biowarfare

Technocracy X: Nano-Science (2)

 “We cannot rely on trial-and-error approaches to deal with existential risks… We need to vastly increase our investment in developing specific defensive technologies… We are at the critical stage today for biotechnology, and we will reach the stage where we need to directly implement defensive technologies for nanotechnology during the late teen years of this century… A self-replicating pathogen, whether biological or nanotechnology based, could destroy our civilization in a matter of days or weeks.”

― Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology


dna_nano_tech-wideThe military is the largest investor in the U.S. Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). The share of the NNI budget given to the Department of Defence (DoD) since the program started has reached $6.6 billion with part of the expenditure going to DARPA and the departmental laboratories of the Navy, Army and Air force, the rest ending up at universities as research grants or as part of the Multi-University Research Initiative (MURI).[1]  Though spending has been fluctuating since 2007, there remains steady interest in nanotech’s military capabilities. Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) revealed from their research that: “… government funding for military R&D dwarfs that spent on social and environmental programs across the industrialized world …” with military R&D fixed towards “… a narrow weapons-based security agenda.” [2]  Which means the marginalisation of conflict prevention and analysis of the roots of conflict and its links to poverty, the environment, security and health issues continue to be under-funded. Nanotech advances are being hijacked away from improving civilian life with “game-changing” technology as the culprit.

A fervent need to make these grand visions a reality was given a sturdy platform for realisation back in 2007 from the DoD and their little known advisory body called the Defence Science Board (DSB) whose paper entitled: “DSB 2006 Summer Study on 21st Century Strategic Technology Vectors” laid some important groundwork for the future. In an attempt to place nanotech at the top of the military agenda the paper drew their attention to “synergistic combinations” of all forms of nanotech and their “… truly revolutionary capabilities in human performance enhancement, medical treatment and prophylaxis, miniaturization, life extension, robotics, and machine intelligence …” [3]  It was unabashed in its agenda for clandestine tagging and tracking, where: “A combination of nanotechnology, biology, and chemistry promises to provide significant increases in capability to conduct pervasive surveillance on a global basis.”

spybee

prototype for cyborg-bee © unknown

Some of these other applications currently in R & D or primed and ready for action include the following:

Nano-biotechnology – or miniaturized biotechnology is the recent development of merging biology research with nanotechnology, most notably using biomolecules, bio-membranes and nano-photonics for vaccinations and virus research. Particularly active in medical fields the new science is seeking to generating cures; develop stem cell treatments, creating muscle tissue and artificial proteins. The convergence between computers and biology is of primary interest where eventually computing will be sourced from a biological platform where “Colonies of live neurons can live together on a biochip device.” [4]

Nano-electronics – The development of molecules with useful electronic properties which can then be used in nano-devices. This includes synthetic chemical methods and the creation of synthetic molecular motors. Other forms include carbon nano-tubes which have taken over from silicon-based chips. Now, the race is on to fit billions of these tubes onto computer chips thereby increasing the chip performance to “… run at more than three times the frequency and consuming just a third of the energy.” [5]

DNA nanotechnology – the construction of structures out of DNA and other nucleic acids. This branch has a special relationship to nano-medicine and “SMART drugs” for targeted drug delivery, the development and creation of vaccines and the adjacent field of nano-electronics with real world applications in both fields looming large. [6]

Nano-robotics/weaponryself-sufficient machines operating at the nano-scale. Applying nano-robots in medicine are proving difficult due to a multitude of problems adapting to the biology of organic systems, though progress is there. However, military nano-robotics in combination with cybernetics is moving ahead in leaps and bounds. There are still very little scholarly articles on the nature and pace of advances on military robotics along with only a sluggish attempt at raising the ethical and moral issues inherent in the use of such weaponry. What is clear is that the military is getting very excited by it all due to the unlimited scope of applications. Reduced to the size of perhaps 0.1mm or less, autonomous mini and micro-robots could be deployed on the ground, in water and in air, using the same propulsion principles found in larger electronic and mechanical systems. All forms of movement are mimicked such as human legs, various types of hopping, flapping wings like a bird, flagella, and even side-winding movements of a snake. The multi-purpose nature of robotics means that weapons systems targeting, reconnaissance, communication and surveillance are easily utilized. Insects and small mammals are already being integrated into bio-cyborg hybrids with nervous system and brain interfacing with cybernetics, software and electrodes.

cyborg-mothcyborg moth | © unknown

Returning to our whacky friends down at DARPA and their various sponsored companies and subsidiaries, we find they are still churning out helpful prototypes for new ways to spy, maim and murder. Some of these latest offerings are still prototypes, in the manufacturing stage or on the drawing board. They comprise:

1) Nano-Scouts – real insects and simulated bird-like technologies which act as the eyes and ears of intelligence. Flies and mosquitoes have embedded nanotech capabilities which allow them to determine the presence of certain chemicals, changes in moisture levels or barometric pressure, and be able to sense movements, temperature, and vibration.[7]

2) Nano-Poisons – A variety of toxic substances with nanomolecules carefully tailored to illicit the correct responses. By interfering with neuro-chemical inhibitors and release agents introducing precise “onboard” quantities of synthetic poisons behaviour modification is taken to a whole new level. Almost any type of mind control would be available from encouraging the victim to lie obsessively to provoking suicidal thoughts; stimulating a person to react violently or to kill. And of course, a Brave New World of somatic release could be programmed where the person cannot help but love everyone and where anger and aggression is blocked. Nano-molecules would effectively quadruple the effectiveness of purely psychological methods of mind control.

3) Nano Force Fields –nano-coatings which can hermetically seal a vehicle or building by allowing particles to seek out air gaps and block them.

4) Nano Mind Erasers – Want to take out a politician or spy without fuss or bother of assassination? Then, inducing the equivalent of instant Alzheimer’s is the answer. Wiping the sections of the brain clean using micro fields programmed to flare up as tiny, molecular neutron bombs would do the trick.

5) Nano Needles – With no visible wounds and invisible to the naked eye these weapons represent an up-dated version of the old KGB poison-tipped umbrella. The needles could be shot from a suitably modelled gun to paralyse people. Presumably the lethal nature of the needles would be dependent on their carrier capability.

6) Nano Heart-Stoppers – Nano-blood flow restrictors and Stroke Inducers – Long known to be a part of military-intelligence operations the assassination of sensitive targets such as politicians, heads of state and celebrities. Undetectable in the blood stream, nano-molecules could mimic heart attacks or strokes; restrict the blood flow causing an array of symptoms, even inducing personality disorders.

7) Nano-Naut Swarms These are ‘SMART dust’ particles which act as an information or sensor clouds capable of analysing areas with sharp detail and relying back information to HQ. As reported in the MSM in early February 2013, the British Army has been deploying tiny nano-drones in Afghanistan for over two years. At just 10cm long and weighing only 16 Grams they are used to relay full motion video and still images back to the devices’ handlers. But technology is advancing as fast as weapons can be bought.

8) Cyborg Insects – could be the delivery tool of much of the above allowing viruses and lethal substances to be to their individual or mass target, something that Bill Gates and his forays into mosquito-driven vaccines would no doubt happily welcome. Spying and surveillance capabilities have also been successfully tested and deployed. One of DARPA’s less malevolent offerings, the Nano Hummingbird was named One of Time Magazine’s 50 best inventions of 2011. Shaped like a humming-bird the mini robot is remotely-controlled without an external power source and can fly, hover, move forward and backward in the air while shooting Hi-Resolution video.

9) Programmable Matter – Starting in 2007, with DARPA support, Carnegie Mellon delved into the possibility of creating hardware and software to make material that can programmed to morph into 3-Dimensional shapes – essentially, shape-shifting. Named the Claytronics Project, the brains behind this venture believe that it has the capacity to change every facet of human experience. They consider claytronics to be a platform for a new form of called “Pario” with the reproduction of moving 3-D objects the primary goal. In other words, the quest to program the world around us. Just a few years later in 2010 with a “self-folding origami” robot which can literally fold itself up and crawl away. Meantime, shape-shifting sand made an appearance in 2012 where; “New algorithms enable heaps of ‘smart sand’ that can assume any shape, allowing spontaneous formation of new tools or duplication of broken mechanical parts.” This of course begins to the blur the whole fields of nanotechnology bioengineering, cybernetics, biological-based pharmaceuticals, programmable vaccines and the advance of synthetic biology.

The US Department of Defence is also researching the feasibility and applications of robotic mosquitoes. So far testing has found that they can be remotely controlled with an on-board camera and a microphone. They will be able to land on unsuspecting dissidents or terrorists with the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. Flying in through a crack in your window or attaching itself to your clothing in passing would prove no problem for these adorables. No doubt law enforcement and Homeland Security are salivating at such a prospect. [8] In fact, sightings of insect-like drones have been occurring for years in the US, most frequently at activist demonstrations and marches. According to a 2006 Flight International report: “… the CIA had been developing micro UAVs as far back as the 1970s and had a mock-up in its Langley headquarters since 2003.”

robot_insectAssuming such machines can fly onto a local protester’s arm and then wing its way back to its controller with a fresh little DNA sample to analyse, this compliments another disturbing scenario as described by authors Andrew Hessel, Marc Goodman, and Steven Kotler who “…outline futuristic human genome work that evolves from the very real GE $100 million breast cancer challenge.” In this scenario: “freelancers receive bids to design personalized virus offering customized cures for the sick.” An individual succumbs to colon cancer and instead of going the route of standard chemotherapy he chooses an immediate payment of $1000 to have his genome decoded over two days. Virologists of the near future will have information about the disease and the exclusive genome sequence. The design cure will be outsourced the winning bid providing the formula to rid your body of the specific cancer. Targeting the US President by criminal cartels or terrorist cells would be relatively easy.

A 2010 release of secret cables by WikiLeaks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered US embassies “… to surreptitiously collect DNA samples from foreign heads of state and senior United Nations officials.” [9]With that in mind, an article by Atlantic magazine takes the next logical step in personalised bio-weapons and micro-drones.

Picture an African President busy with civil war and child soldiers. Perhaps his DNA had been sampled as part of a UN / US mandate. A drug is tailored to that genome sent to an online bio-marketplace and synthesised into actual genetic material. The authors explain that it is here that “… the future of drones and virology could intersect.”

The article continues:

A few days later tablets are delivered to a group that dissolves them and injects the liquid into a handful of micro-drones. The team releases the drones and infects the people in the African leader’s circle of advisors or family. The infected come down with flu like symptoms, coughs and sneezes that release billions of harmless virus particles — but when they bring their symptoms in the vicinity of the African leader — the particles change. Once the virus particles are exposed to that very specific DNA sequence, a secondary function within their design unlocks.[10]

Perhaps the formula contained a “fast-acting neuro-destructive disease that produced memory loss and, eventually, death.” For the African leader or any other head of state which was proving an obstacle to US hegemony “the symptoms could be tailored an infinite number of ways. Designed to reflect a uniquely local affliction like Dengue Fever, or to appear like symptoms of a genetic condition.” [11]Combined with the inherent nature of the military-coporate-banking complex and with their puppet Obama who sees no problem with murdering American citizens via remote drone attacks discarding any notions of law and democratic due process, then you can be sure that such a scenario will take place in the very near future – if it hasn’t already.

The above scenario set against military nanotechnology and other forms of “non-lethal” warfare is justified due to the threat of terrorism and the belief that we can all bring an end to the world’s violence and crime. It is believed that technology will save the day on the battlefield and in civilian life. If left to these people it would rapidly start to resemble an endless battle in itself, which is the general idea. Convincing people not to act on their “evil” thoughts by allowing nano-dust particles to seep into their brains is bread and butter behaviour modification. For anyone else, it is a step towards a Huxleyian nightmare.

Although many commentators prefer to believe that the fail-safe mechanisms of quantum computing and the intelligence apparatus would be enough to protect mainstream society, they fall into the trap of believing that those of conscience are presently guiding humanity. Once again, you cannot use a juvenile dictionary to explain a psychopathic reality that is operating on an entirely different cognitive and perceptual mainframe.

