Imperial Party forum

thomas davison

Monday, July 21, 2014
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) Monsanto is widely recognize as the most hated and most evil corporation on the planet. Even so, several internet-based media websites are now marching to Monsanto's orders, promoting GMOs and pursuing defamatory character assassination tactics against anyone who opposes GMOs, hoping to silence their important voices.

These Monsanto collaborator sites tend to be "leftist" publications but also include at least one prominent business and finance publisher on the political right. All of them are Monsanto collaborators who have signed on to accelerate heinous crimes being committed against humanity under the false promise of "feeding the world" with toxic GMOs.

Monsanto is called the IG Farben of modern world because its actions reflect the kind of crimes against humanity that remind me of those pursued by IG Farben, the chemical conglomerate run by Nazi collaborators during the Adolf Hitler regime. IG Farben used Jewish prisoners as human guinea pigs in horrific medical experiments, and the company pioneered so-called "science-based breakthroughs" for the development of psychiatric drugs, chemical pesticides, chemotherapy agents and gas chamber death chemicals like Zyklon B.

The entire Nazi regime, by the way, was based on invoking "science" as its justifying foundation. The killing of Jews was based in "science," as was Hitler's desire to use genocide to "cleanse the human race" by killing off those he saw as "genetically inferior." Science was the buzzword of the Nazi regime, and it was used to justify almost every crime carried out by the Nazi regime.

Anyone who resisted the Nazi regime was condemned as "anti-science" in precisely the same way that anyone who now questions the wisdom of unleashing genetically modified seeds into the open environment is also called "anti-science." But questioning science is not "anti" science at all -- it is an inherent part of the scientific process. That's a fact that the biotech industry has conveniently forgotten. Their stance today is that no one can ever question the "science" of GMOs, period.

Thus, GMOs aren't based in science at all. They are the domain of a radical cult where questions are not allowed and critical thinking is condemned and censored.

Nazi collaborators
"Nazi collaborators" were individuals and corporations that promoted the power and reach of the Nazi party, publishing pro-Nazi propaganda and attacking anyone who criticized Adolf Hitler or the Nazi regime. Collaborators included many scientists, academics, publishers and of course politicians, all of whom played key roles in furthering the genocide that saw over six million Jews heartlessly slaughtered by the Nazi regime.

Today, a number of once-independent media sites are selling out to corporate interests and quickly becoming Monsanto collaborators. This is readily apparent by noticing which media sites attack Dr. Mercola, the Food Babe, Jeffrey Smith, the Health Ranger or anyone else fighting against the scourge of GMO genocide against humanity. These attacks all have one thing in common: they are orchestrated by paid biotech muckrakers -- people I call "Monsanto collaborators."

Parallels to the Nazi regime are numerous. GMOs, after all, are genetically engineered to either grow poison in the plant or to resist deadly poisons sprayed on the crops. In both cases, GMOs expose the public to toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that kill people just as effectively (although not as quickly) as Zyklon B. The Nazi Regime was also steeped in the use of deadly chemicals to accomplish its goals, and just like the biotech industry, the Nazis weren't afraid to use human subjects as guinea pigs in large-scale medical experiments. (The U.S. government also continued this tradition under the National Institutes of Health, orchestrating inhumane medical experiments on prisoners in Guatemala.)

Both Nazis and Monsanto also believe that the power to control human destiny should be concentrated in the hands of a very small number of people who dictate terms to everyone else. In a world where every agricultural crop is based on a patented seed controlled by a greed-driven corporation, humans can never truly be free. This was also the aim of the Nazi regime, which sought to command all "human resources" in a mandatory push to build Adolf Hitler's utopian society.

That utopian society sounds a whole lot like the "feed the world" mantra spouted by Monsanto collaborators today, all of whom remain utterly blind to the mass genocide they are promoting.

Seventy years ago, people who run these propaganda websites that obey Monsanto would have been Hitler's propaganda ministers, publishing "scientific" articles on the science of eugenics and genocide, and praising Hitler's "amazing vision" for global peace and prosperity.

This is almost exactly the same message, after all, that Monsanto is now fronting: The world will starve to death if we don't all surrender our seeds, farmlands and food supply to this corporate empire, we're told. "Science" will save humanity by concentrating total control of food resources into the hands of the few. Meanwhile, all who oppose Monsanto are vilified as anti-science quacks while all who buy in to the Monsanto genocide are praised as being "scientific" (even though they are nothing more than paid propaganda hacks).

