Since Monsato was mentioned, I thought I'd add this that I found in my email this morning:
> ************************************************** ****
> Milk, Lies, and Videotape -
> Monsanto's War Against Your Health
> Move over drug companies. Your position as the greediest
> companies on the planet with the least concern for truth
> and human life has been displaced. Monsanto has just pushed
> you out. Yes, the chemical giant, the maker of Roundup,
> aspartame, genetically engineered seeds, and BST hormone
> (which increases a cow's milk production), is the new
> emperor of Pillage for Profit.
> Reporters at a Fox News affiliate in Florida did an in-depth
> investigation of the dangers of Monsanto's BST in milk and
> its clear connection to cancer in people who consume the milk.
> Monsanto lawyers heard about the story and threatened the
> network with "dire consequences" if the program was aired.
> The network tried to bribe the reporters to change the story.
> They refused. The station then threatened to fire them. They
> fought back. The station negotiated to make changes to the
> story that the reporters could live with. But after an unheard
> of 83 rounds of rewrites and cuts, the final story was so
> watered down, the reports refused to go along with it.
> Fox fired them for insubordination. The reporters filed suits
> as whistleblowers and a jury awarded them $425,000.
> A happy ending? I wish it were so. Here's what happened next:
> Fox appealed and five major news chains filed briefs in support
> of Fox. The Florida appeals court (notice this wasn't from a jury)
> reversed the verdict, denying them whistleblower protection. The
> court found that Fox, and the media in general, have no obligation
> to tell the truth! In other words, the media can report known
> fiction (lies) to you as real news.
> Now consider this: If I were to write a fantastic story about a
> supplement that I also endorsed, but exaggerated the story to make
> it sound better than it is, federal agencies would quickly take
> action against me. In fact, I would face very stiff fines and a
> possible jail sentence. Why? Because "commercial" speech is not
> protected by the first amendment.
> But the media can lie to you over the airways. According to the
> courts, it's not commercial speech. The courts hold that the media
> aren't profiting from the sale of the drugs (or other products).
> While that's technically true, the networks are profiting - and
> in a big way - from by the ad revenue their lies protect.
> I repeatedly saw the same problem in Anchorage, where one of the
> largest advertisers was a local hospital. The local paper
conveniently avoided stories about the hospital's scandalous gross
negligence. A woman with a bowel obstruction was allowed to languish
over the weekend untreated until her bowel became gangrenous and she
needed emergency surgery to avoid imminent death. The local
newspaper wouldn't run the story for fear of losing ad revenue from
> This story is to remind you not to believe anything you read, see,
or hear in the mass media regarding medicine or alleged scientific
studies. Anything and everything presented to you is likely tainted
by what effect the story has on their advertising dollars.
> If you would like more information on this story about Monsanto,
please click on this website:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axU9ngbTxKw.
If you're as outraged as
I am, please forward this to your friends. If they're drinking milk
from hormone-injected cows, this story could save their life. And
they certainly won't get this information from the mainstream media.
> Yours for better health and medical freedom,
> Robert Jay Rowen, MD