Palaces For The People
Saturday, December 27, 2003
 
Yahoo! Groups : ERAS-ag Messages : Message 11 of 11

From:
Date: Sat Dec 27, 2003 3:08 pm
Subject: What MEDOCINO CALIFORNIA needs to know about GMO Fedayeen tactics

ADVERTISEMENT
As the subversive jackals descend on Mendocino
California to PREVENT FREEWILL DEMOCRATIC PROCESS from
being undermined by crass Corporate Serial Murderer
Greed, they need the facts...

And here are some,,,
==============================
http://www.verdant.net/monsanto.htm
. RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #563
.
. ---September 11, 1997---
.
. HEADLINES:
.
. WHY IS EPA IGNORING MONSANTO?
.

==============================
http://www.verdant.net/corp.htm
CORPORATE POWER, INFLUENCE, MONEY AND INTERLOCKING
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS PAGE

Here's the latest list of people in "our" government
and where they used to-or will soon-work after they
complete their assignments: Monsanto and G.W. Bush
Administration: Who Will Own the Store?

Here's another Monsanto connection: Donald Rumsfield.

Rumsfeld Lobbied FDA Approval of Toxic Aspartame
(continued)
...
It's obvious that Monsanto is well connected in
Washington. How does this insider power get used?
Here's a nice example from Times Beach, Missouri:
WHY IS EPA IGNORING MONSANTO?

In our humble opinion, Mr. Ruckelshaus', (director of
Monsanto-ex EPA director) Enterprise For The
Environment looks suspiciously like a greenwashing
front for corporate interests. i.e.

Read a few excerpts from an Interview with William
Ruckelshaus by Timothy K. Judge and Bruce W. Piasecki
Published in Corporate Environmental Strategies, the
Journal of Environmental Leadership

JUDGE: The effort you are leading at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, the Enterprise
for the Environment has been underway for about a year
now. How is Enterprise for the Environment changing
the debate and ultimately the publics view on
environmental issues?

RUCKELSHAUS: "Well, it's not changing any debate yet
because we haven't agreed on anything. We may change
the debate of the people going through the process,
but as of yet we have had no impact on the public
simply because what we've been doing has largely been
screened from public view...
==============================
http://www.rense.com/health3/milkhormone_h.htm

Monsanto's rBGH Milk
Hormone Linked
To Cancer?
http://www.
corpwatch.org/trac/corner/worldnews/other/173.html

* Monsanto says on camera that Canada's ban on rBGH
has nothing to do with human health concerns - but
Canadian government officials speaking on camera say
just the opposite. * Canadian government officials,
speaking on camera, say they believe Monsanto tried to
bribe them with offers of $1 to $2 million to gain
approval for rBGH in Canada. Monsanto officials say
the Canadians misunderstood their offer of 'research'
funds.

* Monsanto officials claim on camera that 'the milk
has not changed' because of rBGH treatment of cows. As
noted earlier, there is abundant evidence - some of it
from Monsanto's own studies -- that this is definitely
not true.

* On camera, a Monsanto official claims that Monsanto
has not opposed dairy co-ops labelling their milk as
'rBGH-free'. But this is definitely not true. Monsanto
brought two lawsuits against dairies that labelled
their milk 'rBGH-free'. Faced with the Monsanto legal
juggernaut, the dairies folded and Monsanto then sent
letters around to other dairy organisations announcing
the outcome of the two lawsuits - in all likelihood,
for purposes of intimidation. (Conveniently, the FDA
regulations that discourage labelling of milk as
'rBGH-free' were written by Michael Taylor, AN
ATTORNEY WHO WORKED FOR MONSANTO BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER
HIS TENURE AS AN FDA OFFICIAL.)
==============================

Political Corruption
A Collection of Links on politics and political
corruption in relation to financial scandals.

Monsanto Accused of Attempt to Bribe Health Canada
Health Canada researchers accuse Monsanto of bribery
in bid to get approval for use of bovine growth
hormone.

==============================
http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/news/10009.htm

Monsanto Accused of Attempt to Bribe Health Canada for
rBGH (Posilac) Approval

Return to Monsanto Investing News web page.

[Excerpted The Ottawa Citizen, Fri 23 Oct 1998, Page
A1, by James Baxter]

Scientists `pressured' to approve cattle drug:
Health Canada researchers accuse firm of bribery in
bid to OK `questionable' product

Veterinary scientists from Health Canada's Human
Safety Division testified yesterday that they are
being pressured to approve a controversial hormone
intended to boost milk production in dairy cattle.
``We have been pressured and coerced to pass drugs of
questionable safety, including rBST,'' Dr. Shiv Chopra
told the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and
Forestry.

