Genetic Genocide: How misused Science Threatens Life

The problem with genetic modification of plants, animals and plants; cloning and splicing genes is not its existence, but the results of this unregulated practice.

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | OCTOBER 29, 2012

If you are partially or totally ignorant about genetically modified products, I will not blame you. In 15 years of research I have not been able to get a significant grasp on what genetically engineering humans, fish, soy, corn, milk and other products could mean for humankind.

When I set out to write this article my first challenge was how to present the information in a concise, yet shocking enough to wake up people who still believe that cloning humans for organ harvesting, splicing animal and human genes and making food out of human DNA or tissue is just science fiction.

I thought then, that the most appealing way to start off was to simply provide the headlines of some of the articles and documents I found during my research process, so that the readers had an immediate notion of what genetic engineering really means and how it affects them directly now and how it will affect them in the future. Posting the headlines will also facilitate the research for you and will give you the opportunity to do your own investigative work.

So let’s see what the headlines tell us.

Why the future doesn’t need us.

New Federal Guidelines Will Allow Creation of Human-Animals Chimeras

GM Food Dangers Include: Low Fertility, Organ Damage and Hormone Disruption

GM goat spins web based future

‘Spider-goats’ start work on wonder web

Transgenic fish could threaten wild populations

‘Trojan gene’ could wipe out fish

Chimeras, Cloning and Freak Human-Animal Hybrids

Bone marrow cell-mediated production of transgenic chickens Open

Part Human/Part Animal Hybrid Monsters Are Being Created By Scientists All Over The Planet

Human-rabbit clone announced and no noses twitch

The Case for Fertility Control Using Immuno-contraception

Endosulfan and Endocrine Disruption:

Human Risk Characterization

19 Studies Link GMO Foods to Organ Disruption

GMO Pesticides linked to birth defects, disruption of male hormones, cancer

On top of the fact genetic engineering is literally compared with “Playing God” with the building blocks of life, you should know that this widely exercised practice is almost completely unregulated. Furthermore, there are initiatives to promote its deregulation and to create legislation to exempt genetic engineering from all oversight. My question regarding genetic engineering deregulation was then: What would happen if scientists who are provided with unlimited money and resources have no legal liability to realize their experiments cloning humans and literally engineering new species?

Last time scientists were given unlimited funding and resources they manage to create things like the nuclear bomb, the hydrogen bomb, and nowadays, they are trying to imitate the origin of the universe with the already infamous Supercollider. We all know what happened when corporations and governments with no oversight got their hands on the first two pieces of technology.

When you think about genetically modified organisms it is always tempting to believe that such organisms are created and experimented with only in industrialized countries, where high tech labs are available. Maybe you think they are only held at research labs that belong to pharmaceutical corporations or public and private universities. What would you think if I told you that human-animal cloning, for example, is carried out in Costa Rica, and that this practice has been taking place for at least a decade there? It was reported in the Washington Post, which described discussions about human cloning among scientists:

“During one recent meeting, scientists disagreed on such basic issues as whether it would be unethical for a human embryo to begin its development in an animal’s womb, and whether a mouse would be better or worse off with a brain made of human neurons..”

So, hundreds of companies and governments are free to carry out genetic experiments in thousands of laboratories, mixing genes from several species, and are completely free to put it in food and water supplies across the planet with no oversight. That is the conclusion of the situation that we now face.

Evidence of Genetic Engineering, Cloning and Splicing

If you cannot or do not want to get into the heavy research, I am about to give you a detailed report on the state of genetic engineering, human-animal cloning and gene splicing.

Let’s start by possibly the most disturbing but not the newest fact. There are scientists out there splicing human and cow genes for the purpose of promoting the growth of human clones in cow wombs. Cloned humans and or animals would be “living drug factories by producing valuable pharmaceutical substances in their milk, or as organ factories because theirs will not be rejected by the human immune system.”

The reason for the cloning of humans and animals and the splicing of their genes is what I often cite as the sneaky treat of convenience. Sure, there is a need to find cures for all disease and to have organs available when people’s own rotten because they smoke for 40 years or drank their pension funds until the end. Would not it be convenient to have an organ bank, or a cure for lung and stomach cancer? Who would oppose to growing human fetuses in animal wombs, or extracting the organs of living animals or fellow humans to substitute our own? Convenient, right? Wrong.

In a farm near Reno Nevada, a farmer keeps sheep that hold human livers, hearts, brains among others. The “scientist” who is in charge of the experiment said he could not wait to see the effects the human cells had on the brain of the animal. He had himself injected those genes. According to the report from the Associated press, this kind of experiments fall within the new ethics guidelines that govern the type of “scientific research conducted at the farm.

In an article dated June 19 2011, The London Telegraph announces that pigs are now able to host organs from other species as “scientists have found they can create chimeric animals that have organs belonging to another species by injecting stem cells into the embryo of another species.” Another article from the Daily Mail advertises how pigs will serve as human organ farms. “Human organs could be grown inside pigs for use in transplant operations following pioneering research.” Then they launched the convenience hook again by saying that “The method would help reduce the risk of the transplanted organ being rejected.” This type of experiments will also allow animals to provide blood for transfusions whenever a patient needs it. So, the clone will be harvested for its organs and people will have on-demand organ transplantation.

The New Atlantis publication even dared to ask why wouldn’t be a good idea to use artificial wombs. The undated article claims that using human and / or animal cells or genes is a fairly new and imperfect practice. Probably the author ignores that this kind genetic manipulation has been discussed — if not applied — since the mid 1960’s. So there is nothing new here.

The Plan Behind Genetically Engineering Humans and Food

One aspect often ignored in the discussion of human cloning and genetic engineering, is the goals; the real goals these practices seek. Because believe, no matter how convenient it sounds, it is not for aiding humans live a longer, healthier life. Corporations and tax payer funded universities are researching how to enhance human and other forms of life because those who get to implement these technologies intend to have a humanless future. Does it sound insane enough? The article on The New Atlantis attempts to be positive about these experiments and related them to a brighter, healthier future for humankind. “Today, we have inched slightly—but only slightly—closer to perfecting the technology that would realize Haldane’s vision, albeit for reasons other than the eugenic improvement of the race.” The problem is, that is exactly where human genetic experiments originated and that is why they are still being carried out. If the future does not need humans to invent, design, construct, repair or reproduce, why would the world need humans? Mimicking human reproductive powers, as the author from The New Atlantis says, is named “ectogenesis” and has been tried for centuries.

Rather than expending all scientific talent and resources developing artificial wombs,” Reason science correspondent Ronald Bailey wrote recently, “I suspect that it will be much easier and cheaper to establish pregnancies with human embryos in other mammals, like cows and horses, than it will be to achieve the same thing using artificial uteruses.”

Although modern technology allows all kinds of experiments in medicine, food, water and even air, the overall goal is not and will not be to help humanity extend its presence in this planet. Most articles I found through my research present all kind of scenarios where genetic engineering would be applied for our benefit. From spider goats to human milk in cows’ utters,  genetically modified salmon, soy or corn, the applications seem to be endless. One of the most common responses when pro GMO people are questioned about the dangers of playing with life is that it will help feed the hungry or aid the poor.

But in practice, any and all life extension technology — as we see it now with electronics — only cause further degeneration of the human race. Through convenience, empty promises and what ifs, those who are empowered by their riches and political power want to use our own DNA to end human life as we know it.

In an article titled Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us, Wired magazine explores the possibility that humans will become a threatened species as more and more technologies turn us into useless eaters, as some globalists have called humankind. Humans who are ‘chosen’ to actually take advantage of the latest technology will merge with robots or become robots in what will become the next sentient creatures. As Ray Kurzweil, the inventor of the first reading machine for the blind writes in his book The Age of Spiritual Machines, those fortunate humans will gain near immortality by becoming one with robotic technology. But what will happen to the rest of us, or our children and grandchildren who will come after us?

What does the Genetic Engineering Threat Entail?

Simply put, the out-of-control insanity of modern science and biotechnology implies Genetic Genocide. Depending on where you obtain information, scientists and researchers coincide that the common denominator of genetically engineered forms of life is the end of current forms of life. According to researcher Jeffrey Smith, when lab animals were fed genetically engineered organisms, it resulted in complete sterilization. Such sterilization came in some cases in the second and third generations, but scientists also saw test subjects losing its capacity to reproduce during the subject’s life term.

William Muir and Richard Howard of Purdue University, Indiana, warned about a ‘trojan’ gene in fish which could wipe out natural forms of fish off the planet if GM fish are released into the wild or escape from farms. “This resembles the Trojan horse,” said Muir. “It gets into the population looking like something good and it ends up destroying the population.” Both Muir and Howard studied the use of human growth hormone in fish, which in now being used in laboratory experiments to make salmon grow bigger, faster while eating less feed. The researchers found that GM fish turned sexually mature faster than the rest and produced more eggs as well. According to a report from the BBC, professor Muir asserts that GMO fish “would enjoy the same reproductive advantages of a natural one, so the hGH gene would quickly spread through a fish population.”

Human Growth Hormone (hGH) is also put in the feed given to cattle and other farm animals which humans consume later. Coincidentally, both male and female humans have experienced physical development with girls getting to puberty at earlier and earlier ages, while boys have suffered from hormonal changes that many researchers associate with the feminization of a large portion of human males.

