Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Vani Hari has been harassed at speaking engagements, doxed in a corporate database, had her Wikipedia page taken over, and watched as hired experts were deployed against her in the press for years. Monsanto Bayer did all of it to protect a product she says they know causes cancer....

10,807 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

It worked with vaccines. They're trying it again with our food supply. While everyone's eyes are on bombs dropping overseas, something just happened in Washington that will affect every American sitting down to dinner for generations. The Trump administration's EPA filed a brief at the Supreme Court backing Bayer, arguing that because the EPA never required a cancer warning label on glyphosate, Bayer can't be held liable for not putting one there either. Never mind that the only major safety study the EPA leaned on to clear the product was just retracted weeks ago for its ties to industry. Never mind that three of the nine DOJ attorneys who signed the brief previously worked for law firms that represented Bayer and Monsanto. Glyphosate is sprayed on 80 to 90% of our crops. Over $10 billion has been paid out in cancer lawsuits. 97.8% of respondents to ICAN's poll oppose liability immunity for glyphosate manufacturers. 89% oppose the federal stockpile. And 80% say the retraction of that foundational safety study has shaken their trust in current safety claims. Del has been covering this since 2015 - before the lawsuits, before the WHO declared glyphosate a probable carcinogen, before any of this was mainstream. He saw exactly where it was heading. This is the same playbook as 1986. Get the government to grant immunity. Remove market forces. Remove the ability to sue. And then nobody has any reason to make a better product ever again. It worked with vaccines. They're trying it again with our food supply. April 27th. Washington DC. Supreme Court steps. The People vs. Poison. Mark it. Be there.

The HighWire

262,545 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

A farmer got cancer, sued Monsanto, and won $1.25 million. Monsanto appealed. The farmer won again. So Monsanto took it to the Supreme Court and argued it should be immune from being held responsible at all. This week, the Court agreed. The legal hook was a federal pesticide law called FIFRA. The Court found that FIFRA supersedes states’ rights, even though, as Cianci pointed out, “there is no, no direct language in FIFRA that gives it the right to supersede states’ rights.” Then she got to who was sitting on the bench. Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Elena Kagan have both previously worked on cases for Bayer Monsanto, and neither recused themselves. The attorney arguing for the company, Sarah Harris, was Thomas’s former clerk. And Harris’s résumé gets stranger. Cianci described how Harris left her roughly $2 million Bayer Monsanto salary for just four months last year to work for the federal government, long enough to write the brief the United States would submit in support of the company, and then returned to the firm representing Bayer Monsanto. “This was the most incestuous ruling I’ve seen come out of the Supreme Court in a very, very, very long time,” Cianci said. “Without those two attorneys, it would have been a different outcome.” The practical result: no state can now tell its citizens they have the right to sue when a carcinogenic chemical ends up on their crops, in their food, or in their water. The ruling can’t be appealed. But Congress can override it in a single sentence, and that fight starts in the next two weeks.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

30,720 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat