I.G. Farbensanto At It Again: Seed Exchanges In Africa Under Pressure

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 16, 2017

It appears that big “agribusiness” – which we less-than-lovingly refer to here on this website as I.G. Farbensanto – is at it once again, using its usual bag of dirty tricks to attempt to outlaw normal seed exchanges in Africa (whew! is that the distinct whiff of imperialism and even racism that I smell here? Sure smells like it). At least, it is if the following article shared by Mr. V.T. is true:

Monsanto and Big Ag Colonizing Africa, Criminalizing Traditional Seed Exchanges

Just in case you missed how utterly draconian their policies are, and how utterly immoral and out of touch with humanity they are, consider these opening paragraphs of the article, noting in particular the use of GMOs as part of John Perkins’ “economic hit man” strategy:

Of the many concerns surrounding the dominance of agrichemicals companies and GMO foods, the most frightening dimension is that corporate manufactured seed is wiping out global biodiversity in food crops and creating a punitive legal framework for our total dependence on these companies for food.

Monsanto, Syngenta and other majors in agribusiness are presently colonizing Africa with the help of international aid programs which force nations into agreements requiring dependence on patented seeds, thereby prohibiting traditional seed exchanges.

Reporting on the situation in Tanzania, Ebe Daems of Mondiaal Nieuws informs us of recent legislation which puts local farmers under the threat of heavy fines of up to €205,300 and even prison terms of up to 12 years for violating the intellectual property rights of agrichemicals companies if individuals sell or trade in non-patented seed.

“If you buy seeds from Syngenta or Monsanto under the new legislation, they will retain the intellectual property rights. If you save seeds from your first harvest, you can use them only on your own piece of land for non-commercial purposes. You’re not allowed to share them with your neighbors or with your sister-in-law in a different village, and you cannot sell them for sure. But that’s the entire foundation of the seed system in Africa,” ~Michael Farrelly of TOAM, an organic farming movement in Tanzania.

This is highly disturbing, yet the laws are part of the umbrella of G8 agreements which require intellectual property rights to be enforced as part of an exchange for development aid. This type of agreement is shockingly similar to the methods described by economic hitman John Perkins, who, in his book Confessions of an Economic Hitman, explained how aid and development agencies conquer sovereign nations by offering at in exchange for natural resources.

Imagine, for a moment, that you’re a poor African farmer. You may, or may not be, literate, but even if you are, you probably aren’t a lawyer able to spend the time and sort through all the tangle of legalese that your government has engaged in, forbidding you to exchange your natural seeds in traditional seed exchanges.

The result?

As the author of the article, Alex Pietrowski points out (and as many others have also pointed out): the loss of biodiversity in seeds, and a corresponding loss of ability of natural seeds and food supply to adjust to changing natural conditions. And that imperils everyone, in the name of corporate profits and power for Mr. Globaloney. Why? Very simple: nature can respond far faster to changing conditions, than can Mr. Globaloney’s scientists in I.G. Farbensanto’s laboratories.

But no mind: I.G. Farbensanto would rather imperil the entire human food chain – including their own – in the name of profits and power than wake up and exercise their (here comes those words they hate) God-given rationality, conscience, and reason. There’s only one thing worse than the atheist Communist, and that’s the atheist crony corporate crapitalist. Both are forms of organized nihilism, but the crony crapitalist does it so much better, and makes more money in the process. Like the Communist, they attempt to shut down real discussion, and promote a narrative.

You know me, however, and know that I cannot resist a bit of high octane speculation when I see stories like this. I cannot help recall the third episode of the third season of the American television series, Blacklist, starring James Spader as the arch-international criminal mastermind, Raymond Reddington. In that episode, titled “Eli Matchett,” Reddington and former FBI agent Elizabeth Keene (played by actress Megan Boone), stumble less-than-accidentally on a plot of an argibusiness giant, a fictitious corporation called “Verdiant Industries,” to corrupt their own GMO seeds by genetically engineering a virus which attacks them, wiping out the food supply they themselves have foisted on most of the world via crony crapitalist means, which are, as they always are, special “concessions” for their products from governments.

Of course, the fictitious “Verdiant Industries” has a ready-made cure for their own pestilence, which after the food crisis breaks open, they will then offer to a starving world at a handsome profit, and, of course, even more power.

The trouble is, having watched the GMO “agribusiness” industry over the years, I put nothing past them.

And hence my nickname for them: I.G. Farbensanto.

Raymond Reddington, we need you.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Genetics Are The New Eugenics: How Genetically Modified Foods [GMOs] Reduce The Human Population

GMO Biohazard
Source: Katehon.com
F. William Engdahl
February 22, 2017

The following is from an interview transcript

Last year, we had a series of mergers in the agribusiness’ GMO-corporations worldwide. This has created an alarming concentration of corporate power in the hands of basically three corporate groups.