The fractal nature of the nano-world of military applications means that advances in weaponry would take place exponentially with a modus operandi that would excite any social dominator beyond all measure. Using the premise of the molecular assembler, a device capable of breaking and creating the chemical bonds between atoms and molecules, it means duplication is not only feasible and efficient but a requirement once the technology is up and running. Think of the white Storm-trooper clones in the Star Wars films – very much military-technocratic ambrosia. As nanotech guru Eric Drexler explained: “a state that makes the assembler breakthrough could rapidly create a decisive military force – if not literally overnight, then at least with unprecedented speed.” He further observes: “A nation armed with molecular nanotechnology-based weapons would not require nuclear weapons to annihilate a civilization. In fact, it seems that a rather surgical system of seeking and destroying enemy human beings as cancerous polyps could be developed–leaving the nation’s infrastructure intact to be repopulated.” [12]

irobotStill from ‘I Robot’ (2004) Twentieth Century Fox

A research paper sponsored by the European Commission for a 2004 conference on the military uses of nanotechnology and the hazards to society at large, came to some sobering conclusions. While the benefits in medical and non-military domains was clear and should not be unduly hindered provided regulations and ethical boards were swiftly introduced, there were a number of indirect ways that society could be: “detrimentally affected” through the “diffusion of the technology.” The paper offered some examples, including the temptation for the National Security State and related agencies, corporations and criminals to purloin micro-sensors and robots for spying, as well as: “the use of small autonomous systems for criminal attacks – and in particular terrorism – including attacks on critical infrastructures.” They also included a third possibility, that of:

“… implanted systems and other forms of body manipulation for ‘improving human performance’. Deciding what kinds of body manipulation should be permitted, and under which circumstances is a problem of peacetime civilian life, and should be handled by civilian society. However, military R&D and deployment of such systems could establish a fait accompli before society is able to carry out a thorough debate on the desirability of particular technological developments.”

And there’s the problem.

The last thing psychologically compromised persons enjoying their place at the helm of Official Culture is to see the involvement of local communities and civic society. Genetically modified organisms and foodstuffs went this way as did television, banking, media, warfare and most other socio-political power structures which required either secrecy, perception management or corporate monopolisation to ensure a singular reality. Nanotech will be no different if it is allowed to continue without regulations and in the hands of those who wield power for their own ends. If we have humans behaving in psychopathic ways then it doesn’t require the greatest leap of imagination to realise that military robots will be a reflection of their state of mind and intentions. Pathocratic control systems require global dominance in all domains and nanotech represents a mighty leverage in the race to achieve it. Horizontal proliferation would be nearly unavoidable with small, self-replicating systems where in principle, a single copy would be sufficient for growth in another country or sub-state entity.

The report goes on to state:

Military robots with sizes from nanometres to metres would bring threats on an unknown scale. If they could kill, they could constitute new forms of weapons of mass destruction more potent than known biological warfare agents. With non-lethal effects, such as disruption of personality, mass attacks could lead indirectly to the breakdown of a society and the death of a large portion of its members. Partly as a result of their smallness, but mainly owing to their potential for self-replication and the production of additional weapons on site, nano-robots would create extreme uncertainty. [13]

Given the nature of nanotech, automated decision making would grow based on its tendency for a kind of peak, fractal replication to emerge, once technological thresholds have been reached and surpassed. When this level of technology fuses with the mentality of unlimited growth much like the standard economic mind set currently dominating, then a virtual arms-race at the molecular level could ensue with entirely unforeseen consequences. Military production overlaid with ideological insanity.

C60a

“Buckminsterfullerene C60, also known as the buckyball, is a representative member of the carbon structures known as fullerenes. Members of the fullerene family are a major subject of research falling under the nanotechnology umbrella.” (uploaded by Mstroeck at English Wikipedia Later versions by Bryn C at en.wikipedia)

Alongside the massive drive to foist genetically modified foods on global populations agribusiness is fascinated by the part nanotech can play in making food production and consolidation more efficient. However, using molecular assembly principles “nano scale carriers” will soon be used for delivering fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and plant growth regulators. A case is being made to reduce environmental impact with nanotech. It is believed that this will improve stability and lessen environmental degradation in terms of chemical runoff and other related problems. An example of these carriers would be the use of clay nanotubes for pesticides which will apparently reduce the amount of pesticide use by 70–80 per cent. Nanoparticles can act to help mollify and transform resistant chemical compounds in to non-toxic ones while waste water treatment and disinfectants have the potential to be markedly improved. Fluorescent labelling by “quantum dots” (QDs) using bio-recognition molecules for anti-bacteria and disease control will be supplemented with an array of rapid detection and enzymatic biosensors. There is even a device called the “E-Nose” inspired by the human nose which, through the use of nanoparticle gas sensors can detect precisely the quality and quantity of gas present. [14]

Socio-economic demands will ensure that wireless nanosensors in crops designed to monitor and collate data on agronomic intelligence processes such as planting and harvesting cycles will become more and more important. Water levels, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and other treatments will also be under the nanosensor umbrella in the hope that maximization of crop yields and a reduction in resource input will be the end result. [15]

Biotechnology at the nanoscale is already having some success in the battle against plant resistance and environmental stresses such as drought, salinity and diseases. Nanobarcodes will be used for authentication and tracking in agricultural food and husbandry products. As knowledge grows in the area of plant gene traits and nanotechnology-based gene sequencing it is taken for granted that such process will offer new ways to reduce costs and maximize profits. [16]  With undoubted benefits that nanotechnology can provide, this is still inside the constraints of Official Culture. Farming has already been transformed into a leviathan of corporate efficiency where community, civic and independence has been sacrificed. Nano-farming may increase the overall efficiency and provide intermittent benefits, but will it have the capacity to transform agriculture away from agribusiness corporatism?

If new endeavours are dominated by the matrix of the 4Cs and the 3EM then it will limit the hope for social renewal and become just another tool to increase exploitation still bound by the same lowest common denominator. Consumerism, far from being modified or somehow reduced under this new technology will only intensify mechanisation, commodification and the encoding organic life, this time at the molecular level. Nanotechnology may have a place in improving humanity’s lot but not by being grafted onto a socio-political and economic framework that caused the problems in the first place.

Quite apart from providing new innovative tools for medical advances and the promise of an agricultural revolution, evidence so far in relation to health and environmental concerns doesn’t exactly promote confidence. Some of the latest research results show that:

  • Rats breathing in nanoparticles were found to exhibit inflammation, skin aging and stress responses.
  • DNA and chromosome damage which in turn “linked to all the big killers of man, namely cancer, heart disease, neurological disease and aging”.
  • Carbon nanotubes – the possible replacement for silicon – have shown to have the potential to cause mesothelioma ( a form of cancer).
  • Nanoparticles and nanofibres have shown to cause lung disease in a similar way to asbestos. [17]

Mark Wiesner Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Duke University in Durham N.C., has argued for a rethink as to the way nanoparticles are selected and defined in relation to potential impacts on human health and the environment. His international team of researchers from the federally-funded Centre for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology (CEINT), based at Duke University in the United States, have raised a number of issues which need to be addressed if nanotechnology is to prove viable and ethically responsible. He believes there is presently confusion as to what truly constitutes a nanoparticle where “… materials often do not meet full definition of having special properties that make them different from conventional materials.” According to Wiesner, a key question that needs to be answered: “… is whether or not a particular nanoparticle has toxic or hazardous properties that are truly different from identical particles in their bulk form,” and this due to the fact that: “Many nanoparticles smaller than 30 nanometers undergo drastic changes in their crystalline structure that enhance how the atoms on their surface interact with the environment.”

The professor explains further:

“…because of the increased surface-area-to-volume ratio, nanoparticles can be highly reactive with other chemicals in the environment and can also disrupt certain activities within cells. … “While there have been reports of nanoparticle toxicity increasing as the size decreases, it is still uncertain whether this increase in reactivity is harmful to the environment or human safety,” Wiesner said. “To settle this issue, toxicological studies should contrast particles that exhibit novel size-dependant properties, particularly concerning their surface reactivity, and those particles that do not exhibit these properties.” [18]

Perhaps it is not the health and environmental issues which are really the problem. We humans are extraordinarily creative and ingenious. All the above is driven on the assumption of cybernetics and its systems theory as viable working models; the idea of “nested” organic systems and dissipative structures which are interrelated and interconnected by virtue of their functional similarity. *This means that bio-engineers and technocrats look at nanosystems as providing the potential for exponential growth via automatic and autonomous emergent properties. As described previously, this opens up a whole new pandora’s box when matter becomes programmable.

nanotubes_carbone

Carbon Nanotubes Source: tpe-nanotechnologie-cb.e-monsite.com/

According to nano scientists this follows that society and the human condition is about to “reshaped” in very positive ways: cleaning the environment, easing the pressure for natural resources, tackling hunger, curing AIDS and other invasive diseases; giving new life to paraplegics whilst enhancing the human body. However, will these laudable aims be set against a background of unresolved questions which threaten to undermine the human species? What has happened to new advances in technology in the past?

Nanotech advocates display frightening naïveté in this regard and an often ironic binary evaluation of what are highly complex issues, notwithstanding an ignorance of ponerology and psychologically compromised cultures. It is a contradiction to say that strengthening our democratic processes will somehow ensure responsible ethics which will insulate against the darker applications of nanotechnology when overwhelming expenditure is already focused in the hands of those who seek weapons advancement and shareholder profits. A barrier to accountability will remain as tenacious as it has proved to be in narcotics, conventional weapons and trafficking. It benefits the Establishment just as nanotechnology promises to do.

Futurist David Brin’s prescription to cultivate a “transparent society” where privacy is effectively non-existent is dangerous as it opens the backdoor for just about every totalitarian precept going. The self-replicating nature of molecular nanotech has given rise to end time scenarios where machines take over the world replacing humanity and organic life. Eric Drexler coined the term “grey-goo” otherwise known as ‘ecophagy’ to illustrate such a cybernetic apocalypse.[19]Think along the lines of “the Collective” from the Borg in the Star Trek TV series or the “Hive mind” so beloved of humanists and transhumanists. Expansion derives from assimilation and adaptive properties – “group think” in a futurist setting.

transmission-5speed-gears.ai

Corporations will be regulated insofar as it does not impinge on the market value of nanotechnology. This means regulations in medical and consumer arenas where it matters less will be followed. Where it is most needed however, is in domains such as weaponisation and agriculture and which will likely follow the traditional route of lobbyists and cartel economics – the path of least resistance. Meanwhile, legislation will have a very tough time keeping up with the rise of nanotechnology especially when environmental and privacy laws are only applicable to those adhering to the public domain and wholly irrelevant to government /corporate experimentation outside such accountability.

Although the military is driving nanotech advances (as with all things) the testing ground has begun with many “passive” or “first generation” commercial applications finding their way to the market place. As explored in the previous post the list is endless. If sunscreen products in the US contain nanoparticles and thus freely pass through the blood-brain barrier then the background of complex toxicology issues must remain at the forefront. In the same way, as GMOs, Wi-Fi and cell phones all have serious health questions hanging over them and health and environmental concerns of nanomaterials at this early stage have been completely ignored. Issues of privacy and confidentiality are also profoundly important.

The precautionary principle means that it is essential not to jump in feet first with this technology when there is an absence of suitable definitions regarding nanoparticle properties which could help scientists determine what represents a threat to the environment or human health. Despite certain advocacy groups calling for government regulation, the only principle which governs decisions is the one leading to the quickest possible profit. Nanotech forges ahead, in love with itself and its seemingly unlimited potential.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that it will go the same way as GMOs since the focus behind the drive to conquer nature, deny death and embrace immortality is exactly the same. Until regulation, insurance and extensive public discussion is forthcoming it is likely the more negative scenarios surrounding nanotech will play a greater role. After all, once the perceived genie is out of the bottle the consequences of its “magic” are more difficult to manage. This means that with all the wondrous potential for cleanng up the environment patents will arrive forcing us to pay for such ecological magic just as it was with the so-called “Green Revolution” of genetically modified crops. This means an expansion of selective wealth where transformation happens according to your pocket and status thereby replicating the same old divisions and class divides.

