Monsanto and my opinions/impressions

wannabechef · #61 12/31/12, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrettyPaisley

Cute. I've not seen cartoon with the elevator. Love it!

They can probably be found on huffintgon post...

wannabechef · #62 12/31/12, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidepasser

Yes I am sure. I do not take any drugs other than the occasional Aspirin and do not use Firestone tires. I do not drive a GM vehicle, and I make sure that my 401 K is not vested in companies which I feel are a danger to US citizens or for the matter, ANY citizen in ANY country.

I do not boycott companies which make honest mistakes and then correct them.

I do boycott companies which intentionally KILL people and know they are doing and accept money for doing so. If I could boycott the US government I would. As it is I live here so have to make the best of things but I do not trust the government any further than I can throw any US Senator or Representative as I feel that at any given time any of them would sell out their own Grandmother if the price was high enough.

Other than that - yeah I am good.

On the other hand I do NOT defend companies which kill US Troops and knowingly do so. There is too much documentation which states (and Monsanto stated the same fact) that they knew dioxin was in Agent Orange and yet continued to manufacture it and continued to profit from it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=waT...page&q&f=false

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...-west-virginia

Further stated by a corporate executive at Dow Chemical and documents released under the Freedom of Information Act:

A review of the documents related to the use of Agent Orange –- a dioxin-laden herbicide -– in Vietnam, including decades-old declassified papers from the companies that manufactured it and the government and military that used it, provides compelling evidence that those in charge also concealed evidence of the devastating effects it could have on people.

A declassified letter by V.K. Rowe at Dow’s Biochemical Research Library to Bioproducts Manager Ross Milholland dated June 24, 1965 clearly states that the company knew the dioxin in their products, including Agent Orange, could hurt people.

In reference to 2,4,5-trichlorophenol and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (components of Agent Orange), Rowe stated:

“This material is exceptionally toxic; it has a tremendous potential for producing chloracne and systemic injury.”

Rowe worried the company would suffer if word got out.

“The whole 2,4,5-T industry would be hard hit and I would expect restrictive legislation, either barring the material or putting very rigid controls upon it.”

So he said the company should keep quiet about the toxicity: “There is no reason why we cannot get this problem under strict control and thereby hopefully avoid restrictive legislation … I trust you will be very judicious in your use of this information. It could be quite embarrassing if it were misinterpreted or misused … P.S. Under no circumstances may this letter be reproduced, shown, or sent to anyone outside of Dow.”

Dow played its cards right, never getting in serious trouble. The spraying of Agent Orange in Vietnam went on for another six years.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/vietnam...t-orange/14720

Though reports point to the fact that chemical companies like Dow and Monsanto knowingly hid evidence of dioxin-related medical problems from the government, the declassified 1990 Zumwalt Report suggests that US military experts knew that Agent Orange was harmful at the time of its use.

The report quotes a 1988 letter from Dr. James R. Clary, a former government scientist with the Chemical Weapons Branch, to Senator Tom Daschle. Dr. Clary was involved in designing tanks that sprayed herbicides and defoliants in Vietnam, according to the report.

Clary told Daschle:

When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the 1960′s, we were aware of the potential for damage due to dioxin contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the ‘military’ formulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the ‘civilian’ version due to the lower cost and speed of manufacture. However, because the material was to be used on the ‘enemy’, none of us were overly concerned. We never considered a scenario in which our own personnel would become contaminated with the herbicide. And, if we had, we would have expected our own government to give assistance to veterans so contaminated.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/vietnam...t-orange/14720

Defend these companies if you wish..it is a proven FACT and one that Monsanto provided evidence of. They knew, and yet continued to manufacture, a very dangerous herbicide which to this day, continues to cause cancer, birth defects and death in people exposed to it.

Those are the FACTS.

