1

Monsanto in Trouble While Citizens Mobilize

International Monsanto Tribunal News and related.
May 25, 2018 - Chris Kresser writes about glyphosate and "the
conflicts of interest that plague medical research and public health
policy. ...
The story of glyphosate is perhaps one of the best examples of
this.
Monsanto continues to insist that it's safe, despite accumulating
evidence to the contrary. The latest study, published in the journal
Environmental Health[15], found that more than 90 percent of
pregnant women had detectable glyphosate levels in their urine
and that these levels were directly associated with shortened
pregnancy length.
This was an observational study, so it didn't prove that the higher
glyphosate levels caused the shortened pregnancy duration.
However, as the authors point out, in utero exposure to
glyphosate has been linked to birth defects and miscarriage in
frogs, chickens, and numerous mammals.
Glyphosate has also been shown to "disrupt enzymatic pathways,
such as the cytochrome P450, and to damage DNA structure in
human breast epithelial and placental cells."
This is only the latest entry to a growing body of evidence linking
exposure to a wide variety of pesticides—not just glyphosate—to
birth defects, pregnancy loss, and pregnancy length.
Unfortunately, public awareness of these connections remains
low. Why? There are several reasons:
The current head of the EPA has a long history of siding with
chemical manufacturers rather than protecting the health of
citizens. (WTF?)
 2

Chemicals are "innocent until proven guilty." A company can

introduce a new chemical into the environment without proving
that it's safe, which leaves it up to underfunded scientists and
gutted regulatory agencies to investigate.
Even without the two issues above, there is historically a large
gap in time—sometimes lasting decades rather than years—
between when discoveries are published in the scientific literature
and when they show up in public policy and general clinical
practice. ...[14]
-
***

December 20, 2017 - Towards a new era -
In this newsletter: the failure of Bt cotton in India and dicamba in
the US, the glyphosate battle in the UE, news from the witnesses,
the new NGO Justice Pesticides and the Monsanto Tribunal
"Making of" documentary.
2017 has been the year of a great and ever growing opposition to
Monsanto and the poison companies that try to control our food
system. The legal opinion[10] of the Monsanto Tribunal was a
highlight. For the very first time, Monsanto victims from all over
the world came together and convinced a panel of international
judges that the company is violating basic human rights. We did
not manage to stop the re-authorization of glyphosate in the EU,
but instead of green light for a 15-year period, Monsanto got a 5-
year permit. France and Italy are discussing a 3-year phase out of
the herbicide. An impressive 1.3 million people signed the
citizens' initiative and discussions on the behavior of Monsanto
were all over the news in many countries. A court case of
glyphosate victims in the US led to the release of the 'Monsanto
Papers', that show Monsanto is manipulating science, press and
 3

politics. More documents and evidence of Monsanto's

misbehavior will follow in spring.
In the meantime, Monsanto’s cash machines are grounding to a
halt. The introduction of their new dicamba resistant GMO crops
turned into a disaster as 3.6 million acres op crops (1,5 million
hectares) are damaged by pesticide drift. Already over a 1000
farmers in the US are suing the company for the damage. The
new generation of BT crops is supposed to fight insects has failed
in India. Weed and insect resistance are nature's answer to those
crops.
Monsanto is trying to hide these failures by stepping into other
fields of destruction. They try to tighten their grip on agricultural
data, to get even more control on the food system. They will
probably merge with Bayer to increase control and try to hide the
bad name of the company, but Bayer is buying a Trojan horse.
The share value of Monsanto is massively overrated, because
both techniques on which the GMO revenue model depends are
failing. More and more people, farmers, and consumers see that
we have to change the food system to stop the ecocide.
A German study[11] shows us that the insect populations in
nature reserves have decreased by 75% in the last 27 years. This
sent shock waves through the world. Humans cannot survive if we
kill all life around us, and we have to work with nature instead of
against it. The era of highly toxic, fossil fuel dependent and soil
and resources depleting chemical agriculture must come to an
end, and leave space for agroecology to thrive. The sooner the
change of agriculture paradigm, the better: help wherever and
whenever you can, for ourselves and especially our children and
grandchildren. [12]
-
 4