To reiterate the immovable direction of technology: it is the military and nano-weaponry which will determine the future of nanotech as a whole not whether a surgeon can provide life-saving operations or the disabled individual can begin to walk again. Altruism is not the primary currency of social exchange in a world shaped by psychopaths. Nanosystems will be nurtured on the same directive until such time we can wrest control.

 


* Dissipative Structure – A system that exits far from thermodynamic equilibrium thus dissipating the heat generated to sustain it. It has the capacity of changing to higher levels of orderliness leading to self-organization. These systems contain sub-systems that continuously fluctuate.


Notes

[1] ‘More soldiers in nanotechnology labs?’ By Michael Berger, nanowerk.com August 22, 2007.
[2] Ibid.
[3] http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2006-02-Summer_Study_Strategic_Tech_Vectors_Vol_I_Web.pdf
[4] NanoMedicine – A Review by K.K. Senthil Kumar, International Journal of Innovative Drug Discovery, Vol. 2 / Issue 1 / 2012 / 40-47 (from International Journal of Biopharmaceutics)
[5] ‘Carbon nanotubes fit by the thousands onto a chip’ By Jason Palmer, BBC News, 29 October 2012.
[6] DNA nanotechnology and transhumanism seem to fit snugly together in terms of their technological vision for humanity. Whether or not most persons working in the field are predisposed to this belief is irrelevant but the belief that vaccinations across the board are absolutely necessary and beyond reproach is a powerful part of the medical establishment. As such, the transhumanist paradigm naturally joins forces with materialism, atheism and corporatism to unfold their agenda accordingly. Journalist Sayer Ji has this to say on the subject:

“Not only have humans strayed from their mammalian roots by creating and promoting infant formula over breast milk, and then promoting synthetic immunity via vaccines over the natural immunity conferred through breastfeeding and sunlight exposure, for instance, but implicit within the dominant medical model is to replace natural immunity with a synthetic one. This is the philosophy of transhumanism, a movement which intends to improve upon and transcend our humanity, and has close affiliation with some aspects of eugenics.
The CDC’s immunization schedule reflects a callous lack of regard for the 3 billion years of evolution that brought us to our present, intact form, without elaborate technologies like vaccination — and likely only because we never had them at our disposal to inflict potentially catastrophic harm to ourselves. The CDC is largely responsible for generating the mass public perception that there is greater harm in not “prophylactically” injecting well over 100 distinct disease-promoting and immune-disruptive substances into the bodies of healthy children. They have been successful in instilling the concept into the masses that Nature failed in her design, and that medical and genetic technologies and interventions can be used to create a superior human being.
In this culture of vaccination, the non-vaccinated child is “inferior,” “dirty,” perhaps even “sub-human” to those who look upon vaccination as the answer to what perfects the human immune system.
Transhumanism participates in a dialectic which requires a simultaneous and systematic dehumanization of those who do not share the same way of thinking and behaving. The eugenic undertones of mass vaccination and the cult of synthetic immunity are now only thinly veiled, as we move closer to the point where a psuedo-scientific medical dictatorship lays claim to our very bodies, and the bodies of our children.
The point of no return (if not already traversed) is only around the corner: the mass introduction of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccine technology. Vaccines moved through the following stages (a tortured history of failures and massive “collateral damage”): Live Vaccines > Attenuated Vaccines > Subunit Vaccines > Toxid Vaccines > Conjugate Vaccines, only now reaching towards converting our living tissue into “vaccine-making factories” through the use of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccines, which are designed to directly alter cells within the vaccinated person’s body so that they create the antigens normally provided by vaccines themselves.
While not yet in use, clinical trials are now underway to obtain FDA approval. If we do not educate ourselves now and act accordingly, their mass implementation is inevitable, and our very genomes will become the next target of the vaccination/transhumanist agenda.” – ‘The Vaccination Agenda: Implicit Transhumanism’ By Sayer Ji, Contributing editor, Activist Post, January 24, 2012.
[7] Most Innovative Defense Technology’ 2008 Award Nominee – Nano SCOUT AeroVironment Inc.| http://www.defense-update.com/ | ‘The dragonfly built to spy – Tiny flying robots have the military abuzz, says Mark Harris’ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tech.
[8] A COMBINED EXPERIMENTAL-NUMERICAL STUDY OF THE ROLE OF WING FLEXIBILITY IN INSECT FLIGHT Lingxiao Zheng, Xiaolin Wang, Afzal Khan, R. R. Vallance and Rajat Mittal1 Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, George Washington University, Washington DC 20052 Tyson L. Hedrick 2009. http://www.me.jhu.edu/fsag/Publications/Papers/AIAA-2009-382-170percent5B1percent5D.pdf
[9] ‘Hacking the President’s DNA’ November 12, The Atlantic Magazine, By Andrew Hessel, Marc Goodman and Steven Kotler.
[10] ‘Micro-Drones Combined With DNA Hacking Could Create A Very Scary Future’ By Robert Johnson, Oct. 28, 2012. Business Insider | http://www.businessinsider.com/
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘A Glimpse Into China’s Post-Nuclear Super-Weapons: An Interview with Lev Navrozov on Nanoweapons by Ryan Mauro for http://www.worldthreats.com Sept. 26, 2003. | Quotes sourced from Engines of Creation By Eric Drexler (1986).
[13] ‘Military Uses of Nanotechnology – European Commission’ ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/soa_en.pdf
[14] ‘How helpful is nanotechnology in agriculture?’ By Allah Ditta 2012 Adv. Nat. Sci: Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 3 033002 doi:10.1088/2043-6262/3/3/033002 Vietnam Academy of Science & Technology, 29 May 2012. IOP Science | http://iopscience.iop.org/2043-6262/3/3/033002/article#ansn431989bib05
[15] Ibid.
[16] ‘The potential and challenges of nanopore sequencing’ Nature Biotechnology 26, 1146 – 1153 (2008) Published online: 9 October 2008 | doi:10.1038/nbt.1495
[17] ‘Tiny Inhaled Particles Take Easy Route from Nose to Brain’ August 3, 2006, University of Rochester Medical Centre. | Wu, J; Liu, W; Xue, C; Zhou, S; Lan, F; Bi, L; Xu, H; Yang, X et al. (2009). ‘Toxicity and penetration of TiO2 nanoparticles in hairless mice and porcine skin after subchronic dermal exposure’. Toxicology letters 191 (1): 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.05.020. PMID 19501137. | Jonaitis, TS; Card, JW; Magnuson, B (2010). ‘Concerns regarding nano-sized titanium dioxide dermal penetration and toxicity study’. Toxicology letters 192 (2): 268–9. doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.10.007. PMID 19836437. | Schneider, Andrew, ‘Amid Nanotech’s Dazzling Promise, Health Risks Grow’, March 24, 2010. | ‘ Nanofibres ‘may pose health risk’,’ BBC News, August 24, 2012. | ‘Is Chronic Inflammation the Key to Unlocking the Mysteries of Cancer?’ By Gary Stix, Scientific American, July 2007.
[18] ‘When Nano May Not Be Nano’ Duke University, Depart. Civil & Environmental Engineering September 14 2009.
[19] ‘Some Limits to Global Ecophagy by Biovorous Nanoreplicators, with Public Policy Recommendations’ By Robert A. Freitas Jr. April 2000. | www.rfreitas.com/Nano/Ecophagy.htm

Advertisements

World State Policies X: MONSANTO and Seeding the Future

“The hope of the industry is that over time the market is so flooded [with GMOs] that there’s nothing you can do about it. You just sort of surrender”

– Don Westfall, biotech industry consultant and vice-president of Promar International, in the Toronto Star, January 9 2001.


monsanto11

                       VISTOENLAWEB.ORG

With its astonishingly aggressive lobbying and ruthless application of gene technology, the Monsanto Corporation lies at the top of the GMO pile. if ever there was a psychopath in corporate form, Monsanto fits the bill. As the largest producer of glyphosate herbicides, Monsanto’s most popular brand, “Roundup” has proved to be a health hazard for humans and animals and just about any sentient being unfortunate enough to come into contact with its mass spraying. The Environmental Protection Agency has officially stated that Monsanto is a “potentially responsible party” for 56 contaminated sites in the United States.

Not content with routinely damaging the health of its employees or residents living nearby, the company was involved in yet another controversy when introduced recombinant Bovine somatotropin (rBST), a synthetic hormone injected into cows to increase milk production. Unfortunately for Monsanto there were substantial side effects for humans, including the reduction of natural defences against cancer. [1]Cows became seriously ill with various diseases most notably mastitis, an infection of the udder which contaminates milk with pus. It was found that the unnatural increase in milk production at the expense of the cow’s health was ultimately passed on to the consumer along with the high level of antibiotics inflicted on the cows in order to combat the original side-effects. Before selling the operation, it did not stop the company from conducting a large-scale lobbying campaign to prevent labelling of rBST milk which was largely successful.

Phil Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications summed up the regulatory ethos in 1998: “Monsanto should not have to vouch for the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is FDA’s job.” And when the Food and Drug Administration has been holding hands with Monsanto throughout its career of maximizing profits over people, this statement amounts to nothing more than callous irresponsibility. [2]

With its legendary history of environmental pollution and such heart-warming products as defoliate Agent Orange in the Vietnam War, the manufacturing of DDT and widespread innovation in plastics and subsequent spread of PCBs, Monsanto feels right at home when virgin forests need clearing and indigenous peoples require to be forcibly removed if the bribes prove ineffectual. The soya bean crops can and will be planted, come what may. The dominant types of GM foods as transgenic plant products include corn, canola, rice, and cotton seed oil, all of which Monsanto produces, distributes and directs according to a military-evangelical blend of national and international lobbying. Argentina was an early target of the GMO junta and represents a classic case-study of geo-political strategy working in unison with government and agribusiness’ interests. The soya bean has radically changed socio-economic and environment of the country. The displacement of other forms of often natural crop cultivation, pasture-based cattle ranching and the destruction of virgin forests and grasslands continues apace, with China and Europe benefitting from its substantial exports.

Economically, the divide between the rich and poor always becomes more pronounced when mass farming is introduced. Argentina has seen hundreds of thousands of workers forced off the land and a rise in poverty and malnutrition since the imposition and subsequent dependency on the soya bean. According to official statistics: “20.6 percent of Argentina’s 38 million people are poor. But in the North Eastern region, where soy is king, 37 percent are below the poverty line, and 13.6 percent live in absolute poverty, unable to feed themselves properly.” [3]

individual_monsanto_federal_position-largeThe revolving door of individuals working for Monsanto and Federal government (click on the image to enlarge) Source: http://occupy-monsanto.com/

Back in the mid-1970s Kissinger, as a Rockefeller provocateur, had considerable experience in fermenting dissent in other countries. Chile had been a textbook case of black operations let loose against a democratically elected leader and replaced with General Pinochet’s brand of fascism. According to declassified US State Department documents released years after the event, the same formula was envisaged for Argentina in a 1976 meeting between Argentine Foreign Minister, Admiral Cesar Guzzetti; Rockefeller’s political go-between vice-president Nelson Rockefeller and Kissinger as Secretary of State. Author F. William Engdahl notes: “Rockefeller even suggested specific key individuals in Argentina to be targeted for elimination. At least 15,000 intellectuals, labor leaders and opposition figures disappeared in the so-called ‘dirty war.’ ” [4]

Argentina began its trade in slavery and an increase in minority wealth and social divisions. With the help of foreign investment and support from Monsanto and the big six grain conglomerates such as Cargill, wealthy landowners worked to erode traditional workers’ rights and grab as much extra land as they could. Upwards of 200, 000 rural famers and their families have been displaced from generationally owned land, inevitably finding themselves destitute or living hand to mouth on the outskirts of cities or in slum areas. Prior to Wall St. and their banking families descending on Argentina, it enjoyed one of the highest living standards in Latin America. In fact, Soy is now the main export of the nation, amounting to one-third of the country’s total exports. [5]

Both in Latin America and the USA, Monsanto is now able to hold farmers to ransom by forcing them to sign binding contracts where they must agree not to re-use saved seeds. They must also pay new royalties to Monsanto every year. The fact that farmers have been working the land for thousands of years with their own seeds provided by Nature, free of charge is a minor quibble for the corporation and its shareholders. Despite most of the world’s farmers being too poor to afford the company’s GMO license and various other seed fees, most fall under Monsanto’s targeted multi-million marketing and live to bitterly regret it. Such a system is another manifestation of the neo-feudalism so favoured amongst the Establishment. Seeds have become an intellectual property and by extension, the genetic source of Nature as patent.