If you take aspirin it's ingredients were originally patented by Bayer...a company that also makes herbicides. Right off the top of my head the herbicide "Celcius".

wannabechef · #63 12/31/12, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unioncreek

I wish all you anti everything people would start your own forum so you can bitch and moan to yourself without the rest of us having to listen to you.

Lmao! Maybe they should join Huffington post? Some are probably already members there.

Paquebot · #64 12/31/12, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unioncreek

I wish all you anti everything people would start your own forum so you can bitch and moan to yourself without the rest of us having to listen to you.

There is one, General Chat. Wasn't too long ago that we were informed that further Monsanto threads should be in that forum. Too late close the door now. No holds barred now. Nobody had to be nice anymore.

Martin

greg273 · #65 12/31/12, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

There is one, General Chat. Wasn't too long ago that we were informed that further Monsanto threads should be in that forum. Too late close the door now. No holds barred now. Nobody had to be nice anymore.

Martin

'General Chat' is probably a much better place for the argumentative threads. I am really surprised to see the recent spate of 'GMO/Monsanto the Devil' threads popping up here. From what I understand, this forum is for 'friendly advice' and GC is more for 'arguing with strangers over controversial subjects'.

billooo2 · #66 12/31/12, 09:44 AM

I simply shared.....MOnsanto's history with Agent Orange......and my experience with Monsanto executives and other employees.....

Paquebot · #67 12/31/12, 10:47 AM

Would be nice if there were something new but rehashing the same old stuff is counter to whatever the goal of some are. Instead of dissemination of new information, it generally ends up coming across as attempting to recruit more people to a cause and establish a division among the members. That worked 100 years ago when it was done on a soapbox in a town square with a near-illiterate audience being totally ignorant of the topic. Doesn't work that way now. If this audience is intelligent enough to find this forum and participate in it, they are intelligent enough to find all of the information and decide on their own without having it forced on them. Berating them for any reason is counter-productive and goes against Man's nature of being able to reason independently rather than being led like herd animals. And the longer it persists, the weaker the cause becomes and the recruitment tactics more and more take on the appearance of desperation.

Martin

JHinCA · #68 12/31/12, 10:49 AM

And, as always, I wonder: You people who don't like these threads--why are you reading and posting on them????

Paquebot · #69 12/31/12, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHinCA

And, as always, I wonder: You people who don't like these threads--why are you reading and posting on them????

It's because those are part of the general forum discussions rather than individual specialized sub-forums. The General Homesteading forums are exactly that, general, and meant to be topics of interest to all members. I don't read a number of other sub-forums since I am not interested in sheep, goats, crafts, and a lot of other things which are of interest to many others in this diverse group. But I am interested in the extremely important act of eating on a daily basis and assuring that everyone else has the ability to do so. Sometimes it's difficult to get that idea across to those who can't think or type with their mouths full but as one member so wisely states it, hunger is not an option.

Martin

Onwrd Farm · #70 12/31/12, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wannabechef

I agree.

Selective quoting? Of course you agree.........

francismilker · #71 12/31/12, 01:31 PM

As the late Rodney King stated, "Can't we all just get along?"............

A person would have to look long and hard to find any company that's been around for a while that doesn't have a skeleton in their closet.

Now.............make a conscious stance based upon your personal opionion and get on with it.

sidepasser · #72 12/31/12, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

It's because those are part of the general forum discussions rather than individual specialized sub-forums. The General Homesteading forums are exactly that, general, and meant to be topics of interest to all members. I don't read a number of other sub-forums since I am not interested in sheep, goats, crafts, and a lot of other things which are of interest to many others in this diverse group. But I am interested in the extremely important act of eating on a daily basis and assuring that everyone else has the ability to do so. Sometimes it's difficult to get that idea across to those who can't think or type with their mouths full but as one member so wisely states it, hunger is not an option.

Martin

While people here criticize those who do comment on a controversial post, why read it? Why not just skip it?

I am not interested in cows, but there is a post about cows here - specifically what do you call your cow? Since I am not interested, I did not post.