The first one is Bayer AG of Germany, which made a friendly takeover of Monsanto. The reason for this was that Monsanto became identified in the public mind as pure evil and everything bad about GMO’s, which was accurate. This became a burden on the whole GMO project. So, Bayer stepped in, which has a friendly image of an aspirin, harmless, nice company, but in fact is the company that invented heroin in the 1880’s and made gas for the ovens of Auschwitz during WWII. It’s one of the dirtiest agribusiness companies in the world with a series of homicides and pesticides that killed off bee colonies and many other things that are essential to life and to nature.

ChemChina – China State Chemical giant – for some reason took over Swiss Syngenta, which makes weed-killers.

Then, Dow Chemicals and DuPont merged their GMO businesses together.

So, we have three gigantic corporate groups worldwide controlling the genetically-modified part of the human food chain. As dangerous as the GMO crops are and the more they sell, it is becoming more and more obvious that they are the chemicals that by contract must be applied to those GMO seeds by the corporations. They demand that if you buy roundup ready soybeans or corn, you must use Monsanto (now Bayer) roundup.

Therefore, this is giving more corporate power to the GMO industry than ever before and that’s an alarming trend. They are putting pressure on the bureaucracy in Brussels. One example: there was a massive public campaign against the renewal of the license of the European Commission for Glyphosate. Glyphosate is the most widely used weed-killer in the world. Glyphosate is the main ingredient in Monsanto’s roundup. The other ingredients are Monsanto’s corporate secret, but the combination of them is one of the most deadly weed-killers.

The World Health Organization’s body responsible for assessing genetic dangers made a ruling the last year that Glyphosate was a probable cancer-causing agent.

The license came up for automatic renewal last year – a 15-year license. The EU commission for health was prepared to automatically renew it for 15 years. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which is responsible allegedly for the health and safety of European citizens, recommended approval based on a German study by the German Food Safety Agency that was simply lifted 100% from studies given by the private corporation Monsanto! So, the whole chain was corrupt from the beginning and all the information was rigged. In reality tests have shown that in minuscule concentrations, lower than in recommended levels in Europe and in the US, Glyphosate causes kidney disease, liver disease, and other illnesses that are potentially fatal.

Now, Glyphosate has shown up in urine tests, in urban drinking water, in gardens, in ground water and so forth. And that gets into the system of childbearing women, for example, with embryo. It’s all in this!

The EU commission, despite a million petitions – this is a record setting – and despite recommendations from leading scientists around the world to not renew the license, made a compromise under huge industry pressure and renewed it for 18 months. Why did they renew it for that time? Because at the end of 18 months, they were told by Bayer and Monsanto that the takeover of those two giant corporations will be completed and Bayer is going to replace Glyphosate with another, likely more deadly toxin, but not so well-known as Glyphosate. So, they simply bought time. And that is just one example.

This agenda of GMO is not about the health and safety; it’s not about increasing crop yields – that’s a lie that has been proven in repeated tests in North America and all around the world. Crop yields for farmers, using GMO plants, may increase slightly for the first 1-2 harvest years, but ultimately decline after 3-4 years. And not only that! We’ve been promised by Monsanto and other GMO giants that the use of chemicals will be less, because of these “wonderful” traits that GMO plants resist. In fact, the weeds become resistant and you have super weeds, which are 5-6 feet in a height and choke out everything. It’s a catastrophe. So, farmers end up using added weed killers to kill the super weeds. This whole mad playing around with the genetic makeup of nature is a disaster from the beginning.

The real agenda of GMO, which I have documented in great detail in my book “Seeds of Destruction”, comes from the Rockefeller Foundation. It comes out of the 1920s-1930s Eugenics movement. The Rockefeller Foundation during the 1930’s, right up to the outbreak of World War II when it became politically embracing too, financed the Nazi Eugenics experiments of Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin and in Munich. Why did they do this? Their goal was the elimination of what they called “undesirable eaters”. That is called population reduction.

After the war, the head of the American Eugenic Society, who was a good friend of John D. Rockefeller, at the annual conference of the American Eugenic Society said: “From today, the new name of eugenics is genetics”. Moreover, if you keep that in mind – genetic engineering, the Human Genome Project and so forth – they all are scientific frauds. Russian scientists have proven that the entire Genome Project utterly disregarded 98% of the scientifically valuable data in favor of 2%  that was completely nonsense and a waste of billions of dollars.

Therefore, they have been obsessed with the idea of how to reduce human population in a way that would not be so obvious as simply going out and carrying out mass-sterilization.

Actually, they have done that in Central America together with the World Health Organization by giving certain vaccines that they cooked-up to have abortive effects. Therefore, the women of child-bearing age in Central America were given these vaccines against tetanus. The organization of the Catholic Church became suspicious because the shots were given only to women, not to men. And they found that there was buried in the vaccine an abortive effect that made it impossible for women to conceive and bear children. This is all covert population reduction.

