Government witch hunt to eliminate Monsanto critics

Government witch hunt to eliminate Monsanto critics

US Dept. of Agriculture scientists under the gun; explosive details

by Jon Rappoport

May 19, 2015

NoMoreFakeNews.com

“Anybody can fake scientific results. But to be believed, you want a prestigious organization behind you with a billion-dollar budget and access to compliant reporters. You want to manipulate technical language. You want to keep saying how much you care about people. And then you also want to get down and dirty when you have to, and threaten and coerce your in-house scientific dissenters who won’t go along with the fakery. Cut their pay, demote them, fire them, ruin their careers and lives. This is all standard procedure in the major leagues of science. I’ve watched it happen.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Wonder how a federal agency as large as the USDA can keep claiming pesticides like Roundup are safe?

Wonder how the truth can be kept from leaking out?

Wonder how this agency, tasked with protecting the public from unsafe food, can turn fake science into “real science” like clockwork?

Wonder how, in Hawaii, Monsanto and Dow can defend their toxic, open-air, pesticide experiments as “approved by the USDA?”

Government scientists who believe in exposing the truth are being targeted.

Ten scientists at the US Dept. of Agriculture are on such a target list, because their research findings would harm big-corporate agriculture. (See Common Dreams, 5/5/15, “Suppressing Science for Monsanto?”)

PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility), a non-profit group, knows who these scientists are, but they aren’t talking. Not yet. They’re trying to gain protection for the researchers.

Here is a March 26 release from PEER, “USDA Urged to Shield Its Scientists From Harassment”:

“Scientists within the U.S. Department of Agriculture are subjected to management pressure and retaliation for research threatening agribusiness interests…”

“PEER has received reports concerning USDA scientists ordered to retract studies, water down findings, remove their name from authorship and endure long indefinite delays in approving publication of papers that may be controversial. Moreover, [USDA] scientists who are targeted by [big-Ag] industry complaints find themselves subjected to disruptive investigations, disapprovals of formerly routine requests, disciplinary actions over petty matters and intimidation from [USDA] supervisors focused on pleasing ‘stakeholders’.”

The “stakeholders,” of course, would include huge biotech companies. Like Monsanto.

In a separate PEER petition to the USDA, we find this statement:

“The USDA Scientific Integrity Policy actively enables [USDA] agency managers to suppress and alter scientific work products for their policy implications, regardless of their technical merit. It also appears clear that agribusiness interests, such as Monsanto Corporation, have access to top [USDA] agency managers and are invited to lodge complaints and concerns about the published work of [USDA] agency scientists. Significantly, the [USDA] Policy lacks any mechanism to effectively challenge this political manipulation of science.”

The PEER petition goes on to describe what truth-telling USDA scientists face:

“USDA scientists have been subjected to Directives not to publish data on certain topics of particular sensitivity to [big-Agriculture] industry;

“Orders to rewrite scientific articles already accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal to remove sections which could provoke [big-Ag] industry objections;

“Summons to meet with [USDA] Secretary Vilsack in an effort to induce retraction of a paper that drew the ire of [big-Ag] industry representatives;

“Orders to retract a paper after it had been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The paper could only be published if the USDA scientist removed his authorship thus leaving only the names of authors unassociated with USDA;

“Demotion from supervisory status and a reprimand after the scientist provided testimony before Congress that did not reflect [USDA] agency preferences;

“Disruptive and lengthy internal investigations to search out any irregularity that could be used for management leverage against the targeted scientist;

“Suspensions without pay and other disciplinary actions for petty matters, such as minor irregularities in travel paperwork;

“Inordinate, sometimes indefinite, delays in approving submission for publication of scientific papers that may be controversial;

“Restrictions on topics that USDA scientists may address in conference presentations;

“Threats by USDA managers to damage the careers of [USDA] scientists whose work triggers [big-Ag] industry complaints.”

“USDA scientists working on topics with direct relevance to [big-Ag] industry interests are under constant pressure not to do anything to upset these important ‘stakeholders.’ Rather than shield staff scientists from [big-Ag] industry influence, USDA managers amplify it.”


power outside the matrix


This is a witch hunt.

The notion of believing anything the USDA says or publishes is absurd.

Claims of the inherent safety and value of GMO food? Claims about the safety of pesticides? The assertion that corporations like Monsanto and Dow aren’t favored USDA clients?

Smoke blowing in the wind.

Claims that the USDA is serving the public interest?

A fairy tale.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

This entry was posted in GMOwar.

