowcroft was to hold in the Bush administration), was put in charge of implementing the plan. CIA Director George Bush was ordered to assist Scowcroft, as were the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture.


The bogus arguments that Kissinger advanced were not original. One of his major sources was the Royal Commission on Population, which King George VI had created in 1944 "to consider what measures should be taken in the national interest to influence the future trend of population." The commission found that Britain was gravely threatened by population growth in its colonies, since "a populous country has decided advantages over a sparsely-populated one for industrial production." The combined effects of increasing population and industrialization in its colonies, it warned, "might be decisive in its effects on the prestige and influence of the West," especially effecting "military strength and security."


NSSM 200 similarly concluded that the United States was threatened by population growth in the former colonial sector. It paid special attention to 13 "key countries" in which the United States had a "special political and strategic interest": India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Turkey, Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia. It claimed that population growth in those states was especially worrisome, since it would quickly increase their relative political, economic, and military strength.





For example, Nigeria: "Already the most populous country on the continent, with an estimated 55 million people in 1970, Nigeria’s population by the end of this century is projected to number 135 million. This suggests a growing political and strategic role for Nigeria, at least in Africa." Or Brazil: "Brazil clearly dominated the continent demographically." The study warned of a "growing power status for Brazil in Latin America and on the world scene over the next 25 years."


Food as a weapon


There were several measures that Kissinger advocated to deal with this alleged threat, most prominently, birth control and related population-reduction programs. He also warned that "population growth rates are likely to increase appreciably before they begin to decline," even if such measures were adopted.


A second measure was curtailing food supplies to targetted states, in part to force compliance with birth control policies: "There is also some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements by AID [U.S. Agency for International Development] and consultative groups. Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand, allocation of scarce PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion."


"Mandatory programs may be needed and we should be considering these possibilities now," the document continued, adding, "Would food be considered an instrument of national power? … Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?"


Kissinger also predicted a return of famines that could make exclusive reliance on birth control programs unnecessary. "Rapid population growth and lagging food production in developing countries, together with the sharp deterioration in the global food situation in 1972 and 1973, have raised serious concerns about the ability of the world to feed itself adequately over the next quarter of century and beyond," he reported.


The cause of that coming food deficit was not natural, however, but was a result of western financial policy: "Capital investments for irrigation and infrastucture and the organization requirements for continuous improvements in agricultural yields may be beyond the financial and administrative capacity of many LDCs. For some of the areas under heaviest population pressure, there is little or no prospect for foreign exchange earnings to cover constantly increasingly imports of food."


"It is questionable," Kissinger gloated, "whether aid donor countries will be prepared to provide the sort of massive food aid called for by the import projections on a long-term continuing basis." Consequently, "large-scale famine of a kind not experienced for several decades—a kind the world thought had been permanently banished," was foreseeable—famine, which has indeed come to pass.

This globalist "return of famines" would not be possible without the participation of multinational corporations. The elite, writes Richard Freeman for the Intelligence Review, are in the process of applying "a tourniquet to food production and export supplies, not only to poor nations, but to advanced sector nations as well." Of course, this would not be possible without the cartelization of agricultural, now known as "agribusiness." Freeman elaborates:

The Windsors’ Global Food Cartel: Instrument for Starvation


Ten to twelve pivotal companies, assisted by another three dozen, run the world’s food supply. They are the key components of the Anglo-Dutch-Swiss food cartel, which is grouped around Britain’s House of Windsor. Led by the six leading grain companies—Cargill, Continental, Louis Dreyfus, Bunge and Born, André, and Archer Daniels Midland/Töpfer—the Windsor-led food and raw materials cartel has complete domination over world cereals and grains supplies, from wheat to corn and oats, from barley to sorghum and rye. But it also controls meat, dairy, edible oils and fats, fruits and vegetables, sugar, and all forms of spices.


Each year tens of millions die from the most elementary lack of their daily bread. This is the result of the work of the Windsor-led cartel. And, as the ongoing financial collapse wipes out bloated speculative financial paper, the oligarchy has moved into hoarding, increasing its food and raw materials holdings. It is prepared to apply a tourniquet to food production and export supplies, not only to poor nations, but to advanced sector nations as well.


The use of food as a weapon can be found at least four millennia ago in Babylon. Imperial Rome took this tack, as did Venice and various Venetian offshoots, including the Antwerp-centered, powerful Burgundian duchy, and the Dutch and British Levant companies, East India companies, and West India companies. Today, food warfare is firmly under the control of London, with the help of subordinate partners in especially Switzerland and Amsterdam. Today’s food companies were created by having had a section of this ancient set of Mesopotamian-Roman-Venetian-British food networks and infrastructure carved out for them.