These are the Western patriarchs who believe they are the gods, sitting on the throne with great dignity, controlling mankind. I think they are a bunch of fools, but they have this agenda of genetic manipulation. It’s against nature, it’s chemically unstable. And I have to congratulate the Russian Federation that they had the courage and the moral concern for their own population to ban GMO cultivation across Russia. That was a step forward for mankind. I would hope that Russia will use its influence to get China to do the similar thing, because their agriculture is in dire need of some healthy Russian input. But this step by Russia to make a GMO-free agriculture is a great step for mankind.

Read More At: Katehon.com

Did Bayer AG Do A Sly Deal On Glyphosate With The European Union Commission?

Did Bayer AG do a Sly Deal on Glyphosate with EU Commission?

Source: WilliamEngdahl.com
F. William Engdahl
January 24, 2017

There is growing evidence that the EU Commission’s extraordinary ruling of June 29, 2016 granting the toxic weed-killing agent Glyphosate a reprieve of 18 months until December, 2017 was made in order to allow sufficient time for Bayer AG, the new owner of Monsanto since December time to bring its substitute weed-killer on the market once the merger is complete. The issue is highly controversial not the least owing to a determination from an agency of the Geneva WHO that glyphosate is a “probable carcinogen.” The EU Commission ignored that WHO determination, relied on a fraudullent German government safety assessment and ignored the will of a majority of EU Governments to give glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s world-leading weed-killer, Roundup, an artificial life extension.

Early in 2016, the EU Commission recommended re-approval for another 15-years of the license for the controversial glyphosate toxin, the most widely used weed-killer in the world, the main ingredient in Roundup of Monsanto. The Commission, a decidedly anti-democratic, non-elected body of faceless bureaucrats, declared then that their “yes” decision was based on the determination by the EU’s European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) that there was no reason to believe glyphosate is a carcinogen. That all was before the decision by Germany’s Bayer AG to takeover Monsanto.

The snag in that early EU Commission decision to renew for another 15 years glyphosate lies in the fact that the EFSA refused to make open disclosure of the relevant health and safety studies EFSA claimed to rely on. Most alarming in that initial EU decision to renew was the fact that EFSA’s decision went totally against the 2015 determination by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that glyphosate, was a “probable human carcinogen.” In lay terms that means odds greater than 50% are that it causes human cancers on exposure. Glyphosate presence has been tested in ordinary drinking water or in food crops sprayed with Roundup of other glyphosate-based weed-killers.

German Government Corrupt Science

EFSA based its initial early 2016 glyphosate renewal approval solely on a report by Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), which in turn took its decision from a clearly biased report by Monsanto and other agrochemical industry groups. Using the Monsanto-linked assessment for glyphosate, the German BfR went against the professional and highly-respected WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer, stating, again using Monsanto’s self-interested claim, that glyphosate was “unlikely” to pose a cancer risk. IARC used only data that was in the public domain, but the corrupt German BfR based its report on secret industry studies by Monsanto and other agrichemical firms that it refused to release to IARC or to the public

Public pressure, the objections of several EU states and an EU-wide petition signed by more than one million EU citizens demanding an end to glyphosate use as well as a letter of protest signed by almost one hundred leading scientists to EU Health and Food Safety Commissioner (also known as DG SANTE) Vytenis Andriukaitis, were ignored.

The fact that the member states of the EU were unable to reach a required Qualified Majority vote in favor of renewing glyphosate, allowed the decision, through an EU Commission technical loophole, to fall to the clearly biased Vytenis Andriukaitis.

To little surprise, Andriukaitis ruled to extend. Until now however, the bizarre aspect was that he stated a renewal for only 18 months and not the 15 years requested by Monsanto and approved by him only a few months before.

Bayer Swallows Monsanto

The EU Commission extrordinary ruling flew in the face of the widely-accepted and even EU law that requires decisions based on the “precautionary principle,” namely that when there is the slightest doubt about health risks of a crop or chemocal, err on the side of precaution and ban.

Notably, Andriukaitis’ ruling for limited renewal of glyphosate was made on June 29 just as the boards of the German pesticide giant, Bayer AG and Monsanto were finalizing weeks of discussion of a friendly $66 billion takeover of Monsanto to create the largest agribusiness leviathan on the planet, with an alarming 29 percent of the world’s seeds, most of the market share of GMO patented seeds, and 24 percent of its pesticides and agrichemicals.