19 comments on “Government witch hunt to eliminate Monsanto critics

  1. swo8 says:

    They’ll never be able to shut us up. I’m so mad at what they have done with the corn and tomatoes. (Lord only knows what else they had messed with)
    Leslie

  2. jimmy hagan says:

    hi jon. would you be interested in some air time to discuss some of the details contained herein? i am host on pir radio http://www.peoplesinternetradio.com and would be very interested in hearing more.

  3. Mathew says:

    The ignorant monsanto shills certainly are out online in record numbers.

  4. From Québec says:

    Two incredibly good interviews about GMO’s and Monsanto.
    MUST listen to:

    Start listening at: 47:16

    The Alex Jones Show (VIDEO Commercial Free) Thursday May 14 2015: Jeffrey Smith, Percy Schmeiser

  5. Daniel Noel says:

    Assuming this witch hunt is indeed happening, it may very well have another, more sinister, and perhaps more important component. A mentally healthy public servant would necessarily expose her/himself to the kind of repression the article sketches. However, a pathologically egoistic public servant would have no difficulty toeing the USDA line and lying to the public. So this witch hunt could be a little pathocratic project, whose objective would be to fill USDA’s managerial positions with essential psychopaths and similar unempathic mental deviants. As the USA keep flirting with pathocracy, promotions based on mental pathologies rather than competence and commitment are to be expected. They may even come with seminars that discreetly teach the Cleckley mask of sanity, the process by which pathologically egoistic people manage to appear normal to almost anybody except an experienced psychologist. But I am starting to write like a conspiracy theorist.

    Love,

    • David says:

      I suspect the same is true in government, and all areas where people have power over decisions that effect big business. Ed Snowden’s revelations showed that much of the US surveillance was on behalf of big business, and it seems likely that psychopaths with a hidden criminal past, would make ideal blackmail targets, and therefore ideal candidates for promotion within politics etc – into a useful positions. It can’t be a coincidence that most of these people seem to be psychopaths.

    • real says:

      Excellent comment.
      You are a Realist, not a conspiracy theorist.

  6. Just goes to show that nothing changes!

    The entire “scientific peer-review” process is suspect, on account of the adverse pressures and influences alone. This should be considered “old-news” by now, but too many STILL just don’t get it!!!

  7. Charles Green says:

    How is the scientist (rhymes with Shmephanie Shmenef) able to stay employed, alive, and disseminate her scathing research?

  8. Rife says:

    But they’re trying to save the pollinators…………What a joke!

  9. donnavoetee says:

    I found this USDA report that came out in 2005, but nobody else read it, apparently. The author was Robert W. Young, the Assistant Inspector General for Audit of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and author of Audit Report 50601-8-Te that was released December 2005, “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Controls Over Issuance of Genetically Engineered Organism Release Permits.” Inspector Young cut no corners. His report was scathing and terrifying to anyone who eats. Inspections with a phone call? Yep. Lost crops of dangerous GMO’s? Yep. To my knowledge, there has not been another report like this one. And I wonder what happened to Mr. Young???

    http://grannygoodfood.blogspot.com/2008/10/the-ugly-truth-about-food-that-nobody.html

  10. keikiokaaina says:

    The Continuing Story of UH Shenanigans…

    via The Hawaii Independent

    As the University of Hawai‘i was cozying up to ‪#‎GMO‬ giant Monsanto, one of the school’s professors says that he was forced to tolerate a climate of “bigotry, retaliation and hostility” for speaking out about the potential risks of genetic engineering. The university disputes his charges.

    ‪#‎FoodSovereignty‬ ‪#‎MonsantoMoney‬ #AlohaAina #KukiaiHawaiiNei

    http://hawaiiindependent.net/story/the-silencing-of-hector-valenzuela

  11. Well said again Jon, the usda and the fda who are supposed to protect the American people from toxins and health risks, just seem to fast track the very products that these institutions sell as they are the biggest contributors of advertising to government campaigns and media ads. When you cannot trust the medicine and goods we buy from the authority who was put into place to protect us, we have to continue to expose this rubbish. So to those who don’t know what to do with the info, Jon talks about in his blog or I do I my website http://www.rollmanrevolution.com and the podcast, Just share the info to all those you encounter. Open the dialogue and action follows shortly after. Great Post Jon!!