With the advent of soya bean monoculture and mass farming techniques comes the intensive use of agrichemical herbicides and pesticide, and preferably for Monsanto, their favourite and highly toxic “Round up.” Ironically, parallel to much lower yields with Roundup crops compared to traditionally grown soya, health issues for rural communities, farmers and animals soared as a result of constant exposure to the spraying crops increased. They found their own natural food cultivation destroyed by the chemicals not having the built-in gene resistance found in the large Monsanto designed soya bean crops.

In 2002, it was found by the UK’s Cropscience company that chicken fed glucosinate-tolerant GM maize Chardon LL were twice as likely to die prematurely than chickens in the control group. And from the same year up to 2005, four Italian universities published articles revealing adverse effects from GM soya which targeted pancreatic, hepatic (liver) and testicular cells in young mice. [6]

In 2005 and 2006, the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted an experiment on female rats fed with glyphosate-tolerant GM soya and reported that the female rats produced an excessive number of stunted pups, over 50 percent of them dying within three weeks and the other half, sterile. Accusations of faulty data could not be levelled at the experiment as it was repeated many times with the same result. [7]

Many more studies have not only shown the toxic effects on plants and animals but the economic and environmental unsustainability of herbicide and pesticide use. As the top-soil becomes essentially burned away, more and more agrichemicals are needed to maintain a false fertility derived from a dying soil and zombie crops saturated with chemicals. This inevitably leeches into the animal and human food chain adding to the concern of health issues and the already questionable nature of GMOs themselves. Meanwhile, great profits continue to accrue for the CEOs and their shareholders safely tucked away behind their boardroom desks, buffered from the carnage of the ecological and socio-economic disaster that claims the most vulnerable, a dynamic which has continued to characterise large-scale GMO cultivation.

As F. William Engdahl observes, the consequences for the environment and human health remain worrying:

“By 2006, together with the United States, where GMO Monsanto soybeans dominated, Argentina and Brazil accounted for more than 81 percent of world soybean production, thereby ensuring that practically every animal in the world fed soymeal was eating genetically engineered soybeans. Similarly, this would imply that every McDonald’s hamburger mixed with soymeal would be genetically engineered, and most processed foods, whether they realized or not.” [8]

With the help of WTO sanctions, strong-arm tactics of companies like Monsanto and the background support of a Washington Government firmly on board, the ambitious objective of controlling the world’s food supply by seeding every country with GM crops is well underway. In 2002, aid agencies were instructed by the US State Department to take their orders from the government agency USAID and to:

“… immediately report to them any opposition in a recipient country, to GMO food imports. They were told to collect documentation to determine if the anti-GMO attitude of the local government was ‘trade or politically motivated’ If they determined it was trade motivated, the US Government had recourse to the WTO or to the threat of WTO sanctions against the aid recipient country, usually an effective warning against poor countries.” Even emergency famine relief aid came in the form of: “… genetically modified US surplus commodities, a practice condemned by international aid organizations, as it destroyed a country’s local agricultural economy in the process of opening new markets for Monsanto and friends.”

In the same vein, the cosy relationship between agri-business, GMO firms and the US State Department and its agencies is obvious when food aid organisations ship only grain that has been provided by USAID – and that meant only genetically modified US grain. [9]

In the late 1980s and 1990s Monsanto’s gene technology produced a breakthrough which would enforce the rights of the company’s gene patents and fees. It was a chilling development in biotechnology fittingly named “Terminator” where the seeds would be genetically modified to “terminate” themselves after just one harvest season. A toxin was released before the seed ripened which caused the plant embryo to die. This meant that the thousand year old tradition of saving of seeds for the next harvest would become illegal under agribusiness.

The Terminator seeds or patented ‘suicide’ seeds, officially termed GURTs (Genetic Use Restriction Technologies) hark back to a project more than twenty years old as part of the early experiments in genetic engineering. By 1998 the US Patent Office had granted joint ownership to US Dept. of Agriculture and the Delta & Pine Land Company for ‘Control of Plant Gene Expression’ Patent No. 5,723,765. [10]

In the official D&PL SEC filing it states:

“The patent broadly covers all species of plant and seed, both transgenic (GMO-ed) and conventional, for a system designed to allow control of progeny seed viability without harming the crop’. […] ‘One application of the technology could be to control unauthorized planting of seed of proprietary varieties … by making such a practice non-economic since non-authorized saved seed will not germinate, and, therefore, would be useless for planting.” With almost salacious anticipation: “the prospect of opening significant worldwide seed markets to the sale of transgenic technology in varietal crops in which crop seed currently is saved and used in subsequent seasons as seed.” [11]

The company is clearly saying that dis-empowering farmers is economically viable by preventing any escape from the GM juggernaut once it has duped its passengers into hitching a ride. It is a disturbing declaration of intent and planning which has been pressing ahead since the first GM trials back in 1982.

fluorescentTobaccoA second generation of Terminator technology was developed at the end of the 1990s called T-GURT seeds, or Trait Genetic Use Restriction Technologies. Otherwise known as the ‘Traitor’ process the plant’s fertility and its genetic characteristics can be controlled by the introduction or restriction of a chemical inducer, rather like a light switch which could be turned on or off depending on what you wanted the plant to do. It was cheaper and less complicated to produce than Terminator seeds. Tied to the agrichemicals, it was potentially a big bonanza with total control over what the farmer could and couldn’t do, charging him every step of the way. Of course, the gene resistance to certain pests would be provided by Monsanto or Syngenta who held the patent rights. You wanted your GM crops to flourish then you had to pay. If farmers tried to buy “illegal seeds” from other sources then the chemical compound needed to turn on the resistance gene would be missing. As with any commercialisation and consolidation process, more farmers in the developing world needed to be “persuaded” to climb aboard and the big companies were not afraid of using the tactics of bribery, coercion, and illegal smuggling.

The health issues still loom large in Monsanto’s continuing fortunes. For instance, in 2003, the company’s Bt maize hybrid left five Pilipino villagers dead and many seriously ill. They tested positive for antibodies to the Bt protein. [12]  The Law of Unintended consequences frequently arrives in the absence of humility. As many experts have warned, the rise of superbugs and their ability to adapt in response to highly synthetic crops and their chemicals was inevitable. A research paper published in the latest issue of the journal GM Crops & Food [13]detailed the problems from the Western corn rootworms which have been busily munching their way through genetically modified maize. A 2010 sample of the rootworm population had “… an eleven-fold survival rate on the genetically modified corn compared to a control population.” Strong resistance to GM corn is becoming the norm. As farmers become dependent on GM crops the outlook is bleak for both agriculture and consumers. Adaptation, resistance and increasing recovery rates amongst the burgeoning population of super-bugs means ultimately the poor and vulnerable and the burgeoning global middle-class will foot the bill, not just for corn which has become a vitally important derivative product, but for a range of foodstuffs and consumables in general.

The drop in GM crop yields will continue just as many farmers continue to plant, while receiving very little in return and where rising costs outweigh the perceived benefits. As food prices steadily rise in response to yet another manipulated economic downturn, Elite families like the Rockefellers are not remotely concerned. After all, they sell organic food and non-GMO food in their various cafeterias and conference venues, [14]so why should they be concerned about their agri-engineering of the world’s populations if it gives them a good return on their money and reduces the population growth that much more?

This hypocrisy gives the global population two forced choices: eat poisoned GM foods or die of starvation.

The Obama Administration carried on the tradition of staying snug and warm in the corporate pocket as the above diagram illustrates. To that end, bought-and-paid-for Congress happily allowed their puppet president to sign into law the Agriculture Appropriations Bill 2013. This effectively gave immunity from prosecution for agri-business, which means MONSANTO has a free reign to do as it pleases.

Rows of a Carrot Field

As we have seen so far in this series,  the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Population Council, the World Bank and the UN Development Program and their close working relationship with the WHO banded together to introduce covert sterilisation programs using vaccinations. Lest we think that the merging of birth control and eugenics is just paranoid ramblings of researchers with too much time on their hands, keep in mind the sources behind the genetic engineering and biotechnology are not necessarily those who work within these fields. It then becomes easier to determine which direction humanity is being led.

Transgenic plants have already taken on frog and fish genes but in the context of birth control the Rockefeller passion for a depopulated world, the geneticists have been busy bees. Take Epicyte in San Diego for example, which held a press conference in 2001 to make an announcement about its work stating:

“Epicyte reported that they had successfully created the ultimate GMO crop-contraceptive corn. They had taken antibodies from women with a rare condition known as immune infertility, isolated the genes that regulated the manufacture of those infertility antibodies, and, using genetic engineering techniques, had inserted the genes into ordinary corn seeds used to produce corn plants.” [15]

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is another media darling that has rode the wave of philanthropy and praise while concealing its real agenda. While anthropogenic global warming (AGW) (rather than Climate change) is fast being seen for what it truly is: a politically driven power-grab, this apparently escaped the notice of the billionaire in his TED talk of 2010 where he followed the Al Gore (Goldman Sacs) propaganda of CO2 emissions as the global culprit for ensuing global catastrophe. Eager to show his depopulation credentials by highlighting dire projections of a global population at 9 billion by 2050, he made this curious comment early on in the talk: “… if we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps about 10 to 15 percent.” It is here we see that Bill has enthusiastically bought into the Elite nonsense and has put his money where his misinformed mouth is by pledging $10 billion for vaccines in order: “… to fight disease among the “world’s needy children.” [16] That is an extraordinarily large sum by anyone’s standards and truly admirable if it is founded on real science and long-term beneficial effects.

Unfortunately, neither of those possibilities is likely to be true.

billgates

Bill Gates

Bill Gates is famous for his relentless drive and constant activity. He is the CEO of the Microsoft Corporation representing one of the most all-encompassing monopolies on earth. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have used an almost inconceivable amount of dosh dispensed to needy causes around the world. It also helps that multibillionaire Warren Buffet added to the already blistering endowment total of $34.6 billion with a gift of a further $30 billion dollars’ worth of shares in one of his businesses which no doubt made Bill & Belinda supremely happy.

Apart from Gates’ chosen ignorance and/or indifference regarding the toxic health effects and long-time propaganda relating to GM foods and their use and distribution, vaccines are still Gate’s number one passion. His foundation decided to commission Japanese scientists to make another whacky vision a reality by engineering vaccines into mosquitoes that will deliver the inoculations through their bite. Bill & Melinda had stalwart support and involvement from the World Health Organisation, The PEW Charitable Trusts, and government agencies in the United States, England and Malaysia. They secured the development and promotion of the GM mosquitoes under the pretext of eradicating Dengue fever which was virtually non-existent until it suddenly popped up in Florida just after the genetically-modified vaccine carrying mosquitos was released. [17]In truth, GM mosquitos were released into the environment in the Cayman Islands in 2009 but the CIA sponsored experiments in bio warfare had been using mosquitoes in Florida for several decades so it was no surprise to find Dengue fever conveniently appearing to support Bill and Melinda’s quest for mass vaccination and the depopulation they so earnestly seek.[18]

Where Rockefeller’s and Gates’ visions really fuse is through the little known project that has been quietly carrying out its operations in the remote location of Svalbard, Spitsbergen, on the Barents Sea near the Arctic Ocean.

