TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240676: May 2nd 2018 at 4:39:25 AM

As I said it's an anti-monopoly argument, not an anti-GMO argument.

Disgusted, but not surprised
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#240677: May 2nd 2018 at 4:54:31 AM

It's an argument in the context of being that the technique is being exploited. The same way that The Cartel murdering 40,000 people in Mexico is an argument against drugs. Yes, you can say it's a side effect but it's a pretty relevant one.

GM Os allow Monsato to potentially fuck with the food supply of the world in great and terrible ways.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#240678: May 2nd 2018 at 5:05:16 AM

Existing GMO strains are demonstrably safe, though that shouldn’t become an axiom; while exceedingly unlikely as long as adequate quality control measures are in place, it’s possible something mildly harmful (ie a natural pesticide that turns out to be a very mild carcinogen) could end up slipping by unnoticed because of an under-regulated manufacturer cutting corners.

That’s not terribly different from the risk of getting sick from a defective batch of medication or tainted meat that slipped by inspection, but the reason GMOs are safe is because of rigorous quality control. That’s an important caveat if something does go wrong in the future.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#240679: May 2nd 2018 at 5:05:16 AM

Existing GMO strains are demonstrably safe, though that shouldn’t become an axiom; while exceedingly unlikely as long as adequate quality control measures are in place, it’s possible something mildly harmful (ie a natural pesticide that turns out to be a very mild carcinogen) could end up slipping by unnoticed because of an under-regulated manufacturer cutting corners.

That’s not terribly different from the risk of getting sick from a defective batch of medication or tainted meat that slipped by inspection, but the reason GMOs are safe is because of rigorous quality control. That’s an important caveat if something does go wrong in the future.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240680: May 2nd 2018 at 5:05:43 AM

[up][up][up] Okay, I know you didn't just try to equate Monsanto engaging in predatory business practices selling GM Os with cartels outright murdering people to peddle illegal drugs.

[up] And nobody is saying GM Os should not be regulated and inspected carefully.

edited 2nd May '18 5:07:25 AM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#240681: May 2nd 2018 at 5:12:17 AM

I did and I'll do it again.

Monsata gave people STARVING and suffering from FAMINE seeds which would require them to use fertilizer they could not afford.

All to up their stock price.

That is demonstrably evil and on a way entirely consistent with drug cartels.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#240682: May 2nd 2018 at 5:17:33 AM

No, it really isn't.

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#240683: May 2nd 2018 at 5:19:07 AM

When Monsanto organizes an armed insurgency and starts having firefights with the US Army across these rural farming towns and racks up a death toll in the thousands then we can start those kinds of comparisons.

Oh really when?
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240684: May 2nd 2018 at 5:20:41 AM

Making this kind of false equivalence is pretty disrespectful to the victims of cartel violence. Unless you seriously think corporate extortion via shady business practices is just as bad as outright murder.

Disgusted, but not surprised
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#240685: May 2nd 2018 at 5:22:22 AM

Sorry....preying on starving people still wins in my opinion.

And whenever an argument is made, I hear...

"Preying on starving people."

edited 2nd May '18 5:22:45 AM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240686: May 2nd 2018 at 5:25:25 AM

You're trying to say this is just as bad as the murders of thousands of people over the years.

I really hope nobody who lost a loved one to the cartels is reading this.

Disgusted, but not surprised
RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#240687: May 2nd 2018 at 5:25:53 AM

[up][up]That's still not going around murdering people for getting in your way.

edited 2nd May '18 5:26:26 AM by RainehDaze

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240688: May 2nd 2018 at 5:28:27 AM

Sorry....preying on starving people still wins in my opinion.

Re-reading that, I realized this isn't making an equivalence. This is outright claiming that what Monsanto does is worse than cartel violence.

Disgusted, but not surprised
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#240689: May 2nd 2018 at 5:28:46 AM

Are you aware of the 250,000 Indian farmer suicides linked to Monsato's business practices?

Yes, I'm comfortable saying that white collar technology crime is worse than the Cartels if the body count is magnifold higher.

Yes, they are worse than five Mexican organizations of terrorists that have been engaged in a civil war as well as people who have done war crimes.

edited 2nd May '18 5:30:14 AM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#240690: May 2nd 2018 at 5:29:20 AM

‘We’ll See,’ Trump Says on North Korea. And Iran. And Nafta. And So On.