BTW - I am not a member of HuffPo nor am I a bleeding heart liberal, I really do get tired though of people ignoring facts in favor of "what feels good at the moment".

That is the only reason I posted and I was not arguing whether or not anyone else should use herbicides or not..I really could care less. I do think that people have FORGOTTEN our veterans of Vietnam and most could probably care less what happens to those that are still around. However I am NOT one of those people and I WILL and HAVE spoken up time and time again for those that suffer ill effects from Agent Orange.

It's the least I can do since I watched my father DIE of cancer which the Government finally did acknowledge was cause by Agent Orange.

You folks can do as you wish, I will continue to inform people of WHO is responsible for this and continue to help veterans get the benefits they need to address their illnesses. If that makes me a bleeding heart Huffpo liberal, then so be it.

Paquebot · #73 12/31/12, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidepasser

While people here criticize those who do comment on a controversial post, why read it? Why not just skip it?

I am not interested in cows, but there is a post about cows here - specifically what do you call your cow? Since I am not interested, I did not post.

BTW - I am not a member of HuffPo nor am I a bleeding heart liberal, I really do get tired though of people ignoring facts in favor of "what feels good at the moment".

That is the only reason I posted and I was not arguing whether or not anyone else should use herbicides or not..I really could care less. I do think that people have FORGOTTEN our veterans of Vietnam and most could probably care less what happens to those that are still around. However I am NOT one of those people and I WILL and HAVE spoken up time and time again for those that suffer ill effects from Agent Orange.

It's the least I can do since I watched my father DIE of cancer which the Government finally did acknowledge was cause by Agent Orange.

You folks can do as you wish, I will continue to inform people of WHO is responsible for this and continue to help veterans get the benefits they need to address their illnesses. If that makes me a bleeding heart Huffpo liberal, then so be it.

As quoting my reply, don't know what response, if any, you expect from me in return but forum etiquette is that I'm entitled to reply if I'm inclined to do so.

I do note a personal agenda and everyone is entitled to that. I had a second cousin who was wounded 7 times in the Battle of the Bulge with 7th one being a bayonet just to make certain that he was dead. Two uncles bailed out of their B17s over Germany and spent a miserable time as POWs for the remainder of the war. Another uncle had to swim for his life when his destroyer was sunk by a kamikaze plane in the Pacific. A distant relative was killed when his P38 was shot down over Tunisia. Where should any residual hate be directed? Our families got over it and none are developing any ulcers because of those events. We buried the past and only looked ahead. Maybe it's just a Wisconsin thing since the state motto is "Forward".

Martin

sidepasser · #74 12/31/12, 03:46 PM

Perhaps so Martin, perhaps because those things that happened to your relatives were part of war and not the result of a corporation making a profit. If you feel that I have a personal agenda, well then you would be correct. However I did not arrive at this agenda without 20 plus years of soul searching, research, visiting the VA hospitals, interviewing members of the military and many doctors.

If that makes me a "bad" person that should just "get over it" then so be it. Perhaps that is why America is in the shape it is in today, to many people ignore the facts in favor of "getting over it" which allows those responsible to do as they will without regard to those that are harmed.

And because I did not quote anyone, please feel free to ignore any future postings of mine. I will continue forward to help those that are not aware that the government will pay for their treatment for cancer, will compensate them somewhat for their illnesses and injuries and will provide assistance for children that are born with horrific birth defects from Agent Orange.

Sometimes I do wonder how I wound up defending veterans and assisting them in getting what is due them. I did not set out to do so. I never even thought much about it. I ran into a quite a few vets that had no clue they could be treated for their leukemia, their prostrate cancer, etc. I helped them and I will continue to do so regardless of what those that disagree with me think I should do.

wannabechef · #75 12/31/12, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onwrd Farm

Selective quoting? Of course you agree.........

Whatever this was supposed to mean...

