"For the King of Babylon has plotted against you. He has devised a plan against you. Rise up against a nation at ease, that dwells securely, says the Lord. A nation that has no gates or bars, that dwells alone. Their camels shall become booty; their herds of cattle a spoil." Jeremiah 49:30-32

History contains many accounts where nations at ease became easy prey for marauding external powers through lack of vigilance. At one time, Babylon was the largest and most powerful city on earth. In its relentless pursuit for global domination, it swallowed everything and everybody in its path. Nations that fared better were those who posted watchmen on the walls of their cities.

Today, in our globalised, 'take-over here, take-over there' market-place, we are witnessing multi-national corporations amass incredible power, then using the most devious tactics to secure that power, while swallowing everything and everybody in their path. And were Jeremiah alive today, no doubt he would be discerning the times in which we live. He would be fully comprehending the Machiavellian moves of Big Business and Big Government as they engulf nation after nation, very few with watchmen on the walls. Marauders always come into the camp when the watchmen have fallen asleep. Take Tyson Foods, for example:


Based in Springdale, Arkansas , Tyson Foods  is the single largest poultry supplier in the world. Its annual turnover exceeds $7.4 billion, and the company 'processes' 42 million chickens a week. The Tyson corporate webpage describes the company as a 68,000-strong team, with 7,400 contract growers in 100 communities, with operations in 18 US states and 15 countries, and exporting to 73 countries worldwide.  In their food safety education program literature, we read: "We've always been at the forefront of food safety practices." And  "Consumers around the world have come to depend on the Tyson Brand for trusted quality chicken." [1]

Forbes Magazine once described Tyson Foods  as one of those  "undeniably formidable business juggernauts, whose mind-boggling concentrations of wealth and influence have everything to do with a no-holds-barred unfettered approach to free enterprise." [2] Tyson Foods are indeed the single largest poultry product supplier in the world, and they have every intention of becoming the largest beef supplier in the world too. At the time of writing, they are vying to buy what is currently the world's largest beef supplier, IBP  Corporation.

But where does the Tyson Foods  'no-holds barred' approach to business affairs position them in the 'morality and ethics' league? Journalist Norman Sullivan describes Tyson Foods in a slightly different manner to the corporate brochure:  "The organisation keeps its farmers in near-indentured servitude... works its underpaid, frequently injured workers at an extraordinary pace... and discharges half a million tons of chicken s**t [3] into Arkansas  rivers every year." [4]

And here are just a few of the many disturbing facts about Tyson Foods  for your sober consideration.


Some 4,500 people have added their names to a lawsuit, initially filed by 159 current and former employees, against Tyson Foods . The US Department of Labour  has stepped in, saying it will conduct a nationwide audit of the company's practices. [5] After one particularly nasty incident, when two Tyson workers met their gruesome deaths, after falling into a vat of decomposing chicken pieces, investigating officers from OSHA were turned away by Tyson managers who demanded a search warrant. OSHA officials were admitted only after obtaining a court order. According to US press reports, more Tyson plants are named on the OSHA High Hazard Targeted Inspection list with more frequency than any other poultry company in the US. [6]


Tyson Foods' financial records show that they had been funding former US president Bill Clinton in many of his political campaigns, beginning back at the time when Clinton was Governor of Arkansas. Don Tyson was one of Bill Clinton's closest friends and biggest supporters, according to grand jury testimony concerning Tyson's political misconduct. And Don Tyson was Bill Clinton's top fundraiser during his governorship and presidential elections. [7]

Joe Henrickson, a former Tyson airplane pilot, recently admitted to transporting endless envelopes of cash from Tyson corporate offices to Governor Clinton money that doesn't of course feature in the annual accounting system. [8] And recently, Tyson Foods were fined $6m as a result of confessing their donation of at least $12,000 in cash and gifts to former US Agricultural Secretary, Mike Espy, up until his swift departure in early 1994. [9] A March 1994 Wall Street Journal  article noted that, "Espy had been "fêted" by Don Tyson at a football game and had outlined several regulatory decisions that seemed to benefit Tyson Foods." In another instance, inside information supplied by Tyson Foods chief counsellor James Blair  to Hilary Clinton on a swine futures market deal enabled the First Lady to make an overnight profit of approximately $100,000. [10]


In return for favours such as these, Clinton's influence at internal affairs level was able successfully to head off various poultry food manufacturer practice investigations. Externally, at a 1995 summit meeting in Egypt, Bill Clinton  furthered Tyson business interests in a most extraordinary manner. He agreed to make clear his public support for the re-election of Russian President Boris Yeltsin, who at the time was becoming increasingly unpopular for his war against Chechnya . In what became known as the 'Chechens for Chickens' affair, leaked notes of the Clinton -Yeltsin  meeting revealed that Clinton's support would be offered in return for Yeltsin  agreeing to lift Russia 's embargo against American chicken.