Other studies on genetically modified organisms show that its consumption results in problems such as low fertility, organ damage and hormone disruption. This last one is specifically important, because it is through hormonal disruption that some scientists have discovered how and why some men are beginning to lose interest in mating and some women choose same sex mates instead of men. In the study titled: “A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health the International Journal on Biological Sciences found that Monsanto’s Bt corn contributes to liver failure. All types of Monsanto-created GMO corn (Mon 863, Mon810, and NK 603) are approved by the FDA and labeled as safe for human consumption in the United States and Europe.

Other studies conducted using pesticides, revealed that these chemical products cause endocrine disruptions. Ingredients such as glyphosate, used in Roundup, increases the number of birth defects in animals. Birth defects include something called cyclopia, or the appearance of one single eye in the middle of the forehead. Additionally, glyphosate causes stillbirths and miscarriages.

A study conducted in Argentina, confirmed what older studies have found regarding the consequences of ingesting products contaminated with pesticides and herbicides. Andres Carrasco, head of the Molecular Embryology Laboratory at the University of Buenos Aires, presented a report that explains how Monsanto’s Roundup is responsible for causing infertility, sperm destruction, and cancer. Carrasco tested the effects of glyphosate on animal embryos and found that the chemical alters and impairs proper embryonic development. “I didn’t discover anything new,” said Carrasco, “I just confirmed what other scientists discovered… There is scientific proof and, above all, there are hundreds of affected towns [that] are a living evidence of this public health emergency.”

Recently, the UK Daily Mail reported on how scientist in England are experimenting with half human, half animal clones and how these experiments have been kept in secret. “The revelation comes just a day after a committee of scientists warned of a nightmare ‘Planet of the Apes’ scenario in which work on human-animal creations goes too far,” reads the article.

But the toughest cookie to chew is not any of these examples of human, animal or plant manipulations I have provided examples of. As mentioned before, nothing good comes out of corporations, governments, or for that matter scientists controlled by and / or paid for these two entities. The subject then, moves to bio-weapons. For the past century, at least, governments in association with the biotechnology industry launched a movement to produce biological weapons that were race specific. These bio-weapons would be used in war to wipe out enemy populations. What are the chances that those bio-weapons are used on all of us? Just about the same chances genetically engineered organisms have of making it to our food and water supplies. In other words, it is highly likely. As the link above exemplifies, former US Defense Secretary William Cohen described what he thought was the threat posed by certain countries that sought to develop “certain types of pathogens” that were ethnic-specific.

The infamous document titled: Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources describes how the establishment may seek to develop “advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes… …transforming biological warfare into a political useful tool.” No matter what human or animal disease you think about, rest assured that the establishment has thought of them all as possible biological weapons. Hemorrhagic fever, Ebola are two of those experimented upon weapons, which by the way were first tested on animals.

Aside from biological weapons, the more mundane genetic engineering that is supposed to benefit humanity is suddenly turning against its creators. Those tiny modifications performed to human, animal and plant genes, are not finding their ways out of human control and getting to other species. As reported on GM.org, scientists at Bristol University announced the discovery of a route, which genetically engineered organisms ‘jump’ through to invade the environment. This invasion, the scientists say could come in the form of infection or multiplication, no matter what barriers are set between species.

So if it is not from natural mutation or infection derived from some insane scientists “Playing God”, humans are threatened by establishment-created biological weapons that can be directed to specific races or ethnicities. Choose your poison. Either way, we have been and continue to be genetically engineered.

GMO foods and other chemicals are the origin of most allergies. Meanwhile, governments fight alongside with pharmaceutical and chemical corporations to ban any type of labeling of GMO ingredients in food. Most people do not even know that the meat they are eating comes from a cloned or cross species bull or that the milk they are drinking comes from a cloned cow. How could they? There are no labels!

The rates of once rare diseases such as cancer, diabetes, autism as well as allergies and other health problems are now going through the roof, and this has no other origin, as I have shown here, than the genetic Russian roulette game played by mad scientists who are supported by an out-of-control ruling class. The same people who experimented on children by giving them polio and syphilis, the same establishment that weaponized air borne Ebola and finances abortions in China; who tell us that family planning is the greatest tool for women’s independence are the same people that in the pursue of ‘human immortality’ are endangering our own existence.

This is what we know about the threat posed to humans by Genetic Engineering. This is what I know, anyways. Can you imagine what we do not know?

The Real Agenda encourages the sharing of its original content ONLY through the tools provided at the bottom of every article. Please DON’T copy articles from The Real Agenda and redistribute by email or post to the web.

Consulted Materials:

Life Magazine.Control of Life. 1965.

Wired Magazine.Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us. April 2000.

Organic Consumers Association. New Federal Guidelines Will Allow Creation of Human-Animals Chimeras. April 27, 2005.

Natural Living 360. GM Food Dangers Include: Low Fertility, Organ Damage and Hormone Disruption. May 30, 2011.

GMO.org. Scientists Discover New Route For GM Genes To Jump Species. March 4, 2011.

BBC. GM goat spins web based future. August 21, 2000.

The Telegraph. ‘Spider-goats’ start work on wonder web. Jan 18, 2002.

Purdue University News. Transgenic fish could threaten wild populations. April 2000.

BBC. ‘Trojan gene’ could wipe out fish. December 1, 1999.

Infowars. Chimeras, Cloning and Freak Human-Animal Hybrids. November 23, 2004.

Laboratory Investigation. Bone marrow cell-mediated production of transgenic chickens.April 25, 2011.

The American Dream. Part Human/Part Animal Hybrid Monsters Are Being Created By Scientists All Over The Planet.

Natural News. Phthalate warning: Medications contain chemicals that “feminize” unborn baby boys. November 17, 2009.

ABI. Human-rabbit clone announced and no noses twitch. August 26, 2003.

Lisa K. Chambers, Malcolm A. Lawson and Lyn A. Hinds. The Case for Fertility Control Using Immunocontraception.

Laura M. Plunkett, Ph.D., DABT Integrative Biostrategies, LLC. Endosulfan and Endocrine Disruption: Human Risk Characterization. June 23, 2008.

Dr.Mercola. 19 Studies Link GMO Foods to Organ Disruption. April 27, 2011

Dr. Leonard Coldwell. GMO Pesticides linked to birth defects, disruption of male hormones, cancer. April 28, 2011.

NPR. Cloned Beef: It’s What’s for Dinner?  January 16, 2008.

Consumer Affair. Genetically Engineered Foods May Cause Rising Food Allergies. June 8, 2007

Big Government: It’s Coming to Take It All

By LUIS R. MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | APRIL 26, 2012

If by now you are not familiar with the stated agenda from international government — working through national and local agencies — to effectively take humanity back to the stone age, I suggest you pinch yourself. The number of initiatives established to sequester our way of life and to reduce it to having to cook, shower and live as people used to do back in the Dark Ages continues to pile up. The proponents of these de-industrialization policies are no longer limited to crazy environmentalists who request that we all commit suicide in order to save the planet, but is it is preached on us by accomplice politicians and heads of NGOs who are worried about the consequences of development and a higher living standard for the third world.

The latest example of the lunacy with which politicians and bureaucrats want to impose their radical agenda on everyone else comes from an official at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Al Armendariz, an EPA regional administrator was quoted by US Senator James Inhofe as saying how much he and his agency intended to “crucify” oil and gas companies. Don’t take me wrong, big oil and gas companies are undoubtedly some of the largest polluters on the planet joined by a selected group of corporations from the agroindustrial and medical-pharmaceutical establishments. In fact, governments around the world do very little to safeguard the public from production practices that endanger everyone’s lives.

Take for example the case of the genetically modified organisms that are put in almost everything we eat or use today. Governments refuse to properly label GMOs excusing themselves and the corporations that produce them by saying that there is not difference between naturally conceived products and those made in a lab. This couldn’t be further from the truth, of course. One would not have enough time to cite the number of studies that have unequivocally found a direct relationship between GMO consumption and sterility, cancer, and other diseases. Only studies conducted or sponsored by large industrial conglomerates continue to show that GMOs are safe.

Another case is the oil and gas industry which has played its game off the hook for decades. This resulted in the deliberate mass pollution of the environment around the globe without any kind of accountability. Big Business is the Biggest Polluter of the Environment, however, Big Government continues to blame small farmers and self-sufficient folks for the direst damages caused to mother nature. Sadly, the ‘greenies’ that want us all to live in caves are nowhere to be found when it comes to defending ourselves and the environment from the irresponsible industrial production practices used by the largest polluters. The reason for this is, as you many already know, that ‘greenies’ are by and large bought and paid for by Big Business. Every re-known environmental organization — from government and otherwise — is directly or indirectly funded by corporations or by the government itself. These organizations are charged with the responsibility to make us think that we humans are all bad; that we have brought onto ourselves the wrath of mother nature because we have been selfish and greedy. But ask yourself now, in case you haven’t done it before, who are the largest polluters?

Government cannot let the people off its leash, so efforts are on the way to restrict energy and food independence. The war that Big Government is waging against our way of life is not meant to control Big Business so it doesn’t abuse consumers. Rather, it is to ensure that Big Business becomes the sole regulator and provider of everything any human being requires to stay alive. That is why it is common to hear bureaucrats speaking about savagely attacking oil and gas companies, locally managed water companies, independent farmers, ‘prepers’, those who choose to have a garden in their backyard, or even people who sell vegetables or raw milk to neighbors or relatives. For this attack to be successful, government enlists cowardly snitches who enjoy the power trips provided by a badge and a gun. The EPA, for example, is not interested in keeping the environment safe and clean; otherwise they would have already remediated the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico — instead of spraying Corexit –, they would not allow BPA to be used in plastics, they would have prohibited the sale of products that were not properly labeled for their ingredients, and so on.