Paquebot · #76 12/31/12, 05:43 PM

Collateral damage and friendly fire are two unfortunate components of war and the goal is to constantly strive to reduce them and recent conflicts have proved that it's been quite successful. What seems to be overlooked here is that there were more than one company producing it but only one is faulted. During the Vietnam War, the most violent protests on the UW campus were against Dow. I still remember signs which said: "Dow Also Makes Soap." Unless there's a record of every barrel which went to Vietnam, where it was sprayed, and if that barrel was certain to have contained dioxin, there's no way that all fingers can be pointed at the same company. If Agent Orange is used as an excuse to hate a company who was only responsible for manufacturing a portion of it, why isn't the same hatred expressed against the other companies? Dow not only manufactured Agent Orange at the same time that Monsanto did, they're also presently involved in the agricultural business and sell much the same seeds as Monsanto. Where's the rants against them? When I'm gone, the last thing that anyone will ever say about me is that I was a hypocrite although I do admit that I still use soap!

www.dowagro.com/products/finder

Martin

billooo2 · #77 12/31/12, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

Collateral damage and friendly fire are two unfortunate components of war and the goal is to constantly strive to reduce them and recent conflicts have proved that it's been quite successful. What seems to be overlooked here is that there were more than one company producing it but only one is faulted. During the Vietnam War, the most violent protests on the UW campus were against Dow. I still remember signs which said: "Dow Also Makes Soap." Unless there's a record of every barrel which went to Vietnam, where it was sprayed, and if that barrel was certain to have contained dioxin, there's no way that all fingers can be pointed at the same company. If Agent Orange is used as an excuse to hate a company who was only responsible for manufacturing a portion of it, why isn't the same hatred expressed against the other companies? Dow not only manufactured Agent Orange at the same time that Monsanto did, they're also presently involved in the agricultural business and sell much the same seeds as Monsanto. Where's the rants against them? When I'm gone, the last thing that anyone will ever say about me is that I was a hypocrite although I do admit that I still use soap!

www.dowagro.com/products/finder

Martin

Martin,
Though we have disagreed at points in the past, your arguments are usually better framed.

Perhaps I am missing something here (it would not be a first time).

I am failing to see how combat injuries equate to a situation where a company produces a product without concern for the safety of the consumer. ???????

And I am really puzzled as why other companies are brouht into the conversation...????

I heard right from some executives.....their ONLY concern was whether or not they could be sued......otherwise they had no concerns....

Paquebot · #78 12/31/12, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billooo2

I simply shared.....MOnsanto's history with Agent Orange......and my experience with Monsanto executives and other employees.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by billooo2

I am failing to see how combat injuries equate to a situation where a company produces a product without concern for the safety of the consumer. ???????

No, you didn't miss anything. You brought Agent Orange in here and Sidepasser commented on his family wartime experience with it. Only thing that you failed to mention was that Agent Orange was not a product exclusive to Monsanto. For those who didn't know that before, they are very much wiser now than they were when they woke up this morning. Of course, you would have already known that so it was not for your benefit but rather as "Neighborly help and friendly advice."

Martin

billooo2 · #79 01/01/13, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paquebot

No, you didn't miss anything. You brought Agent Orange in here and Sidepasser commented on his family wartime experience with it. Only thing that you failed to mention was that Agent Orange was not a product exclusive to Monsanto. For those who didn't know that before, they are very much wiser now than they were when they woke up this morning. Of course, you would have already known that so it was not for your benefit but rather as "Neighborly help and friendly advice."

Martin

Thanks, Martin,

The strongest impression that I have of Monsanto is not the Agent Orange issue .......it is from my experiences with the Monsanto executives and employees themselves.

arabian knight · #80 01/01/13, 09:11 AM

America is the "Bread Basket" of the World. And it is done this through companies like Monsanto, and many others that are developing crops and allowing farmers to grow more on every acre they plant. Period!