German nation celebrates those who tried to assassinate Hitler
Interestingly, just yesterday German President Joachim Gauck celebrated the lives of those brave Nazi officers who attempted to assassinate Adolf Hitler in 1944. (1) Their attempted Wolf's Lair bombing failed, but it was an honorable attempt to rid the world of tremendous evil by killing one of the people responsible for it.

This official ceremony sends a message to the world, and that official message from the nation of Germany to the rest of the world says that it is the moral right -- and even the obligation -- of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity.

This fundamental philosophical truth is now enshrined in history by the highest office of the nation of Germany herself, the very nation where mass government propaganda spearheaded by a highly-charismatic political leader drove the population to commit genocide in the name of "peace."

Today, Monsanto collaborators -- publishers, journalists and scientists -- have signed on to the Nazi genocide machine of our day: the biotechnology industry and its evil desire to dominate the world's food supply and blanket the planet with deadly chemicals that have been scientifically shown to cause horrific cancer tumors. They use many of the same tactics as the Nazi regime, too: intimidation, character assassination, threats and fabricated disinformation. Hitler's Ministry of Propaganda, it turns out, is alive and well today in America. Its headquarters is not in Berlin but St. Louis.

Humanity must record and remember those who collaborated with the enemy
Just as history needed to record the names and deeds of Nazi war criminals, so too must all those collaborators who are promoting the death and destruction caused by GMOs be named for the historical record. The true extent of their collaboration with an anti-human regime will all become readily apparent once the GMO delusion collapses and mass global starvation becomes an inescapable reality.

I'm hoping someone will create a website listing all the publishers, scientists and journalists who are now Monsanto propaganda collaborators. I have no doubt such a website would be wildly popular and receive a huge influx of visitors, and it would help preserve the historical record of exactly which people contributed to the mass starvation and death which will inevitably be unleashed by GMO agriculture (which is already causing mass suicides in India and crop failures worldwide).

The crime of today's biotech experiments on humanity must never be forgotten, nor must we ever forget the deplorable tactics used by the industry against anti-GMO activists and scientists. Remember: the biotech propaganda machine not only engages in mafia-style intimidation tactics and character assassination attempts, it also systematically intimidates scientists and uses heavy-handed techniques to heavily censor science journals to make sure they don't publish any science highlighting the harm caused by GMOs.

The now-famous Seralini study, for example, was subjected to an extreme, criminal-minded censorship agenda organized by the biotech industry. This scientific censorship was so underhanded and intellectually dishonest that the retraction of the study by the Food and Chemical Toxicology journal stands as one of the most shameful events ever witnessed in the history of western science. In fact, it all but admitted that corporate-influenced western science is an absolute fraud, where corporations now control the science journals.

thomas davison · Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:36 am Post subject:

GMO pushers horrified at idea of being held responsible for their role in farmer suicides, crop failures and environmental devastation

(NaturalNews) The single greatest fear of GMO pushers has just been revealed. In the days after I wrote my now-famous article comparing GMO advocates to Nazi collaborators, the blogosphere erupted with a heated discussion of Monsanto, journalism, the scientific dictatorship of the Nazi empire and the parallels with modern-day GMO pushers.

This story thrust the topic of GMOs back into the minds of millions of people, which was of course the whole point. It also helped introduced terms into the minds of the public like "Monsanto collaborators" and "agricultural holocaust." Critics of the article only helped this effort by pointing to it and bringing more traffic to Natural News, causing our email subscriber list to rapidly explode over the last few days.

Lists of GMO skeptics are acceptable, but lists of GMO collaborators cause panic
Naturally, I expected to be attacked and vilified for daring to make such a comparison, but what I didn't expect was to discover just how freaked out GMO pushers would be when they found their names being added to a list. The list, hosted by a still-fishy website called MonsantoCollaborators.org (which appears to be offline at the moment), contained a list of names of a selection of pro-Monsanto bloggers, journalists and scientists. The list seemed somewhat random, and I didn't even recognize half the names on it. But the mere existence of such a list freaked out the GMO pushers to an extreme. Essentially, they panicked.