Up until that point, US chicken had been judged too polluted to meet Russia 's environmental laws. Ninety percent of US poultry exported to Russia comes from Tyson Foods . As City Pages columnist Doug Ireland states, "In other words, Clinton gave Yeltsin a blank cheque to kill as many Chechens as he wanted, provided the Russians bought Don Tyson's dirty chickens." [11] Does this help to bring a fresh perspective to the myriad 'ground-breaking' peace summits beamed out to us almost daily?


In 1997, Tyson Foods expressed interest in buying beef giant Hudson Foods. Hudson declined the Tyson offer. Very soon after the rejection of Tyson's bid, a government inspectorate task force under the control of Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman 'visited' Hudson Foods, where they very conveniently 'found' evidence of e.coli bacteria contamination. By the time Glickman's task force had finished with Hudson Foods, the story had taken on national and international proportions, with the 'beleaguered' company having to recall 25 million pounds of beef, costing the company its largest customer, Burger King. The resultant fallout devalued Hudson corporate stock by 35%. [12] The Wall Street Journal  said at the time: "Hudson's rapid tailspin has stunned some meat industry executives, who blame the record beef recall pushed by the Agriculture Department for breaking the back of HudsonÉ.  "What happened to Hudson Foods doesn't make sense," said Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute." [13]


The presence of e.coli at the Hudson plant was never proven, but the damage had been done. In 1998, Tyson Foods managed to acquire Hudson Foods at a rock bottom price, in a deal described by Leonard Teitlebaum of Merrill Lynch and Coas "adding beautifully to Tyson's distribution and production system." [14] The Wall Street Journal  commented, "Hudson's brush with Glickman's gang meant the Tyson's buyout bid was an offer the company couldn't refuse." [15]   It is not difficult to see that contrary to Patrick Boyle's comment, the E.coli raid made perfect sense.


In December 1997, Associated Press reported that a 60-year-old woman in Hong Kong had died of suspected bird flu . This report was swiftly followed by world media attention on the Hong Kong chicken flu  'outbreak'. The US government immediately announced it would call an immediate halt to all chicken imports from China  in a move to curb the spread of the 'virus '. Days later, pressured by the media and foreign governments, 1.2 million Asian chickens were slaughtered to prevent the alleged flu from spreading to other countries and species. Said a jubilant US Secretary of Heath and Human Services, Donna Shalala at the time:

"Perhaps the best example of the kind of worldwide monitoring and surveillance system we need to have is the excellent system that stopped the avian flu outbreak in Hong KongÉ So when the very first known case of the avian flu was diagnosed in a 3-year-old boy, the warning bells went off immediately. When a second case appeared in November, health officials around the world went on the alert and a team from the CDC left for Hong Kong.É Fortunately, the slaughter of over one million chickens seems to have halted the virus - at least for now." [16]

US author Leonard Horowitz  states, "Few knew that prior to these events, Tyson was vying to bring the Asian poultry industry into its global, monopolistic fold. The emergency primarily targeted Tyson's Asian competition, mostly small chicken farmers. What was most likely a CIA-directed 'outbreak' conveniently required the annihilation of Tyson's competitors. That would have been a very effective, albeit immoral, industrial espionage operation." [17]

On 15th March 2001, USA Today reported that Tyson Foods  stands to gain most from the current foot-and-mouth disease problem. They had four times tried to purchase America's leading beef supplier IBP Corporation, most recently for $3.2 billion, or $30 per share of stock valued at only $24.11. The international slaughter of cattle, the article said, was sure to reduce IBP  profits, making Tyson's offer even more appealing.

Leonard Horowitz 's press release ends as follows: "Dr. Horowitz, in support of the British Farmers for Action, is calling for an immediate halt to the slaughter of uninfected herds, and an investigation by the British government into the possibility that the entire foot-and-mouth disease outbreak was premeditated." [18]

And in the latest reporting on the foot and mouth crisis, we are being told that foot and mouth is now quite possibly helping to spread mad cow disease. It seems that another psycho-plague is soon set to wreak havoc upon our 'beleaguered' agricultural community.


Observer Newspapers, 20th May, 2001:

Ministers have summoned their top scientific advisers to an emergency meeting as fears mount that ash and the buried carcasses of cows slaughtered during the foot and mouth epidemic could be spreading the deadly human version of BSE. On Thursday new evidence from tests at hundreds of sites where cattle have been burnt or buried will be reviewed by experts. Ministers are concerned that proteins known as 'prions' which cause Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans and are found in BSE-infected meat may have polluted the water supply or the air. The hastily convened meeting shows the depth of the Ministers' concern.

Ministers showing concern? Armed with the information contained in this book, who now is actually taken in by this particular style of news delivery? Introducing such a falsity as 'slaughtered cows spreading BSE' gives our governments the perfect vehicle to introduce the further slaughter of perfectly healthy livestock.


