Our Occulted History: Do the Global Elite Conceal Ancient Aliens? (33 page)
If there is a ruling elite, the best way to keep its subjects under control would be through bad water and bad food that made people unhealthy, obese, and depressed. One of the ways to make the water bad would be through the use of fluoride, which, despite much positive publicity, is only used in public water supplies by eleven nations.
Concern over fluoride in the nation’s water supply was once derided as right-wing paranoia, but recently the public has become privy to studies suggesting the dangers of fluoride toxicity. International author and medical writer Mary Sparrowdancer noted that, since the 1930s, German and Austrian scientists knew how to treat overactive thyroids by bathing a person in fluoride. This was effective because fluoride blocked thyroid function. “For the US government, long partnered with the pharmaceutical industry, to then force this same treatment on a nation of people with healthy thyroids under the lie that fluoride ‘prevents cavities in children,’ is unconscionable. The Nuremberg Code of ethics pertaining to human experimentation labels it an act of crime, stating, ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.’ Today, 70 percent of the US is being forced to receive this thyroid-blocking chemical via their water without consent or medical monitoring for overdose, allergic reaction or blocked thyroid function.”
Symptoms of thyroid damage and fluoride poisoning include weight gain, edema, kidney disease, kidney failure, hair loss, depression, aggression, aches, pains, skin problems, bone deformities including arthritis, sexual/erectile dysfunction, memory loss, weakness, fatigue, heart disease, irritability, digestive disorders, and cancer. As the dangers of fluoride reach more of the public, an increasing number of cities and communities have abandoned the fluoridation of their water supply, a practice initiated in the past with little or no debate. This is due to the fact that many of these cities didn’t even have a choice on fluoride in the first place. According to the former head of the Harvard School of Dental Medicine, James M. Dunning, “The big cities in the United States were mostly fluoridated by executive action in such a way as to avoid public referenda.”
And fluoride might be in more than just our drinking water. A 2005 study at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis found some commercial iced tea mixes contain up to 6.5 parts per million (ppm) of fluoride, which is well above the 4 ppm maximum allowed by the EPA in drinking water and the 2.4 ppm permitted by the FDA in bottled water and beverages. Researcher Michael Whyte said, “When fluoride gets into your bones, it stays there for years, and there is no established treatment for skeletal fluorosis. No one knows if you can fully recover from it.” Yet fluoridation has been an agenda item of the elite’s giant chemical corporations for many years.
Who will ultimately control the state of the nation’s water supply apparently was decided by an executive order signed in March 2012 by President Obama. Under section 201 (5), National Defense Resources Preparedness Order (NDRPO), the secretary of defense will be in charge of water resources, which seems odd in that under this order, the secretary of energy is in charge of energy and the secretary of transportation in charge of transportation. But defense? According to this NDRPO, virtually everything in the United States will come under the total control of the National Security Council and Homeland Security Council, in conjunction with the National Economic Council, all of which serve the president.
One firm at the center of worldwide controversy over the use of both chemicals and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is Monsanto. As the world’s leading chemical company (it partnered with the global Nazi chemical firm IG Farben prior to Farben’s dissolution in 2003), Monsanto has been involved in several scandals involving toxic chemicals. For forty years, it produced industrial coolants known as PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), which were dumped by the millions of pounds into open-pit landfills and rivers. These coolants are now banned. Monsanto also helped manufacture a number of harmful dioxins that pollute the environment and can afflict humans who come into contact with them. The most famous of these was Agent Orange, a defoliant that caused many U.S. Vietnam War veterans, as well as several hundred thousand Vietnamese, to suffer debilitating problems after the war, such as skin, nerve, and respiratory disorders, cancer, birth defects in offspring, and many other problems.
An investigation in the early 1990s by the EPA concluded that the chemical giant had misrepresented data concerning the hazards of dioxins and Agent Orange, which led to the government denying compensation to Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange and their children suffering birth defects.
In 2011, despite widespread opposition in the light of studies indicating harmful effects from genetically modified seeds and despite a Supreme Court decision banning the planting of such seeds pending environmental impact studies by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Obama and the USDA decided to deregulate two of Monsanto’s GMO seed varieties—alfalfa and sugar beets.