WASHINGTON — Trade clashes with Europe are brewing. Border tensions with Mexico are boiling. Negotiations with North Korea and Iran are murky as ever. What can Americans expect in these uncertain times?

We’ll see what happens.

President Trump, a new-to-the-game politician who once campaigned on a promise of “I alone can fix it,” has spent the past month speaking with a decidedly less definitive stance, shrugging off a series of diplomatic high-wire acts that may come to define his presidency with a bit of well-worn Trumpese.

“We’ll see,” when a reporter asked Mr. Trump on Tuesday whether he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to arrange peace talks between North and South Korea.

“We’ll see what happens, I often say,” the president said a day earlier about relations with North Korea, apparently aware of his tendency to take an indefinite view on timely negotiations.

“So the end result is, we’ll see,” Mr. Trump said last week, again broaching the summit meeting with North Korea.

At least two dozen times in the past month, the president appears to have shifted into full-on verbal tic mode, deploying some variation of “We’ll see what happens” as a cast of world leaders from France, the Baltic States, Japan and Nigeria rotated in and out of the White House or his Florida estate. Mr. Trump’s one-person guessing game came into play as he addressed topics including Mexico, Nafta, Russia, Amazon, North Korea, Mike Pompeo, Dr. Ronny L. Jackson, Iran and the special counsel’s investigation into his presidential campaign.

Republican and Democratic speechwriters and others who study the president’s speech patterns say “we’ll see what happens” may be a way to signal a veiled threat to unpredictable adversaries, like the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, amid delicate negotiations. But many who watch closely say Mr. Trump is using the phrase to avoid accountability.

“The occasions in which he’s made specific promises, like ‘we’ll build a wall and Mexico would pay for it,’ he has had trouble delivering,” Kathleen Hall Jamieson, the director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. “Instead of forecasting and being accountable for the forecast, he’s opening the possibility that there are a range of possibilities not anticipated for which he does not want to be held accountable.”

Mr. Trump is not the first president to rely on a verbal crutch to make a point, avoid criticism or skirt a question. When faced with pressure, President George W. Bush famously referred to himself as “the decider” — a phrase thought of as the “You’re not the boss of me!” of presidential declarations — and had a penchant for using “fabulous,” a decidedly non-Texan adjective, to voice his approval. President Ronald Reagan tended to tug on his ear and mutter “I can’t hear it” to avoid questions shouted at him on the way to Marine One. And President Barack Obama often relied on the phrase “let me be clear” to get his audiences to pay attention during several of his first-term speeches, until people started to catch on to the rhetorical device.

“The more people heard it, the less effective it became,” one of Mr. Obama’s speechwriters, David Litt, said in an interview, “which is one reason there were fewer ‘Let me be clears’ in the second term.”

Mr. Trump is different from other presidents because he seems to enjoy speaking extemporaneously on matters of consequence, said Ms. Jamieson, who has written extensively about Mr. Trump’s talent for using blunt language to subvert political norms. That approach has lent itself to a collection of presidential favorites: In Trumpese, she said, “many people are saying” means “I wish many people were saying this because I want you to believe they are.” “People don’t know,” she said, likely means “I just found out,” and “believe me,” on some level, may signal “I have real doubts.”

Mr. Trump’s modern predecessors, she said, tended to adhere to a tightly scripted approach. For example, she had a hard time imagining President John F. Kennedy saying “we’ll see what happens” while negotiating his way through the Cuban missile crisis.

“The presidents wanted to ensure that they knew what outcomes could be achieved and that their rhetoric could help them achieve the outcome,” she said. With Mr. Trump, “the signaling function is being eroded,” meaning that even words uttered by a commander-in-chief have a way of losing their power if they’re said often enough.

Speechwriters have often sought to hammer out such crutches, aware that an audience’s eyes and ears begin to glaze over if subjected to a rhetorical overdose. (Easier said than done, of course, when a president delights in veering off script.)

“If you keep forcing the same phrases into people’s ears all the time, people start to wonder what you’re actually meaning,” Matt Latimer, a literary agent and former speechwriter for Mr. Bush, said in an interview. He said the danger in Mr. Trump’s tendency could be, “after a while it’s like, ‘He really doesn’t know what’s going to happen, does he?’”