***

May 23, 2018 - "Breakthrough In Explosive Lawsuit Against
Monsanto" - By Jon Rappoport -
A San Francisco lawsuit against Monsanto and its weedkiller,
Roundup, is moving forward. And it’s just received a new green
light from the judge in the case.
Monsanto’s lawyers are bracing for a deep level of attack, which
they were hoping to avoid. The judge has ruled the jury can hear
testimony on this issue: Monsanto suppressed evidence that
Roundup causes cancer.
Reporter Carey Gillam has the story (The Guardian, 5/22): “At the
age of 46, DeWayne Johnson is not ready to die. But with cancer
spread through most of his body, doctors say he probably has just
months to live. Now Johnson, a husband and father of three in
California, hopes to survive long enough to make Monsanto take
the blame for his fate.”
“On 18 June, Johnson will become the first person to take the
global seed and chemical company to trial on allegations that it
has spent decades hiding the cancer-causing dangers of its
popular Roundup herbicide products – and his case has just
received a major boost.”
“Last week Judge Curtis Karnow issued an order clearing the way
for jurors to consider not just scientific evidence related to what
caused Johnson’s cancer, but allegations that Monsanto
suppressed evidence of the risks of its weed killing products.
Karnow ruled that the trial will proceed and a jury would be
allowed to consider possible punitive damages.”

“’The internal correspondence noted by Johnson could support a

jury finding that Monsanto has long been aware of the risk that its
glyphosate-based herbicides are carcinogenic ... but has
continuously sought to influence the scientific literature to prevent
 5

its internal concerns from reaching the public sphere and to

bolster its defenses in products liability actions’, [Judge] Karnow
wrote.” [Yes, the Judge in the case wrote that statement.]
“Johnson’s case, filed in San Francisco county superior court in
California, is at the forefront of a legal fight against Monsanto.
Some 4,000 plaintiffs have sued Monsanto alleging exposure to
Roundup caused them, or their loved ones, to develop non-
Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Another case is scheduled for trial in
October, in Monsanto’s home town of St Louis, Missouri.”
“How the Johnson lawsuit plays out could be a bellwether for how
other plaintiffs proceed. If Johnson prevails, there could be many
more years of costly litigation and hefty damage claims. If
Monsanto successfully turns back the challenge, it could derail
other cases and lift pressure on the firm.”
“According to the court record, Johnson had a job as a
groundskeeper for the Benicia unified school district where he
applied numerous treatments of Monsanto’s herbicides to school
properties from 2012 until at least late 2015. He was healthy and
active before he got the cancer diagnosis in August 2014. In a
January deposition, Johnson’s treating physician testified that
more than 80% of his body was covered by lesions, and that he
probably had but a few months to live.”
How will Monsanto proceed? First, they’ll argue that Johnson’s
cancer could have been caused by other factors. They’ll throw the
kitchen sink at the jury. It could have been genetics. It could have
been lifestyle. It could have been causes that are still unknown to
researchers. It could have been starlight from a galaxy far, far
away. Monsanto’s lawyers will try to bury the jury in reams of
supposition.
Second, they’ll show the jury an EPA (Environmental Protection
Agency) finding that Roundup does not cause cancer. Like the
FDA, the EPA has sided with major corporations in efforts to
 6