To make the situation more alarming for those of us seeking a healthy diet, in 2016 a huge cartelization of world agrichemicals and GMO seed makers took place. In addition to the Bayer swallow of Monsanto, ChemChina, a China state chemical company bought the large Swiss GMO and pesticide company, Syngenta. And the two other US GMO and agrichemical giants, Dow Chemical and DuPont, have also merged in the past twelve months. The Swiss company fended off that offer only to agree later to a takeover by China’s state-owned ChemChina. The effect is that these now three giant behemoth companies control nearly 70 percent of the world’s pesticide market and 80 percent of the U.S. corn-seed market, most all the latter GMO seed.

Bayer Takes Liberty

At this point, since the WHO determination that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen,” glyphosate’s days were clearly numbered. Now once the technical corporate takeover by Bayer of Monsanto is completed, expected towards the end of this year, 2017, just as the renewal for glyphosate expires, Bayer AG plans to push its fast-growing substitute for glyphosate known by the trade name, Liberty and Basta, a so-called systemic Glufosinate weed-killer similar to glyphosate but without (so far) the WHO stigma of carcinogenic.

Moreover, since the Monsanto patent on glyphosate-based Roundup expired, other companies have been flooding the market globally with cheap substitutes. Three Chinese companies — Jiangsu Sevencontinent, Hebei Veyong, and Sichuan Lier — have been aggressively exporting glufosinate since 2015. Production of glufosinate on the other hand is far more limited allowing Bayer AG, minus Roundup, to emerge as the dominant weed-killer giant. Moreover, by offering to sell off its Roundup busiess, the new Bayer AG appears to be making a noble sacrifice in the interest of reducing anti-trust concerns.

There is no aspect of the Bayer AG takeover of Monsanto that is positive for the world. To mention “anti-trust” violations is putting it mildly. Government anti-trust, certainly in the agribusiness sector is a dead letter. True protection of consumer health and safety is a dead letter, certainly in Brussels. How the Trump Presidency and his Agriculture Secretary nominee, former Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue, weigh in on this will be more than interesting to see. After all, Bayer-Monsanto is not “America First,” but a German company.

Read More At: WilliamEngdahl.com
__________________________________________________

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Breaking: Bayer buys Monsanto: the Empire strikes back

QuestionEverything
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
September 16, 2016

This is the largest corporate cash buyout in history.

Mega-giant Bayer put $66 billion on the table, and mega-giant Monsanto said yes.

Think GMOs, crop seeds, pesticides, medical drugs.

Keep in mind that one of the consultants on the European side of this deal is the Rothschild Group.

But that’s not all. Dow and DuPont are planning to merge. Recently, another biotech giant, Syngenta, was swallowed up by the state-owned ChemChina. And this just in: two major Canadian fertilizer manufacturers, Potash Corp of Saskatchewan Inc. and Agrium Inc. are merging.

Consolidation, monopoly. The Empire strikes back.

The global rebellion against GMOs and pesticides, particularly Monsanto’s Roundup, is one of the reasons for these deals. But lurking in the background is another factor, exemplified by the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) treaty.

If the TPP passes, corporate tribunals will take over the adjudication of disputes in which a nation rejects importing toxic pesticides, medical drugs, or GMOs. These tribunals will decide whether that nation is permitted to refuse importation.

Of course, the tribunals will favor mega-corporate interests. But now, with the mergers involving Bayer, Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, Syngenta, and ChemChina, the devastating clout of the tribunals will be that much more powerful.

The ability to shove toxic products down the throats of populations will elevate.

This is the corporate face of Globalism.

This is a giant step in the direction of controlling the world’s food supply.

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
________________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Bayer raises bid to purchase Monsanto to over $65 BILLION

Monsanto

Source: NaturalNews.com
Vicki Batts
September 13, 2016

German pharmaceutical giant Bayer AG seems to know no limits in its quest to acquire the world’s most notorious agricultural company. The drug manufacturer has recently pushed its offer for procuring Monsanto up to a whopping $65 billion.

Bayer has confirmed that the two corporations are currently engaged in “advanced negotiations,” though it seems less like negotiating and more like Monsanto trying to take Bayer for everything they have. The original offer from Bayer averaged out to $122 per share, or $62 billion. Their new $65 billion offer averages out to about $127.50 per share. Bayer would also assume Monsanto’s $9 billion in debt, which pushes their offer up by an additional 2 percent. However, Monsanto is apparently seeking a jaw-dropping $130 per share, at least according to Bloomberg.

The attempted wooing of Monsanto is just one of many consolidations that have occurred lately in the agricultural industry. Bloomberg reports, “China National Chemical Corp. agreed in February to acquire Syngenta AG, while DuPont Co. and Dow Chemical Co. plan to merge and then carve out a new crop-science unit.” These kinds of deals in the crop and seed industry threaten to leave just a few oversized global giants in the Big Ag industrial complex.

