The single greatest fear of GMO pushers has just been revealed. In the days after I wrote my now-famous article comparing GMO advocates to Nazi collaborators, the blogosphere erupted with a heated discussion of,
This story thrust the topic of GMOs back into the minds of millions of people, which was of course the whole point. It also helped introduced terms into the minds of the public like,
Critics of the article only helped this
effort by pointing to it and bringing more traffic to my website,
causing our email subscriber list to rapidly explode over the last
Lists of GMO skeptics are acceptable, but lists of GMO collaborators cause panic
Naturally, I expected to be attacked and vilified for daring to make such a comparison, but what I didn't expect was to discover just how freaked out GMO pushers would be when they found their names being added to a list.
The list, hosted by a still-fishy website called MonsantoCollaborators.org (which appears to be offline at the moment), contained a list of names of a selection of pro-Monsanto bloggers, journalists and scientists:
The list seemed somewhat random, and I didn't even recognize half the names on it.
But the mere existence of such a list
freaked out the GMO pushers to an extreme. Essentially, they
I can't even think of how many hate lists my name is probably on by now due to my outspoken criticism of GMOs, vaccines, chemotherapy and psychiatric drugs. I think it's fair to say I have somehow achieved the dubious honor of being the most polarizing person in alternative media today, loved by millions of readers and fans and yet absolutely despised by biotech bloggers and journalists.
Or, perhaps, Alex Jones still
retains the title and I'm a close second. That's why I still honor
Alex Jones for his willingness to tell the truth about what he
believes, even though I'm not associated with his show anymore.
Who should be held responsible for GM crop failures and farmer suicides?
All this brings up a truly important
discussion into the question of who should be held responsible when
GMO crops fail and lead to farmer suicides?
If the crop doesn't succeed, the farmer
finds himself in far worse financial straits than if he had planted
conventional seeds which cost considerably less.
This is a crucial question for the obvious reason of corporate liability.
Once, Big Tobacco sold products that caused cancer. For decades, the tobacco industry paid off scientists to publicly proclaim cigarettes were not only safe but even healthy!
This set the precedent of evil
corporations buying off scientists to control the
conversation and obfuscate the facts.
It is these questions that the biotech industry is desperately trying to avoid.
The industry knows that both Big Tobacco
Big Pharma have been haunted by
lawsuits stemming from consumers who were harmed or killed by those
products. One tobacco company was recently hit with a
multi-billion-dollar judgment stemming from the death of one man
The immediate pressure that was exerted to engineer a contrived retraction of the study was unprecedented in the history of science (and also one of the most shameful anti-science campaigns in the history of science).
Fortunately, the Seralini team was not to be intimidated, and they found another science journal that republished the study. But consider the consequences to companies like Monsanto is lawyers can begin to argue that cancer cases across the world are being caused by GM corn.
Suddenly you've got the biotech industry
in the same position as Big Tobacco in the early 1990's, with law
firms lining up to file an endless stream of lawsuits.
Are GMOs "defective products?"
See, the real kicker here is what happens when GMOs are recognized to be defective products.
In the automobile industry, when a car is defective and causes loss of life, the car manufacturer is liable for the damages. The same is true in the tobacco industry, to an extent.
What happens when GMOs are established
in the courts to be defective products that cause harm?
Then the superweeds take hold and the farmer is forced to spray with as many as 4-7 different chemical herbicides instead of just one.
Crop production falls, soil health
plummets and future yields are compromised. This is the pattern
we're seeing with many GM crops, and this doesn't even take into
account the long-term health effects on humans.
Watch for that tactic to be attempted as
the biotech industry begins to see signs of growing legal liability.
Whistleblowers and journalists
Throughout the 1950's, 60's, 70's and 80's, there were countless journalists who were paid off by Big Tobacco to write stories insisting "smoking cigarettes is safe."
Those journalists operated with the same
arrogance and indignation as GMO journalists today, but in
retrospect all they did was bring shame upon themselves for
furthering the destructive scientific dictatorship of the tobacco
The day is coming, of course, when the link between BT Corn and cancer tumors can no longer be denied.
The day is coming when glyphosate's
systemic destruction of soils and the environment can no longer be
covered up. When that day comes, it is important that history
remember the names of those who actively participated in furthering
that destruction. That's why I suggested the idea in the first
In an age of deceit, telling the truth
really is a courageous act, and I thank all those anti-GMO activists
who continue to tell the truth in our collective fight for
protecting life, health and the environment against corporate
poisoners and their paid-off shills.
Learn more truth about GMOs at these websites