protect them. Monsanto will claim: “The federal government has

asserted Roundup is safe, and that’s the end of our responsibility.
The federal government is the final arbiter.” Which is to say: the
truth isn’t the final arbiter.
Third, Monsanto will execute a series of acrobatic moves to prove
they never suppressed evidence that Roundup causes cancer.
They were simply “considering all relevant safety issues.” They
were “posing various scenarios.” Their internal memos were
“temporary work product” on the way to making a final judgment
about Roundup’s safety. They were raising valid concerns about
flawed studies that claimed Roundup was dangerous.
If all else fails, Monsanto might try to settle with Johnson—and
then claim the $$ payout was simply a way to show compassion
for his unfortunate condition—and move on—continuing to offer
the public a fine and safe product (Roundup). No guilt admitted.
In the extreme—and I need to raise this question—might
Monsanto, behind the scenes, secretly and illegally offer
Johnson’s lawyer and his client a very large sum to present a
weak case in court and let Monsanto win the case?
You decide.
If Monsanto has intentionally hidden the dire effects of Roundup
for decades, while people have gotten sick and died, what
wouldn’t they do?
Among the myriad scandals and crimes of Monsanto, here is one
that sheds light on the mindset of the company. Axisoflogic.com
reports (3/22/12): “In 2001, 3,600 inhabitants of the city of
Anniston, Alabama, attacked Monsanto for PCB [a chlorine
chemical] contamination. According to a report, declassified by
the U.S. Agency of Environmental Protection (EPA), Monsanto for
almost forty years dumped thousands of tons of contaminated
waste in a stream and an open garbage dump in the heart of a
black neighborhood in the city.”
 7

“The way The Washington Post reported the story is instructive:

‘Monsanto documents — many emblazoned with warnings such
as ‘CONFIDENTIAL: Read and Destroy’ — show that for
decades, the corporate giant concealed what it did and what it
knew. In 1966, Monsanto managers discovered that fish
submerged in that creek turned belly-up within 10 seconds,
spurting blood and shedding skin as if dunked into boiling water.
They told no one.”
“Monsanto was finally convicted in 2002 of having polluted ‘the
territory of Anniston and the blood of its people with the PCB’. The
firm was ordered to pay $ 700 million in damages and to
guarantee the cleaning-up of the city. No legal action was brought
against the company officials.”[13]

-
***

October 1, 2017 -
"Monsanto is launching a super poison that kills plants in its path
-- except for Monsanto GMOs. It even flies through the air onto
neighbouring land!
But in days we can shut it down.
After a massive outcry from 1,000 affected farmers, a key US
state could now ban this poison. This will set a precedent to
influence regulation around the world.
Monsanto is mounting an intense pressure campaign, and hoping
to keep it to a local fight. But if one million of us sign this petition
now, we’ll submit it to the official process and show that the whole
world wants this toxic chemical out of our fields and off our food!
Add your name!":
https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/
monsanto_dicamba_og_ctrl/? cQtfvab
 8

***

September 26, 2017 -
In this newsletter: expiration of the glyphosate's licence in Europe,
Monsanto Papers scandal, glyphosate residues discovered in
foodproducts and thorough investigations about Monsanto's
work... [9]
In a recent YouTube video [about the "real Morpheus" (i.e."The
Matrix")] a reference was made to Monsanto and like business
models that corrupt a system (whether of nature's technology or
Man's) in order to provide products to fill the gaps created by their
corruption.
***

April 20, 2017 -
Monsanto’s activities have negative impact on basic human rights
-
Legal opinion: Better regulation needed to protect victims of
multinational corporations. On Tuesday April 18th the five
international judges of the Monsanto Tribunal presented their
legal opinion. They have come to important conclusions, both on
the conduct of Monsanto and on necessary developments in
international law.
The judges conclude that Monsanto has engaged in practices
which have negatively impacted the right to a healthy
environment, the right to food and the right to health. On top of
that Monsanto's conduct is negatively affecting the right to
freedom indispensable for scientific research.[7]
Also: "In the third part of the advisory opinion, the Tribunal
focusses on the widening gap between international human rights
law and corporate accountability. It calls for the need to assert the
primacy of international human and environmental rights law. A
set of legal rules is in place to protect investors rights in the frame
 9

of the World Trade Organization and in bilateral investment

treaties and in clauses in free-trade agreements. These
provisions tend to undermine the capacity of nations to maintain
policies, laws and practices protecting human and environmental
rights."[7]
This "opinion" underscores the urgent need to revoke the legal
status of so called "citizenship" for corporations as well as their
presumed "personhood" that had previously come about in part
through fraudulent action under color of law. Simultaneously to
the revocation would be a return to a very limited corporate
charter issued by the state as the basis for the existence of the
corporation (just as it was up till the legal fraud that occurred in
the late 1800s).
See the summary and full reports.[8]
***