This I find truly funny at one level because the Monsanto collaborators in the media are constantly listing the names of those they claim are "quacks" or anti-GMO skeptics. I can't even think of how many hate lists my name is probably on by now due to my outspoken criticism of GMOs, vaccines, chemotherapy and psychiatric drugs. I think it's fair to say I have somehow achieved the dubious honor of being the most polarizing person in alternative media today, loved by millions of readers and fans and yet absolutely despised by biotech bloggers and journalists. Or, perhaps, Alex Jones still retains the title and I'm a close second. That's why I still honor Alex Jones for his willingness to tell the truth about what he believes, even though I'm not associated with his show anymore.

Who should be held responsible for GM crop failures and farmer suicides?
All this brings up a truly important discussion into the question of who should be held responsible when GMO crops fail and lead to farmer suicides?

GMOs lead to far greater numbers of farmer suicides following crop failures because the steep price of GM seeds places a far higher financial burden on the farmer. If the crop doesn't succeed, the farmer finds himself in far worse financial straits than if he had planted conventional seeds which cost considerably less.

So far, farmer suicides in India that have been linked to genetically modified crops are approaching 300,000 farmers, a horrifying number that justifyably invokes the phrase "agricultural holocaust."

The real question that's now being raised in all this is: Who is responsible for the failures and devastating effects of GMOs?

This is a crucial question for the obvious reason of corporate liability. Once, Big Tobacco sold products that caused cancer. For decades, the tobacco industry paid off scientists to publicly proclaim cigarettes were not only safe but even healthy! This set the precedent of evil corporations buying off scientists to control the conversation and obfuscate the facts.

Eventually, the mountain of evidence against Big Tobacco became so large and irrefutable that the companies were driven into a multi-billion-dollar settlement that gutted their profits and tightly restricted their future marketing of tobacco products. Right now, the biotech industry is pulling out all the stops, desperately attempting to whitewash the cancer effects of its own products in order to avoid the same fate as Big Tobacco.

In fact, if you start to ask a few reasonable questions about GMOs, you begin to understand just why there is so much fear among those paid-off corporate shills and sellout scientists who are fronting the biotech agenda:

� Who should be held accountable for the farmer suicides caused by failed GM crops?

� Who is responsible for the wave of cancer being caused by exposure to bt corn and glyphosate?

� Who will be held responsible for the devastating environmental effects of GM crops in the case of runaway genetic pollution or a systemic crop failure leading to starvation?

It is these questions that the biotech industry is desperately trying to avoid. The industry knows that both Big Tobacco and Big Pharma have been haunted by lawsuits stemming from consumers who were harmed or killed by those products. One tobacco company was recently hit with a multi-billion-dollar judgment stemming from the death of one man from cancer.

That's why the Seralini study was so aggressively attacked by the biotech operators: it was the first study to show the devastating cancer-causing effects of GMOs and glyphosate in rats. The immediate pressure that was exerted to engineer a contrived retraction of the study was unprecedented in the history of science (and also one of the most shameful anti-science campaigns in the history of science). Fortunately, the Seralini team was not to be intimidated, and they found another science journal that republished the study.

But consider the consequences to companies like Monsanto is lawyers can begin to argue that cancer cases across the world are being caused by GM corn. Suddenly you've got the biotech industry in the same position as Big Tobacco in the early 1990's, with law firms lining up to file an endless stream of lawsuits.

Are GMOs "defective products?"
See, the real kicker here is what happens when GMOs are recognized to be defective products. In the automobile industry, when a car is defective and causes loss of life, the car manufacturer is liable for the damages. The same is true in the tobacco industry, to an extent. What happens when GMOs are established in the courts to be defective products that cause harm?

Think about it: GMOs are sold under a collection of false promises that claim that will produce more food, not less. They've been sold with claims that they require fewer chemicals, not more. They've been celebrated as the answer to starvation and a "miracle" technology that will feed the world.

But in the real world, GMO crops are quickly failing. The typical pattern is to see a 1-2 year increase in crop production followed by a sharp drop as the glyphosate kicks in. Then the superweeds take hold and the farmer is forced to spray with as many as 4-7 different chemical herbicides instead of just one. Crop production falls, soil health plummets and future yields are compromised. This is the pattern we're seeing with many GM crops, and this doesn't even take into account the long-term health effects on humans.

Will the biotech industry follow in the footsteps of the vaccine industry and lobby Congress for total legal immunity? Watch for that tactic to be attempted as the biotech industry begins to see signs of growing legal liability.

Whistleblowers and journalists
Throughout the 1950's, 60's, 70's and 80's, there were countless journalists who were paid off by Big Tobacco to write stories insisting "smoking cigarettes is safe." Those journalists operated with the same arrogance and indignation as GMO journalists today, but in retrospect all they did was bring shame upon themselves for furthering the destructive scientific dictatorship of the tobacco era.