It was claimed by Norway without much fuss in 1925 because no one really wanted it. Nonetheless, on this barren outcrop of rock inside the mountain lies the “doomsday seed bank” or more officially known as the Svalbard Global Seed Vault where a motley crew of Monsanto, the Syngenta and Rockefeller foundations and Bill Gates have been investing millions; squirreling away different varieties of seeds from all over the world, ‘so that crop diversity can be conserved for the future,’ according to the Norwegian government. [19] They have the capacity to store more than 3 million seeds tucked safely away from whatever catastrophe they envisage befalling the Earth’s environment. As F. William Engdahl not unreasonably, asks: “What future do the seed bank’s sponsors foresee, that would threaten the global availability of current seeds, almost all of which are already well protected in designated seed banks around the world?” [20]

Up until 1998, Margaret Catley-Carlson was working for John D. Rockefeller’s Population Council (the eugenics inspired front for “family planning and sterilisation) and now chairs the Rome-based Global Crops Diversity Trust (GCDT) founded by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and Bioversity International (formerly the International Plant Genetic Research Institute), a branch of the CGIAR. Other GCDT members read like an Elite encyclopaedia of Establishment insiders from the weapons industry to Hollywood, biotech companies to bankers, all of whom share the same entropic perception of reality that hasn’t changed for two hundred years. With such rampant colonisation of the developing world; ecologically disastrous consequences from invasive technology like Terminator and Traitor; the death of traditional farming practices and the fake harvest gains they engender, the construction of the Doomsday Seed Vault surely raises urgent questions as to its true nature. It represents a significant biotechnology resource in combination with other seed banks around the world, all of which are owned and run by the same six agribusiness partnerships and their affiliated think-tanks and top-tier organisations. The Svalbard seed vault has the capacity to house over 4.5 million seeds, but to what end?

frohvelv_svalbard_Svalbard Global Seed Vault (left) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation HQ (right)

When you have the likes of Bill Gates, Dupont, Monsanto, Syngenta and the Rockefellers getting together for a joint venture you can be sure that it is most certainly not for altruistic reasons but to make a big, fat profit. However, they are not just in it for the money. On the one hand, the “Green Revolution” and the monoculture expansion continue to make inroads into Africa while on the other, they preserve seed diversity in a “doomsday vault.”

Is it not chilling that the guardians of this seed diversity are corporations and foundations pushing for a biotechnological free-for-all with a history of rapacious corporate predation and the funding of social control and eugenics?

***

The nature of psychopaths in power demands the introduction of long-term ideas that facilitate the reduction and dilution of the global population. Social dominators and authoritarian personalities are attracted to romantic notions of a World State and a neo-feudalism in order to maintain Elite bloodlines. Is it possible that eugenic beliefs of Anglo-Saxon superiority and various military-corporate-occult machinations are a cover for the mass culling and manipulation of “normal people” in favour of psychopathic dominance? This obsession with genetically altering nature has a variety of disturbing off-shoots in this context.

If we cast our eye back to the discussion of Israeli ethnic specific weaponry, the advances in genetic bio-warfare and interest in eugenics and place this in context of population reduction, is it really so far-fetched to expect that genetically modified crops may serve a more sinister purpose at the very top of this agricultural pyramid? A book called BattleField of the Future has a chapter written by Lt. Col. Robert P. Kadlec, USAF entitled: “Biological Weapons for Waging Economic Warfare.” Kadlec refers to cost effective and economically viable nature of biological weapons and warfare (BW) stating: “Not only is BW more affordable, but militarily significant quantities of BW agents (kilograms) in legitimate biological laboratories make BW production easy to accomplish and conceal. Any nation with a moderately sophisticated pharmaceutical industry can do so.” He then remarks on GMO-based biological weapons of mass destruction, the use of which: “… under the cover of an endemic or natural disease occurrence provides an attacker the potential for plausible denial. In this context, biological weapons offer greater possibilities for use than do nuclear weapons.” [21] Indeed, MIT biology professor Jonathan King says that the “… bio-terror programs represent a significant emerging danger to our own population,” adding: ‘while such programs are always called defensive, with biological weapons, defensive and offensive programs overlap almost completely.’ [22]

If we recall the Rockefeller history and Kissinger’s “Food as a weapon” politics and the US military fetish for bio-warfare then we must also entertain the probability that genetic engineering serves a variety of purposes all of which have nothing whatsoever to do with the betterment of humankind. If the spectre of bio-warfare and the weaponisation of food are part of the “invisible hand” of Pathocratic rule then we can expect a future planted with the same dark seeds.

There may be a further reason why the Elite are falling over themselves to eradicate a large quota of the population, build their bunkers and conserve various seed species. Do they have the inside knowledge that “something wicked this way comes”? The rise in cases of Ebola and various strains of Bubonic plague and the possibility of adaptive and muting strains may well indicate a strange confluence of natural occurrences and synthetic manipulation connected with the above bio-warfare. Further, if you are aware that the Earth endures terrain changes and cyclic catastrophes throughout its history with a similar cyclic manifestation of disease carried by cosmic harbingers such as comets and meteors, knowledge of such a confluence may be known by many at certain privileged levels. They may be at least partially aware of myth and science that tells us that we are way over due for another periodic of environmental and cosmological upheaval. Specific preparations would ensue, especially if you seek to retain control and protect your place at the top of the pyramid after the dust and ashes have settled.

Whatever the truth, it seems we won’t have too long to wait before we all find out.

In the next series of posts we will look into how the Establishment has co-opted environmentalism with special attention to the idea of eco-fascism and its traditional alignment to elite ideology.

——————

For news, resources and activism please visit:  monsantowatch.org

 


Notes

[1] Hankinson SE, Willett WC, Colditz GA, Hunter DJ, Michaud DS, Deroo B, Rosner B, Speizer FE, Pollak M (May 1998). “Circulating concentrations of insulin-like growth factor-I and risk of breast cancer”. Lancet 351 (9113): 1393–6. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)10384-1. PMID 9593409. / Pollak M (June 2000). “Insulin-like growth factor physiology and cancer risk”. Eur. J. Cancer 36 (10): 1224–8. DOI:10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00102-7. PMID 10882860. / Sandhu MS, Dunger DB, Giovannucci EL (July 2002). “Insulin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), IGF binding proteins, their biologic interactions, and colorectal cancer”. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 94 (13): 972–80. DOI:10.1093/jnci/94.13.972. PMID 12096082.
[2] ‘Playing God in the Garden’. The New York Times by Michael Pollan October 25, 1998 The New York Times Magazine. p. Section 6; Page 44.
[3] ‘Soy – High Profits Now, Hell to Pay Later’ By Marcela Valente , Jul 29 , 2008 (IPS)
[4] op. cit. Engdahl (p.178)
[5] Javier Souza Casadinho, “Expansión de la soja en el Cono sur” (“Expansion of Soy in the Southern Cone”), Centro de estudios sobre tecnologías apropiadas de la Argentina Red de Acción en plaguicidas de América Latina (Center for the Study of Appropriate Technologies of Argentina, Pesticide Action Network Latin America) (Source Watch)
[6] GM Crops the Health Effects, The Soil Association 2007 | http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=SqDvBO1pyEUpercent3D&tabid=390
[7] ‘Weaponized Food and Medicine is Bad for Your Health’ by Paul Fassa, Natural News, August 25, 2009 | http://www.naturalnews.com/
[8] op. cit. Engdahl (p.190)
[9] op. cit. Engdahl (pp.267-268)
[10] United States Patent 5,723,765 Oliver, et al. March 3, 1998: Oliver; Melvin John (Lubbock, TX), Quisenberry; Jerry Edwin (Idalou, TX), Trolinder; Norma Lee Glover (Quanah, TX), Keim; Don Lee (Leland, MS) Assignee: Delta and Pine Land Co. (Scott, MS) The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of (Washington, DC) Appl. No.: 08/477,559. http://patft.uspto.gov/
[11] op. cit. Fassa.
[12] Ibid
[13] ‘Western corn rootworm and Bt maize: Challenges of pest resistance in the field’ Volume 3, Issue 3 July/August/September 2012. Authors: Aaron J. Gassmann, Jennifer L. Petzold-Maxwell, Ryan S. Keweshan and Mike W. Dunbar. http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/gmcr.20744
[14] ‘Gates and Rockefeller Cafeterias Reject Monsanto GE Foods 01 March 2012. | http://www.templestreamxangablog.com
[15] op. cit. Engdahal (p.270)
[16] ‘Gates’ Vaccine Boost’ UPI, Jan. 29, 2010.
[17] PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases – http://www.plosntds.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001502
[18] ‘Viruses and the GM Insect “Flying Vaccine” Solution’ by Brandon Turbeville, Activist Post December 13, 2010
[19] ‘‘Doomsday Seed Vault’ in the Arctic – Bill Gates, Rockefeller and the GMO giants know something we don’t’ By F. William Engdahl Global Research, December 4, 2007.
[20] Ibid.
[21 Battlefield of the Future: 21st Century Warfare Issues Editors: Barry R. Schneider, Lawrence E. Grinter Revised Edition 1998. PDF http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/ Chapter 10 Biological Weapons for Waging Economic Warfare, Lt Col Robert P. Kadlec, MD, USAF (p.251).
[22] op. cit. Engdahl (Global Research)

Save

The Z Factor XVI: Bio-Piracy and Bio-Warfare

 ” ‘Israel is at the top,’ … ‘It has tentacles reaching out worldwide. [It has] a pyramid system at work that’s awesome … they have brokers everywhere, bank accounts everywhere; they’ve got recruiters, they’ve got translators, they’ve got travel agents who set up the visas.’ “

Dr. Nancy Scheper-Hughes, UC Berkeley Professor of Medical Anthropology


As if all this were not horrific enough, it seems that for the psychopaths and morally deficient presently embedded in the Israeli government, military and medical establishment, even the dead bodies of Palestinians can be turned into a profit-making enterprise. Indeed, the trafficking of body parts had a head start in Israel as a major destination and transit point. From around 1997-2007 there existed an extensive Israeli transplant tourism/organ-trafficking network worth millions of dollars. It supplied only a few thousand Israeli patients worldwide with organs-to-order. Media attention and public recognition of the networks was made from the arrest of orthodox rabbi, Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, where through his wheeling and dealing, links to New York hospitals and the organ trade were established.

In 2003, After living in Australia for several years, Rosenbaum and his wife arrived in the U.S. from Israel, settling in Brooklyn. Rosenbaum launched a company called Medicalink USA Inc. in 2000 and also managed a charity Kav Lachayim United Lifeline Inc. set up by a relation. It was designed to assist mostly Jewish sick and disabled persons by offering donor transplants. Rosebaum made millions from these “charities” in a relatively short period of time with “… four New York properties for a total $5.1 million and built the 6,745-square-foot brick house where he now lives” according to a Bloomberg News report from October 21, 2011. The report went on: “He previously rented a three-bedroom, two-bath apartment for about $1,500 a month, according to Yitzchok Krasne, who lives there now. In court, Mr. Rosenbaum said he worked in the real estate business.”

In July 2009, Rosenbaum was arrested by the New Jersey FBI as part of a major crackdown on money laundering and political corruption. Other rabbis and city mayors were also charged. Authorities gradually learned that the orthodox Rabbi was part of a major organ trafficking outfit involving the brokering and sale of kidneys by Israelis and who charged Americans as much as $160,000 a kidney. He created a scheme by which donor and recipient would deceive hospital workers who checked for illegalities. According to Rosenbaum’s attorney Ronald Kleinberg: “The transplant surgeries occurred in prestigious American hospitals, and were performed by experienced and expert kidney transplant surgeons.”