The senators sat dumbfounded as Dr. Margaret
Haydon told of being in a meeting when officials from
Monsanto Inc., the drug's manufacturer, made an offer
of between $1 million and $2 million to the scientists
from Health Canada -- an offer that she told the
senators could only have been interpreted as a bribe.

Dr. Haydon also recounted how notes and files
critical of scientific data provided by Monsanto were
stolen from a locked filing cabinet in her office. Dr.
Chopra said that all files pertaining to rBST are now
controlled by one senior bureaucrat and can only be
viewed by gaining permission. ``I can't even believe
I'm in Canada when I hear that your files have been
stolen and that all the files are now in the hands of
one person,'' said Senator Eugene Whelan. ``What the
hell kind of a system have we got here?''
==============================
http://ngin.tripod.com/295.htm

Scientists `pressured' to approve cattle drug:
HEALTH CANADA RESEARCHERS ACCUSE FIRM OF BRIBERY IN
BID TO OK `QUESTIONABLE' PRODUCT

Veterinary scientists from Health Canada's Human
Safety Division testified yesterday that they are
being pressured to approve a controversial hormone
intended to boost milk production in dairy cattle.
``We have been pressured and coerced to pass drugs of
questionable safety, including rBST,'' Dr. Shiv Chopra
told the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and
Forestry.

The senators sat dumbfounded as Dr. Margaret
Haydon told of being in a meeting when officials from
Monsanto Inc., the drug's manufacturer, made an offer
of between $1 million and $2 million to the scientists
from Health Canada -- an offer that she told the
senators could only have been interpreted as a bribe.

Dr. Haydon also recounted how notes and files
critical of scientific data provided by Monsanto were
stolen from a locked filing cabinet in her office. Dr.
Chopra said that all files pertaining to rBST are now
controlled by one senior bureaucrat and can only be
viewed by gaining permission. ``I can't even believe
I'm in Canada when I hear that your files have been
stolen and that all the files are now in the hands of
one person,'' said Senator Eugene Whelan. ``What the
hell kind of a system have we got here?''...

Grievance Hearings...
The Plot Thickens...
==============================
http://www.psrast.org/bghcanad.htm

MILK CONTROVERSY SPILLS INTO CANADA

(Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly #621; October
22, 1998)

(Editings in bold, italics and size have been added by
the editor of this website)

,,,However, a recently-released Canadian government
report indicates that the findings of Monsanto's
90-day rat feeding study were misreported by FDA in
SCIENCE in 1990.[5] The Canadian report says that 20%
to 30% of the rats fed rBGH in high doses developed
primary antibody responses to rBGH, indicating that
rBGH was absorbed into their blood. An antibody
response is evidence that the immune system has
detected, and responded to, a substance entering the
body. Furthermore, cysts reportedly developed on the
thyroids of the male rats and some increased
infiltration of the prostate gland occurred. Despite
these results, FDA reported in SCIENCE that there were
"no... clinical findings" in the Monsanto rat
study.[2,pg.878] The Canadian government report
concludes flatly that "the 3-month rat study did show
a physiological response."[5,pg.29]

One FDA official told the Associated Press this month
that FDA never examined the raw data from Monsanto's
rat feeding study but based its 1993 safety conclusion
only on a summary of the study provided by
Monsanto....

,,,** Two of the report's authors, and four other
Canadian government scientists, testified that they
have been threatened with transfers to other jobs
where "they would never be heard of again" if they did
not speed up approval of Monsanto's rBGH product in
Canada, despite the absence of long-term data showing
the product is safe for humans. Monsanto's application
to market rBGH in Canada has been pending since 1990.
According to the TORONTO STAR, "The scientists contend
managers in Health Canada [the Canadian equivalent of
FDA] are more concerned about pleasing the companies
that submit the drug applications and are paying for
their approval than they are about protecting
health."[7] The Canadian scientists have been
forbidden to speak to the press about their concerns,
but they testified last month before a government
board of inquiry.,,,
==============================
http://www.psrast.org/indmanipsci.htm

The Enemies of Democracy

Source: Rachel's Environment & Health News, #725, May
24, 2001

Editings in bold, italics and sub-headings added by
PSRAST

The enemies of democracy are flexing their muscles,,,
==============================


Because ephemeral news items can provide facts which
cause as a consequence a change of mind, there needs
to be a record of such emphemeral items somewhere. If
asked where did you come up with that opinion, one
should be able to quote a source. The USA copyright
laws permit, for educational and scientific purposes,
making such records without the permission of the
copyright owner, under FAIR USE criterion. The United
States Supreme court has even ruled that quoting an
entire short work can come under fair use if it meets
the other criteria of the laws. From time to time I
post articles which have a short shelf-life so as to
provide a hardcopy record of published information
sources, which constitute a short exerpt from the
entire work, and do not injure the copyright owners
right to profit off their work. This is FAIR USE.
==============================



Powered by Blogger