If Bayer and Monsanto were to merge, they would create what would be one of the world’s largest agricultural suppliers. Monsanto is presently the world’s largest seed manufacturer, and Bayer currently offers their own “crop-protection” products (if you can really call them that). Between the two, they will make for a nearly-untouchable conglomerate. Monsanto has announced that it is considering Bayer’s offer, but the company is not the GMO giant’s only suitor; several other companies are seeking to acquire Monsanto as well.

In spite of their tremendous offer, Monsanto reportedly feels that their company is somehow being undervalued, but is still “open” to negotiation. Clearly, Monsanto is blind to the growing aversion to its name and products.

While the apparent ego of the company is worrisome, there are many more things to be concerned about, especially if this deal were to come to fruition. If two massive companies tied to the agricultural industry join forces, it could spell disaster for farmers and food prices. Their consolidation would lead to fewer choices for farmers, and you know what happens when there is a monopoly: prices skyrocket. With farmer bargaining power limited, it’s natural to expect seed prices to increase. And that means that the price of produce in supermarkets will increase along with them.

Robert Lawrence, a professor from Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and the founding director of the Center for a Liveable Future, told Market Watch, “The consolidation and driving out of smaller competitors, and controlling the marketplace and raising prices of seeds and pesticides for farmers worldwide is going to be a real shock to the food system.”

The merger could also mean fewer options for consumers, and may even effect the availability of organic crops and crops grown with fewer pesticides. Given the size of the two companies, the potential for them to further reduce farmers’ options is very real.

You would think that with the growing demand for organic, pesticide-free produce, Bayer would not be so interested in Monsanto; after all, that name has become something of a dirty word.

However, Bayer reportedly took Monsanto’s poor image into account, but made their offer to acquire the company anyway. This isn’t surprising though; anytime two large companies such as these merge together, the net result will always be more power. Even if people don’t like them, the increase in market share will still inevitably yield more economic power. And with economic power comes political power. As if Monsanto doesn’t already have their claws deep enough into our political system, merging with Bayer would surely grant them invincibility.

The most frightening thing about this acquisition is its potential to make Monsanto a stronger force in the agricultural industry, and consequently, further reduce the availability of non-GMO foods.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

USAToday.com

Bloomberg.com


MarketWatch.com

‘Dark Act’ Won’t Truly Label GMO’s – Food & Agriculture Consultant

Source: RTAmerica
August 3, 2016

Critics have branded the new law requiring the labeling of GMO products the DARK Act, short for “Denying Americans the Right to Know,” arguing that it allows companies to use QR codes or 1-800 numbers as a form of labeling, forcing consumers to scan the code or make a call to get more information. Independent food and agriculture consultant Elizabeth Kucinich joins RT America’s Lindsay France to discuss the law, which she claims “won’t truly label GMO’s.”

Chemical Industry Withholding Crucial Pesticide Toxicity From Regulatory Authorities

Toxic chemicals
Source: NaturalNews.com
L.J. Devon
July 28, 2016

Crucial data on pesticide toxicity is often concealed by the deceptive language put in place by the chemical industry. To bypass regulatory oversight, the chemical industry uses clever marketing language to make their patented chemicals sound legitimate. Some of the biggest agrochemical formulators, including Monsanto, Dow, Bayer and Syngenta, are claiming that their chemicals are safe, while hiding the known compounding, synergistic effects of their pesticides (often hidden in patent applications).

There is no scientific standard or regulation to address the synergy of new pesticide products, the compounding effects of pesticide formulations, or the unknown toxic effects of mixing and accumulating pesticides in the fields. For these reasons alone, pesticide burden and toxicity is far greater than assumed. Over time, as various amounts of pesticides accumulate in ground water and in soil, people become nothing but rats in a DNA-damaging real life lab experiment.

The gray area: Synergistic effects of widely-used agrochemicals lead to compounding toxicity

According to an investigation by the watchdog group, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), nearly 100 different pesticide products aren’t really safe at all, even after being given a license by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Over a six year time period, the EPA actually green-lighted nearly 100 pesticide products that had synergistic compounds known for “increasing the dangers to imperiled pollinators and rare plants.” Ecological biodiversity and agricultural sustainability are at risk here, but the threats are allowed to continue on.

These synergistic effects occur when two or more chemicals come together and interact in a way that increases and emboldens their toxicity. In tests, one chemical may be non-toxic at a certain level, but when the chemical is combined with another, the newfound toxicity can cause considerable harm to pollinators, rare plants or human health. The EPA may deem that a certain pesticide is safe at a certain level of exposure, but over time, intermixing chemicals can generate much greater toxic effects.

The CBD’s latest report, Toxic Concoctions: How the EPA Ignores the Dangers of Pesticide Cocktails, breaks down the harm that the chemical industry is doing by fooling regulatory authorities and using loopholes to embellish the data.