To legitimize such action, in 2012 riders were attached to both the 2012 Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act, known simply as the Farm Bill (HR 6083), and section 733 of the 2013 Agriculture Appropriations Bill (HR 5973) that would require the secretary of agriculture to “immediately” grant temporary approval or deregulation to GMO crops even if the crop’s safety is in question or under legal review. “In other words, if this single line in the 90-page Agricultural Appropriations bill slips through, it’s Independence Day for the biotech industry,” warned Alexis Baden-Mayer and Ronnie Cummins on the AlterNet website. They noted that under this provision, the “Monsanto rider,” all that any farmer or biotech firm need to do is ask, and “the questionable crops could be released into the environment where they could potentially contaminate conventional or organic crops and, ultimately, the nation’s food supply.”
To understand the purposes of such deregulation, one should look at who stands to gain from it. Anthony Gucciardi, writing on the Natural Society website, noted that Bill Gates, cofounder and chairman of Microsoft, was urging that GMO seeds be used to meet the world’s demand for food and that his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had funded experiments with the seeds in five African nations. “Monsanto’s drought-resistant corn seeds were given to African farmers facing drought conditions, replacing traditional and sustainable farming with Monsanto’s GMO crops,” reported Gucciardi.
At a meeting of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) in early 2012, Gates touted the use of GMO seeds and announced that his foundation would provide $200 million in new grants to research new GMO corn. As of August 2010, Bill Gates’s foundation had purchased five hundred thousand shares of Monsanto stocks.
Despite Gates’s endorsement, some studies suggest that GMO crops may create more problems than they solve. John Vidal, the environment editor of London’s
Guardian
, has written, “Genetic engineering has failed to increase the yield of any food crop but has vastly increased the use of chemicals and the growth of ‘superweeds,’ according to a report by 20 Indian, south-east Asian, African and Latin American food and conservation groups representing millions of people.”
Even more disturbing, a recent study reported in
Reproductive Toxicology
, showed Bt (
Bacillus thuringiensis
) toxins engineered into genetically modified foods were found in the blood of twenty-eight of thirty pregnant women tested and in 80 percent of the tested women’s umbilical cords. In a nonpregnant group, traces were found in the blood of 69 percent. It was believed that the toxins entered the human body as a result of eating meat, milk, and eggs from farm livestock fed GM corn. Pete Riley, director of GM Freeze, a consumer group opposed to GMO farming, said, “This research is a major surprise as it shows that the Bt proteins have survived the human digestive system and passed into the blood supply—something that regulators said could not happen.”
Despite a lack of reporting in the corporate news media in America, the public should know that Monsanto’s plans for its GMO crops and seed, often referred to as Frankenfood, have been beaten back in more than two dozen nations. According to a February 2012 item in
European Biotechnology Science & Industry News
, “The exodus of plant biotechnology out of Europe seems to have accelerated. Just three weeks ago, BASF Plant Science announced it would leave Europe as an R&D location for developing its GM plants. But now, it looks like US-based Monsanto is following the example of its German R&D partner and turning away from Europe for good. First, the company announced that it does not plan to sell its genetically modified maize MON810 in France despite the highest court recently overturning a three-year ban on its sale. Now United Press International reported that Monsanto is closing its wheat growing operation, based in Cambridge, which employed 125 people, and selling off crop-breeding centers in France, Germany and the Czech Republic.” The article also mentioned that many in Denmark were opposed to European governments approving GM plants. Apparently the European Union came to an agreement that companies seeking EU approval for a GM crop would agree not to market the product in those countries that wish to restrict cultivation, in return for those countries not blocking EU authorization to grow the crops elsewhere in Europe.
The fact that GMO products are taking a beating in Europe was acknowledged by BASF Plant Science president and CEO Peter Eckes, who wrote, “The socio-political climate and the regulatory conditions do not give us any indication that genetically modified plants can be successfully commercialized in Europe in the years to come.”
