> Typical fear mongering, media distortion, and a deliberate to misguide the public

> Can't agree with you on this one Pete.

I was not referring to the significance of the Section 18 exemption, but the twisting of words. The use of lies and distortion is never justified, no matter how large the outrage. To deliberately mislead is to shoot a huge hole in your case. If the case has merit, then it should stand up without needing to be exaggerated. To recap:

The article stated that the EPA considers honey bees insignificant, which is false. What the EPA may have stated was that the effect of the product was insignificant on honey bees. But we don't even know what they said, because no link was provided to the actual discussion. To date, I have not seen it so I don't know what they said.

We are left with the author's statement that "The EPA Still Considers Honey Bees To Be Insignificant," which is nonsense.

PLB

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html