Ashley Mote  is a British agricultural journalist. He was formerly the Markets Editor for Farmers Weekly . He is also the author of several books. He is concerned that the UK, and in particular, UK agriculture, is being systematically dismantled to conform to European designs on this country. 'Defence of the Realm' and 'Vigilance: a Defence of British Liberty' are two publications in particular that focus on the decline of UK's independent infrastructure since its involvement in European affairs. The promotional editorial for 'Vigilance' begins thus:

"One day this book may be banned. Our right to freedom of speech will have been abolished. Some people think the United Kingdom has effectively been abolished already. It will certainly cease to exist as a free and sovereign nation unless we reverse the erosion of our ancient rights, freedoms and customs by endless interference in British affairs by the European Union.

In 1975, as new members of the EEC, we thought we were voting for a free-trade area. What we have today is an undemocratic, unaccountable police state that makes laws behind closed doors and seeks by stealth to destroy the UK as an independent nation. The European Union is being increasingly rammed down British throats in pursuit of a dream we never voted for. That dream has become a living nightmare. Silent discontent is no longer an option." [19]


The Treaty of Nice is a European parliamentary policy amendment paper signed by UK Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen. Article 191 states, "The Council acting shall lay down regulations governing political parties at European level and in particular the rules regarding their funding." [20] This statute will effectively make it impossible to criticize the European parliament, and will allow said powers to withdraw funding from whomsoever they wish.

Other threats contained in this treaty, which has been signed by all 15 member states, include Article 6.1. This clearly provides for a country to be 'ganged up upon' purely because the Commission said that the 'guilty nation' threatened to breach various undefined principles. This would in effect render such a condemned country a voteless colony of the EU. Article 280A is another section which calls for the creation of the European Public Prosecutor (EPP), most probably leading to the end of habeas corpus, the right to trial by jury.

And then there's the creation of the now 60,000-strong Rapid Reaction Force, which, if given the remit to operate within the EU rather than externally, would mean that Britain and other nations could find themselves with an occupying armed force (Europol), immune to prosecution and answerable, not to individual parliaments or constituents, but only to an unknown, unelected committee in Brussels. [21] The gradual decommissioning of the British Army over these last few years is a very strong indicator that the European Rapid Reaction Force or other similar 'army' will soon be upon us.                                                                         


Credence Publications contacted Mr Mote with regard to a particularly interesting letter sent to us, highlighting a 1998 European Commission meeting of European agricultural ministers attended by UK Agricultural Minister, Nick Brown . The letter stated that, during that EU meeting, a discussion had taken place with regard to the UK being possibly designated as 'arable land only'   arable meaning 'crop production'. Mr Mote  stated that this information had been relayed to him by a trusted colleague acting as an interpreter at that meeting. He was not able to reveal the identity of this person, as doing so would threaten his/her position. And already, certain news items are appearing that confirm the general direction that UK farming is headed. This in the UK's Guardian, 11th April 2001:

English Government to close 25% of small farms. The government plans a major reduction in the number of farms and farmers as part of a recovery package for British agriculture in the wake of the foot and mouth outbreak, the Guardian has learned. Ministers expect that by 2005 as many as 25% of farms - almost all small ones - will have closed or merged, with 50,000 people forced to leave the industryÉ Mr Brown has broadly hinted at a large scale early retirement scheme. He told MPs on Monday: "The big decision for farmers who have received a compensation payment is whether to restock the farmholding " or pause and think very carefully what the future holds for them."ÉMAFF figures show that many uneconomic farms make more money from offering bed and breakfast, than from farming.

Readers will no doubt be aware of that timeless phrase, "Lies, damn lies and statistics." The MAFF/DEFRA statistics can be engineered to show us anything as long as it suits them.


Mr Mote  added that, upon his return from the EU meeting, Nick Brown  made no mention of these discussions. Whilst the above 'EU' discussions remain unsourced at present, we cannot dismiss the rise in the number of GM crop discussions recently taking place. The following information is very revealing. In 1998/9, Tony Blair had an unprecedented 17 meetings with Monsanto, the multi-national corporation at the forefront of promoting genetically engineered crops into the UK. And Michael Meacher, the UK Environment Minister, has announced only recently that 58 new major GM test field sites for oilseed rape and beet will be going ahead, despite major concerns being aired by many members of the general public. [22]


Monsanto  is renowned for its 'terminator' seed development. Terminator  seeds allow for one crop growth only. No viable seeds are produced from that crop. This brings an end to ongoing independent food production. The grower has to return to Monsanto to buy more seed. He is in effect being controlled. He has been swallowed up. In Terminator  Unleashed   Patenting Life, Patenting Death, Mary Jo Olsen  states:

"The only thing that can keep pace with the rate of agricultural biotechnological change these days is the speed with which the transnational Life Industry is eating itself. In the last couple of years, Monsanto has spent more than $6.7 billion buying seed and other agri-biotech companies. We have at best two years, and at worst six months to safeguard the right of farmers as seed-savers and breeders. Who's interests are being served? The right of farmers for thousands of years to save and improve seed could be coming to an end - now." [23]

