Docs Show How Monsanto Crushes Dissent with Thousands of Paid Trolls

Monsanto was once blamed for having an entire department within its St. Louis headquarters for dishing out disinfo and trolling dissenters, but now there is a paper trail proving they’ve been messing with your heads.

Pre-trials for over 50 lawsuits in the US District Court in San Francisco have unearthed Monsanto’s dirty little secret – aside from the Plaintiffs’ claim that the herbicide Round Up caused their non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

It seems Monsanto has been hiring, through third parties, thousands of Internet trolls to counter negative comments about their products and business practices, and to promote their company with pseudo-scientific reports downplaying the probable risks of glyphosate, as well as the “inert” ingredients in their best-selling pesticides.

If you’re a savvy reader, you can see evidence of a pointed disinformation campaign. There are even trolls and shills that dismiss the “Monsanto Shill Syndrome.” These people say hateful things about the Food Babe, Moms Against Monsanto, GMO-whistleblowers, organic farmers, et al.

I can attest from my own experience writing about Monsanto’s actions for over six years now that I have had trolls follow me from one site to another to try to discredit me personally or make light of almost any argument I put forth concerning GMOs or glyphosate. However, after half the world has banned these reprehensible “crops”, are we surprised at all about Monsanto’s equally contemptible tactics?

Here’s one of my favorites to give you an example of Monsanto’s modus operandi. A commenter named ‘GMO Roberts’ once wrote: “Poor Chrissy sure is jealous of Monsanto. It is a shame that she can’t accept the fact that farmers want gmos.”

This was one of the nice comments.

While its possible this wasn’t a hired troll, GMO Roberts (and others with similar names) commented on every single article I wrote for more than three years. That’s some serious time spent arguing for GMOs and Monsanto.

I wouldn’t be surprised if ‘GMO Roberts’ and his buddies end up being exposed in the papers that are being gathered at the website of the food-safety whistleblower, US Right to Know. 

The plaintiffs in California have alleged that Monsanto targeted all online materials and even social media comments that indicate potential dangers of its products, per one document released late in April. The document details the accusations further,

“Monsanto even started the aptly-named ‘Let Nothing Go’ program to leave nothing, not even Facebook comments, unanswered; through a series of third parties, it employs individuals who appear to have no connection to the industry, who in turn post positive comments on news articles and Facebook posts, defending Monsanto, its chemicals, and GMOs.”

Then there’s the additional claim that Monsanto has been filling the coffers of think tanks and fake science organizations, Universities, etc. to promote their wares. You may have seen places like the ‘Genetic Literacy Project’ and the ‘American Council on Science and Health”– “organizations intended to shame scientists and highlight information helpful to Monsanto and other chemical producers,” according to the plaintiffs.

There’s proof to boot. There are batches of emails, some written by Monsanto executives, inducing “independent scientists” to ghost write pseudo-scientific articles supporting glyphosate, Round Up, and GMOs.

It isn’t as if this is really news to any of us, but it is darned satisfying to see that the truth always comes out. This time a California court might be holding Monsanto to the fire not only for causing wide spread cancer, but proving that they used Orwellian mind control tactics to sway the public’s acceptance of their own poisoning.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/05/03/docs-show-monsanto-crushes-di...

Views: 31

Reply to This

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service