“I was in a meeting once and I gave an analogy to my staff about my philosophy of enforcement, and I think it was probably a little crude and maybe not appropriate for the meeting, but I’ll go ahead and tell you what I said: It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean.  They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them. Then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.” These statements in bold summarize what Big Government, in cahoots with Big Business, intends to do with us.  They want us to be slaves to them and their policies. I do not need to repeat Monsanto’s idea of the future of food supply, but I am going to. “No food shall be grown that we don’t own”. How much have governments done to assure the people that this will not happen?

When Barack Obama opposes the exploration and extraction of oil and natural gas or the construction of a new pipeline, this doesn’t reflect his interest in keeping the environment clean. Instead, it means he will assure Warren Buffet’ ability to maintain control of the transportation of such resources, a scenario that would end should Obama support the construction of such pipeline system.

When Big Government invests trillions of dollars in new energy sources by providing taxpayer money to dubious enterprises that go bankrupt soon after without producing a single piece of technology that achieves such a goal, it does not mean that government intends to make a country independent from fossil fuels, but that it needs to pay back the thousands of contributions received during the political campaign and to close backdoor deals negotiated during private meetings with campaign contributors and monopoly men.

Big Agra is another example of the ironic world we live in. Because people are now realizing that they need to be self-sufficient, that it is necessary to detach themselves from government and corporate welfare, those two entities are doing everything possible to restrict people who seek economic, health, nutritional and intellectual independence. While only a handful of corporations control the food supply, for example, more people are working hard to put together their own food garden and raise chickens or cows. But in a world where governments are more out of control than ever before, being self-sufficient is a crime. That is why law enforcement, at the behest of Big Government, burn down fields, charge people with crimes for selling raw milk, confiscate food, kick  folks out of their properties and ultimately threaten them with long jail terms all for the sake of a saving the environment. In summary, Big Government does everything possible to make us fail; it is coming to take everything we own, everything we’ve earned.

They come to schools and indoctrinate kids to make them believe that it is better to be dead in order to save the environment, they take private lands and ‘protect them’ under the guidance of the United Nations. These lands are, in most cases, later handed to contractors who develop them into large elite-ran facilities for their own enjoyment, instead of conserving them for future generations, which is what they tell us they’ll do. They create policies to manage the food and supplement choices that people have, banning natural treatments while imposing Big Government mandated healthcare that pushes deadly medications on everyone. This in turn will guarantee that more people will become patients of the pharmaceutical industry by having to use their toxic products for the rest of their lives. Some of them don’t even get to use them for that long, as the chemicals in those products kill them before they reach their golden years.

Big Government and Big Business are assuring themselves that we will all need to come to them for anything and everything. Their plans include creating a failed society, where people will follow their corrupt leaders as supposed to holding them accountable. They want to reduce or completely eliminate prosperity and kill people’s dreams of growth, comfort and development. Their policies intend to keep the cost of living so high, through energy monopolies and speculation, that people will beg for action to get cheaper energy or to attack countries to rob them of their resources. At the same time, they will make us feel inadequate for having hot water and electricity in our homes and a car to drive to work. They artificially make energy prices high, so that unreal new proposals for cheaper energy find fertile ground to fall on. They indoctrinate the population to make them believe that progress is responsible for global warming, so that people restrict their needs of traveling, feeding, clothing and leisure. They tell the kids that humanity causes the weather to cool off and to warm up, so we all need to stop driving, flying, feeding and having fun. Then, they call any natural disaster climate change and blame it on all humans.

Meanwhile, the Banking elite blames the nonexistent free-market for the economic crisis and call for a world government to help standardize fiscal, financial and monetary policies, much like they did after World War II, when the United Nations was formed to avoid criminal wars. This elite blames the same prosperity they’ve enjoyed for decades for the warming, the cooling, the crisis and the conflict, so people believe that it is prosperity what needs to go. Many of those people, who’ve never seen prosperity are now strongly condemning it and calling for a global socialist system that helps spread ruin and misery worldwide. They of course, see it as spreading the wealth and as an opportunity to get what they deserve; even though they haven’t earned it. The strong opposition to development the elite finds in the massive ignorant public emboldened them to create regulations that favor their monopolistic control-mad agendas while eliminating their competition; the innovative small and mid-sized businesses. They create and impose globalization as a way to bring about progress, but globalization only brings poverty, environmental destruction and underdevelopment. Globalization and the so-called free trade are indeed the new faces of Feudalism applied on a global scale.

Big Government’s intent is to change our goals and dreams to own a home, raise a family and educate our children. The bureaucrats want us to believe those things are privileges, just as they did with driving and are now doing with free speech and self-defense (owning a firearm). Big Government, under the command of Big Business works hard to make it impossible to live in peace without being bullied for wanting to raise three kids, instead of one, to produce what we eat or to mine the resources we need to build and improve the lives of those who haven’t seen what human ingenuity is capable of. And when they allow people to access high quality goods and services, they do it with a double intention to turn them dependent on those products. Through their hubris filled behaviour, regulators empower themselves to support laws that only the corporations that wrote them can understand and that they can be interpreted vaguely enough to leave open doors for more corruption. They invent unreal conditions and products to rip consumers off, to steal their life savings as they invest their hard earned social security monies into artificial financial products that are as ephimerous are the air. They reward companies that send jobs abroad, or that pay slaves to create the toys and distractions we all waste our time on while they become ever more powerful. They subsidized Big Corp, to eliminate competition and to turn healthy economies into labor camps. They created a financial crisis, and are now charging taxpayers for the costs of getting bailed out.

They’ve now transformed people’s legitimate concern to keep the world we live in clean and healthy, into an agenda of environmental suicide, by allowing toxic products to pollute the air, water, and soils, while banning all forms of creative entrepreneurship that may bring cleaner, simpler, environmentally friendly forms of production. While we the people need to go through austerity in order to ‘save the global economy’, the elite continues to spend our money and our resources in their lavish palaces and large properties. We the dependent and ignorant need to curb our footprint, while theirs grows uncontrollably. The elite-controlled Big Government preys on the decent and honest people, brainwashes their children and bribes their pastors to make them believe that all its corruption and oppression is for the best; that they are the only ones who can deliver us from doom, even if that means that we humans need to learn to hate ourselves.

Genetic Genocide: How Misused Science Endangers… … All Life

Genetic engineering is not new. Apparently, it has been talked about -if not applied- since the 1960′s. The issue with genetic modification of plants, animals, animals and plants, cloning and splicing genes is not its existence. It is the results of these unregulated practices what should alarm us.

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
July 29, 2011

If you are partially or totally ignorant about genetically modified products, I will not blame you. In 15 years of research I have not been able to get a significant grasp on what genetically engineering humans, fish, soy, corn, milk and other products could mean for humankind.

When I set out to write this article my first challenge was how to present the information in a concise, yet shocking enough to wake up people who still believe that cloning humans for organ harvesting, splicing animal and human genes and making food out of human DNA or tissue is just science fiction.

I thought then, that the most appealing way to start off was to simply provide the headlines of some of the articles and documents I found during my research process, so that the readers had an immediate notion of what genetic engineering really means and how it affects them directly now and how it will affect them in the future. Posting the headlines will also facilitate the research for you and will give you the opportunity to do your own investigative work.

So let’s see what the headlines tell us.

Why the future doesn’t need us.

New Federal Guidelines Will Allow Creation of Human-Animals Chimeras

GM Food Dangers Include: Low Fertility, Organ Damage and Hormone Disruption

GM goat spins web based future

‘Spider-goats’ start work on wonder web

Transgenic fish could threaten wild populations

‘Trojan gene’ could wipe out fish

Chimeras, Cloning and Freak Human-Animal Hybrids

Bone marrow cell-mediated production of transgenic chickens Open

Part Human/Part Animal Hybrid Monsters Are Being Created By Scientists All Over The Planet

Human-rabbit clone announced and no noses twitch

The Case for Fertility Control Using Immuno-contraception

Endosulfan and Endocrine Disruption:

Human Risk Characterization

19 Studies Link GMO Foods to Organ Disruption

GMO Pesticides linked to birth defects, disruption of male hormones, cancer

On top of the fact genetic engineering is literally compared with “Playing God” with the building blocks of life, you should know that this widely exercised practice is almost completely unregulated. Furthermore, there are initiatives to promote its deregulation and to create legislation to exempt genetic engineering from all oversight. My question regarding genetic engineering deregulation was then: What would happen if scientists who are provided with unlimited money and resources have no legal liability to realize their experiments cloning humans and literally engineering new species?

Last time scientists were given unlimited funding and resources they manage to create things like the nuclear bomb, the hydrogen bomb, and nowadays, they are trying to imitate the origin of the universe with the already infamous Supercollider. We all know what happened when corporations and governments with no oversight got their hands on the first two pieces of technology.