August 2, 2016 -
"The Monsanto Tribunal is an international civil society initiative to
hold Monsanto accountable for human rights violations, for crimes
against humanity, and for ecocide. Eminent judges will hear
testimonies from victims, and deliver an advisory opinion following
procedures of the International Court of Justice. A parallel
People's Assembly provides the opportunity for social movements
to rally and plan for the future we want.
The Monsanto Tribunal, which will be held in The Hague from 14
to 16 October 2016, aims to assess these allegations made
against Monsanto, and to evaluate the damages caused by this
transnational company. The Tribunal will rely on the 'Guiding
Principles on Business and Human Rights' adopted at the UN in
2011. It will also assess potential criminal liability on the basis of
the Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court in
The Hague in 2002. The Tribunal shall also assess the conduct of
Monsanto as regards the crime of ecocide, which it has been
 10

proposed to include in international criminal law. It shall examine

whether the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal
Court in force since 2002 should be reformed, in order to include
the crime of ecocide and to allow for the prosecution of individual
and legal entities suspected of having committed this crime."[1]
***

Oct. 15th -
Veterinarian Art Dunham spoke this morning and that inspired me
to research carbon sequestering and as a result I offer a page of
videos[2]

***
18th -
The chairwoman of the Tribunal, Judge Tulkens, expressed the
importance of the Tribunal in an interview with the French
newspaper, Le Monde[3]: "The questions of the access to water
and to healthy food are old. Those are not new issues coming out
of the mind of angry activists. ... It is our duty to set legal tools to
face those issues. The Monsanto Tribunal is a step and a tool
within this dynamic."
Judge Tulkens was also asked: What is the purpose of this
Tribunal Monsanto that you agreed to chair?
(Following from Google translate)

Françoise Tulkens: "We will deliberate among us, the five judges
to issue an "advisory opinion" .... Six questions are we on the
rights recognized by international law, such as the right to food,
the right to a better state of health or the right to freedom
indispensable for scientific research."
Does that mean you have the legal tools to condemn Monsanto?
 11

"We will not pronounce judgment. We will give an advisory

opinion. Specifically, we will check if Monsanto's activities are in
compliance with the laws as they exist in the UN legal instruments
essentially I mentioned. We are therefore not a court that
condemned the criminal nor civil judge at fault."
What do you mean by "ecocide"?
"This offense does not yet exist and for this we must first define it
precisely. Genocide is a crime against humanity aimed at the
partial or total destruction of a group of persons because of their
nationality, ethnicity, race or religion. The ecocide would be a
'genocide' committed to the environment, environmental damage
that would alter serious and sustainable ecosystems upon which
human life. The International Criminal Court here in The Hague,
decided on 15 September to include environmental concerns in its
field of investigation, it is evolving."
Nnimmo Bassey at the opening said: "Being an ambassador to
this Tribunal is like being an ambassador to mother Earth. If
mother Earth could speak, Monsanto ought to be in jail long
before now. Food is a celebration, it is culture, it is life. This is a
struggle not against one multinational corporation, it is a struggle
for life, it is a struggle for liberty. A struggle to stop big companies
from colonizing our food systems, colonizing our agriculture,
holding mother Earth as a slave for their profits."
-
***
November 8, 2016 -
"Both the hearings of the Monsanto Tribunal and the parallel
People’s Assembly were a great success. ... it was clear that
Monsanto is guilty of the violation of basic human rights. Now it is
up to the five independent judges to give their legal opinion on
this matter. They have indicated that they will need and take their
 12

time to come with a thoroughly founded advice that can be useful

in other cases and in the discussion on the development of
international law. The legal opinion will follow in spring (the
beginning of 2017)."[4]
-
***

March 6, 2017 -
Just received an update from the Tribunal team[6] with additional
information on the following:

"Within just a few weeks, two studies were published in the peer-
reviewed journal Scientific Reports that cast new doubts on the
safety of genetically modified foods and glyphosate herbicide. The
first found that a genetically modified corn, NK 603, was not
substantially equivalent to a non-GMO counterpart, which is
contrary to claims of GMO proponents. The second study found
that glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup
herbicide, can cause a serious liver disease at doses thousands
of times lower than that allowed by law."[5]
Also:

"Dr. Michael Antoniou: We used a modern in-depth compositional
analysis to test the claim that a genetically engineered corn
variety, NK603, was substantially equivalent to an isogenic non-
GMO counterpart.
The establishment of substantial equivalence is a foundation for
safety evaluation of GMO crops. In the United States and in other
countries, the crops that have been commercialized are claimed
to be substantially equivalent to non-GMO equivalents, and
therefore safe.
But the kind of compositional analyses done thus far to see if a
GMO crop is substantially equivalent is a crude nutritional
analysis of total protein, fats, and vitamins.
 13

If you use cutting-edge molecular profiling methods as we did,

they will provide a spectrum of different types of proteins and
small molecule metabolites. It’s a very in-depth analysis.
Does the claim of substantial equivalence stand up to this fine
compositional analysis? No, it doesn’t. Our analysis found over
150 different proteins whose levels were different between the
GMO NK603 and its non-GMO counterpart. More than 50 small
molecule metabolites were also significantly different in their
amounts.
They indicate that there were changes in the protein profile that
were reflective of an imbalance in energy metabolism and
oxidative stress. In terms of metabolite changes, the most
pronounced were increased levels of two polyamines. These
polyamines, putrescine and especially cadaverine, can be toxic in
certain contexts when consumed in large amounts.
The bottom line of the paper is that once you do a compositional
analysis properly, the GMO corn doesn’t stand up to claims of
substantial equivalence. This questions the validity of a key step
in the GM corn’s approval process.
A more detailed safety evaluation should have been conducted for
this corn."[5]
This report underscores the saying: "The devil is in the details"!
-
***********^***********
Notes:
[1] http://www.monsanto-tribunal.org/why-a-tribunal/

[2] http://www.endtransgenictrespass.org/page39/styled-8/
[3] the French newspaper, Le Monde:
 14

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2016/10/16/nous-allons-
verifier-si-les-activites-de-monsanto-sont-en-conformite-avec-les-
regles-de-droit_5014553_3244.html?
xtmc=tribunal_monsanto&xtcr=1
[4] http://en.monsantotribunal.org/main.php?
name=nieuwsbrief&obj_id=555177839
English mailing list English@newsletter.monsantotribunal.org
http://newsletter.monsantotribunal.org/cgi- bin/mailman/listinfo/
english
[5] http://non-gmoreport.com/articles/scientists-ground-breaking-
research-uncovers-new-risks-gmos-glyphosate/
[6] http://en.monsantotribunal.org/main.php?obj_id=215662171
[7] http://www.monsanto-tribunal.org/main.php?obj_id=965946583
[8] http://www.monsanto-tribunal.org/Conclusions
[9] http://en.monsantotribunal.org/main.php?obj_id=462530790
[10] http://en.monsantotribunal.org/Conclusions
[11] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/18/
warning-of- ecological-armageddon-after-dramatic-plunge-in-
insect-numbers
[12] http://en.monsantotribunal.org/main.php?
name=main&obj_id=384283593
[13] https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/05/23/
breakthrough- in-explosive-lawsuit-against-monsanto/
[14] "Is glyphosate as safe as Monsanto says it is?" By: Chris
Kresser
[15] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5844093/?
_ke=Y2hlZkB0aGVzZXRydXRocy5jb20%3D
 15

-
***********^***********
Keywords:
Monsanto Tribunal, international criminal law, India Bt cotton,
dicamba, glyphosate, Justice, Pesticides, Monsanto documentary,
agriculture, food system, human rights, herbicide, Monsanto
Papers, pesticide drift, insect resistance, Weed resistance,
nature, ecocide, fossil fuel dependence, soil depletion,
agroecology