I
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
|
Correct, I was referring to the "inside man" insinuation from the anti-monsanto diatribes, not specifically his existence
Both of those links state very specifically that there is no definitive link between rBGH and cancer. In fact, the first one suggests there's none at all
Quote:
You have to understand that there are some very powerful interests that make gobs of money off of Monsanto's cornering of markets. Anyone that attempts to stand up to them gets crushed. Even when the truth tries to get out, these powerful interests shut them down.
http://www.nationofchange.org/2-fox-...ilk-1385184532
This particular suit resulted in changes to laws about the press, where the requirement for the press to act in the public's best interest, and tell the truth on issues of health and public safety, were dismissed. News bureaus are now able to say what ever they want and bury the truth, if their management so desires.
|
That particular suit is also not how you put it. The television station fired the reporters for threatening them to file a complaint with the FCC. They were mad because the station edited their story, which the station felt the reporters were not being fair. The jury found against the husband on every point, and all but the whistleblowers statute for the wife, which was later overturned.
This really doesn't show anything at all except the station fired the couple after they threatened the station. It's really the station's word against the reporter's. Station said they were presenting biased information, reporters threatened them, and were fired. That's the whole story
Also, no laws were changed that I could find