When you think about genetically modified organisms it is always tempting to believe that such organisms are created and experimented with only in industrialized countries, where high tech labs are available. Maybe you think they are only held at research labs that belong to pharmaceutical corporations or public and private universities. What would you think if I told you that human-animal cloning, for example, is carried out in Costa Rica, and that this practice has been taking place for at least a decade there? It was reported in the Washington Post, which described discussions about human cloning among scientists:

“During one recent meeting, scientists disagreed on such basic issues as whether it would be unethical for a human embryo to begin its development in an animal’s womb, and whether a mouse would be better or worse off with a brain made of human neurons..”

So, hundreds of companies and governments are free to carry out genetic experiments in thousands of laboratories, mixing genes from several species, and are completely free to put it in food and water supplies across the planet with no oversight. That is the conclusion of the situation that we now face.

Evidence of Genetic Engineering, Cloning and Splicing

If you cannot or do not want to get into the heavy research, I am about to give you a detailed report on the state of genetic engineering, human-animal cloning and gene splicing.

Let’s start by possibly the most disturbing but not the newest fact. There are scientists out there splicing human and cow genes for the purpose of promoting the growth of human clones in cow wombs. Cloned humans and or animals would be “living drug factories by producing valuable pharmaceutical substances in their milk, or as organ factories because theirs will not be rejected by the human immune system.”

The reason for the cloning of humans and animals and the splicing of their genes is what I often cite as the sneaky treat of convenience. Sure, there is a need to find cures for all disease and to have organs available when people’s own rotten because they smoke for 40 years or drank their pension funds until the end. Would not it be convenient to have an organ bank, or a cure for lung and stomach cancer? Who would oppose to growing human fetuses in animal wombs, or extracting the organs of living animals or fellow humans to substitute our own? Convenient, right? Wrong.

In a farm near Reno Nevada, a farmer keeps sheep that hold human livers, hearts, brains among others. The “scientist” who is in charge of the experiment said he could not wait to see the effects the human cells had on the brain of the animal. He had himself injected those genes. According to the report from the Associated press, this kind of experiments fall within the new ethics guidelines that govern the type of “scientific research conducted at the farm.

In an article dated June 19 2011, The London Telegraph announces that pigs are now able to host organs from other species as “scientists have found they can create chimeric animals that have organs belonging to another species by injecting stem cells into the embryo of another species.” Another article from the Daily Mail advertises how pigs will serve as human organ farms. “Human organs could be grown inside pigs for use in transplant operations following pioneering research.Then they launched the convenience hook again by saying that “The method would help reduce the risk of the transplanted organ being rejected.” This type of experiments will also allow animals to provide blood for transfusions whenever a patient needs it. So, the clone will be harvested for its organs and people will have on-demand organ transplantation.

The New Atlantis publication even dared to ask why wouldn’t be a good idea to use artificial wombs. The undated article claims that using human and / or animal cells or genes is a fairly new and imperfect practice. Probably the author ignores that this kind genetic manipulation has been discussed -if not applied- since the mid 1960’s. So there is nothing new here.

The Plan Behind Genetically Engineering Humans and Food

One aspect often ignored in the discussion of human cloning and genetic engineering, is the goals; the real goals these practices seek. Because believe, no matter how convenient it sounds, it is not for aiding humans live a longer, healthier life. Corporations and tax payer funded universities are researching how to enhance human and other forms of life because those who get to implement these technologies intend to have a humanless future. Does it sound insane enough? The article on The New Atlantis attempts to be positive about these experiments and related them to a brighter, healthier future for humankind. “Today, we have inched slightly—but only slightly—closer to perfecting the technology that would realize Haldane’s vision, albeit for reasons other than the eugenic improvement of the race.” The problem is, that is exactly where human genetic experiments originated and that is why they are still being carried out. If the future does not need humans to invent, design, construct, repair or reproduce, why would the world need humans? Mimicking human reproductive powers, as the author from The New Atlantis says, is named “ectogenesis” and has been tried for centuries.

Rather than expending all scientific talent and resources developing artificial wombs,” Reason science correspondent Ronald Bailey wrote recently, “I suspect that it will be much easier and cheaper to establish pregnancies with human embryos in other mammals, like cows and horses, than it will be to achieve the same thing using artificial uteruses.”

Although modern technology allows all kinds of experiments in medicine, food, water and even air, the overall goal is not and will not be to help humanity extend its presence in this planet. Most articles I found through my research present all kind of scenarios where genetic engineering would be applied for our benefit. From spider goats to human milk in cows’ utters,  genetically modified salmon, soy or corn, the applications seem to be endless. One of the most common responses when pro GMO people are questioned about the dangers of playing with life is that it will help feed the hungry or aid the poor.

But in practice, any and all life extension technology -as we see it now with electronics- only cause further degeneration of the human race. Through convenience, empty promises and what ifs, those who are empowered by their riches and political power want to use our own DNA to end human life as we know it.

In an article titled Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us, Wired magazine explores the possibility that humans will become a threatened species as more and more technologies turn us into useless eaters, as some globalists have called humankind. Humans who are ‘chosen’ to actually take advantage of the latest technology will merge with robots or become robots in what will become the next sentient creatures. As Ray Kurzweil, the inventor of the first reading machine for the blind writes in his book The Age of Spiritual Machines, those fortunate humans will gain near immortality by becoming one with robotic technology. But what will happen to the rest of us, or our children and grandchildren who will come after us?

What does the Genetic Engineering Threat Entail?

Simply put, the out-of-control insanity of modern science and biotechnology implies Genetic Genocide. Depending on where you obtain information, scientists and researchers coincide that the common denominator of genetically engineered forms of life is the end of current forms of life. According to researcher Jeffrey Smith, when lab animals were fed genetically engineered organisms, it resulted in complete sterilization. Such sterilization came in some cases in the second and third generations, but scientists also saw test subjects losing its capacity to reproduce during the subject’s life term.

William Muir and Richard Howard of Purdue University, Indiana, warned about a ‘trojan’ gene in fish which could wipe out natural forms of fish off the planet if GM fish are released into the wild or escape from farms. “This resembles the Trojan horse,” said Muir. “It gets into the population looking like something good and it ends up destroying the population.” Both Muir and Howard studied the use of human growth hormone in fish, which in now being used in laboratory experiments to make salmon grow bigger, faster while eating less feed. The researchers found that GM fish turned sexually mature faster than the rest and produced more eggs as well. According to a report from the BBC, professor Muir asserts that GMO fish “would enjoy the same reproductive advantages of a natural one, so the hGH gene would quickly spread through a fish population.”

Human Growth Hormone (hGH) is also put in the feed given to cattle and other farm animals which humans consume later. Coincidentally, both male and female humans have experienced physical development with girls getting to puberty at earlier and earlier ages, while boys have suffered from hormonal changes that many researchers associate with the feminization of a large portion of human males.

Other studies on genetically modified organisms show that its consumption results in problems such as low fertility, organ damage and hormone disruption. This last one is specifically important, because it is through hormonal disruption that some scientists have discovered how and why some men are beginning to lose interest in mating and some women choose same sex mates instead of men. In the study titled: “A Comparison of the Effects of Three GM Corn Varieties on Mammalian Health the International Journal on Biological Sciences found that Monsanto’s Bt corn contributes to liver failure. All types of Monsanto-created GMO corn (Mon 863, Mon810, and NK 603) are approved by the FDA and labeled as safe for human consumption in the United States and Europe.

Other studies conducted using pesticides, revealed that these chemical products cause endocrine disruptions. Ingredients such as glyphosate, used in Roundup, increases the number of birth defects in animals. Birth defects include something called cyclopia, or the appearance of one single eye in the middle of the forehead. Additionally, glyphosate causes stillbirths and miscarriages.

A study conducted in Argentina, confirmed what older studies have found regarding the consequences of ingesting products contaminated with pesticides and herbicides. Andres Carrasco, head of the Molecular Embryology Laboratory at the University of Buenos Aires, presented a report that explains how Monsanto’s Roundup is responsible for causing infertility, sperm destruction, and cancer. Carrasco tested the effects of glyphosate on animal embryos and found that the chemical alters and impairs proper embryonic development. “I didn’t discover anything new,” said Carrasco, “I just confirmed what other scientists discovered… There is scientific proof and, above all, there are hundreds of affected towns [that] are a living evidence of this public health emergency.”

Recently, the UK Daily Mail reported on how scientist in England are experimenting with half human, half animal clones and how these experiments have been kept in secret. “The revelation comes just a day after a committee of scientists warned of a nightmare ‘Planet of the Apes’ scenario in which work on human-animal creations goes too far,” reads the article.

But the toughest cookie to chew is not any of these examples of human, animal or plant manipulations I have provided examples of. As mentioned before, nothing good comes out of corporations, governments, or for that matter scientists controlled by and / or paid for these two entities. The subject then, moves to bio-weapons. For the past century, at least, governments in association with the biotechnology industry launched a movement to produce biological weapons that were race specific. These bio-weapons would be used in war to wipe out enemy populations. What are the chances that those bio-weapons are used on all of us? Just about the same chances genetically engineered organisms have of making it to our food and water supplies. In other words, it is highly likely. As the link above exemplifies, former US Defense Secretary William Cohen described what he thought was the threat posed by certain countries that sought to develop “certain types of pathogens” that were ethnic-specific.

The infamous document titled: Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources describes how the establishment may seek to develop “advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific genotypes… …transforming biological warfare into a political useful tool.” No matter what human or animal disease you think about, rest assured that the establishment has thought of them all as possible biological weapons. Hemorrhagic fever, Ebola are two of those experimented upon weapons, which by the way were first tested on animals.

