THE LATEST LITIGATION CONCERNING IG FARBENSANTO
It has been a while since we've heard anything from Big Agribusiness's I.G. Farbensanto, but we can relax: the system of graft, corruption, and denial roles on, according to this article shared by M.W. In fact, according to the article, I.G. Farbensanto has actually managed to win a few recent court cases:
As usual in articles of this nature, there was something that "caught my eye", and when I say that things "caught my eye," regular readers here will have figured out that I mean that something was so somersaultingly glaringly absurd and stupid, and that was disguised in language designed to make the somersaulting and glaring stupidity seem normal that the world, despite being run by insane and incompetent and boobs like the Hochklaus von Blohenschwab or the newly minted King Charles III, won't notice. And if the diction in that previous sentence seems a little too convoluted to make its obvious point, then all I can say is "Q.E.D."
What I'm referring to in the article is this statement:
Since buying Monsanto in 2018, Bayer has steadfastly insisted that there is no cancer connection to Monsanto’s herbicides. The company says that scientific research and regulatory findings, including from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), back its assertions of safety. The company says it has only agreed to settlements in order to mitigate the expense of the litigation.
And that statement has to be understood in the following context:
The plaintiffs’ attorneys say they are armed with new evidence that undermines Monsanto’s defense, including a recent federal court ruling that threw out the EPA’s determination of glyphosate safety.
In June, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court Appeals ruled that the EPA did not properly follow scientific guidelines when it determined glyphosate was not carcinogenic. The court found that EPA officials discounted several important studies and that “most studies EPA examined indicated that human exposure to glyphosate is associated with an at least somewhat increased risk of developing NHL.”
The “centerpiece of Monsanto’s defense, i.e., the EPA’s imprimatur of safety, has been invalidated,” the plaintiffs’ attorneys stated in the court filing.
Monsanto lawyers said in the filing that “it is inaccurate to suggest that EPA’s imprimatur of safety has been invalidated,” and said the EPA’s conclusions “regarding the safety of glyphosate Roundup have never wavered.”
Now let all of that sink in: we're being asked to believe in an extraordinary and infallible magisterium, with both immediate and universal jurisdiction, called the Environmental Protection Agency, whose pronouncements on all things environmental are infallibly scientific, and true for all cases everywhere and for all time, I guess in what amounts to a Vincentian Canon of quod ubique, quod semper, quod omnibus.
That was too much even for the ninth circuit of appeals which, I hasten to remind readers, is in Nuttyfornia and based in San Franfreakshow, so hardly a bastion of legal (or any other kind of) sanity. Yet even they can see through the spurious claims.
This from the same government whose Food and Drug Agency was bought and paid for by the same Mon(ster)santo and other Big Agribusiness, in a revolving door of personnel and corporately sponsored and purchased "science" that predictably (and infallibly) assured everyone that its GMOs were "substantially equivalent" for food purposes to their non-modified competitors, and yet conveniently not "substantially equivalent" when it came to to the purposes of patents and profits.
This, by the way, was and is the same Food and Drug Agency that, thanks to President Trump's Operation Warp speed, rushed highly experimental injections to market, with all the allegations of fraudulent data, testing, and now, adverse reactions and sudden deaths that are emerging.
In other words: same folks, same agency, same revolving door between corporate "science" and public policy and regulatory agencies. Big Pharma merely took the whole Big Agri playbook, and made it their own.
There was one country, of course, that wasn't buying all the claims to immediate, universal, and infallible jurisdiction for the "science" assuring us of "substantial equivalence" from a corrupt, bought-and-paid-for "government," and oddly enough, it was a country whose religious tradition repudiated central one-size-fits-all papal solutions for food:
There's another country, of course, that bought into (or rather, was cajoled and forced to buy into) the GMO globaloney:
See you on the flip side...
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.