Mr. Latimer said that while Mr. Trump enjoys a strong economy and policy victories, like tax cuts, aimed at his base, it’s probably easier for him to wax extemporaneously. For instance, of the impending deadline on negotiations with Iran, Mr. Trump twisted the phrase to suit his penchant for showmanship: “Nobody knows what I’m going to do on the 12th, although, Mr. President, you have a pretty good idea — but we’ll see,” he said during a meeting last week with President Emmanuel Macron of France.

But Mr. Latimer, who scripted a president through the Iraq war and a looming recession, said Mr. Trump’s laissez-faire attitude probably would not last as consequential negotiations advance: “Free styling only works when things are going pretty well.”

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240691: May 2nd 2018 at 5:29:58 AM

[up] Reminds me of when he said "I'll keep you in suspense".

Disgusted, but not surprised
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#240692: May 2nd 2018 at 5:32:27 AM

[up] he has no idea what he's talking about, and "we'll see what happens" is an easy out.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#240693: May 2nd 2018 at 5:32:29 AM

The long term consequences of Trump's actions will be the real litmus test. His actions aren't big and dramatic but he's warped the narrative and reversed progress as well as protections that will kill lots of people over the long run.

Fixing Trump's issues will be a long and bloody battle even if Congress, Senate, and Executive are taken back.

It's also a case of Trump having destroyed American credibility and trusworthiness even more than well....previous administrations.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#240694: May 2nd 2018 at 5:33:06 AM

linked to

That is not a causal relationship and dumps the entire confluence of factors on a single source to proclaim it more evil, as if nothing else is involved.

As opposed to outright killing people, which has a fairly simple chain of responsibility.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#240695: May 2nd 2018 at 5:33:56 AM

Are you aware of the 250,000 Indian farmer suicides linked to Monsato's business practices?

Yes, I'm comfortable saying that white collar technology crime is worse than the Cartels if the body count is magnifold higher.

Except no, those deaths are not linked to Monsato.

In the future you might consider against parroting anti-GMO propaganda.

(and yes people attack Monsato to attack GMO's, doesn't mean the company is innocent but lets not pretend that the motivations of the attackers are innocent)

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#240696: May 2nd 2018 at 5:36:36 AM

A Lobbyist Helped Scott Pruitt Plan a Morocco Trip. Then Morocco Hired the Lobbyist.

WASHINGTON — Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, allowed a lobbyist friend to play an unusually influential role in setting his agenda during a visit in December to Morocco, according to internal communications related to the scheduling of meetings reviewed by The New York Times.

Just months after helping to organize the trip, the lobbyist, Richard Smotkin, was hired by the government of Morocco as a $40,000-a-month foreign agent, according to filings with the Department of Justice. Mr. Smotkin participated in several meetings with Mr. Pruitt in Morocco, including with representatives from some industries, according to participants on the trip.

Mr. Smotkin had worked as a lobbyist for Comcast when he first came to know Mr. Pruitt in Oklahoma, where Mr. Pruitt served as attorney general before joining the Trump administration.

Mr. Pruitt is facing at least 11 investigations examining his first-class travel, pay raises given to his staff, money spent on security and office furnishings, and frequent trips he took to his home in Oklahoma after he was confirmed, at taxpayer expense.

Members of Congress had questioned whether there was a legitimate government reason for Mr. Pruitt to travel to Morocco and also questioned the cost of the trip. Moreover, the swiftness with which Mr. Smotkin then received the Morocco contract raises questions about whether the trip helped Mr. Smotkin secure the deal.

“It makes it almost look like it was part of a business cultivation effort,” said Meredith Mc Gehee, executive director of Issue One, a nonprofit government ethics group.

Mr. Smotkin, who has not publicly disclosed his role in planning the Morocco trip, did not respond to requests for comment. There is no evidence that he has business before the E.P.A.

Jahan Wilcox, an E.P.A. spokesman, did not dispute that Mr. Smotkin participated in the Morocco trip, or some of the meetings that involved Mr. Pruitt. But he said that the visit was organized by agency staff members.

“EPA’s Office of International and Tribal Affairs organized and led the effort around Administrator Pruitt’s official meetings with the Moroccan government,” Mr. Wilcox said in a statement Tuesday. “Additionally, Mr. Smotkin did not attend or participate in any official meetings with the Moroccan government.”

Mr. Pruitt last week faced pointed questions from two congressional oversight committees about his spending and management of the E.P.A., with some lawmakers demanding additional information about his travel and security spending. Mr. Pruitt has often flown on first-class flights, with the airfare alone to Morocco costing more than $16,000.