Aside from biological weapons, the more mundane genetic engineering that is supposed to benefit humanity is suddenly turning against its creators. Those tiny modifications performed to human, animal and plant genes, are not finding their ways out of human control and getting to other species. As reported on GM.org, scientists at Bristol University announced the discovery of a route, which genetically engineered organisms ‘jump’ through to invade the environment. This invasion, the scientists say could come in the form of infection or multiplication, no matter what barriers are set between species.

So if it is not from natural mutation or infection derived from some insane scientists “Playing God”, humans are threatened by establishment-created biological weapons that can be directed to specific races or ethnicities. Choose your poison. Either way, we have been and continue to be genetically engineered.

GMO foods and other chemicals are the origin of most allergies. Meanwhile, governments fight alongside with pharmaceutical and chemical corporations to ban any type of labeling of GMO ingredients in food. Most people do not even know that the meat they are eating comes from a cloned or cross species bull or that the milk they are drinking comes from a cloned cow. How could they? There are no labels!

The rates of once rare diseases such as cancer, diabetes, autism as well as allergies and other health problems are now going through the roof, and this has no other origin, as I have shown here, than the genetic Russian roulette game played by mad scientists who are supported by an out-of-control ruling class. The same people who experimented on children by giving them polio and syphilis, the same establishment that weaponized air borne Ebola and finances abortions in China; who tell us that family planning is the greatest tool for women’s independence are the same people that in the pursue of ‘human immortality’ are endangering our own existence.

This is what we know about the threat posed to humans by Genetic Engineering. This is what I know, anyways. Can you imagine what we do not know?


Consulted Materials:

Life Magazine. Control of Life. 1965.

Wired Magazine. Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us. April 2000.

Organic Consumers Association. New Federal Guidelines Will Allow Creation of Human-Animals Chimeras. April 27, 2005.

Natural Living 360. GM Food Dangers Include: Low Fertility, Organ Damage and Hormone Disruption. May 30, 2011.

GMO.org. Scientists Discover New Route For GM Genes To Jump Species. March 4, 2011.

BBC. GM goat spins web based future. August 21, 2000.

The Telegraph. ‘Spider-goats’ start work on wonder web. Jan 18, 2002.

Purdue University News. Transgenic fish could threaten wild populations. April 2000.

BBC. ‘Trojan gene’ could wipe out fish. December 1, 1999.

Infowars. Chimeras, Cloning and Freak Human-Animal Hybrids. November 23, 2004.

Laboratory Investigation. Bone marrow cell-mediated production of transgenic chickens.April 25, 2011.

The American Dream. Part Human/Part Animal Hybrid Monsters Are Being Created By Scientists All Over The Planet.

Natural News. Phthalate warning: Medications contain chemicals that “feminize” unborn baby boys. November 17, 2009.

ABI. Human-rabbit clone announced and no noses twitch. August 26, 2003.

Lisa K. Chambers, Malcolm A. Lawson and Lyn A. Hinds. The Case for Fertility Control Using Immunocontraception.

Laura M. Plunkett, Ph.D., DABT Integrative Biostrategies, LLC. Endosulfan and Endocrine Disruption: Human Risk Characterization. June 23, 2008.

Dr.Mercola. 19 Studies Link GMO Foods to Organ Disruption. April 27, 2011

Dr. Leonard Coldwell. GMO Pesticides linked to birth defects, disruption of male hormones, cancer. April 28, 2011.

NPR. Cloned Beef: It’s What’s for Dinner?  January 16, 2008.

Consumer Affair. Genetically Engineered Foods May Cause Rising Food Allergies. June 8, 2007

Agribusiness: Food Safety’s Greatest Enemy

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
May 11, 2011

Misinformed people enjoy calling population growth the menace of the 21st century, especially when it is related to food availability. Although access to food is one of the most important issues that humanity faces today, the “food problem” has everything to do with its safety and nothing to do with the lack of it due to planetary overpopulation. The world has changed in many ways in the last fifty years and many of those changes have been for good, but many important ones for very bad. In the past, most countries produced their own food, and people were food independent. Today, a handful of corporations control the whole process of seed and food production and distribution. When it comes to food supply, perhaps there is a worse consequence than monopolistic practices and policies. Food, which is supposed to provide us with nutrition is actually making us sick and in many cases killing us.

In the United Kingdom, a bacteria called Campylobacter found in chickens causes diarrhea, fever, abdominal pain and cramping. Often times, it worsens and produces chronic, life-threaten­ing, conditions. It is estimated that 85% of the chickens in the UK are infected. Meanwhile, in the United States, the Norovirus, which is transmitted through manipulation of food with dirty hands, as well as Salmonella, that infects people who ingest food with feces, cause vomiting and diarrhea, fever and cramps. These are only two examples of poor food management in what we call the “developed world”. But it gets worse in third world countries, where rules for food safety are less clear or simply ignored by the food industry.

In China, for example, a 2008 case of food contamination with melamine caused the death of six babies and made 300,000 others ill. The contamination occurred when melamine, and industrial chemical got into the milk supply. Back in the “developed world”, Germany had its own case of massive food poisoning with dioxin in some 4,000 farms around the country. A German company sold 200,000 tones of animal feed contaminated with dioxins and this feed was given to thousands of animals. Dioxins are poisons that cause cancer.

Although there is not a formal process to record food poisoning cases and other health threats carried around by tainted food, the data made available shows that food contamination is a common affair in most nations. Even countries that manage to have their own system to keep food clean from chemicals and natural born bacteria and viruses cannot avoid massive cases of poisoning among its citizens. In Singapore, 3 million people die every year as a result of food poisoning.

Unsafe to Eat

A recent assessment issued by GRAIN, an international non-profit organisation that reports on food safety issues around the world and whether a crop is suitable to eat or not, described a series of reasons to consider when determining food safety. “Bad practices (poor hygiene, animal abuse, reliance on antibiotics and pesticides), unproven or risky technologies (ge­netic modification, nanotechnology, irradiation, cloning), deliberate contamination (such as tampering), or just poor supervision” are just a few of the reasons why food arrives contaminated to your table. That is why a relevant matter with food safety has to do with the size of the corporations that produce the things we all eat. It is a fact that the industrialized food scheme that governs food production and distribution is the main cause of today’s food pollution. It all comes to size. If a small producer of meat or vegetables provides contaminated food, the impact is small, but if a large company that produces and distributes food all around the world manages its processes badly, the result is more often than not, thousands of people ill and many others dying as a consequence of tainted food.

Big scale production and distribution is one of the main causes of massive food poisoning. Not only are standards more difficult to enforce when a company produces large amounts of packed meat or grains, but also it is likely those companies are not as concerned with enforcing practices that guarantee good hygiene and work security, for example. The quantity of product that enters and exits a meat packing plant or a grain processing facility makes it almost impossible to keep an eye on every single item that circulates in and out. The policies that govern large producing units are to receive, pack and send out as much of the product as possible.

Where are the regulators?

In one sentence, government regulators are usually in bed with Big Corp. It is not realistic to believe that bureaucrats who oversee food safety are simply unaware of problems with the production and distribution of food, although that is usually the excuse given by them and the government to justify their inaction. There is plenty of proof that both government agencies and corporations are continuously colluding to avoid enforcing the laws that protect consumers. Almost every new law passed regarding food safety opens a new door for the food industry to untie a regulation and produce food their own way. Take for example the case of raw milk. Milk is processed through pasteurization and homogenization literally everywhere. Countries that have not banned the sale and consumption of raw milk are currently working on legislation to do it. Milk processing is needed, governments and corporations say, to avoid the ingestion of bacteria that may exist in the milk when it is raw. However, it is also true that milk pasteurization and homogenization simply kills all nutrients that natural raw milk has. Did anyone say calcium deficiency pandemic? Osteoporosis? There is a pill to solve those problems of course.

Raw milk is one of the most important sources of nutrition for poor folks around the world. It is one of a few affordable sources of nutrition and it can be easily boiled at home to guarantee its safety. So why are governments enforcing laws or regulations that ban raw milk? They are effectively creating and imposing regulations sent to them by the World Trade Organization, an institution that works for the international food cartel that controls most of the production and distribution of food. Other reasons commonly given to justify banning the sale of raw milk is the idea that it will help modernize the dairy industry, which in turn will bring benefits because the companies will be able to compete with others that import and export milk and other products. None of this is true. The real reason is that countries affiliated to the WTO are mandated to adhere to its regulations if they want to have a chance to participate in so called Free Trade Agreements. Free Trade Agreements are tools used by the corporations to amass control over most if not all productive activities. Truly, food safety policies have little to do with public health and everything to do with complete control of market, monopolies, profits and dominance.

Free Trade Agreements are the materialization of monopolistic controls executed by multilateral organizations on behalf of Big Corp. The negotiation rounds that are held often within a country or at the WTO’s headquarters regarding food production, are dealt with as matters of commerce and not as issues related to science or food accessibility. Around the world, corporations dictate more and more what is allowed as a practice for food production and manipulation and what isn’t. GRAIN cites the cases of companies that feed cows with animal parts as a way to provide protein to them. This practice in many cases leads to Mad Cow Disease, but it is still permitted in countries like the Unites States and Japan. Another case is that of ractopamine, a substance given to pigs to promote their growth. This element is added to their feed. In a rare siding with food safety, even countries like China and whole regions like the European Union, that together produce around 70 percent of the world’s supply of pork, banned its use in meat. Other countries like the U.S. continue to use ractopamine in the feed given to pigs, turkeys, chickens and cows. The U.S. government not only allows its use but often times defends the producer of ractopamine, Eli Lilly and its meat exports from being banned in countries with whom it has trade agreements. Not only are American consumers being contaminated with this chemical, but also every person in every country that accepts American pork, beef, turkey and chickens.

