100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: Just One of Monsanto's Crimes | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Alexis Baden-Mayer
Organic Consumers Association Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:52 CDT 2,4-D and the dioxin pollution it creates are too dangerous to allow, period, but in the hands of bad actors like Monsanto and Dow Chemical the dangers increase exponentially. What's the Environmental Protection Agency doing? Helping coverup the chemical companies' crimes! In February, Monsanto agreed to pay up to $93 million in a class-action lawsuit brought by the residents of Nitro, West Virginia, for dioxin exposure from accidents and pollution at an herbicide plant that operated in their town from 1929 to 2004. That may seem like justice, but it is actually the result of Monsanto's extraordinary efforts to hide the truth, evade criminal prosecution and avoid legal responsibility. A brief criminal fraud investigation conducted (and quickly aborted) by the EPA revealed that Monsanto used a disaster at their Nitro, WV, plant to manufacture "evidence" that dioxin exposure produced a skin condition called chloracne, but was not responsible for neurological health effects or cancers such as Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. These conclusions were repeatedly utilized by EPA and the Veterans Administration to deny help to citizens exposed to dioxin, if these persons did not exhibit chloracne. The EPA knew the truth about Monsanto's dioxin crimes, but it decided to hide it. Why? It would have affected us all. EPA's brief criminal investigation of Monsanto included evidence that Monsanto knowingly contaminated Lysol with dioxin, even as the product was being marketed for cleaning babies' toys. more here, with videos http://www.sott.net/articles/show/244007-Just-One-of-Monsanto-s-Crimes-Or-Why-We-Can-t-Trust-the-EPA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexis Baden-Mayer Organic Consumers Association Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:52 CDT 2,4-D and the dioxin pollution it creates are too dangerous to allow, period, but in the hands of bad actors like Monsanto and Dow Chemical the dangers increase exponentially. What's the Environmental Protection Agency doing? Helping coverup the chemical companies' crimes! In February, Monsanto agreed to pay up to $93 million in a class-action lawsuit brought by the residents of Nitro, West Virginia, for dioxin exposure from accidents and pollution at an herbicide plant that operated in their town from 1929 to 2004. That may seem like justice, but it is actually the result of Monsanto's extraordinary efforts to hide the truth, evade criminal prosecution and avoid legal responsibility. A brief criminal fraud investigation conducted (and quickly aborted) by the EPA revealed that Monsanto used a disaster at their Nitro, WV, plant to manufacture "evidence" that dioxin exposure produced a skin condition called chloracne, but was not responsible for neurological health effects or cancers such as Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. These conclusions were repeatedly utilized by EPA and the Veterans Administration to deny help to citizens exposed to dioxin, if these persons did not exhibit chloracne. The EPA knew the truth about Monsanto's dioxin crimes, but it decided to hide it. Why? It would have affected us all. EPA's brief criminal investigation of Monsanto included evidence that Monsanto knowingly contaminated Lysol with dioxin, even as the product was being marketed for cleaning babies' toys. more here, with videos http://www.sott.net/articles/show/244007-Just-One-of-Monsanto-s-Crimes-Or-Why-We-Can-t-Trust-the-EPA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexis Baden-Mayer Organic Consumers Association Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:52 CDT 2,4-D and the dioxin pollution it creates are too dangerous to allow, period, but in the hands of bad actors like Monsanto and Dow Chemical the dangers increase exponentially. What's the Environmental Protection Agency doing? Helping coverup the chemical companies' crimes! In February, Monsanto agreed to pay up to $93 million in a class-action lawsuit brought by the residents of Nitro, West Virginia, for dioxin exposure from accidents and pollution at an herbicide plant that operated in their town from 1929 to 2004. That may seem like justice, but it is actually the result of Monsanto's extraordinary efforts to hide the truth, evade criminal prosecution and avoid legal responsibility. A brief criminal fraud investigation conducted (and quickly aborted) by the EPA revealed that Monsanto used a disaster at their Nitro, WV, plant to manufacture "evidence" that dioxin exposure produced a skin condition called chloracne, but was not responsible for neurological health effects or cancers such as Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. These conclusions were repeatedly utilized by EPA and the Veterans Administration to deny help to citizens exposed to dioxin, if these persons did not exhibit chloracne. The EPA knew the truth about Monsanto's dioxin crimes, but it decided to hide it. Why? It would have affected us all. EPA's brief criminal investigation of Monsanto included evidence that Monsanto knowingly contaminated Lysol with dioxin, even as the product was being marketed for cleaning babies' toys. more here, with videos http://www.sott.net/articles/show/244007-Just-One-of-Monsanto-s-Crimes-Or-Why-We-Can-t-Trust-the-EPA yea, i'm always at that website... i just skip over the jew bashing tho... they seem a little anti-Isreal... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexis Baden-Mayer Organic Consumers Association Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:52 CDT 2,4-D and the dioxin pollution it creates are too dangerous to allow, period, but in the hands of bad actors like Monsanto and Dow Chemical the dangers increase exponentially. What's the Environmental Protection Agency doing? Helping coverup the chemical companies' crimes! In February, Monsanto agreed to pay up to $93 million in a class-action lawsuit brought by the residents of Nitro, West Virginia, for dioxin exposure from accidents and pollution at an herbicide plant that operated in their town from 1929 to 2004. That may seem like justice, but it is actually the result of Monsanto's extraordinary efforts to hide the truth, evade criminal prosecution and avoid legal responsibility. A brief criminal fraud investigation conducted (and quickly aborted) by the EPA revealed that Monsanto used a disaster at their Nitro, WV, plant to manufacture "evidence" that dioxin exposure produced a skin condition called chloracne, but was not responsible for neurological health effects or cancers such as Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. These conclusions were repeatedly utilized by EPA and the Veterans Administration to deny help to citizens exposed to dioxin, if these persons did not exhibit chloracne. The EPA knew the truth about Monsanto's dioxin crimes, but it decided to hide it. Why? It would have affected us all. EPA's brief criminal investigation of Monsanto included evidence that Monsanto knowingly contaminated Lysol with dioxin, even as the product was being marketed for cleaning babies' toys. more here, with videos http://www.sott.net/articles/show/244007-Just-One-of-Monsanto-s-Crimes-Or-Why-We-Can-t-Trust-the-EPA yea, i'm always at that website... i just skip over the jew bashing tho... they seem a little anti-Isreal... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Laura_Knight_Jadczyk http://www.sott.net/page/1-About-Sott-net That Lady is slightly Off-Beat,somewhere in the League of David Icke,or worse! I don't doubt that there was Skullduggery by Monsanto,but it would definitely be more credible if it didn't come from that Site! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexis Baden-Mayer Organic Consumers Association Tue, 10 Apr 2012 23:52 CDT 2,4-D and the dioxin pollution it creates are too dangerous to allow, period, but in the hands of bad actors like Monsanto and Dow Chemical the dangers increase exponentially. What's the Environmental Protection Agency doing? Helping coverup the chemical companies' crimes! In February, Monsanto agreed to pay up to $93 million in a class-action lawsuit brought by the residents of Nitro, West Virginia, for dioxin exposure from accidents and pollution at an herbicide plant that operated in their town from 1929 to 2004. That may seem like justice, but it is actually the result of Monsanto's extraordinary efforts to hide the truth, evade criminal prosecution and avoid legal responsibility. A brief criminal fraud investigation conducted (and quickly aborted) by the EPA revealed that Monsanto used a disaster at their Nitro, WV, plant to manufacture "evidence" that dioxin exposure produced a skin condition called chloracne, but was not responsible for neurological health effects or cancers such as Non-Hodgkins lymphoma. These conclusions were repeatedly utilized by EPA and the Veterans Administration to deny help to citizens exposed to dioxin, if these persons did not exhibit chloracne. The EPA knew the truth about Monsanto's dioxin crimes, but it decided to hide it. Why? It would have affected us all. EPA's brief criminal investigation of Monsanto included evidence that Monsanto knowingly contaminated Lysol with dioxin, even as the product was being marketed for cleaning babies' toys. more here, with videos http://www.sott.net/articles/show/244007-Just-One-of-Monsanto-s-Crimes-Or-Why-We-Can-t-Trust-the-EPA yea, i'm always at that website... i just skip over the jew bashing tho... they seem a little anti-Isreal... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Laura_Knight_Jadczyk http://www.sott.net/page/1-About-Sott-net That Lady is slightly Off-Beat,somewhere in the League of David Icke,or worse! I don't doubt that there was Skullduggery by Monsanto,but it would definitely be more credible if it didn't come from that Site!
i agree, but they mainly post articles from other websites, some are true, some aren't... but for the science and UFO things, i think they are ok... i just look at it as i don't know, i just read it and try to find the truth as best as i can...same with other things that are posted on here, some make sense, others don't... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The government should shut down Monsanto for good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The government should shut down Monsanto for good. agreed, Monsanto is one of the most evilest corps in the world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The US Supreme Court has empowered Monsanto in ways even money doesn't explain.
How can a corp own a patent on a plant that has been around for thousands of years? We are talking the original plant, not some GMO. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the claims being made in the OP seem absolutely plausible to me. It'd be nice if the article was from a more credible source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