On Tuesday, two of his top aides, including his head of his security detail, resigned.

Mr. Pruitt has also faced questions about why he focused on the trip on promoting liquefied natural gas exports, an issue that is not part of the E.P.A.’s mission. Mr. Pruitt testified that the Moroccan ambassador invited him to the country to negotiate the environment portion of a free-trade agreement. He said the ambassador, Lalla Joumala, asked him to raise the issue of liquefied natural gas when he was in Morocco.

In April, Mr. Smotkin signed the lobbying contract with the embassy of Morocco to “craft an outreach program” that includes promoting Morocco as a film destination, with the start date of this contract backdated to January. His connection to Mr. Pruitt’s Morocco trip was first reported over the weekend in Le Desk, a Moroccan news outlet, and on Tuesday in The Washington Post.

During his time in Oklahoma, Mr. Pruitt and Mr. Smotkin developed a friendship as they repeatedly met up at resort destinations, including at an elite mountainside lodge in Park City, Utah, and the Broadmoor hotel in Colorado Springs for meetings of Republican attorneys general, attendance lists of the events show.

“He has a good relationship with Scott Pruitt,” said Walter Cohen, the former Pennsylvania attorney general, who has also worked as a lawyer for Comcast, and who was present at several of the social and campaign-fund-raising events. “Some of these meetings we would go out to have dinner with Scott and his wife and Rick and a couple of other people.”

Mr. Smotkin told Mr. Cohen, among others interviewed by The Times, that he had played a role in helping set up the Morocco trip. Mr. Smotkin has been visiting Morocco on behalf of Comcast for several years, working to help promote the northern African nation as a site for film productions for Comcast and its subsidiaries, NBC Universal and other film companies.

Mr. Smotkin organized several of the meetings Mr. Pruitt held in Marrakesh and Rabat, according to people familiar with the arrangements. Among the meetings was a Dec. 12 discussion with Mostafa Terrab, the chairman of Morocco’s state-owned phosphate mining company, OCP Group, which Mr. Smotkin attended. Mr. Pruitt during the trip stayed at the luxury Hôtel Sofitel Marrakech, one agency official on the trip said.

The day after the meeting, Mr. Smotkin attended a conference sponsored by the OCP Policy Center, a think tank funded by the phosphate giant.

A representative for OCP, which originally stood for Office Chérifien des Phosphates, did not respond to a request for comment.

Maria Bensaid, a spokeswoman for the Moroccan Embassy, said in a statement that the embassy issued the invitation to Mr. Pruitt “to further our partnership and deepen certain sectors of cooperation.” She said all working visits there were organized through official diplomatic channels.

Mr. Smotkin was among the Comcast executives who made a contribution in 2013 to Mr. Pruitt as he prepared to run for a second term as attorney general. During Mr. Pruitt’s tenure in Oklahoma, Mr. Smotkin joined with other movie industry executives to reach out to Mr. Pruitt’s office, emails show, to seek help in urging an investigation into Google, which NBC Universal and other companies believed was not doing enough to combat the illegal distribution of bootlegged films on the internet.

Mr. Smotkin, who had been listed as a lobbyist contact on behalf of Comcast in Canada, had also played a role in setting up a March 2017 meeting between Mr. Pruitt and Stephen J. Harper, the former prime minister of Canada, who, like Mr. Pruitt, is a known climate change skeptic.

A spokeswoman for Comcast said that Mr. Smotkin left the company last July and that Comcast was not involved in the Morocco trip.

On Mr. Pruitt’s other foreign trip as E.P.A. administrator — to Italy in June — he also granted unusual access to a friend, Leonard A. Leo, who heads a conservative judicial group, the Federalist Society, according to three people involved in that trip. Mr. Leo was involved in some aspects of planning the trip and also joined Mr. Pruitt during a visit to the Vatican for a private Mass.

Two people involved in the travel arrangements said Mr. Leo’s involvement was unusual because outside personnel do not typically help plan international trips for E.P.A. administrators and because his name was not listed on any publicly released documents.

Like Mr. Smotkin, Mr. Leo has enjoyed privileged status at the E.P.A., according to a former agency official, who said that requests made by them were treated as a priority. If either called Mr. Pruitt’s office “and asked for something, we did it, it doesn’t matter what it was,” said the former official, who requested anonymity for fear of running afoul of Mr. Leo, who is powerful among conservatives in Washington.