  12. Tore B. Krudtaa says:

    Here is a GM-story from over here (Norway).
    First some background information:

    Cass Sunstein, the information csar in the Obama administration, published some truly horrible ideas some years back. In order to remove unwanted critical voices he and his co-author encouraged the government to do the following:

    Conspiracy theories by Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule (2008):
    Freely available here:
    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585
    “…What can government do about conspiracy theories? Among the things it can do,
    what should it do? We can readily imagine a series of possible responses. (1)
    Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind
    of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government
    might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy
    theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in
    counterspeech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such
    parties, encouraging them to help. Each instrument has a distinctive set of potential
    effects, or costs and benefits, and each will have a place under imaginable conditions.
    However, our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration
    of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of (3), (4) and (5)…”

    The thing is that Sunstein and his co-author want to use this methods against people that produce legitimate and much needed critics. What is the democracy worth without legitimate critical voices?

    Sunstein has been confronted with his utterly undemocratic proposals, here…
    Obama Information Czar Cass Sunstein Confronted on Cognitive Infiltration of Conspiracy Groups:

    As one can see, Sunstein does not retract these utterly irresponsible suggestions. He even tries to give the impression that he cannot remember that he has produced this nonsense together with a lot of bla bla bla responses.

    Recently Cass Sunstein was invited to Fritt Ord in Norway, an “Association of the Freedom of Expression Foundation”
    http://www.frittord.no/en/

    I have not asked Fritt Ord what they have to say about Cass Sunstein proposals on how to deal with people that use their “freedom of expression” to get the truth out to the masses, but Sunstein held at talk in Oslo titled: “Fifty Shades of Manipulation”:
    I found a document by Sunstein online, in that document, the expert manipulator Sunstein write the following (on page 4):

    “…A qualification is necessary. If a disclosure requirement focuses on one of many
    aspects of a situation, and fixes people’s attention on that aspect, a charge of
    manipulation would not be unreasonable. Consider the controversy over the idea that
    sellers should have to disclose that food has genetically modified organisms (GMOs). See
    Charles Noussair et al., Do Consumers Really Refuse to Buy Genetically Modified
    Food?, 114 Economic Journal 102 (2004). For those who object to compulsory labeling
    about GMOs, there is a plausible claim that labels are a form of manipulation, activating
    public concern where there is no objective reason for that concern. Of course those in the
    private sector might engage in similar forms of manipulation, drawing people’s attention
    to a feature of a product that, while real, appears far more important than it actually is…”

    The document is to be found here…
    Fifty shades of manipulation:
    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2565892

    If one does not know about the quirks about the GMO-industry, the regulatory bodies (e.g. the FDA) and the politics that set the course for the GM-industry (as revealed in the excellent book Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: http://alteredgenestwistedtruth.com/ ), most people will probably believe the subtle GMO-propaganda from Sunstein. But for the rest of us, with knowledge about Sunstein’s anti-democratic publication (first link here), should quickly see that the talk about manipulation is told by an expert manipulator.

    It might be that Fritt Ord (the Association of the Freedom of Expression Foundation) in Norway thought it would be a good idea to use one expert manipulator, to talk about manipulation. But, I did not see one word from the Fritt Ord, where they warned the audience about what kind of deception several of Sunstein’s papers represents.

  13. wp1268 says:

    Whose government is it???

    We the People, Not We the Corporations
    http://www.MoveToAmend.org

  14. MONSANTO GOVERNMENT TIES – I would say this is a conflict of interest…
    Toby Moffet – Monsanto Consultant – US Congressman
    Dennis DeConcini – Monsanto Legal Counsel – US Senator
    Margaret Miller – Chemical Lab Supervisor – Dep. Dir. FDA, HFS
    Marcia Hale – Director, Int’l Govt. Affairs – White House Senior Staff
    Mickey Kantor – Board Member – Sec.of Commerce
    Virginia Weldon – VP. Public Policy – WH-Appt to CSA, Gore SDR
    Josh King – Director, Int’l Govt. Affairs – White House Communications
    David Beler – VP, Govt & Public Affairs – Gore’s Chief Dom, Policy Advisor
    Carol Tucker-Foreman – Monsanto Lobbyist – WH-Appointed Consumer Adv
    Linda Fisher – VP, Govt &Public Affairs – Deputy Admin EPA
    Lidia Watrud – Manager, New Technologies – USDA, EPA
    Michael Taylor – VP, Public Policy – Dep. Commiss, FDA
    Hillary Clinton – Rose Law Firm, Monsanto Counsel – US Senator, Secretary of State
    Roger Beachy – Director, Monsanto Danforth Center – Director USDA NIFA
    Islam Siddiqui – Monsanto Lobbyist – Ag Negotiator, Trade Rep

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s