Over 90 agrochemicals on the market cause synergistic, compounding toxic effects

One of Dow AgroScience’s toxic pesticide products was revoked in 2014 for these reasons. Dow’s Enlist Duo, containing 2,4-D and glyphosate, causes such toxic, synergistic effects to plants, that the EPA revoked its license, even after approving it in October 2014.

Several products patented by Monsanto, Dow, Bayer and Syngenta have similar synergistic effects that the companies fail to properly disclose. No one is really studying and cross checking what these compounding effects can do to the environment and to human beings.

The Center for Biological Diversity investigated 140 patented products from these large chemical companies. Ninety-six of them or (69 percent) demonstrated synergy between the various active chemicals in the products. Of the patented applications, 72 percent of the products demonstrated synergy involving the most widely-used chemicals in agriculture. These chemicals included glyphosate, atrazine, 2,4-D, dicamba and the neonicotinoids thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and clothianidin, among others.

“It’s alarming to see just how common it’s been for the EPA to ignore how these chemical mixtures might endanger the health of our environment,” said CBD scientist Nathan Donley. The EPA doesn’t even cross examine compounding synergistic effects for the many different neonicotinoids.

“It’s pretty clear that chemical companies knew about these potential dangers, but the EPA never bothered to demand this information from them or dig a little deeper to find it for themselves,” he stated.

While the government looks the other way, CWC labs is working toward greater transparency. CWC labs will soon have the capability to disclose not only the heavy metal content of popular food items, but also various pesticide levels. In this way, CWC labs can help the public recognize where they may be consuming toxic, synergistic combinations of agrochemicals.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

BiologicalDiversity.org[PDF]

CommonDreams.org

The Amazing Glyphosate Revolt Grows – F. William Engdahl

34534534544

Source: Journal-Neo.org
F. William Engdahl
May 23, 2016

I must make a confession. I never thought it would get this far. There is an absolutely amazing international revolt against the most deadly and most widely used weed killer in world agriculture–glyphosate. Those of you who have followed my earlier writings can detect my feeling of pessimism that mere “democratic” grass-roots protest, combined with a scientific assessment from an agency of WHO that glyphosate was a “probable carcinogen” would be enough to stop the pending, twice-postponed EU Commission renewal of the expiring license for glyphosate in the EU. It almost doesn’t matter at this point what the ultimate vote is when the next EU Commission glyphosate meeting is convened. The genie is out of the bottle. One of the world’s most important eugenics projects to maim and ultimately reduce human population is on the brink of being banned much as DDT decades ago.

On May 19, a revised proposal by the European Commission to re-approve glyphosate for use in Europe for 9 more years (rather than the original 15 years), but with almost no restrictions on use, failed to secure the required qualified majority among EU governments. This is an amazing and very positive development for democratic empowerment against an institution increasingly seen–not only by the British population–as an anti-democratic, even totalitarian structure irresponsive to the most basic concerns for the health and safety of EU citizens.

The agri-chemical industry bigs—Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer and friends–are stunned at their failure. Corruption in government corridors whether in Berlin or Brussels seems to be losing its efficacy.

The next step for the troubled glyphosate renewal process will be for the EU Commission, those faceless, unelected bureaucrats, to come up with a new revised proposal that will bring Germany to approval by end of June when the old license expires or order glyphosate withdrawn from the entire EU market within six months according to Henry Rowlands’ international GMO watchdog media, Sustainable Pulse.

They cite Brussels EU Commission sources who report that the Commission did not even dare call for a formal vote, realizing that they would fail the EU requirement of Qualified Majority “yes” vote of the 28 EU states. France and Italy would have voted against in an informal polling. Germany would have abstained along with six other EU states.

Under current EU rules incorporated in the Treaty of Rome, a matter coming for a vote in the Council of Ministers of the 28 member states requiring a Qualified Majority approval, must satisfy two criteria. First, that 55% of member states vote in favor. Second, that the proposal is supported by member states representing at least 65% of the total EU population. Under the rules, an abstention under qualified majority voting counts as a vote against.

According to official statements of various EU governments in March before the latest May 19 meeting, in addition to open opposition to glyphosate license renewal on EU Commission terms expressed by France, Sweden and the Netherlands, the governments of Bulgaria, Denmark, Austria, Belgium and Italy had joined the “no” group. Their combined populations equal 53% of total EU population when Germany as abstainer is added. In that case the “yes” to glyphosate side would have a mere 47% not the required 65%.

An EU glyphosate ban today could deal a possible death blow to the global GMO project as more of the world wakes up to the fact that the entire GMO crop cultivation is part and parcel of the consumption of deadly glyphosate. It can be said that the Rockefeller Foundation’s funding of genetic manipulation, of genetics since World War II, as I document in my Seeds of Destruction book, is about eugenics or race purity as the Nazis practiced during the Third Reich. Little known is the fact that the Nazi eugenics, otherwise known as creation of the “Master Race,” was financed by…the Rockefeller Foundation. Monsanto has been in the orbit of Rockefeller core assets, now joined by Bill Gates, since World War I.