Despite the high levels of concern amongst ordinary citizens, the GM crop drive continues unabated. At a recent CropLife International meeting, Belgian Farm Minister Jaak Gabriels announced that agriculture needed to embrace GM crops and related biotechnology and promised to promote the issue during the Belgian presidency of the European Union.  Gabriels, who for six months from July 2001 chaired the monthly EU farm ministers meetings, said he would devote an informal ministerial meeting to biotechnology in September 2001.  Said Gabriels, "I want to give this technology the chance to be applied in Europe as well." Hendrick Verfaillie, chief executive officer of Monsanto, was also at that meeting. He applauded Gabriels, stating: "I appreciate his balance and also his commitment and courage to take a leadership role over this controversial issueÉ" [24]

Would Verfaillie say anything else?

And as of August 7th 2001, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) concluded negotiations to license terminator seed technology to its seed industry partner, Delta & Pine Land (D&PL) - the world's 9th largest seed corporation, with revenues of $301 million in 2000. D&PL has joint ventures and/or subsidiaries in North America, Brazil, Argentina, China, Mexico, Paraguay, South Africa, Australia, and China. There are of course many groups opposed to this latest marauding move. Ms Hope Shand is research director for  RAFI, (Rural Advancement Foundation International) an organisation dedicated to sustainable use of bio-diversity. Says Ms Shand:  "USDA's decision to license Terminator flies in the face of international public opinion and betrays the public trust." Colleague Ms Silvia Ribeiro stated "USDA's role in developing Terminator seeds is a disgraceful example of corporate welfare, involving a technology that is bad for farmers, dangerous for the environment and disastrous for world food security." [25]


Monsanto  is also interested in controlling global fresh water supplies, as the following abridged article reveals:

"Global consumption of water is doubling every 20 years. Multinational corporations recognize these trends and are trying to monopolize water supplies around the world. Monsanto, Bechtel, Enron  and other global multinationals are seeking control of world water systems and supplies. The World Bank  recently adopted a policy of water privatization and full-cost water pricing. This policy is causing great distress in many Third World countries, which fear that their citizens will not be able to afford for-profit water.

Maude Barlow, chairperson of the Council of Canadians, Canada's largest public advocacy group, states, "Governments around the world must act now to declare water a fundamental human right and prevent efforts to privatize, export, and sell for profit a substance essential to all life. Research has shown that selling water on the open market only delivers it to wealthy cities and individuals. The finite sources of fresh water are being diverted, depleted, and polluted so fast that, by the year 2025, two-thirds of the world's population will be living in a state of serious water deprivation.

Governments are signing away their control over domestic water supplies by participating in trade treaties such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO). Monsanto  plans to earn revenues of $420 million and a net income of  $63 million by 2008 from its water business in India  and Mexico . Monsanto estimates that water will become a multibillion-dollar market in the coming decades." [26]


Monsanto  will then not only be able to control who receives seed, but also who receives the means to grow it. And Monsanto's close links to the major institutes espousing population control philosophies, such as the World Health Organisation, World Bank  and IMF,  force us to ask what unsavoury plans might be birthed as a result of these conglomerates being in control of both food and water.

More on Monsanto later.


While on an individual basis, these chemical and pharmaceutical giants compete over specific products, they are cooperating very closely in other ways. Novartis , for example, is one of the 39 multinational biotech corporations (made up of about 600 companies like DeKalb, DuPont, Monsanto , and Zeneca) and 14 national research associations that have joined together into EuropaBio, an umbrella organisation formed to represent the industries' genetically modified interests in Europe. According to the EuropaBio website, their mission is: "To establish an encouraging climate for biotechnology [formerly known as genetic  engineering] in Europe, and thereby promote the creation of wealth and skilled employment." [27]

Because of humanity's overall marked resistance to genetically modified and engineered products, EuropaBio have hired public relations firm Burson-Marsteller, the PR arm of the well-known advertising firm Young & Rubicam , to smooth the way for the future acceptance of genetically engineered foods. As an indication of their ability to 'get the job done', Young & Rubicam's partial client-list speaks for itself: AT&T , Colgate/Palmolive, DuPont , Sears, Ford, Phillip Morris, and the US Army .

But in the PR game, 'Perception Management' is the key corporate mission phrase down at Burson-Marsteller. Their website states boldly,  "Perceptions are real. They colour what we see . . . what we believe . . . how we behave. They can be managed . . . to motivate behaviour . . . to create positive business results." [28]

The agency ensures that the perceptions surrounding a client are consistent with the client's desired business objectives. Monsanto stated in one 1998 report: "There are clearly large forces at work that are making public acceptance of genetically engineered foods problematic." [29]


The following example of calculated, western-led psychological warfare is excerpted from our book World Without AIDS. The information reveals the level of detail which goes into planning how one might effect a subtle change of direction in the minds of a given populace. The following tactics are frequently used by the World Health Organisation, World Bank, IMF and related organisations to coerce nations into adopting western ideals not necessarily suited to the indigenous culture. In this instance, the western ideal being introduced is population control - in other words, the target nation is being coerced into limiting the size of its families. The terms 'audience identification' and 'message design' are of particular interest to this study.


