No, I looked for it in the article you posted. There was no evidence, just a claim by an organization that they suspected it was intentionally being overlooked by the USDA, and that was it. It was like four links in too. The first article claimed the USDA themselves were "Pumping" it into the food supply. It's ridiculous. Just scanning the subsequent headlines I don't see anything that suggests they have anything hard. And if an attorney is on it, presumably we will eventually see a lawsuit and can revisit it and the evidence he presents.
I agree this stuff is important, and I don't doubt interested parties desire it, most likely for money. While it's not worth speculating, I wouldn't rule out some kind of population reduction scheme, knowing Bill Gates is involved and that he has stated that desire on the record. Likewise the eugenics link with his dad. Regardless, I'm suggesting you focus on presenting hard data in a concise manner, otherwise people are going to ignore you. Alternatively you could say, "I believe this because..." and then present your circumstantial evidence. The ridiculous headlines and outlandish, unsubstantiated claims just turn people off who otherwise might be interested.