Industry Panic

At this point the global agrichemical cartel–one getting dramatically smaller from proposed mergers between ChinaChem with Syngenta and now Bayer AG with Monsanto are approved–is in a clear panic mode, and making stupid mistakes in the process. What’s at stake is huge for the health and safety of world citizens and for the future of the deadly agrichemicals industry. Glyphosate is the major component of Monsanto’s proven-toxic Roundup, the most profitable product of the GMO giant and the world’s most widely-used weed-killer.

Now Washington wants the EU to drop all health and environmental safeguards on GMOs to pave the way for a transatlantic trade agreement (TTIP). TTIP negotiations started on 25 April in New York. EU Health Commissioner Andriukaitis’ rush to ram through a re-licensing of glyphosate in May, shortly after his New York TTIP talks, was clearly another reflection of immense Washington pressure on the unaccountable EU Commission bureaucracy.

On May 16, timed for release just hours before the scheduled EU Council of Ministers vote on approval of glyphosate license renewal, the FAO/WHO Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) released what it claimed was a scientific study. They admit in the first sentence that it was rushed to publication. The study concluded regarding glyphosate:

“The overall weight of evidence indicates that administration of glyphosate and its formulation products at doses as high as 2000 mg/kg body weight

by the oral route, the route most relevant to human dietary exposure, was not associated with genotoxic effects in an overwhelming majority of studies conducted in mammals, a model considered to be appropriate for assessing genotoxic risks to humans. The Meeting concluded that glyphosate is

unlikely to be genotoxic at anticipated dietary exposures…the meeting concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet.”

This means that one part of the WHO says glyphosate is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet,” while another arm of WHO, the very respected World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that glyphosate, the weed-killer used in most every GMO plant worldwide, and most other crops and even home gardens as well, was a “probable human carcinogen.”

The new FAO/WHO rush job however is no science. It’s fatally flawed bought-and-paid for prostitution science, with no offense to the world’s oldest profession meant.

As one critic points out, “this announcement was made without one single regulatory or industry glyphosate study ever having been performed at a real-life dietary exposure level (under 3 mg/kg body weight/day). This is a huge hole in the risk assessment process for glyphosate, as low levels of the herbicide may hack hormones even more than high levels and hormone hacking chemicals are often carcinogens.”

Conflicts of Interest

Moreover, the FAO/WHO rush job study committee is riddled with members with glaring conflicts of interest in terms of ties to the chemical industry desperately trying to ram through glyphosate re-approval until 2031. According to a report in the UK Guardian, Professor Alan Boobis, who chaired the UN’s joint FAO/WHO meeting on glyphosate, is vice-president of the International Life Science Institute (ILSI) Europe. The co-chair of the sessions was Professor Angelo Moretto, a board member of ILSI’s Health and Environmental Services Institute, and of its Risk21 steering group too, which Boobis also co-chairs. The Guardian report pointed out that in 2012, “the ILSI group took a $500,000 (£344,234) donation from Monsanto and a $528,500 donation from the industry group Croplife International, which represents Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta and others, according to documents obtained by the US Right to Know campaign.”

Continue Reading At: Journal-Neo.org

___________________________________________________________________

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

 

What The Biotech & Vaccine Giants Have In Common: Extreme Secrecy COmbined WIth SCientifice Fraud, Censorship, Intimidation & Media Collusion

Big Pharma

Source: NaturalNews.com
J.D. Heyes
May 5, 2016

The world’s biggest biotech and Big Pharma companies have a nearly unlimited supply of cash, so they can essentially purchase whatever they desire – and more than anything, they desire the ability to continue to sell their products to the world.

And nothing perpetuates that endless cycle of sales like manipulation of the media and so-called “official” sources of information, as well as government agencies and academia.

For instance, as noted by the Center for Research on Globalization, the biotech sector loves to scream “peer-review” when anti-GMO factions refer to scientific analyses and research-based findings in order to state their case. But even when such research is published in peer-reviewed journals, the industry unleashes its attack shills (like Jon Entine) to discredit and ruin the individual researchers, the methodology of the research, and anything else related to the study.

Other ‘concerns’ outweigh those of public safety

As the center notes further:

“Peer review or no peer review, it seems to matter little to the biotech sector when research findings have the potential to damage its interests. In any case, peer review is only for the sector’s critics. It doesn’t seem to apply much to it. For instance, in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) scientists had continually warned regulators that GM crops could create unpredictable and hard to detect side effects, including allergies, toxin production, nutritional problems, and new diseases. They recommended that long-term studies were needed to fully assess the effect of GM foods on other crops, the ecosystem, and animal and human health, but these warnings were ignored.”