The most horrifying thought in the minds of today's GMO-fronting journalists is that they, too, will be called out for their role in the massive global harm caused by GMOs. The day is coming, of course, when the link between bt corn and cancer tumors can no longer be denied. The day is coming when glyphosate's systemic destruction of soils and the environment can no longer be covered up. When that day comes, it is important that history remember the names of those who actively participated in furthering that destruction. That's why I suggested the idea in the first place.

It's also true that history will owe GMO skeptics a massive apology in the same way that history owed Big Tobacco whistleblowers an apology. Whistleblowers are always disparaged and vilified for telling the truth or sounding the alarm. Just look at the endless attacks on heroic truth-tellers like Edward Snowden, Jesse Ventura or David Icke. In an age of deceit, telling the truth really is a courageous act, and I thank all those anti-GMO activists who continue to tell the truth in our collective fight for protecting life, health and the environment against corporate poisoners and their paid-off shills.

thomas davison · Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:39 am Post subject:

How Monsanto and biotech companies violate the Nuremberg Code with inhumane experiments on human

NaturalNews) The basic human rights protections established by the Nuremberg Code, which was adopted immediately after the end of World War II, continue to serve as a global template for how human beings are to be treated by the scientific community. But the modern equivalent of the Holocaust is now taking form under the guise of feeding the world and saving the planet, with Monsanto and others in the biotech industry routinely testing their chemicals and faux foods on the public without informed consent, just like amoral scientists did in the death camps.

As far as medical experiments go, every individual has the right under the Code to consent, or not, to being used in scientific trials or tests that involve toying around with new or unusual substances. This constitutes the essence of the Code, which expressly prohibits human experimentation unless the person being experimented on first gives his or her permission, with full disclosure of any potential adverse events.

"The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential," states the first point of the Nuremberg Code.

"This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him/her to make an understanding and enlightened decision," it adds.

Unlabeled GMOs are a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code
As far as genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which are still not properly labeled in North America, the ongoing use of these untested additives in the food supply without full disclosure represents a blatant violation of the dictates of the Code. Since not a single long-term study has ever verified that GMOs are safe for human consumption, these substances are, by their very nature, experimental.

This suggests that in order for them to justifiably exist as "food," GMOs must, at the very least, be properly labeled so that people who consume them know they are present. There also must be full disclosure about the potential risks of consuming GMOs if the technology is to meet the moral obligations outlined in the Nuremberg Code.

But neither of these criteria is being met, as GMOs have remained hidden in the American food supply since the mid-1990s, without consequence. Even though copious independent research has raised major questions about GMOs and their effects on human health, practically nothing has been done to address this deliberate lack of transparency.

In fact, as you may already well know, Monsanto has been given a free pass to essentially lie to the public about the nature of GMOs, with false claims that they are materially identical to real food. Such claims only apply to concerns about food safety that affect the public, of course -- as far as patents go, Monsanto will be the first to tell you that its "intellectual property" is most certainly not the same as natural seed.

Deadly crop chemicals like Roundup, 2,4-D spreading disease and death to unwitting public
Not only are GMOs themselves a problem as far as the Nuremberg Code is concerned, but so are the chemicals used to grow them. It is the official position of Monsanto that its popular Roundup formula, which contains glyphosate as its active ingredient, is completely safe. And the American government affirms this, allowing Roundup to be sprayed at volumes of up to 200 million pounds per year.

But again, this approval is based on the biased "science" coming directly from the chemical lobby, which has a vested interest in portraying its products in the best light. There is plenty of independent science, including a 2013 study published in the journal Entropy, that point to major health problems such as infertility and cancer that can emerge from exposure to Roundup, yet none of this is considered in light of Roundup's continued heavy use.

Residential lawns, city planters, public parks, agricultural fields and much more are quietly and routinely doused in Roundup, exposing families and young children to chemical compounds that could damage their nervous systems and make them infertile. But few people know about this because, once again, full disclosure is not taking place. The American public simply isn't being given the option to consent or refuse these chemical exposures before encountering them -- these exposures, in other words, represent nothing more than weapons in a global chemical war.

"[S]ome in the bioethics movement seek to undermine this crucial human subject protection," wrote Wesley J. Smith for National Review about this departure from the Nuremberg Code in our modern context.