In November 1990, the World Bank  launched a US $27 million population control project for Ghana  with the goal of cutting the size of the next generation of Ghanaians in half, from approximately 45 million to only 25 million by the year 2020. Aware of the fact that Ghanaians do not wish the size of their country to be manipulated by outsiders, the bank commissioned Opia Mensah Kumah , senior program officer for the US government's population communication campaign in Africa, to produce a 'procedural' report. The report stated that deeply held traditional beliefs and values would hinder population control  efforts, making persuasion more difficult. Indeed, in many parts of the continent, cultural prohibitions exist against even counting one's children, believing them to be a blessing, not a curse. [30]

Based on Kumah's research, both the World Bank  and USAID implemented programs designed to overcome resistance to population reduction and bring about drastic changes in public attitudes and personal conduct. Involving coercion and deception, their tactics conform exactly to the strategies outlined by Colonel Michael Dewar,  in his book The Art of Deception in Warfare, a study on psychological warfare and covert actions. Dewar is a former army intelligence officer who now runs his own public relations agency in London . He outlines six basic principles:

The operation must be well planned and centrally co-ordinated, so as to be consistent and sustained.

Preparation is essential.

Those conducting the campaign must be thoroughly familiar with their audience, and be able to gauge its probable reaction to the campaign.

False information must be made to appear absolutely logical, seeming neither out of harmony with current events nor in any way suspicious. The greater variety of sources that can be used to plant false information, the more believable it becomes.

Timing is critical; people generally notice marked events, but are very poor at perceiving gradual change.

The operation and its purpose must be concealed from the enemy. [31]

With almost military precision, the WHO population control  strategy for Ghana  incorporates each of these six principles:

The activities of the World Bank , USAID  and other donors  are carefully co-ordinated, and strict monitoring procedures are in place to enforce the terms of the agreement at every stage. 

Extensive background research was carried out in Ghana . Surveys were conducted to determine how best to sell the idea of family planning, gradually exposing the populace to subtle messages, allowing new contraceptive ideology to take root slowly, without arousing suspicion. 

In all campaigns such as these, messages are discreet and shy away from the controversial. They are kept at a muted, persuasive level, repeated exposure to the message influencing the people to accept birth control  to such an extent that they eventually identify with the message.

WHO and relevant associates held approximately 80 special conferences and presentations during the first three years of operations in Ghana. These included presentations to traditional chiefs, private meetings with top government officials, dozens of seminars for journalists and government ministers, special briefings for private sector leaders, and a variety of special events. More than 100 pre-packaged radio broadcasts, numerous television productions and hundreds of propaganda packets were carefully prepared and distributed.

Foreign policy had now been successfully incorporated into indigenous broadcasting systems. As such, the campaign has progressed from raising the level of awareness to influencing attitudes, opinions, and beliefs favourable towards WHO ideas on birth control, those ideas now being promoted within and by the targeted populace . The existence of this western orchestrated, western-led Ghanaian population control  program remains largely unknown to the public. [32]


James Miller, a correspondent for Human Life International, brings us the following report on an equally inhumane, equally covert attempt at human population control, this time carried out in Tanzania, Nigeria, Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines. Quite shockingly, this particular campaign was creatively disguised as a 'deeply caring' World Health Organisation tetanus vaccination campaign.

During the early 1990's, the World Health Organization conducted an extensive vaccination campaign against tetanus in a number of countries. In October 1994, Human Life International became suspicious of the campaign protocols. They obtained several phials of the vaccine  and had them analysed by chemists. Some of the phials were found to contain human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally occurring hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy.

When introduced into the body, coupled with a tetanus toxoid carrier, antibodies  are formed not only against tetanus but also against hCG. In this case the body fails to recognize hCG as a friend and will produce anti-hCG antibodies . The antibodies  will attack subsequent pregnancies by killing the hCG which naturally sustains a pregnancy. When a woman has sufficient anti-hCG  antibodies  in her system, she is rendered incapable of maintaining a pregnancy.

HLI reported the sketchy facts regarding the Mexican tetanus vaccines to its affiliates in more than 60 countries. Soon additional reports of vaccines laced with hCG hormone were received from the Philippines, where more than 3.4 million women were recently vaccinated. Similar reports came from Nicaragua, which had conducted its own vaccination campaign in 1993.

 "The Known Facts concerning the WHO tetanus vaccination campaigns in Tanzania, Nigeria, Mexico and the Philippines. Only women were vaccinated, and only women between the ages of 15 and 45. Why? Aren't men at least as likely as young women to come into contact with tetanus? And what of the children? Why were they excluded?