The Windsor-led oligarchy has built up a single, integrated raw materials cartel, with three divisions—energy, raw materials and minerals, and increasingly scarce food supplies. Figure 1 represents the situation. At the top is the House of Windsor and Club of the Isles. Right below are two of the principal appurtenances of the House of Windsor: the World Wide Fund for Nature, headed by the Doge of London, Prince Philip, which leads the world in orchestration of ethnic conflict and terrorism, such as the British-created afghansi movement; and British intelligence’s Hollinger Corp. of Conrad Black, which is leading the assault to destroy Bill Clinton and the American Presidency.


The firms within each cartel group are listed. While they maintain the legal fiction of being different corporate organizations, in reality this is one interlocking syndicate, with a common purpose and multiple overlapping boards of directors. The Windsor-centered oligarchy owns these cartels, and they are the instruments of power of the oligarchy, accumulated over centuries, for breaking nations’ sovereignty.

Here i thought you guys have been over reading the situation for the last several weeks. How the heck can America the bread basket of the world have a food shortage. Now I understand after listening to Glen Beck. It was pointed out that due to the devalue of the dollar, foreign interests are puchasing our crops.

And Americans by and large have a very large and very warranted distrust of anything resembling a foreign power on our soil, especially the utterly corrupt UN.

Reuters
3-Wal-Mart's Sam's Club limits rice purchases
Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:12pm EDT

By Nicole Maestri

NEW YORK, April 23 (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc's (WMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Sam's Club warehouse division said on Wednesday it is limiting sales of several types of rice, the latest sign that fears of a rice shortage are rippling around the world.

Sam's Club, the No. 2 U.S. warehouse club operator, said it is limiting sales of Jasmine, Basmati and long grain white rice "due to recent supply and demand trends."

U.S. rice futures hitting an all-time high Wednesday on worries about supply shortages.

On Tuesday, Costco Wholesale Corp (COST.O: Quote, Profile, Research), the largest U.S. warehouse club operator, said it has seen increased demand for items like rice and flour as customers, worried about global food shortages and rising prices, stock up.

Sam's Club, the No. 2 U.S. warehouse club operator, is limiting sales of the 20-pound (9 kg), bulk bags of rice to four bags per customer per visit, and is working with suppliers to ensure the products remain in stock.

Warehouse clubs cater to individual shoppers as well as small businesses and restaurant owners looking to buy cheaper, bulk goods.

With prices for basic food items surging, customers have been going to the clubs to try to save money on bulk sizes of everything from pasta to cooking oil and rice.

Sam's Club said the large-sized bags of rice subject to the limits are typically purchased by its restaurant owner or food service customers.

Sam's Club said is not limiting sales of flour or cooking oil at this time. Costco said some of its stores have put limits on sales of items such as rice and flour, but it was trying to modify those restrictions to meet customer demand.

Costco Chief Executive James Sinegal told Reuters that he believed the recent surge in demand was being driven by media reports about rising global demand and shortages of basic food items in some countries.

Food costs have soared worldwide, spurred by increased demand in emerging markets like China and India; competition with biofuels; high oil prices and market speculation.

The situation has sparked food riots in several African countries, Indonesia, and Haiti. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has warned that higher food prices could hurt global growth and security.

Rice prices have risen 68 percent since the start of 2008.

Trade bans on rice have been put in place by India, the world's second largest exporter in 2007, and Vietnam, the third biggest, in hopes of cooling domestic prices. Rice is a staple in most of Asia.

On Tuesday, Tim Johnson, president-CEO of California Rice Commission, which represents growers and millers of rice in the state, said: "Bottom line, there is no rice shortage in the United States. We have supplies."

Wal-Mart shares were up 0.4 percent to $56.80 in afternoon trading, while Costco shares rose 1.7 percent to $69.26. (Reporting by Nicole Maestri, editing by Jeffrey Benkoe and Tim Dobbyn)

Sam's and Costco in Kansas City area are limiting rice.

Demoulas in the east coast of massachusetts has a rationing of flour, oil, and rice.

Evergreen wrote: thanks, Albert, for making this "sticky". I think having a food rationing site might be a good idea for the next six months or so. For anyone who would like to research this, one of my coworkers recently came back from the mid-west and says there are huge grain silos full of wheat, etc. With this much surplus, why is there rationing? Are there great surpluses of grain and why isn't it being channeled into the market? D

Much of our grain has been sold overseas. The grain you see in the silos may be sold and just waiting to be shipped out of the U.S.

