Mc Do

[Coligny]

I think they killed Mista James...

Somebody know where they might have buried the daughter ?

[Taro Toporific]

I think they killed Mista James...
Somebody know where they might have buried the daughter ?

[floatl][/floatl]
"Donald" Mcdonald got to him.


Now they havemcdonalds.co.jp/guitarman

[Greji]

[floatl][/floatl]
"Donald" Mcdonald got to him.

Yup, but they didn't let "Donald" get away with it....

[Taro Toporific]

According to the blog.goo.ne.jp/otis_eikaiwa website, the Mr. James campaign poignantly ended in November when his three-month tourist visa expired.

[Catoneinutica]

I think they killed Mista James...

Somebody know where they might have buried the daughter ?

Why, would you like to exhume her to satisfy your twisted desires? I know I would!

Coligny knows that the French have a specific term for what they peddle at McDo: malbouffe. It's a great word - much better than "junk food" - because it's onomatopoeic: it sounds like what it is.

-catone
-is Debito going to claim credito for the Mister James campaign's short lifespan?

[FG Lurker]

[quote="Taro Toporific"]According to the blog.goo.ne.jp/otis_eikaiwa website, the Mr. James campaign poignantly ended in November when his three-month tourist visa expired. ]
So he was working on a tourist visa?

[IkemenTommy]

So he was working on a tourist visa?

Technically no. He was doing a public service for Japan.

[Cyka UchuuJin]

According to the blog.goo.ne.jp/otis_eikaiwa website, the Mr. James campaign poignantly ended in November when his three-month tourist visa expired. ]http://www.fuckedgaijin.com/forums/images/vbimghost/1294b1f6ec52b0c2.jpg[/img]

ahahahaha! i always knew the government was somehow tied to mc do!

very clever way to remind the gaijin to go home at visa expiration time.

[Coligny]

Why, would you like to exhume her to satisfy your twisted desires? I know I would!

Coligny knows that the French have a specific term for what they peddle at McDo: malbouffe. It's a great word - much better than "junk food" - because it's onomatopoeic: it sounds like what it is.

Yeah, but their movement is not limited to McDo (when they are not on strike or blown up by local food terrurists). GMO, anything touched by Monsanto, sandwiches, anything out of industrial farming/slaughterhouse. Think of the Taliban, but more narrowminded dangerous, and not put off by the concept of having sex with the livestock.

[Marked Trail]

...the French have a specific term for what they peddle at McDo: malbouffe. It's a great word - much better than "junk food"

Via Peekasso.tumblr.com

[Catoneinutica]

And the ironic thing is that countries like France and Japan use a lot more fertilizer and pesticides than the big agricultural exporters like the US, Canada, and Australia.

[Catoneinutica]

Via Peekasso.tumblr.com

Bring out the McGimp (tm)!

[Coligny]

And the ironic thing is that countries like France and Japan use a lot more fertilizer and pesticides than the big agricultural exporters like the US, Canada, and Australia.

[citashiun needed]

[Screwed-down Hairdo]

And the ironic thing is that countries like France ... use a lot more fertilizer and pesticides....

I always used to think that the French used their fertiziler, or more specifically the merde part, to dump on MuckDonald's.

[Adhesive]

From what I understand, the GM companies argue that by modifying the crops to be more resistant against pests, and more viable in general, there is less need for fertilizer and pesticide. However, I've heard opponents argue that all they really do is modify the crops to be more resistant to pesticides and herbicides, which allows farmers to use even more of the crap without harming the crops...thus increasing the amount of shit introduced to the environment. I'm sure you can find plenty of citations from both sides of the argument, I'm just too lazy to do the digging.

Personally, I'm all for GM food, because it brings us one step closer to winning the war against nature.

[Coligny]

[quote="Adhesive"]From what I understand, the GM companies argue that by modifying the crops to be more resistant against pests, and more viable in general, there is less need for fertilizer and pesticide. However, I've heard opponents argue that all they really do is modify the crops to be more resistant to pesticides and herbicides, which allows farmers to use even more of the crap without harming the crops...thus increasing the amount of shit introduced to the environment. I'm sure you can find plenty of citations from both sides of the argument, I'm just too lazy to do the digging.

Personally, I'm all for GM food, because it brings us one step closer to winning the war against nature.

]


The few problems are:
killing biodiversity
forbidden to use seeds from the crops the next year must buy all the time if not farmers can be sued for copyright infrigment other something equally ridicullous.
long term effect on health totally unknown.
RoundUp ready seeds don't react to round up. But roundup is... kinda sorta a bitch False advertising regarding it's non toxicity Scientific fraud for falsification of lab test results and Difference between regulatory registered and commercialized formulations which prompted the french governement to ask for removal of the product from sale in 2009 (and by French Gov I mean the actual clusterfuck of shitforbrain pedopyle attention whores open for any corporate bribes running the country to the ground like if they were believing in the 2012 apocalypse)

[Mike Oxlong]

I'm pretty sure it's the latter. Round-up ready seed by Monsanto, and other such varieties of corn and grain. Modified to be resistant to the parent company's own brand of herbicide. They control the plant from seed to market. Same deal recently with meat producers, who basically own the animal from birth to bbq. The small farm farmer is dead. A few holdouts doing organic stuff, but with regulations as to what passes for organic being tweaked to favor big biz, along with the corporations making a "natural" food line to compete with organic (though the food need not be natural in any way to qualify for the label) ensures that the food supply will be totally ruled by a few mega-corporations, and you will eat what you're told!

[Mike Oxlong]

The few problems are:
killing biodiversity
forbidden to use seeds from the crops the next year must buy all the time if not farmers can be sued for copyright infrigment other something equally ridicullous.
long term effect on health totally unknown.
...

Yup. All true. We went from farmers being up-in-arms about not being allowed to save their own seed crops for planting the following season, to seed-cleaners being extinct in a mere decade. Monsanto sues anyone even suspected of saving and cleaning their own stock of seed, even if the lawsuit goes nowhere. The legal battle will bankrupt the farmer, and not even make a blip in Monsanto's balance sheet. They employ spies and stocky men with no necks to persuade farmers to see the light. The average city-dweller is so disconnected from their food supply that they don't know or care about such things. They do care that the proportion of American incomes spent on food has dropped to something like 15% of household expenditures, as opposed to 25% a generation or two back. Of course, the taxpayer funds a lot of this price discrepancy, as grain is generally sold at below the cost of production, and heavily subsidized by the government to keep the farmers in business. The mega-corps make off with super cheap grain, and the government pays them to screw over the farmers, who subsidize themselves with their own taxes, and everybody else's.

[6810]

As far as all the hype around GM crops and bullshit about feeding the world goes...

Two words slice those fuckers and all their arguments in half.

Fukuoka Masanobu.

Total awesome Japanese hippy who walked his talk for more than 40 years. In English even!

[Catoneinutica]

And the ironic thing is that countries like France and Japan use a lot more fertilizer and pesticides than the big agricultural exporters like the US, Canada, and Australia.

Coligny quite rightly asked for a citation of this, and, while you could probably find something online, I'm going off a book called "An Underground Economist" which shows on page 205 of the paperback edition a graph with "Fertilizer Use Kg/Hectare" as the X-axis and "Percent of Subsidy" on the Y-axis. Korea comes in at the uppermost right with a subsidy amount of 70% and 500 kgs/hectare. Japan and Switzerland come in second and third from the right, followed by the EU. Australian agriculture is the least subsidized, followed by Canada and the US. The author cites as his source for the graph FAO, 1998, and OECD, 2000.