Human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) hormone was found in the vaccines. WHO has been actively involved for more than 20 years in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine utilizing hCG tied to tetanus toxoid as a carrier - the exact same coupling as has been found in these vaccines." [33]


The population control agenda includes some very big boys indeed. Allied with the WHO in the development of this particular anti-fertility vaccine have been UNFPA, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the World Bank, the Population Council, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The US National Institute of Child Health and Human Development was the supplier of the hCG hormone in some of the vaccine experiments. [34]

These incidents are by no means isolated. In the same way that Ghana, Tanzania, Nigeria and various South American countries are being influenced, subliminally or otherwise, into accepting various population control measures by big multinational corporations and governments, we can be sure that if we have particular resistances to whatever Big Pharma has decided is good for us, then those resistances will be worked on and diminishedÉ by all means necessary.

Our resistance to genetically modified/engineered products has been identified and is now being targeted for change. [35] Olsen finishes her 'Terminator Unleashed' essay thus: "Greed is a human trait, we probably all have some. But do you get the feeling that these people have somehow slipped over the edge into madness?"


And indeed, returning to Monsanto, there are ominous signs that marketing greed has 'slipped over the edge into madness'. It seems that covert population control measures are being woven into the Monsanto import/export seed market. Judge for yourselves in this next item, dubbed by The Ecologist Magazine asÉ.. 


On the 27th August 1998 and in the name of 'public health protection', the Indian government banned the sale of mustard oil. In many states, mustard oil is an essential constituent of the diet. It is also used widely as a multi-functional medicinal oil, and as a life-saving mosquito repellent. So why exactly did the Indian government ban this invaluable, natural substance? According to the Indian government, the pretext of banning mustard oil was that it was unhygienic and therefore unsafe. And the populace had to be protected from this 'dangerous menace'. Vandana Shiva, the Director the Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology in New Delhi says:

"It's nice to know that our government is so concerned about the health of the people who elected it to power. But why has it shown so little interest in this issue before? It has never taken any action to limit the use of carcinogenic pesticides or radioactive pollution. Why the sudden concern?" [36]

The first hint that there was more to this story than meets the eye was when, in July 1998, the Indian government announced plans to import as much as one million tons of soyabean as oil seed. On the same day that mustard oil was banned, all import restrictions were lifted on what is predominantly a GM multinational corporation product. Indian opposition party concerns were raised over the fact that mustard oil was perfectly satisfactory, that imported soyabean was not necessary and that imported soyabean seed might well include genetically modified varieties, leading to widespread cross-contamination. Resistance to the soyabean import ruling was steadfast. The arguments put forward by the Indian government so far were not convincing enough. Says Shiva, "In the face of this opposition, the government needed to find a more convincing justification for their action." [37]

And almost immediately, a terrible tragedy unfolded. Reported as a dropsy epidemic, India witnessed a horrible 'outbreak' of something in which 41 people died and some 2,300 people were affected by symptoms including nausea, vomiting, kidney damage, fluid on the lungs and heart failure. The source of the mysterious 'outbreak' was soon traced to a very large batch of mustard oil that had somehow been adulterated with argemone - a poisonous black seed that grows alongside the mustard plant, diesel oil and waste industrial oil.

Argemone has been found as a contaminant before in mustard oil, but never, according to Shiva, in more than 0.1% of the mustard oil on the market. In this case, 10 to 30% of the oil had been adulterated. India's health minister at the time admitted that this could only have been the result of some sort of conspiracy, so extensive was the contamination.


Meanwhile, back in America, at the same time as all of this was taking place, Monsanto Corporation was in the embarrassing position of sitting on almost 18 million acres of an increasingly unsaleable 'Round-up Ready' soyabean crop. Bad publicity surrounding Monsanto's latest 'Round-up' formula meant their 18 million acres-worth were not exactly flying out of the door. How and where on earth were they going to get rid of it? Could the answer lie in dumping it upon a Third World nation, where the public were yet to be more fully alerted to the possible dangers of GM crops? And if this were a viable option, then how would Monsanto go about achieving its objective? Vandana Shiva believes there is a strong possibility that the sabotage of the mustard oil and Monsanto's own particular business predicament are all very much interconnected.

"By encouraging the Indian government to ban the sale of mustard oil, the multi-nationals were provided with a perfect market opening for their products. This would enable them on a permanent basis to dominate the market in that country for vegetable oil. This would then lead to the extinction of a crop that is central to India's farming system and we would remain dependent on soyabean for our edible oil. There is a precedent for this phenomenon.