Welcome to the New World Order folks.

I don't have a source  other than from the horse's mouth so to speak-----My husband who was recently out in Arkansas and knows a few of the large farmers out there told him that there is definately a shortage in the real sense of the word and that it was going to get worse.  The grains which are in reserves---much of it is being exported to other countries and due to the bad weather they have been experiencing --the crops will be in bad shape.  Many of the fields have suffered from  flooding etc...  They can't get their equipment into many areas to plant anything.  They said it was a mess and that even the rice fields have to be prepared.  They say many of next years crops will not keep up with the demand, 

As long as you don't use a membership card or store savings card, and you pay in cash or check...stores cannot compel you to purchase only the "limit" per customer.  You can just make seperate visits to the stores, purchasing the "limit" with each trip.

The only way they can force you to comply to limits, is if the govt. hands out ration cards, which you MUST present to cashiers at the stores to purchase limited items.  The cards would probably be stamped or run through a computer scan, so as to thwart you from getting around the rationing.

Hate to tell you Annie, the government already knows how to ration. They did it in WWII and all they needed was paper then, now they have better ways to track us.

The biggest problem is the government is very slow and by the time they could implement a plan the shortages will be over. That is the good news.

FluMom wrote: Evergreen wrote: thanks, Albert, for making this "sticky". I think having a food rationing site might be a good idea for the next six months or so. For anyone who would like to research this, one of my coworkers recently came back from the mid-west and says there are huge grain silos full of wheat, etc. With this much surplus, why is there rationing? Are there great surpluses of grain and why isn't it being channeled into the market? D Much of our grain has been sold overseas. The grain you see in the silos may be sold and just waiting to be shipped out of the U.S. Welcome to the New World Order folks.

Denver Suburbs today:

Costco - No Ration Notices - Had 1/2 Pallet of 50 lb bags long grain rice plus a full pallet up top.

Saw 2 Asian gentlmen with 6 of those 50 lb bags in line to purchse, 1 Asian woman with 50 lb bag of rice and 25 lb bag of flour, 1 non Asian woman with 50 lb bag of rice. The only reason I noted the fact that some of these people are Asian is that the one woman may purchase that much rice on a regular basis because Asians eat a lot of rice. The two Asian gentlemen may have a restrauant or they are sending rice to family overseas. No matter Costco was not out of rice.


Sams - Had ration notice of limit of 4 bags Basmati, long grain or Jasmine. Had out of bags of 25 lb long grain, 1/2 pallet of 50 lb long grain, 1/2 pallet each 20-25 lb Basmati and Jasmine. No rice above in storage.

Did not notice many people buying rice at Sams.

So at this point we have rice. I still believe that when people read about a shortage they run out and buy some even though they many not need any.


Plenty of flour at Sams and Costco.


Looks like were ok here so far.

Phoenix Metro Area - No rice at my Wal-Mart today. Shelf was bare!

Places like Arkansas, well beyond the West or East Coasts, will not feel the effects of rice rationing...at least not for awhile.  Arkansas is the Rice Capital of the World, with Riceland Rice the daddy gorilla of all things rice.

flowerchild wrote: I saw the shelves almost half way cleaned out of rice at my local meijers.  Also, more than half of the dried beans were gone.  Which is unusual, because I swear those same beans have been sitting on that shelf for a year.  My son would eat rice and only rice every day if I let him.  He isn't a picky eater, it is just his favorite food.  Whenever we would go  out to our local Korean restaurant, he would eat all the rice out of the buffet. The owner used to come out and tease him.

flowerchild, are you in California? It is helpful to know which state you are in.   

I am in Michigan.

It's a pyramid and grains are the base. When there are problems at the base everything above is in trouble.

Turboguy wrote: [If it keeps going further, even China might collapse into turmoil. They're having trouble feeding the people they've got NOW! Imagine them trying to feed them all when oil is fifty dollars higher (which isn't unimaginable with the new forecasts) and all staple food prices are considerably higher.

china would be forced into going after the middle east oil fields before they would go
into turmoil.
china needs this pipeline to go threw iran that is why they bulit this one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakhstan-China_oil_pipeline

Many of us do not eat that much rice and many who are purchasing all this rice won't eat it before it goes bad. Most of these people do not know how to either vacuum pack it,mylar bag it or even put it in containers.

But you are correct that this is what it will look like in a pademic. I will also be adding to my long term preps in the next 2 months. It is planting time and I need my money to go to vegis I can dry right now.