This is not the case in America. Anthony Gucciardi reported that “The USDA has allowed Monsanto to run rampant, modifying staple crops, food items, and even milk. Monsanto’s rBGH is a synthetic hormone created using molecules and DNA sequences that are a result of molecular cloning, which has been linked to breast and gastrointestinal cancer. In the United States, this synthetic hormone is present in ¹/³ of all milk. Meanwhile, it is banned in 27 countries around the globe. Marketed under the name Posilac, Monsanto has since sold the brand to a division of Eli Lilly and Company, Elanco Animal Health.”
Apparently even some Monsanto employees are wary of the company’s products. In early 2012, according to Britain’s
Independent
, Sutcliffe Catering Group, which caters to a Monsanto plant in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, banned GMO soybeans and corn from its menu so that “you, the customer, can feel confident in the food we serve.” Monsanto executives confirmed the notice, but company spokesman Tony Coombes said the reason for the GMO-free food was because the company “believes in choice.” This statement seemed ironic to many as Monsanto has for some time fought to prevent the clear labeling of GMO foods and threatened ruinous litigation against those who would investigate the firm.
Many researchers and scientists believe that Monsanto’s GMO crops may be responsible for the die-off of bees, a critical pollinator in the environmental food chain. In addition to adding fluoride to our drinking water and allowing questionable companies to produce food using unsafe chemicals, the U.S. government also allows thousands of questionable additives to be used in the food supplies, such as aspartame and monosodium glutamate (MSG). During the Reagan administration in the 1980s, Donald Rumsfeld pushed the sugar substitute aspartame through a recalcitrant Food and Drug Administration (FDA) even though studies linked this chemical to various cancers. Aspartame, composed of 50 percent phenylalanine, 40 percent aspartic acid, and 10 percent methanol (wood alcohol), has been banned from children’s food products by the European Union. In our bodies, methanol breaks down into formaldehyde, the main ingredient in embalming fluid, and formic acid. Aspartame is found in more than six thousand food products in the United States and Canada today, especially in the commercial sweeteners NutraSweet, Splenda, and Equal, but due to the controversy over its effects on the human body, the sugar substitute is being relabeled as AminoSweet.
MSG is the sodium salt of glutamic acid, a nonessential amino acid, and is used as a flavor enhancer. According to former food-processing engineer and food scientist Carol Hoernlein, mainstream media are now acting surprised that MSG has been linked to obesity, even though scientists have for forty years routinely used MSG or glutamate to induce obesity in lab animals. In the 1960s, John Olney found that MSG damaged cells of the hypothalamus in the brain and made lab mice morbidly obese. MSG also is a cumulative excitotoxin, a compound that overstimulates the brain, leading to migraines and hyperactivity, especially in children.
If it’s not bad enough that our food is filled with these chemicals, some are now saying that substantial amounts of the poison arsenic can be found in fruit juices. Dr. Mehmet Oz sparked this debate when he told TV viewers that tests showed some samples of commercial apple juices contained total arsenic levels exceeding 10 parts per billion (ppb), the legal limit for bottled and public water. Furthermore, an investigation of apple and grape juice by
Consumer Reports
showed that roughly 10 percent of juice samples, from five brands, had total arsenic levels that exceeded federal drinking-water standards. Most of that arsenic was inorganic arsenic, a known carcinogen. One in four samples contained levels of lead higher than the FDA’s bottled-water limit of 5 ppb. As with arsenic, no federal limit exists for lead in juice. The
Consumer Reports
research revealed that inorganic arsenic has been detected at disturbing levels in other foods and that a growing amount of scientific evidence suggests that chronic exposure to arsenic and lead, even at levels below water standards, can result in serious health problems. Special concern was given to children under age five, who research found drink juice in quantities exceeding pediatricians’ recommendations. Joshua Hamilton, a toxicologist specializing in arsenic research, stated, “People sometimes say, ‘If arsenic exposure is so bad, why don’t you see more people sick or dying from it?’ But the many diseases likely to be increased by exposure even at relatively low levels are so common already that its effects are overlooked simply because no one has looked carefully for the connection.”