 In Indonesia, the recent food riots were largely caused by massive imports of soyabean oil, upon which the Indonesian people had become cripplingly dependent. When the currency collapsed, the price of soya escalated, making the cooking oil far too expensive for the bulk of people to afford. India would be put in a similarly vulnerable position if we were to become dependent on imported soya for cooking oilÉ." [38]


Vandana Shiva's Ecologist report then goes on to discuss the chemical properties of the soyabean:

"Soyabeans contain acids which can reduce bioavailability of essential minerals, and contain phytoestrogens above the levels required, and are established carcinogens. They can have an impact on the foetus which can lead to abnormal formation of reproductive organs, to sterility and to the inhibition of sexual maturation. Calculations have shown that an infant fed with soyabean-based formula is ingesting oestrogen equivalent to that obtained from 8 to 12 contraceptive pills a day."   [39]

Given the underhand, focused manner in which these multinational corporations are attempting to a) control worldwide food distribution and b) implement worldwide population control measures, can we really believe it is mere chance that mass tonnage of essential foodstuffs, high in oestrogen levels, is now flooding into the poorer nations of the world?

As if these activities weren't distasteful enough, Monsanto coupled their soyabean drive with a public relations exercise under the banner of 'Monsanto's care and concern' for the poor. They launched a global campaign in the major newspapers of the world, imploring its citizenry to trust Monsanto to develop genetically engineered crops to feed the starving millions. Beginning their $1.6 billion advertising campaign two days before World Food Day and using emotive pictures of starving African children, their 'Let The Harvest Begin' campaign opened thus:

"We all share the same planet - and the same needs. In agriculture, many of our needs have an ally in biotechnology and the promising advances it offers for our futureÉ Healthier, more abundant yields. Reduced reliance on pesticides and fossil fuels. A cleaner environment... As we stand on the edge of a new millennium, we dream of a tomorrow without hunger. etc., etc." [40]

Monsanto's syrupy 'save the world' rhetoric was swiftly countered, not least in this part-statement issued by the African delegates of The Food and Agriculture Organisation:

"We, the undersigned delegates of African countries strongly object that the image of the poor and hungry from our countries are being used by giant multinational corporations to push a technology that is neither safe, environment friendly, nor economically beneficial to us. We do not believe that such companies or gene technologies will help our farmers to produce the food that is needed in the 21st century. On the contrary, we think it will destroy the diversity, the local knowledge and the sustainable agricultural systems that our farmers have developed for millennia and that it will thus undermine our capacity to feed ourselves."


Researchers Daniel Doerge and Daniel Sheehan, two of the Food and Drug Administration's experts on soy, signed a letter of protest, pointing to studies that show a link between soy and health problems in certain animals, which they projected would also have an adverse effect on humans. Doerge and Sheehan say they tried to stop the FDA approval of soy, but their efforts were in vain.

Their full and frank report bears out everything written by Vandana Shiva with regard to infertility and can be obtained at http://www.darifree.com/fdasoy.htm. Should the FDA report subsequently be withdrawn, it has been copied to file and is available upon request.

In a paper entitled 'Where is the safety testing of GM soya?' a sceptical author summarises the scientific papers to date, which attempt to establish the safety of Monsanto's soyabean. The complete listing (which the reader will find at http://www.connectotel.com/ gmfood/soyarefs.html) is headed by the following interesting statement:

"Below is the 'evidence' presented by scientists when asked to show studies which 'prove' the safety of GM soya.  Two problems are immediately apparent: 1) Not one of these studies proves the safety of GM soya. 2) Every study is either carried out by Monsanto, by teams containing Monsanto staff, or by an organisation funded by Monsanto.

So, the eternal question remains... Where is the independent safety testing which proves the safety of the GM soya currently being sold worldwide today? Answer: There is NONE."

This, quite unbelievably, is the level of science currently supporting what is potentially going to be one of the largest available food crops across the globe. Who is actually in control here? This final comment on the Monsanto/Mustard oil issue is from India's Health Tribune. It serves as a reasonable summary of events:

"Even while greed and the desire to attain riches rapidly at all costs is a universal driving force for the perpetrators of such crimes, it requires much more than greed to execute such diabolical programs. The most outstanding is utter insensitivity towards fellow human beings. It is the height of egocentricity to attempt to gain riches at the expense of other people's lives. Yet, that is precisely what has happened in this instance.

Although failure of the executive and their political bosses is writ large on the face of every corpse that has fallen to this man-made disaster, as well as the survivors, who may have to suffer for God knows how long, corrective action has been tardy and the attempts at a cover-up blatant. While bureaucrats will predictably try to shift responsibility, industrialists are apparently pleading ignorance. Industry is clearly guilty of failure to maintain even elementary quality control and must be held accountable for such horrendous disregard for human life in this country. There cannot be any mitigating circumstances for such heinous crimes; the dead are crying for justice." [41]


'Bringing the Food Economy Home' is a document examining the detrimental implications for society should there be a globally controlled food chain.

