Genetic Foods/Monsanto Revealed 1/3

[arundhatiroyfan]

Run time: 09:55 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM7usWHFhjc   Posted on YouTube: January 23, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: April 26, 2008 By DU Member: arundhatiroyfan Views on DU: 457

 
part 2- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8s98-zMH3Q&feature=related

part 3- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH7jAITWd8o&feature=related

[lovuian]

1. Its a great evil sweeping across the world attacking

the one thing precious to mankind their food

[barack the house]

2. Basically they put pesticides in the food bit pointless if they don't work.

They are modifying food so that the food doesn'tgenerate seed and then become the sole supplier of the food supply. I wonder what candidate would take money from them.

[nebula]

3. scientists formally protested political intereference

American scientists signed a report condemning Bushco
as being the most anti-science administration in US history.

That's a lot of freaking scientists.



By Jamie Chapman
6 August 2005

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) recently issued a scathing indictment of the Bush administration’s record on science. Its report, entitled "Science Under Siege," was issued on June 21. It documents the White House’s distortion, abuse and quashing of legitimate scientific inquiry in order to promote its political agenda.

The ACLU commissioned the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) to draft the report. The UCS issued its own report in February 2004, entitled "Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking." This earlier statement has since been signed by over 6o American scientists, including 48 Nobel laureates, 62 National Medal of Science recipients, and 135 members of the National Academy of Sciences.

The new ACLU/UCS report shows that in the intervening 16 months the Bush administration, far from responding to pressure generated by the earlier UCS recommendations, has deepened its attack on science...

...nearly 400 scientists said they had witnessed EPA officials misrepresenting scientific findings, 284 said they had seen the "selective or incomplete use of data to justify a specific regulatory outcome" and 224 scientists said they had been directed to "inappropriately exclude or alter technical information" in an EPA document...nearly 200 of the respondents said they had been in situations where they or their colleagues actively objected to or resigned from projects "because of pressure to change scientific findings."


www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b33731.html