Free Trade Agreements as Tools to Impose Corporate Regulations

In the last 3 decades, Free Trade Agreements have become the default tool used by Big Corp and enabled by the World Trade Organization and the World Health Organization to enforce their rules and carry out their game. It all began back in the 80’s with negotiations known as GATT. Later came the free trade agreements between Europe and Latin American countries and others between North America and Latin American countries such as ALCA, CAFTA and NAFTA. Contained in those agreements are all kinds of tricks written by the corporations to definitely manipulate and control markets. This is so, because there are few restrictions as related to what can be commercialized. The goal that all the previous negotiations had in common was that they promoted the exchange of the cheapest goods at the lowest prices. This would be positive if it wasn’t because cheap goods mean contaminated food, endless abuses to labor laws and laborers and the conquest of global markets by a few corporations that now decide what is produced, sold, bought, tariffed, quotaed, and who want to “protect” everything, including what is not theirs, against “theft” by using absurd intellectual property laws that are attached to all trade agreements.

Free Trade Agreements have nothing to do with free trade, benefiting consumers or enabling the growth of small or mid-size farmers. What the corporations that control governments around the world want is a free pass to invade all markets and produce everything we eat and use, so everyone else but them is dependent on products made across the world for their survival. As GRAIN cites it, free trade agreements are mechanisms to create backdoors used to limit market access. These agreements do nothing to promote or guarantee food safety or public health, but to assure the corporations unlimited growth and gigantic profit margins. Companies achieve market monopolies by creating policies that although inexplicably ridiculous, are accepted as the standard around the world. These policies are adapted to limit fair competition in every country in a way that only those countries where the big corporations run or have an interest in, are allowed to actually exchange anything.

The European Union banned Indian fish imports because the producers did not comply with European rules such as that fish processing facilities had to be sanitized with potable water, even though India lacks the infrastructure to provide clean water to most of its population. In Tanzania, fishermen had the same experience. They used to get 80 percent of their income from Europe, but after the E.U. banned their product, the fishermen had no market for it. Uganda also suffered a similar outcome. The Ugandan case cost the country $40 million in loses. So how did Europe manage to eat fish? Corporations such as Pescanova moved into Africa and began to serve the european market. Once it installed itself in the continent, the company acquired the whole production and distribution business.

The Case for Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

What could be more unsafe to eat than genetically modified organisms that have been proven, time after time, to be harmful to humans and animals. Regardless of conclusive evidence that GMO’s are dangerous to our health, government agencies around the world continue to authorize the use of genetically modified ingredients in the food supply. Not only that, they also refuse to label the products that contain GMO’s alleging it is unfair to the companies that manufacture them and that it may actually be confusing for consumers. In the case of GMO salmon, for example, the pro GMO industry says salmon should not be labeled because their product is identical to the wild salmon. The same is true for other products such as corn, soy, milk and vegetables. The thought that a well informed consumer is the best tool for strong businesses just doesn’t do it anymore for Big Corp. As far as they are concerned, a pool of consumers with the least information possible, is the best scenario to carry out their business practices. A diplomatic cable revealed by Wikileaks details how the Bush administration pressured the government of France to ease their concerns about genetically modified organisms. The cable read:

“we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this [acceptance of GMOs] is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits “. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory”.

This push to impose the use of genetically modified organisms is a clear example of how Big Corp exercises its control of governments so giants like Monsanto, DuPont, ConAgra, Cargill and other biotechnology corpo­rations have no interruptions in countries that may want to ban GM seeds or foods, or require labels that inform consum­ers. Along with France, the corporations that control the United States government also mine the sovereignty of third world countries that have no say over the safety practices utilized in the production, import and export of food crops in their own land. As it happens in developed countries, third world nations are also ordered to “relax” their opposition to GMO’s and to eliminate any “exageration” of the risks that come with the use and consumption of GMO’s. With the creation and implementation of Codex Alimentarius, Big Corp has been strengthened even more. The set of regulations contained in the Codex Alimentarius documents make it clear that neither the corporations nor the transnational agencies that govern food safety and global health are interested in healthy humans or safe food. In fact, it is through Codex Alimentarius that the corporations intend to control the natural foods and supplement markets, by banning natural food production and commercialization and substituting it with laboratory created pharmaceutical products labeled as “natural supplements”.

Codex Alimentarius is the United Nations and World Health Organization’s FrankenScience to push Restrictions on what you are allowed to eat. Since the 1960´s there is a concerted effort not only to limit the choices we as consumers and human beings have in order to take care of our health, but also to restrict the access to food itself as we know it. Codex Alimentarius (Codex for short) means “Food Code.” This world food code is a United Nations agency, jointly sponsored by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). It has existed for nearly 50 years and its international statute gives it a joint mission: protecting food safety and promoting world food trade. It is supposed to do so by adopting voluntary guidelines and standards (defining foods in international trade) and its decisions are enforced through the World Trade Organization (WTO) which considers its guidelines and standards as presumptive evidence in WTO trade disputes. It has become a creature of the Bigs – Big Govt, Big Agra, Big Pharma… etc.

In order to understand what Codex Alimentarius is, one needs to know it has nothing to do with consumer protection as its charter says. Such statement is just a catchy phrase to have the people and the nations approve its implementation. “Codex Alimentarius” means “food rules” in Latin. The plan was born in 1962 when the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) was founded by the U.N. to supposedly facilitate trade relations. In reality, it was created to regulate and control the way in which food and nutrition are guided and how products are sold to people. It is indeed all about the profits of multi-national corporations. The relation is very simple: the more natural products people use, the less profits the pharmaceutical corporations make. Codex Alimentarius was created to protect Big Pharma´s profits through the elimination of natural health products and treatments. What is more alarming at this point is that Codex was approved on December 31st, 2009. After this plan was signed, it was mandated on all member countries through its approval by Congresses around the world; a lot like the Copenhagen Treaty.

Superbugs within Big Corp

Superbugs are bacteria that developed an ability to fight antibiotics. Examples of superbugs first appeared in Europe in the 60’s and since then they spread freely around the world. In the United States, deaths from the MRSA superbug infections reached 17,000 in 2005. A survey conducted in 2007 found that ST398, a new version of MRSA, was present in 39% of pigs and 81% of local piggeries in the Netherlands. Further research has found that MRSA is in at least two thirds of the farms located in E.U. member countries. In studies conducted around Europe, researchers found that Spain and Germany were two of the countries with the highest incidence of MRSA in their farms; with over 40% of pigs testing positive for MRSA. That is why it does not come as a surprise that the Europeans send most of their pork meat overseas. According to the University of Guelph, a study of pigs in Ontario, Canada, showed that ST398 was present in a quarter of local pigs, and one-fifth of the pig farmers that were tested.

A Superbug’s ability to resist antibiotics, as it happens with humans, occurs due to the heavy use of this product in animals. According to the Union for Concerned Scientists, livestock in the United States consume about 80 percent of the antibiotics that are sold in that country. Meanwhile, in China the number ascends to 50 percent of the animals. A report from February 2011 on the Sydney Morning Herald reveals that in Germany, livestock are given three times more antibiotics than the amount humans consume. The existence and spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria in the so called factory farms is the main cause of food poisoning cases, which are spurred by the use of antibiotics that are fed to animals.

The Walmartization of Food

If Monsanto, ConAgra, Cargill and other bio-tech giants are known for their desire to conquer the seed and food market, Walmart may be seen as their equivalent when it comes to the supermarket fad. Food that is delivered to most places today goes directly through and depends on the connections made by big chain supermarkets. Long gone are the days when the producer himself went out to sell his apples, bananas, pineapples or carrots. Today, transnational companies like Walmart and Carrefour control the supply of food to most areas of the planet. This corporations not only transport and distribute the food we eat, but also decide what is produced and what is not, where the products go, when they are shipped and what prices they will have when you grab them from your local supermarket shelf. Large supermarket chains indeed control global food markets.

Walmart’s annual sales reach $405 billion, which is more than the gross domestic product of nations like Argentina, Norway, Greece and Denmark. The corporate success that this number represents has prompted more supermarket chains to put their eyes in regions of the world they can exploit either as a production spot, usually by monopolizing the production and distribution of food, or by securing the purchase of food that is produced cheaply and under their own guidelines. Big retailers like Tesco, Walmart, Carrefour and Lotte are currently acquiring or negotiating their operations in India, China, Brazil and Indonesia. These and other third world nations that still rely on the traditional door to door, street fair sale of food staples, co-ops and local or regional wholesalers for the nutrition of their population. What the big chain supermarkets want to do is go in and cheaply buy their way into those markets by signing contracts with producers, distributors and local supermarkets so they can control the food production and distribution. Once they manage to absorb the markets, Big Corp chains impose their own models and establish the same standards and rules they mandated everywhere else. The direct and immediate consequence of this practice is the start of a new line of dependent consumers who will no longer be able to plant, pick or sell their food. Dependence is the name of the game.