The relationship between Mr. Leo and Mr. Pruitt stems from their involvement in conservative legal fights at the state level.

In Oklahoma, Mr. Pruitt led the way in legal challenges brought by Republican-led states to Obama administration policies. He also was active in nonprofit groups that sought to spur such fights, including the Republican Attorneys General Association and the Rule of Law Defense Fund. Mr. Pruitt helped create the Rule of Law Defense Fund to assist conservatives who then were using the federal court system to try to block President Barack Obama’s environmental efforts, such as the Clean Power Plan.

Mr. Leo, email records from Mr. Pruitt’s Oklahoma office show, joined with Mr. Pruitt to help coordinate some of these efforts, and to raise money for them.

For example, in 2013, Devon Energy, an Oklahoma-based oil and gas company that had close ties to Mr. Pruitt, organized a meeting between Mr. Pruitt, Mr. Leo and a coal industry lawyer, Paul M. Seby, to create a “clearinghouse” that would be named the Center for Energy Independence and “assist A Gs in addressing federalism issues,” referring to state attorneys general, emails obtained from Mr. Pruitt’s Oklahoma office show.

Mr. Pruitt’s chief of staff at the time emailed Devon Energy, saying that “this will be an amazing resource for the A Gs and for industry.”

Mr. Leo was a director of a nonprofit group called the Rule of Law Project that donated $145,000 to the Rule of Law Defense Fund in 2014.

Mr. Leo, at the time Mr. Pruitt served as attorney general, also helped introduce Mr. Pruitt to other key conservatives in Washington, including inviting Mr. Pruitt to a private dinner that included the Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, Mr. Pruitt said in a speech he gave in 2016.

Mr. Leo — an observant Catholic who has played a major role in recommending anti-abortion, anti-regulation judicial nominees for President Trump — accompanied Mr. Pruitt to a private Mass at the Vatican that Mr. Leo helped arrange, according to agency officials who traveled to Rome with Mr. Pruitt. “He was driving most of the schedule,” one former E.P.A. official said of Mr. Leo.

Mr. Leo also joined Mr. Pruitt and his top aides at a top restaurant in Rome, where the bill for the meal totaled several hundred dollars per participant, according to one of the officials. The official said that Mr. Leo traveled with Mr. Pruitt in his motorcade to the Vatican and to the restaurant over the objections of Mr. Pruitt’s aides, according to the official.

Since becoming E.P.A. administrator, Mr. Pruitt has attended events held by the Federalist Society, where he is regarded as the deregulatory champion of the moment.Major donors to the Federalist Society include the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, David H. Koch, Koch Industries and the Chevron Corporation.

Government ethics officials said that at a minimum, Mr. Pruitt’s calendar — an official government document that has been released after Freedom of Information requests by The Times — should have included details related to the role that Mr. Leo and Mr. Smotkin played in these trips, or their presence as part of the delegation. Neither is mentioned.

“With transparency comes accountability,” said Ms. Mc Gehee of Issue One, the nonprofit government ethics group.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#240697: May 2nd 2018 at 5:37:00 AM

https://chrgj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Farmer-Suicides.pdf

But yes, my anger is generally related to the fact in 2009 alone, 17,000 Indian Farmers committed suicide, usually by drinking Monsato Pesticide.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av6dx9yNiCA

The body count for Monsato's practices are not theoretical, they're massive and starvation war via debt.

Edit:

I'm unconvinced by the rebuttals as one can be against Monsato while thinking genetic engineering should be encouraged strongly.

edited 2nd May '18 5:37:46 AM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#240698: May 2nd 2018 at 5:38:59 AM

It’s a little off topic for this thread, but farmer suicides in India have been a real problem since like the 60s. The Indian government has wildly uneven and often outright punitive agricultural policy which has put a lot of pressure on smaller farms.

They should have sent a poet.
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#240699: May 2nd 2018 at 5:39:08 AM

[up][up] Except the main source of your 250,000 suicide thing being Monsanto's fault is from an anti-GMO activist, Vandana Shiva.

edited 2nd May '18 5:39:30 AM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#240700: May 2nd 2018 at 5:41:45 AM

I find it hard to believe that the maker of pesticide matters given that, as things go, it can't exactly be unexpected that its suicide by a literal poison.


Total posts: 417,856
Top