And why? Because in nearly every instance, financial concerns outweigh any related to public safety. For this industry – and, really, for Big Pharma as well – “Commercial interest, political strategy and lobbying, not science, is what really counts,” the center observed.

Monsanto, Syngenta and other biotech giants collude with government agencies and officials to “educate” the public about GMO products (meaning manipulate the public), while Big Pharma does the same when it comes to getting vaccines and other drugs that have not been properly vetted or tested to the market.

These companies use the media as well as key reporters – Entine being a case in point – to propagandize and misinform about their products. These kinds of tactics are the same ones that are currently being used against the explosive new documentary, VAXXED: From Cover-up to Catastrophe, which exposes the legitimate link between autism and vaccines, and even features Centers for Disease Control and Prevention whistleblower Dr. William Thompson, who admitted that his agency covered up that link. Powerful pro-vaccine forces have so far managed to censor the film by having it removed from the list of films to be screened at various festivals, including the recent Tribeca Film Festival. The showing at the annual event, which was co-founded by Hollywood mega-star Robert De Niro (that story is here), was cancelled, even though De Niro has an autistic child and was initially very interested, in the interest of fairness and science, in the film’s content.

‘Astroturf’

“A much-awaited and explosive documentary film … was suddenly pulled from Robert De Niro’s Tribeca Film Festival following an intense censorship effort waged by the vaccine-pushing mainstream media and pharma-funded media science trolls,” Mike Adams, author of Food Forensics, science lab director of CWCLabs.com, editor of NaturalNews.com and creator of Medicine.news, initially reported.

“The vaccine totalitarians and media science trolls who demand absolute obedience to the fraudulent narrative that vaccines are ‘safe and effective’ have zero tolerance for any intelligent conversations about vaccines,” Adams wrote, noting that after De Niro scheduled the film, he was forced to change his mind and pull the film.

Media people who are honest with readers and the American people in general know all about the tactics used by biotech giants and Big Pharma, and that includes former top CBS News investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson, author of the book, Stonewalled. In a recent TED talk, she discussed one of the propaganda techniques, “astroturfing,” an artificial, bought-and-paid for “reality” that supplants the truth.

“Astroturf seeks to manipulate you into changing your opinion by making it seem as if you’re an outlier–when you’re not,” she says in her talk.

“Hallmarks of astroturf and propaganda include use of inflammatory language such as quack, crank, nutty, pseudo, paranoid and conspiracy. Beware when an interest addresses an issue by controversializing or attacking the people, personalities and organizations surrounding the issue rather than the facts. That could be astroturf.”

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

The GMO Scrapbook: Did Brussels Just Actually Listen To The European…

 THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: DID BRUSSELS JUST ACTUALLY LISTEN TO THE EUROPEAN ...
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
April 26, 2016

If you’ve been following the whoel GMO-glyphosphate issue, you’ll be readily aware that the whole scientific method and process has been corrupted by the GMO corporations – a global network of big agribusiness mercantilists that we not-so-lovingly refer to on this website as “I.G. Farbensanto”, or Mon(ster)santo, or DuPontzanto, Syncrudda, and a variety of other accurate names to denote both the quality of their products, and the caliber of their morals and business ethics. To be blunt, and as most readers of this and other websites that are devoted to the subject of GMOs, the corporate-sponsored “science” proving the safety of their own products (big surprise, huh?) has been challenged by a number of independent scientists conducting their own studies (most especially in France, where these studies were legally challenged and vindicated).  Well, there may have been another setback for I.G. Farbensanto in, of all places, Brussels, the center of that bureaucratic-technocratic nightmare misnamed the European “Union”, according to this article shared by Ms. M.W., and written by F. William Engdahl, one of our favorite researchers and commentators on the subject:

Dramatic Turn in Brussels Glyphosate Battle

First, you’ll note the reference to those bothersome French studies that IG Farbensanto tried to kill (indeed, we wonder why it didn’t simply assassinate Dr. Seralini, who conducted them):

The true secret of the toxic danger of GMO crops in the animal and human food chain is gradually coming to light. It is becoming clearer that perhaps as much or even more a toxic danger for human and animal consumption of GMO corn, soy products and other GMO varieties, are the chemicals the GMO seeds are by contract agreement necessarily mated with. No farmer anywhere in the world is allowed to buy Monsanto GMO “Roundup Ready” seeds without at the same time signing a binding contract to annually buy and use Monsanto glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer. In fact, the only trait that Monsanto Roundup Ready corn or soybeans are genetically modified for is to resist the toxic killing effect of Roundup while every living biological matter around not “glyphosate resistant” is killed.

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com

—————————————————————————

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.