As if one hungry supermarket chain wasn’t bad enough for the consumer, these large corporations also work as a cartel. They meet and define what the standards for the industry will be so that they continue to be what they are and continue to control it all. As Barry Harper puts it in his book “Breaking the chain: the antitrust case against Wal-Mart”, the power and size of the corporations are two of the many weapons they have to influence the global food system. Imagine what they can accomplish when working together against a country, a local supermarket in a third world nation or a small farmer. These companies simply have the power and ability to tell suppliers, farmers and food processors what the rules of the game are going to be. The power that food corporations have is so significant that governments are capable of putting their profit making scheme first, and the health of the people second, when it comes to food safety. An example of this is the ban the United States imposed on Mexican cantaloupes due to contamination with Salmonella in 2002. After a round of negotiations between the governments of both countries, which of course counted with the participation of Big Corp, the ban was lifted after a new “program” attached to a new bureaucracy was created. The creation of this new set of rules did nothing to guarantee the safety of the cantaloupes, because the farmers did not provide toilet facilities or water analyses as the new program requested. In fact 94 percent of the farms did not have portable toilets and 88 percent of them used water from rivers to supply their plantations.

Doing away with the local farmer

The agro-colonization of the world by a handful of corporations seems to have the same common denominator everywhere: the disappearance of the farmer. Supermarket giants have many ways to force themselves into new markets, or to increase their share of those markets. The invasion of Big Corp supermarkets in the southern hemisphere converted developing countries in sources of food for the rest of the world and in many cases made those very same regions dependent on big chain supermarket’s capacity and willingness to supply food to them. Because large supermarket chains have the prerogative to decide how much they pay for the food they buy, the standards producers must follow, the delivery timetables, the distribution procedures and so on, it is easy for them to manipulate local, regional and national markets. But when they don’t get their way, supermarkets are capable of importing fruit and vegetables from across the planet in order to drive small or mid-size competitors off the market. Many times, large supermarket chains use false advertising in order to maintain or increase the flow of customers to their shops. For example, when Walmart invaded Central America by purchasing local food chains, the company decided to maintain their original names due to the fact Walmart was already known in those places for its bad reputation abroad.

What this kind of falsehood allows is to keep controlling the demand and supply of food using different names. This practice gives large chains enough time to settle down and absorb more customers until they decide to reveal themselves. But controlling food markets is not only about window dressing. Large supermarket chains don’t even have to establish themselves in a country in order to control the food supply. So called partnerships with producers and distributors can be established from abroad so the food business is monopolized from within. A whole city or country may experience lack of rice or beans, for example, not because they aren’t available, but because they are stored in large supermarket bodegas where they await to be shipped overseas to whomever pays the price the supermarkets want. How does this practice affect farmers? Although the price farmers receive for their grains, fruit or vegetables may be considered fair at some point, in many cases those same farmers could have obtained better yields if they had sold them to local buyers instead of selling to the large supermarkets. The artificial scarcity that food corporations cause by storing food until someone decides to pay what they want is what causes price speculation, which in turn makes it more difficult for more people to feed themselves and their families. In addition, some farmers are held hostage to promises of future purchases while they wait to receive payment for current or older sales to the big chain supermarkets.

In many countries of Asia and Latin America, farmers do not have the cash to start a new planting season because the payment they received does not meet the new costs; and if it does, there is little money left as profit. When the large supermarket chains are not the ones exploiting local farmers, the local supermarket chains take on that role. The tough competition national or regional chains get when fighting against transnational corporations for a share of the market, turns local, regional and national supermarkets into the predators. Competition is such that the national companies that were business partners in the past, suddenly adopt Big Corp’s model and transform the farmers in a group of agro-colonized workers. This is the case with ShopRite of South Africa and DMA in Brazil.

In China, where supermarkets are expanding at a furious pace, these trends are biting hard. The major supermarket chains, both foreign and domestic, are working hand-in-glove with suppliers and local governments to develop farms to supply fruit and vegetables. As part of a drive to im­prove food safety and integrate its 700 million small-scale farmers into “high value food chains” with “scientific methods of farming”, the Chinese government has been pursuing the establishment of fruit- and vegetable-growing bases in partnership with the private sector. In each of these des­ignated production zones, local authorities negotiate deals with private companies whereby the company comes in, leases an area of land from the farmers currently occupying it, or acquires their land use rights, and then sets up large-scale production, hiring the displaced farmers as la­bourers or in contract production arrangements.- Food Safety Briefing

We don’t have to eat the way Big Corp says

The movement to firmly reject the current food safety policies and the corporate business model that is imposed on consumers is a reason for hope. United States produced meat is not accepted by people in Taiwan, Australia, Japan or South Ko­rea. The melamine intoxication in China woke up thousands of others in that country and millions outside the chinese land to reject melamine contaminated milk. In all of Latin America, Europe and some parts of the United States there are growing loud voices that ques­tion the current industrial system used to produce, distribute and sell food. The cases of food poisoning with Salmonella, mad cow disease, superbugs and genetically modified organisms spurred the creation and growth of grassroots groups that are becoming the guardians of food safety and that call for better agricultural practices that replace the current agro-colonial policies created by Big Corp and enabled by corrupt governments and international organizations. In Korea, the people’s resistance towards U.S. Beef resulted in massive questioning of their supposed representative democracy. In Oceania, Australians campaign to regain control of their food system as more people find out more and more consumers share their desire to manage their lifestyle, which of course includes their food supply. As for GMO, the number of citizen groups around the world are as numerous and diverse as the cultures they represent.

One, however, seems to be the common goal of most of these groups: overcoming the social, economic, health and environmental challenges that the industrial food system model has brought upon the populations. More co-ops of organic, locally grown food are appearing even in developed countries, where Big Corp has a strong handle on the food market. Local groups continue to organize campaigns to expose the dangers of genetically modified organisms, industrially produced pork, beef and turkey. Supermarkets that adopt a more environmentally friendly approach to agriculture, farms and farmers are attracting more customers. But perhaps more important than all of this is the fact that more people now understand that food independence is one of the main goals anyone should pursue. New educational campaigns are launched explaining the concept of food sovereignty and the right of the people to healthy food. One of the keys to food independence and safe environmental practices is to avoid agricultural models that promote the plantation and commercialization of one single crop, such as soy, corn, sugar and others. Food diversity in naturally fertilized soils is what proves to be the most effective model to guarantee that there will be food available for anyone who needs it. The creation and promotion of local associations or cooperatives that employ local workers for the cultivation and harvest of locally grown fruits, vegetables and meat continue to yield the best results for people around the world. Local food production is the only way to guarantee safety, fair prices and food availability that has the potential to end with hunger anywhere and everywhere.

For detailed information about food safety visit the following links:

 Institute for Responsible Technology

 Navdanya International

 GRAIN

 Food Safety for Whom

 En Español

 Folleto Riesgos a la Salud

 Guía de Compras No-OMG

An Empire of Lies: The CIA and the Western Media

By Jonathan Cook
Global Research
February 28, 2011

Last week the Guardian, Britain’s main liberal newspaper, ran an exclusive report on the belated confessions of an Iraqi exile, Rafeed al-Janabi, codenamed “Curveball” by the CIA. Eight years ago, Janabi played a key behind-the-scenes role — if an inadvertent one — in making possible the US invasion of Iraq. His testimony bolstered claims by the Bush administration that Iraq’s president, Saddam Hussein, had developed an advanced programme producing weapons of mass destruction.

Curveball’s account included the details of mobile biological weapons trucks presented by Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, to the United Nations in early 2003. Powell’s apparently compelling case on WMD was used to justify the US attack on Iraq a few weeks later.

Eight years on, Curveball revealed to the Guardian that he had fabricated the story of Saddam’s WMD back in 2000, shortly after his arrival in Germany seeking asylum. He told the paper he had lied to German intelligence in the hope his testimony might help topple Saddam, though it seems more likely he simply wanted to ensure his asylum case was taken more seriously.

For the careful reader — and I stress the word careful — several disturbing facts emerged from the report.

One was that the German authorities had quickly proven his account of Iraq’s WMD to be false. Both German and British intelligence had travelled to Dubai to meet Bassil Latif, his former boss at Iraq’s Military Industries Commission. Dr Latif had proven that Curveball’s claims could not be true. The German authorities quickly lost interest in Janabi and he was not interviewed again until late 2002, when it became more pressing for the US to make a convincing case for an attack on Iraq.

Another interesting disclosure was that, despite the vital need to get straight all the facts about Curveball’s testimony — given the stakes involved in launching a pre-emptive strike against another sovereign state — the Americans never bothered to interview Curveball themselves.

A third revelation was that the CIA’s head of operations in Europe, Tyler Drumheller, passed on warnings from German intelligence that they considered Curveball’s testimony to be highly dubious. The head of the CIA, George Tenet, simply ignored the advice.

With Curveball’s admission in mind, as well as these other facts from the story, we can draw some obvious conclusions — conclusions confirmed by subsequent developments.

Lacking both grounds in international law and the backing of major allies, the Bush administration desperately needed Janabi’s story about WMD, however discredited it was, to justify its military plans for Iraq. The White House did not interview Curveball because they knew his account of Saddam’s WMD programme was made up. His story would unravel under scrutiny; better to leave Washington with the option of “plausible deniability”.