One has to wonder just how “rigorous” such an evaluation procedure really was and how much hospital authorities knew about these cases. A spokesman for the Johns Hopkins Hospital who was a client of Mr. Rosenbaum said: “… team of doctors and social workers subjects every donor and recipient to scrutiny.” And in a further statement: “All potential donors and recipients are interviewed multiple times by a team of providers during a rigorous screening process, However, no matter how thorough our policies and procedures are, the pre-transplant evaluation may not detect premeditated and skillful attempts to undermine and deceive the evaluation process.”

The first person to be convicted of organ trafficking in the United States: “Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, 60, pleaded guilty Thursday to three counts of organ trafficking and one count of conspiracy in federal court in Trenton, N.J. He said three ailing people in New Jersey paid him a total $410,000 to arrange the sale of kidneys from healthy donors and an undercover FBI agent paid him $10,000.” He is currently serving 20 years in jail.

picture-247-1316738388

Nancy Scheper-Hughes

The reason the NJ FBI was able to indict Rosenbaum was thanks to the assistance of whistleblower Dr. Nancy Scheper-Hughes professor of anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley, and director of the doctoral program in medicine and society. She is also the co-founder of Organs Watch an independent, medical human rights, research and documentation centre at UC Berkeley. Scheper-Hughes has been an expert on global organ trafficking since 1996 carrying out field research and tracking the routes from Brazil, Argentina, and Cuba, to Europe and Turkey, India, South Africa, and the United States. She discovered one of possibly several international networks of organ traffickers with a complex hierarchy of rogue transplant surgeons, their brokers, lawyers, kidney hunters, insurance and travel agents, safe house operators, and “baby sitters” to mind sick and anxious international “transplant tourists.”

Until Rosenbaum’s arrest it had been impossible for Scheper-Hughes to get the attention of the FBI to even consider her claims that organ harvesting was taking place but gradually evidence was gathered and the fabric of the network slowly began to unravel. Rosenbaum had played his part in this criminal network which originated in Israel under the direction of Jewish Mafia boss Ilan Peri. Although his business was a primary node in the organ trafficking network after initially being arrested, he was eventually released from a German jail and then in his native Israel through convenient judicial loopholes.

Two new laws were passed by the Israeli parliament in 2008, which established a threshold for brain deaths and the prohibition of buying, selling and brokering of organs for transplant. Despite these laws, the presence of the Russian-Jewish mafia in Israel has guaranteed that the business continues though it is much tighter operation. Peri continues to offer what is known as transplant tours which he maintains are wholly legal.

The reason the criminal justice system refused to believe Scheper-Hughes was due to the implicit conditioning that lies as a buffer across all Israeli and American-Jewish culture. To accuse – whatever the legitimacy of the claim – is to be equated with right wing anti-Semitism, a hot potato everyone wants to avoid. When combined with the horror that is organ trafficking then it becomes easy to look the other way and pretend such an accusation is either ridiculous or too horrible to believe.

1026117Rabbi Levy Izhak Rosenbaum

The rumours that Palestinian bodies were being harvested for their organs and skin were circulating throughout the 1990s. In 2009, with the arrest of Izhak Rosenbaum and as Scheper-Hughes’ efforts came to the attention of the media, another article was published in a left-wing, Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet on August 17th of that year by journalist Donald Boström which tackled directly the rumour-ville of organ harvesting in Palestine’s occupied territories by the Israeli Defence Force.

Based on his book Inshallah (2001) which explored the same themes, he revisited his research, summarising his findings under the title of: “Our sons are plundered of their organs”, referencing Palestinian families who were convinced their loved ones had been first murdered then violated for their organs. Boström offered largely circumstantial, albeit compelling – evidence that this was still the case. It was common knowledge that Israeli authorities and hospital managers directors and even civil servants were participating in an illegal but lucrative trade and any claims to the contrary were put down to Palestinian propaganda. He stated it was time to bring to light what was happening in the occupied territories since the intifada began, where: “… young Palestinian men disappeared, that they were brought back after five days, at night, under tremendous secrecy, stitched back together after having been cut from abdomen to chin.”

Needless to say, Israeli government officials, lobbyists and lawyers in Israel and the United States went berserk with accusations of anti-Semitism and the well-worn tag of “blood-libel” which came to be associated with any future claims of organ-trafficking. Pick a sound-bite and mix it with Jewish victimhood and the barrier to criticism remains.

Scheper-Hughes followed this story and was unsure that such a crime could be connected to her own investigations. As she states in her own 2010 article: ‘Israel’s National Forensic Institute: Organ Harvest’ for online politics journal Counterpunch:

With respect to the Swedish “blood libel” against the National Forensic Institute at Abu Kabir, the main issue that wasn’t raised in the avalanche of articles, editorials, and news columns published in Israel, Europe and the United States was one simple question, “Was the organ theft story true?” And were there any grounds for linking the tissue theft from the dead to the organization of illicit transplant tours for Israeli patients? Were there any grounds for linking the one story with another?

Not only was it true that the extent of the network was global, Israel’s L. Greenberg National Institute of Forensic Medicine, otherwise known as The Abu Kabir Institute was at the centre of it all. Working under the auspices of the Ministry of Health, the institute is affiliated with the Sackler School of Medicine at Tel Aviv University (which is yet another body which carries out specialist genetics research) and also serves as the controlling entity for burials by the orthodox religious group Cheva Kadisha. It therefore has a respected status in Israeli society as a legal mortuary on the one hand and a covert role as the central source for illegal organ transplantation.

Abukebir

                       The Abu Kabir Institute

One man who was interviewed by Scheper-Hughes back in July 2000, as part of her research into “transplant tourism” proved to be the lynch-pin around which the whole network was organised. He had even boasted of its creation himself. The director of the Institute Dr. Yehuda Hiss was happy to talk about the illegal activities at the time since it was clear he believed he was operating under the unquestioning strength of his own moral compass. He saw an inadequate situation regarding transplants for Israelis and needed a proactive resolution which he intended to provide. His candour would soon change into complete denial several years later.

Having sat on the interview for ten years Scheper-Hughes for fear of reprisals she decided to publish in 2009, during the trial of Rosenbaum. However, concerned to give Hiss a chance to set the record straight she contacted him and a meeting was set up provided the director and his lawyers could vet the doctor’s questions. In the end, the Ministry of Health denied the chance for another interview under those circumstances. This was not the only effect of her visit. It seems the “blood libel” tag was back. In her own words:

While being interviewed about the effects of the changes in transplant laws and practices, several medical and transplant colleagues in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem often interjected disparaging references to the ‘despicable blood libel by the Swedish media,’ even though they knew full well – and knew that I knew – that tucked inside Boström’s tabloid story was a real medical and political scandal of international proportions. I understood their nervousness about the topic, but not their denial of a known fact that was being manipulated into a global political tool of the Israeli government.”

In the original audio-taped interview, the professor was given some highly revealing responses to her pointed questions. Hiss, freely discussed the: “ ‘informal’ procurement of organs and tissues from the bodies of the dead brought to the Institute for examination and autopsy”, and where there existed a: “‘presumed’ consent, one invented by him and shared with no one except, by example, with his medical students and residents and interns.” She further described his: “… quiet policy of aggressive tissue, bone, skin, and organ harvesting, purportedly for the greater good of his country, a country at war, and for the good of his countryman.”

Hiss, like all delusional and religious authoritarian personalities perceived himself to be following a higher law overlaid with a cold mask of scientific rationalism. As he saw it, his own moral code was in perfect alignment to the needs of the situation. That meant he would provide a service to Israelis whatever the perceived “rules.” Consequently, Professor Hiss was (and probably still is) seen as a hero in Jewish dominated US media as well as in his native Israel since Palestinian lives are worthless as they are all terrorists and suicide bombers anyway. So, what’s the problem of using their bodies as a resource for the superior race of the Jew? Obviously, many Israelis do not subscribe to such a view and are as horrified as any person with conscience across the racial divide. But the topic of organ harvesting – let alone from Palestinians – does not get a chance to be debated within Israeli culture, least of all, within politics.

Two colleagues of Scheper-Hughes, former professor at Hebrew University and anthropologist Meira Weiss, and Chen Kugel, M.D., a forensic pathologist who had worked with his mentor Yehuda Hiss at the Institute. They had both supported Scheper-Hughes and her investigations, urging her to make public the tape-recording of Hiss in 2000. Having been forced from their respective jobs for speaking out, it was now the turn of their colleague.

The Interview took place in Hiss’ office at the Institute on July 21st 2000 in the presence if Miera Weiss and another staff member. Yehuda Hiss’ account gave a thorough and extensive overview of the role that he and the Institute played in the procurement of organs and tissue. The key revelations from the interview, as published in Nancy Scheper-Hughes’ aforementioned Counterpunch article of 2010, are as follows:

  • A personal approach and Establishment connections are paramount. The Israeli Defence Force (IDF) has a strong relationship with the Institute harvesting predominantly skin and corneas for several hospitals.
  • For autopsies permission of the families was always sought in the 1970s but by the 1990s this had changed. Due to resistance in Israel to the idea of autopsy – both Jewish and Arab – “… everything is done off the record, highly informal. We never asked for the families’ permission.” […] But we would harvest only from bodies that the family agreed to allow an autopsy. So, we would never harvest where there were objections to the autopsy.”
  • “The law demands permissions for autopsy, but not for harvesting. I read this in the law books… We were free to take skin from the back of legs. We took cornea. … In the beginning of the 1990s, we began to take some long bones from the legs. Then we were asked for cardiac valves, and we did a few of them, because of the lack of collaboration between us and major thoracic departments. Then, beginning in 1995, we started to do it more formally. It was done according to a certain list of priorities, established by various medical centers and specific departments. It was done as a kind of semi-legal thing. At that point, we would inform the Ministry of Health. Before that time [1995], it was only between me/the Institute and the various departments and medical centers – informally. Later, we decided that it should be done through the Ministry of Health.”
  •  “Independence is very important. We are now part of the Ministry of Health, and the director-general of the ministry is our boss, but we are actually completely independent. Until a few years ago, all medical centers were under the Ministry of Health, but in the late 1990s they have become independent. There are only a few still directly under the Ministry of Health. Since then, they are more interested in what we are doing here and in our capacities [to harvest tissues], and so we now get more demands and we feel that it should be regulated. We want to be on record, too, for the various costs that are involved in the harvesting of skin and cornea, bones, pulmonary values and so forth… . But until then, this was just between us and the various hospitals that we serviced, but we wanted there to be some control over this.”
  • Setting prices: “In 1996, we made up a list of the various medical services that we provided, a list of hundreds or thousands of shekels – there were expenses that we wanted to recoup. We would collaborate only with public hospitals. … Since then – about two years ago [1998] – we were told to ask permission for everything. [This is a reference to the late Sergeant Zeev Buzaglo of the Golani Brigade, who was killed in a training accident in April 1997. When his father, Dr. Haim Buzaglo, a pediatrician, came to see his son’s body, he saw that it had been harmed at the Institute – NS-H.” ]
  • “There is a special relationship between the Institute and the army because of the current political situation in Israel. All Israelis feel that we all have an obligation to help out in some way, and because we all served in the army, we all have a personal stake in the army ever after. We are all linked to the army. And because of this, we took it for granted. We never asked. We thought it was part of the duty of all Israelis to cooperate.”
  • “In Israel, 100 per cent of the skin harvested goes to Hadassah Hospital’s skin bank – it is for military purposes only – no biotech firms have access. There is another skin bank in the south of the country, to which the Institute is not linked – but I know that if something happens – if one of the burn centers need skin for a private patient, say, they can take skin from the Hadassah skin bank, but they have to repay it. Logistically, we are only linked to Hadassah.”
  • “Since six months ago, we have a new man working with us downstairs, who is a kind of mortuary assistant, and he is harvesting skin, bones, cornea, and bones. Before him, there was only an arrangement with the army – they used to send us here every week a plastic surgeon, who would come here to harvest skin for the skin bank in Hadassah. This lasted for many years. More than 12 or 13 years he did this. Since 1987-1988, every other week, a plastic surgeon would come here to harvest skin. But now we no longer have this direct relationship with the army since this latest scandal. Now, we have our own mortuary assistant, who is paid to harvest for us all the skin, bone, cornea, etc., that is needed. He helps out in other activities as well.”
  • The foundation to what has become the modern relationship with Russia and Israel and organ harvesting: “You can buy cornea from Russia for $300 each, I think…. In Moscow, you can get a kidney for $20,000 and cornea for a few dollars, because they really don’t care… At every autopsy, they take what they want, and they have a tremendous stockpile of organs that they can draw on. They have skin and cornea. In some large medical centers in Russia, you can get fresh kidney that they get from auto accidents – and in Turkey as well. So, in both places you can get transplanted organs for just $20,000 – including the kidney – because they have a stockpile of them. I know because I was part of a transplant procurement organization, and we studied this. It is very cheap. It is well done by very good surgeons there. In fact, there is a surplus of kidneys in Russia. They have surplus because fewer people there can afford transplants.”
  • Regarding Transplant Tourism: “… sometimes our surgeons would accompany our Israeli patients to Russia, and they would perform the surgery there and the kidney was from a Russian. The surgery would be performed by Israeli doctors in Russia, with Russian kidneys. Some are leading transplant surgeons from Israel…”
  •  “Many things in Israel are done on a personal basis and through connections… I think that in Israel everything should be as equitable as possible. One should not have to depend on connections or money. If advertising and the media would only persuade the Israeli population to donate organs from deceased victims from trauma… [ and even though there is nothing in Talmudic law against organ harvesting from the dead], a religious family will find a rabbi who will agree with them. I try to tell them how important it is to donate, and they will say, “I need to discuss this with my rabbi” – and nine times out of ten they come back with a negative answer. That is, the answer that they want…”

According to Israeli authorities since the disclosure of the organ trade and the whistle-blowing of Nancy Scheper-Hughes permission for autopsies and harvesting has been formalised and regulations introduced. The trade in organs harvested from the bodies of Israeli soldiers, Israeli citizens, Palestinians and foreign workers was said to have ceased. However, recent allegations suggest that the industry merely went further underground. Perhaps it was unlikely that such a lucrative business would simply grind to a halt.

Israel’s popular newspaper Haaretz published a report on June 20th 2013 with the headline: ‘Israeli MDs harvesting organs for international trafficking ring.’ Costa Rican authorities had been working hard to break up an international organ trafficking ring and had finally achieved success as they carried out raids on several medical establishments. It was reported that several Israeli doctors had been at the centre of the network who: “specialised in selling kidneys to patients in Israel and East Europe.” The head of Nephrology Francisco Mora Palma, who worked at one of the largest state-run medical centers, Calderon Guardia Hospital, was arrested for his role in the trafficking ring. A police officer working with the doctor as a scout for potential donors was also arrested. Once again, the police implied that the ring was merely part of a larger global operation. With estimates of $16,000-20,000 paid for kidney donors, two way traffic from Israel to destination countries and the Ministry of Health’s protestations that it knew nothing about the trafficking – business is flourishing. As Attorney General Chavarria stated, this is likely just the “tip of the iceberg.”

If we cast our mind back to the problem of missing persons in the United States and across the world with such sums of money at stake, is it not logical to assume that many of the missing, mostly children are being abducted and sold for body parts? Well, sure enough this is exactly what the present research is suggests.

sons_p2

19-year-old Bilal Achmed Ghanan was shot and taken away by Israeli soldiers. His body was returned to his family brutally stitched up from the abdomen to the chin. Source: Israeli Organ Harvesting The New “Blood Libel”? by Alison Weir, 2009.

On October 18th 2013, The Telegraph’s Steven Swinford offered the first reported case of organ trafficking uncovered in the United Kingdom. A little Somalian girl was smuggled into the Island expressly to have her organs harvested for needy for those desperate for transplants. Child protection agencies warned that this was unlikely to be an isolated incident since the number of human trafficking victims in the UK has reached record levels, having risen by over 50 per cent in 2012.

Egypt too was suffering from the internal fractures of Western influenced meddling which has resulted in a tragic civil war offers rich pickings for the organ traffickers. IRN News a service of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs ran a story entitled: ‘EGYPT: Rising tide of child abductions’ which was published in December 2013. A coalition of 100 Egyptian child rights advocacy groups is continuing to apply pressure on the military government to take steps to halt the huge rise in child abductions across the country. The report quoted ex-policeman and security expert Maher Zakhry who stated: “The kidnapping of children has become a very worrying phenomenon,” … “Our country’s deteriorating security conditions make this crime more possible.”

Anywhere there is conflict and civilian casualties you will find organ traffickers on the prowl which is why the conflict in Syria and the 11 million refugees is a humanitarian disaster beyond imagining with children being prey not just to government and rebel bullets and shrapnel but the tangential obscenity of traffickers. Indeed, according to the latest reports the US-NATO backed Al-Qaeda outfit The Free Syrian Army has been accused not only of various atrocities, but indulging in a bit of outsourced organ trafficking on the side. Allegations of harvesting the body organs of Syrian civilians and army soldiers after kidnapping and murdering them have been reported by the Turkish paper Yurt. Though similar reports strangely no longer seem to exist on newspaper servers, a debate over whether this is propaganda or not will doubtless continue.

Nancy Scheper-Hughes’ courageous research showed that kidney trafficking in particular was overwhelming sourced from Israel. What is even more disturbing and which confirms yet again, why the idea of revenge and the cliche of self-loathing appears to play a part. Scheper-Hughes identified two motivations of the Israeli organ traffickers. The first was unsurprisingly: “greed” and the second was incredibly: “Revenge, restitution—reparation for the Holocaust.” where they described this further as: “… kind of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. We’re going to get every single kidney and liver and heart that we can. The world owes it to us.’” [1]

Once again, this pathological entitlement to inflict revenge and retribution is drawn from a preceived passivity and acquiescence to that historical victimhood. This has become inverted and its dark shadow projected out into the world to contribute to the spread of that very same infection of evil into the world.

“The World Owes us.”

 

Chemical Weapons and Biological Warfare

And if murdered Palestinians can be used as a source for organ trafficking then it shouldn’t be surprising that such minds can think up other ways to desecrate and even extinguish the very idea of Palestinians as a race.

330px-WMD_world_map.svgBiological | Chemical | Nuclear | Radiological (wikipedia)

Israel has long had a reputation for developing chemical and biological weapons methods (CBW) for their most effective dispersal, preferably in the Palestinian population. Ethnic cleansing always seems to return as the primary mover for such actions, the Israeli occupation of Haifa on 23 April 1948, is an early case. It was thought to be under Arab control and thus under the “protection” of the British forces when it was used as one of the first experiments in Israeli chemical warfare. The city water supply still comes from a nearby village, Kabri, about 10 kms to the north, through an aqueduct. From 6 May to about 19 May, the city population was struck down by a sudden typhoid epidemic. Somewhere along this supply point Zionists injected typhoid into the water system.

The minutes of an emergency conference held at the Lebanese Red Cross Hospital in Acre on 6 May and attended by top level Army and Medical personnel determined the outbreak was “water borne” and “not due to crowded or unhygienic conditions as claimed by the Israelis.” [2]According to Dr. De Meuron of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) it was the first time something of this nature had ever happened in Palestine. The poisoning of Acre’s water supply ended with destruction of the city, the depopulation of its inhabitants, war crimes committed by Zionist soldiers including acts of rape, enforced poisoning by cyanide and the internment of civilians in concentration camps. Homes, farms, businesses and the denial of return to their city were sanctioned, euphemistically known as “Transfer” by Zionists. (It followed a similar pattern of experimental destruction which could be likened to the genocide inflicted on Iraqi inhabitants of Fallujah during the invasion of Iraq).

In 1999 Palestinian physician Dr. Salman Abu Sitta stated the facts to the UK House of Commons that during the 1948 War: “… bacteriological warfare was used by poisoning wells and infecting drinking water with malaria and typhus. This was the case in the summer of 1948, as Ben-Gurion admitted in his diary.” [3] Fast forward to the destruction wrought by the Israeli army on Beit Hanoun’s sanitations and sewage networks intentionally mixing them with potable water networks in the hope of causing environmental and health problems. The Association of Palestinian Hydrologists called on “all the legal institutions to work on disclosing the Israeli practices that aim at spreading diseases and epidemics in the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Hanoun” in July of 2004. [4]

Another example of Zionist flirtation with toxic concoctions hit an upward curve in October 30, 1996. Rebels in Papua New Guinea accused Israel of providing government forces with “chemical bombs” dropped by helicopters, causing skin irritation and burning. Following the tradition of the US who happily sold chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein more than a decade before the first Iraq war, the Israeli government decided to yield to a more open stance of double standards by not submitting the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention to Knesset for ratification. On September 25 1997, Israeli MOSSAD agents attempted to poison Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal with fentanyl in Amman, Jordan. Meshaal is administered an antidote in exchange for Jordan’s release of captured agents.

Israeli’s love affair with micro-biology and chemical warfare is focused in the top secret facility of the Israel Institute for Biological Research, (IIBR) which is obviously very busy. According to one biologist who worked at IIBR: “There is hardly a single known or unknown form of chemical or biological weapon … which is not manufactured at the institute [IIBR].” In August, 1998 Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot published an exposé calling IIBR “metropolitan Tel Aviv’s most severe environmental hazard” which gave some publicity to Israelis living in the area who had launched an appeal to the Supreme Court to prevent the expansion of the institute without success.[5]

In October 2000, perhaps in response to encouraging noises from excited and well paid scientists, the Israeli military was allowed to test out their latest bag of tricks by shooting gas canisters into schoolyard and classrooms at T’ku, near Bethlehem. Over 24 children suffered from gas inhalation and required hospitalisation. Apparently, gas “differs from the standard tear-gas used around the world in dispersing demonstrations.” [6]

American filmmaker James Longley documented the use of unknown gas attacks that took place on February 12, 2001, in Khan Younis, located in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. His film “Gaza Strip” garnered several awards after revealing the reality of the suffering undergone by the victims many of whom were forced to remain in hospital for weeks. More repeated gas attacks followed over February and March with reports from locations near Bethlehem; East of Gaza city and the West Bank village of Al-Zawiya. Experts believe the chemical was a new, unknown type of nerve gas. [7]

dna-horz© infrakshun

BBC Television produced one of the first in-depth investigations into Israel’s use of chemical weapons in March, 2003 called Israel’s Secret Weapon. The attacks in Gaza and the West bank were investigated. The programme’s conclusion was that: “The Israeli army has used new unidentified weapons. In February 2001 a new gas was used in Gaza. A hundred and eighty patients were admitted to hospitals with severe convulsions… Israel is outside chemical and biological weapons treaties and still refuses to say what the new gas was.” Unsurprisingly, even before the programme was aired the Israel PR reflex was in operation over the slightest possibility of criticism and considered “lodging a vehement protest” to banish any thought there may be “double standards” at work as alleged by the film. [8]

Regardless of the prohibition of chemical weapons in the 21st Century the Israeli government believes that riots and unrest provide a perfect opportunity to test the latest chemical weaponry they have in their possession.

By June of 2004, protests against the construction of the West bank barrier clinics in Al-Zawiya saw 130 patients treated for gas inhalation. This was not tear gas or any conventional chemical for crowd dispersal. Dr. Abu Madi stated: “The patients were children, women, old people and young men …there were a high number of cases of [tetany], spasm in legs and hands, connected to the nervous system. Pupils were dilated … Other symptoms included shock, semi-consciousness, hyperventilation, irritation and sweating.”