Nonetheless, Janabi’s falsified account was vitally useful: for much of the American public, it added a veneer of credibility to the implausible case that Saddam was a danger to the world; it helped fortify wavering allies facing their own doubting publics; and it brought on board Colin Powell, a former general seen as the main voice of reason in the administration.

In other words, Bush’s White House used Curveball to breathe life into its mythological story about Saddam’s threat to world peace.

So how did the Guardian, a bastion of liberal journalism, present its exclusive on the most controversial episode in recent American foreign policy?

Here is its headline: “How US was duped by Iraqi fantasist looking to topple Saddam”.

Did the headline-writer misunderstand the story as written by the paper’s reporters? No, the headline neatly encapsulated its message. In the text, we are told Powell’s presentation to the UN “revealed that the Bush administration’s hawkish decisionmakers had swallowed” Curveball’s account. At another point, we are told Janabi “pulled off one of the greatest confidence tricks in the history of modern intelligence”. And that: “His critics — who are many and powerful — say the cost of his deception is too difficult to estimate.”

In other words, the Guardian assumed, despite all the evidence uncovered in its own research, that Curveball misled the Bush administration into making a disastrous miscalculation. On this view, the White House was the real victim of Curveball’s lies, not the Iraqi people — more than a million of whom are dead as a result of the invasion, according to the best available figures, and four million of whom have been forced into exile.

There is nothing exceptional about this example. I chose it because it relates to an event of continuing and momentous significance.

Unfortunately, there is something depressingly familiar about this kind of reporting, even in the West’s main liberal publications. Contrary to its avowed aim, mainstream journalism invariably diminishes the impact of new events when they threaten powerful elites.

We will examine why in a minute. But first let us consider what, or who, constitutes “empire” today? Certainly, in its most symbolic form, it can be identified as the US government and its army, comprising the world’s sole superpower.

Traditionally, empires have been defined narrowly, in terms of a strong nation-state that successfully expands its sphere of influence and power to other territories. Empire’s aim is to make those territories dependent, and then either exploit their resources in the case of poorly developed countries, or, with more developed countries, turn them into new markets for its surplus goods. It is in this latter sense that the American empire has often been able to claim that it is a force for global good, helping to spread freedom and the benefits of consumer culture.

Empire achieves its aims in different ways: through force, such as conquest, when dealing with populations resistant to the theft of their resources; and more subtly through political and economic interference, persuasion and mind-control when it wants to create new markets. However it works, the aim is to create a sense in the dependent territories that their interests and fates are bound to those of empire.

In our globalised world, the question of who is at the centre of empire is much less clear than it once was. The US government is today less the heart of empire than its enabler. What were until recently the arms of empire, especially the financial and military industries, have become a transnational imperial elite whose interests are not bound by borders and whose powers largely evade legislative and moral controls.

Israel’s leadership, we should note, as well its elite supporters around the world — including the Zionist lobbies, the arms manufacturers and Western militaries, and to a degree even the crumbling Arab tyrannies of the Middle East — are an integral element in that transnational elite.

The imperial elites’ success depends to a large extent on a shared belief among the western public both that “we” need them to secure our livelihoods and security and that at the same time we are really their masters. Some of the necessary illusions perpetuated by the transnational elites include:

That we elect governments whose job is to restrain the corporations;

— That we, in particular, and the global workforce in general are the chief beneficiaries of the corporations’ wealth creation;

— That the corporations and the ideology that underpins them, global capitalism, are the only hope for freedom;

— That consumption is not only an expression of our freedom but also a major source of our happiness;

— That economic growth can be maintained indefinitely and at no long-term cost to the health of the planet;

— And that there are groups, called terrorists, who want to destroy this benevolent system of wealth creation and personal improvement.

These assumptions, however fanciful they may appear when subjected to scrutiny, are the ideological bedrock on which the narratives of our societies in the West are constructed and from which ultimately our sense of identity derives. This ideological system appears to us — and I am using “we” and “us” to refer to western publics only — to describe the natural order.

The job of sanctifying these assumptions — and ensuring they are not scrutinised — falls to our mainstream media. Western corporations own the media, and their advertising makes the industry profitable. In this sense, the media cannot fulfil the function of watchdog of power, because in fact it is power. It is the power of the globalised elite to control and limit the ideological and imaginative horizons of the media’s readers and viewers. It does so to ensure that imperial interests, which are synonymous with those of the corporations, are not threatened.

The Curveball story neatly illustrates the media’s role.

His confession has come too late — eight years too late, to be precise — to have any impact on the events that matter. As happens so often with important stories that challenge elite interests, the facts vitally needed to allow western publics to reach informed conclusions were not available when they were needed. In this case, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are gone, as are their neoconservative advisers. Curveball’s story is now chiefly of interest to historians.

That last point is quite literally true. The Guardian’s revelations were of almost no concern to the US media, the supposed watchdog at the heart of the US empire. A search of the Lexis Nexis media database shows that Curveball’s admissions featured only in the New York Times, in a brief report on page 7, as well as in a news round-up in the Washington Times. The dozens of other major US newspapers, including the Washington Post, made no mention of it at all.

Instead, the main audience for the story outside the UK was the readers of India’s Hindu newspaper and the Khaleej Times.

But even the Guardian, often regarded as fearless in taking on powerful interests, packaged its report in such a way as to deprive Curveball’s confession of its true value. The facts were bled of their real significance. The presentation ensured that only the most aware readers would have understood that the US had not been duped by Curveball, but rather that the White House had exploited a “fantasist” — or desperate exile from a brutal regime, depending on how one looks at it — for its own illegal and immoral ends.

Why did the Guardian miss the main point in its own exclusive? The reason is that all our mainstream media, however liberal, take as their starting point the idea both that the West’s political culture is inherently benevolent and that it is morally superior to all existing, or conceivable, alternative systems.

In reporting and commentary, this is demonstrated most clearly in the idea that “our” leaders always act in good faith, whereas “their” leaders — those opposed to empire or its interests — are driven by base or evil motives.

It is in this way that official enemies, such as Saddam Hussein or Slobodan Milosevic, can be singled out as personifying the crazed or evil dictator — while other equally rogue regimes such as Saudi Arabia’s are described as “moderate” — opening the way for their countries to become targets of our own imperial strategies.

States selected for the “embrace” of empire are left with a stark choice: accept our terms of surrender and become an ally; or defy empire and face our wrath.

When the corporate elites trample on other peoples and states to advance their own selfish interests, such as in the invasion of Iraq to control its resources, our dominant media cannot allow its reporting to frame the events honestly. The continuing assumption in liberal commentary about the US attack on Iraq, for example, is that, once no WMD were found, the Bush administration remained to pursue a misguided effort to root out the terrorists, restore law and order, and spread democracy.

For the western media, our leaders make mistakes, they are naïve or even stupid, but they are never bad or evil. Our media do not call for Bush or Blair to be tried at the Hague as war criminals.

This, of course, does not mean that the western media is Pravda, the propaganda mouthpiece of the old Soviet empire. There are differences. Dissent is possible, though it must remain within the relatively narrow confines of “reasonable” debate, a spectrum of possible thought that accepts unreservedly the presumption that we are better, more moral, than them.

Similarly, journalists are rarely told — at least, not directly — what to write. The media have developed careful selection processes and hierarchies among their editorial staff — termed “filters” by media critics Ed Herman and Noam Chomsky — to ensure that dissenting or truly independent journalists do not reach positions of real influence.

There is, in other words, no simple party line. There are competing elites and corporations, and their voices are reflected in the narrow range of what we term commentary and opinion. Rather than being dictated to by party officials, as happened under the Soviet system, our journalists scramble for access, to be admitted into the ante-chambers of power. These privileges make careers but they come at a huge cost to the reporters’ independence.

Nonetheless, the range of what is permissible is slowly expanding — over the opposition of the elites and our mainstream TV and press. The reason is to be found in the new media, which is gradually eroding the monopoly long enjoyed by the corporate media to control the spread of information and popular ideas. Wikileaks is so far the most obvious, and impressive, outcome of that trend.

The consequences are already tangible across the Middle East, which has suffered disproportionately under the oppressive rule of empire. The upheavals as Arab publics struggle to shake off their tyrants are also stripping bare some of the illusions the western media have peddled to us. Empire, we have been told, wants democracy and freedom around the globe. And yet it is caught mute and impassive as the henchmen of empire unleash US-made weapons against their peoples who are demanding western-style freedoms.

An important question is: how will our media respond to this exposure, not just of our politicians’ hypocrisy but also of their own? They are already trying to co-opt the new media, including Wikileaks, but without real success. They are also starting to allow a wider range of debate, though still heavily constrained, than had been possible before.

The West’s version of glasnost is particularly obvious in the coverage of the problem closest to our hearts here in Palestine. What Israel terms a delegitimisation campaign is really the opening up — slightly — of the media landscape, to allow a little light where until recently darkness reigned.

This is an opportunity and one that we must nurture. We must demand of the corporate media more honesty; we must shame them by being better-informed than the hacks who recycle official press releases and clamour for access; and we must desert them, as is already happening, for better sources of information.

We have a window. And we must force it open before the elites of empire try to slam it shut.

This is the text of a talk entitled “Media as a Tool of Empire” delivered to Sabeel, the Ecumenical Liberation Theology Centre, at its eighth international conference in Bethlehem on Friday February 25.

Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.