In a 2009 report entitled: Rain of Fire: Israel’s Unlawful Use of White Phosphorus in Gaza Human Rights Watch said: “Israel’s repeated firing of white phosphorus shells over densely populated areas of Gaza during its recent military campaign was indiscriminate and is evidence of war crimes.” The document provided detailed witness accounts of the “devastating effects that white phosphorus munitions had on civilians and civilian property in Gaza.” Fred Abrahams, senior emergencies researcher and co-author of the report stated: “In Gaza, the Israeli military didn’t just use white phosphorus in open areas as a screen for its troops. It fired white phosphorus repeatedly over densely populated areas, even when its troops weren’t in the area and safer smoke shells were available. As a result, civilians needlessly suffered and died.” [9]

Another paper from the New Weapons Research Committee reported: “the 2006 and 2009 Israeli bombings on Gaza left a high concentration of toxic metals in soil, which can cause tumours, fertility problems, and serious effects on newborns, like deformities and genetic pathologies.” [10] Further, from a Palestine Human Rights Information Centre report of 1989 chemicals in the tear gas canisters ensures the gas sticks to clothes, food and walls, for considerable periods of time long after they have been fired. The report states that: “Residues of CS gas, one of the gases in use, remaining on food, can break down into cyanide when the food is cooked, even long after exposure.” [11] Even the use of Napalm has been employed against the Palestinian people as far back as 1967. Keen to keep up with the new innovations being tested out on Vietnamese soldiers and civilians alike Israel signed on the dotted line in anticipation. [12]

image004

On 17 January 2009, Israeli forces bombed a school run by the United Nations agency for Palestine refugees (UNRWA) in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip. Around 1,600 Palestinians from the northern Gaza Strip, mostly families including young children, sought refuge at the school to escape Israeli air strikes that were targeting homes in densely populated areas. At least two children were killed in the attack and another dozen wounded by the white phosphorus bombs fired at the school.”  –  ‘Photostory: Israel attacks UN school in Gaza’ – The Electronic Intifada


The new Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew University, has just finished patting itself on the back for establishing an anti-terrorism technology centre: “which envisions that the centre will become a world leader in developing anti-terrorism warfare technology, especially relating to chemical and biological anti-terrorism.” One has to wonder why? Especially as the Hebrew University: “… has received around $10 million annually from US government agencies in grants for infrastructure and applied research.” [13]  The absence of a real external threat other than some phony CIA/MOSSAD infiltrated Jihadist group or the conveniently ubiquitous Al-Qaeda threatening to show up in the next country targeted for invasion, this very brief look at chemical warfare shows that Israel and the US are obsessed with these fields of research.

During the Gaza and West bank incursions nerve gases were not the only examples inflicted on the Palestinians. In October, Italian investigators found forensic evidence that suggested that a drive to introduce a new form of chemical warfare in the occupied territories represented the near future of US “counterinsurgency warfare.” With photographic evidence and witness testimony from the many victims and doctors on the ground, the use of Dense Inert Metal Explosives (DIME) was said to be the most probable cause.[14]  Developed at the US Air Force Research Laboratory, DIME is a low collateral damage weapon (LCD) which produces a powerful blast within a small area, while allowing lower pressure but increased impulse in the area. It sprays a superheated “micro-shrapnel” of powdered Heavy Metal Tungsten Alloy (HMTA) that is geno-toxic (extremely harmful to human DNA.) as well as being dangerous to overall health. [15]

Chief of the emergency unit at Gaza’s largest hospital in Al-Shifa, Dr Joma Al-Saqqa had first-hand experience of the effects on the human body. As he was treating patients he observed that: “…despite the damage in internal soft tissue in the bodies of injured people, the fragments were not detected by X-ray. In other words, they had disappeared or dissolved inside the body.”  Dr. Al-Saqqa reported that: “When the wounds were explored no foreign material was found. There was tissue death, the extent of which was difficult to determine … A higher deep infection rate resulted with subsequent amputation. In spite of amputation there was a higher mortality.” [16]

He confirmed:

“… that there were dozens of wounded legs and arms. Many of them had been burned from the inside, and distorted to the point that they cannot return to life again.” … “When the shrapnel hit[s] the body, it causes very strong burns that destroy the tissues around the bones … it burns and destroys internal organs, like the liver, kidneys, and the spleen and other organs and makes saving the wounded almost impossible. As a surgeon, I have seen thousands of wounds during the Intifada, but nothing was like this weapon.” [17]

The doctor also concluded that the effects of the weapon seemed “radioactive.”

After his experiences Al-Saqqa is in no doubt that the Israeli Army was employing a new chemical weapon which had resulted in the deaths of 50 Palestinians and over 200 injured. Analysis of victims’ wounds proved impossible. Gaza’s only forensic crime laboratory was destroyed by the Israelis on June 27 of the siege which seems more than a little convenient.[18] In the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 the exact same evidence of chemical warfare was found. Dr. Mads Gilbert and Dr. Erik Fosse, who were working on Palestinians who suffered wounds in the attacks, believed such injuries could only have come from a new type of weapon such as the DIME bomb. [19]

A 2004 study by the British Medical Association concluded that the world was perhaps only a few years away from “terrifying biological weapons capable of killing only people of specific ethnic groups, citing advances in “genetic weapons technology.” More than a twelve years ago Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz and I.Lewis Libby, Chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney had argued in draft policy statements to press for the further establishment of various imperialist polices including the development of biological weapons that can “target specific genotypes [and] may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.” [20]

The now infamous report in the The Times back in 1998 described Israel’s claim to have successfully developed an “ethnic bullet” that targets Arabs. Indeed, no denials have been forthcoming and from the same report an Israeli government spokesman said: “we have a basket full of serious surprises that we will not hesitate to use if we feel that the state of Israel is under serious threat.” [21]

Translation: anything is acceptable as long as Israel can have its own way.

It seems a far cry from notions of peace and reconciliation though again ironic in its parallels to Nazism. This also connects to the expansion of the Human Genome Project and America’s love affair with eugenics which harks back to the brain-drain of Nazi scientists during and after the Second World War which in turn, created the principles upon which the CIA and the National Security State were formed. The crucial question we might ask here is: if Arabs can be targeted genetically, can the Israelis also target other “genetic lines,” such as peoples of black or Asian or Anglo-Saxon heritage? Stanford University biophysicist, Professor Steven Block makes this pertinent observation: “We’re tempted to say that nobody in their right mind would ever use these things, but not everybody is in their right mind.” [22]

Yet for the many in government, the military and intelligence circles, the only mind is the psychopath’s mind and everyone else must conform to its reality.


See also: Israel is the organ harvesting and human trafficking global ringleader, with complicit help from US and Turkey  It seems Israel and its proxy army ISIS can’t stop themselves…

The following link may have implications for producing ethnic-specific weapons for bio-warfare. This especially interesting since Putin is a major threat to the Three Establishment Model’s design for world order:

Putin: Someone is harvesting Russian bio samples for obscure purposes


Notes

[1] ‘Israeli Organ Trafficking and Theft: From Moldova to Palestine by Alison Weir, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, November 2009.
[2] ‘Traces of Posion – Israel’s Dark History revealed.’ By Salman Abu-Sitta, Al-Ahram Weekly Issue No. 62, Feb 27 – March 5, 2003.
[3] ‘Israel and Chemical/Biological Weapons: History, Deterrence, and Arms Control,’ by Avner Cohen, The Nonproliferation Review, Fall-Winter 2001, Vol. 8, No. 3, p. 32.
[4] ‘Hydrologists warn of Israeli spreading diseases in N. Gaza’ China View March 3, 2004.
[5] Examples from 1990 – 1998 verified and sourced from Nuclear Threat Initiative; Israel Chronology 1998 – 2010 | http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/israel_biological.pdf?_=1316466791.
[6] Iran Republic News Agency (IRNA), October 29, 2000.
[7] ‘Israeli Army Fires Highly Toxic Quantities of Tear Gas at Civilians in Khan Yunis,’ Gaza, Palestine Monitor, February 15, 2001.
[8] ‘Israel considers protesting BBC show on `secret weapons’’ By Sharon Sadeh, Haaretz, March 14, 2003.
[9] ‘Israel: White Phosphorus Use Evidence of War Crimes – Indiscriminate Attacks Caused Needless Civilian Suffering’ Human Rights Watch, March 25, 2009.
[10] ‘Israel Poisons Palestinian Soil, Newborns’ By Fareed Mahdy IDN-InDepthNews Service, December 19 2009.
[11] PHRIC: ‘Uprising In Palestine.’ 1989 Report.
[12] Our Roots Are Still Alive – The Story of the Palestinian People, Written by the Peoples Press Palestine Book Project: Joy Bonds, Jimmy Emerman, Linda John, Penny Johnson, Paul Rupert Illustrations: Ron Weil of Gonna Rise Again Graphics Design: Leah Statman of Gonna Rise Again Graphics Layout: Joy Bonds and Leah Statman, Institute for Independent Social Journalism.
Chapter 13: June 1967 Seizing New Arab Land: “In the West Bank and the Golan Heights, Israeli planes bombed villages and dropped napalm. Napalm rained on areas around Arab Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and the East Bank of the Jordan. Sami Oweida told the story of his family to a British professor. During the war his family left Jericho and tried to cross the King Hussein Bridge to the East Bank of the Jordan and relative safety. According to Oweida’s account: I saw a plane come down like a hawk directly at us. We threw ourselves on the ground and found ourselves in the midst of fire…. I tried to do something, but in vain. Fire was all around. I carried my burning child outside the fire. The burning people became naked. Fire stuck to my hands and face. I rolled over. The fire rolled with me. I saw another plane coming directly at us. I thought it was the end. I saw the pilot lean over and look at us. My daughter Labiba (four years old) died that night. Two children of my cousin also died. My daughter Adla (seventeen years old) died four days later.”
[13] ‘Hebrew U. company sets up anti-terror technology unit,’ by Batya Feldman, Globes, 22 April 2004.
[14] Italian TV: Israel used new weapon prototype in Gaza Strip, Haaretz, October 19, 2006.
[15] ‘Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME)’ globalsecurity.org / and Wikipedia .
[16] ‘Ministry of Health report on toxic Israeli weapons confirmed by Gaza City medical sources’, Palestine News Network, July 13,/2006.
[17] Ibid.
[18]Israel ‘is using chemical ammunition’ in Gaza, Centre for Research on Globalization/Gulf News, June 13, 2006.
[19] ‘Norwegian doctor: Israel used new type of weapon in Gaza’ by Amira Hass, Haaretz, January 19, 2009. “His best guess, he said, is that the pressure wave is caused by a dense inert metal explosive, or DIME, a type of bomb developed to minimize collateral damage. A military expert working for Human Rights Watch also told Haaretz that the nature of the wounds and descriptions given by Gazans made it seem likely that Israel used DIMEs.”
[20] p.60; ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century’ Project for a New American Century, http://www.newamericancentury.org.
[21] Israel planning Ethnic Bomb as Sadaam caves in’ The Times, Novermber 15, 1998. – “The intention is to use the ability of viruses and certain bacteria to alter the DNA inside their host’s living cells. The scientists are trying to engineer deadly micro-organisms that attack only those bearing the distinctive genes. The programme is based at the biological institute in Nes Tziyona, the main research
facility for Israel’s clandestine arsenal of chemical and biological weapons. A scientist there said the task was hugely complicated because both Arabs and Jews are of semitic origin. But he added: “They have, however, succeeded in pinpointing a particular characteristic in the genetic profile of certain Arab communities, particularly the Iraqi people.” The disease could be spread by spraying the organisms into the air or putting them in water supplies. The research mirrors biological studies conducted by South African scientists during the apartheid era and revealed in testimony before the truth commission. The idea of a Jewish state conducting such research has provoked outrage in some quarters because of parallels with the genetic experiments of Dr Josef Mengele, the Nazi scientist at Auschwitz.”
[22] p.277; Seeds of Destruction The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation by F. William Engdahl, Published by Global Research, 2007 | ISBN-10: 0973714727.