"One of the biggest threats to food security today stems from the increasing control of handfuls of corporations have over the world's food supply. For example, four companies now control 87% of American beef, another four control 84% of American cereal, and just two companies, Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland, control 70-80% of the world's grain trade. Five agri-businesses (Astra-Zeneca, DuPont, Monsanto, Novartis and Aventis) account for nearly two thirds of the global pesticide market, almost one quarter of the global seed market, and virtually 100% of the transgenic seed marketÉ. If mergers and takeovers already under consideration are approved, the nine companies now dominating the seed market will be amalgamated into just five." [42]

The document goes on to examine the traditional US Thanksgiving Day meal:

"But for most Americans, the turkey is not from Uncle Ray's farm, nor the potatoes from Aunt Jean, nor the biscuits from Mum's oven. Most will find a turkey from Butterball TM, a joint of ham from Cook Family Foods TM , their long grain rice from Jack Rabbit TM, their potatoes from Golden Valley Foods TM, their bread from Peavey Grain TM, cheese from Miss Winsconsin TM, salad oil from Wesson TM, tomato or apple juice from Motts TM, the pudding from Swiss Miss TM  or Healthy Choice TM, and a nice topping from Reddi Whip TM. In the land of freedom of choice, the fact is that all those products and brands actually come from just one company - ConAgra Inc. Each of the company's 25 branded foods has annual retail sales exceeding $100m, giving 6 cents out of every food dollar spent in the US to ConAgra. But that isn't enough to put it at the top of the corporate food heap. The nation's largest food business, Phillip Morris, takes 10 cents." [43]

For further details on the giant food corporations and on  various population control measures being implemented through 'medicine' and 'food', readers are encouraged to obtain the above-mentioned publication and also World Without AIDS, the details of which can be found at the back of this book. Please also obtain copies of two Ecologist Reports, the first entitled 'Condemned? How Hygiene Regulations Are Killing Real Food' [44] and 'The Monsanto Files. Can We Survive Genetic Engineering?' [45]

by Steve Ransom
What are we swallowing.freeserve.co.uk

excerpted from this book



[1] University of Arkansas press release, 24th May 2000

[2] Doug Ireland's City Pages report.

[3] Missouri Department of Natural Resources report, 20th August 1999, "In response to recent concerns raised by local residents and environmental groups, MDNR has increased compliance monitoring of the wastewater treatment system at Tyson Foods in Noelè" Full story at: http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/newsrel/nr00_079.htm

[4] Doug Ireland's City Pages report, ibid.

[5] The Militant, Vol.64/No.10, 13th March 2000

[6] "Voice of the Injured", Robards, Kentucky report 1st September 1999 http://www.voiceoftheinjured.com/a-oj-Tyson-worker-crushed-elevator.html

[7] Press Release from Dr Leonard Horowitz: No.01-HMD/1. Tetrahedron Press 20th March 2001

[8] Young, Rick & Jim Mokhiber "Secrets of an Independent Council", Frontline Magazine at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/counsel/smaltz/inreespy.html

[9] "Secrets of an Independent Council", ibid. Mike Espy was indicted on 39 counts of corruption in August 1997. He pleaded guilty to one count, and the District Court judge threw out eight others. On 2nd December 1998, a federal jury acquitted Espy of the remaining 30 charges. Espy himself did not take the stand, and his lawyers presented no witnesses to testify in his defence. In closing, they argued to the jury that the gifts he had received were not illegal, in that they stemmed from longstanding friendships with members of the industries he regulated, and that there was no proof that the gifts influenced him in any official decision-making. In a statement issued by the White House after Espy's acquittal, President Clinton said: "I am heartened that he has, as he said, emerged from this ordeal stronger. I hope that, as he moves forward, he will continue his notable record of service to the country."

[10] Doug Ireland's City Pages report:

[11] City Pages, ibid.

[12] Limbacher, Carl, Another Rense Report. "Arkansas Tyson Foods To Buy Biggest US Beef Producer For $3.2 Billion".

[13] Wall Street Journal, 5th September 1997

[14] Limbacher, Carl, ibid.

[15] Wall Street Journal, ibid.

[16] Fighting Infectious Diseases Remarks by Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala at the first CDC International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases, held in Atlanta, GA, 9th March 1998

[17] Press Release: No.01-HMD/1. ibid

[18] Press Release: No.01-HMD/1. ibid

[19] Mote, Ashley Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty, Tanner Publishing, May 2001. www.author.co.uk/vigilance

[20] Full text of The Treaty of Nice found at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/search.html

[21] Readers are strongly recommended to visit

http://www.geocities.com/eerstnl/niceprop.html A concise account of the more serious ramifications of The Treaty of Nice.

[22] Guardian Newspapers, 1st March 2001

[23] Olsen, Mary Jo Terminator Unleashed. http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/terminator.html

[24] Organic Newsline, Vol 2, Issue 23, 14th June 2001

[25]    Commodities Bureau report, Mumbai, 12th August, 2001 at


[26] Phillips, Peter "Water, Monsanto and the World Bank", see:


[27] http://www.europa-bio.be

[28] www.burson-marsteller.de

[29] Monsanto leaked report. October 1998, www.togg.org.uk

[30] Sensible family planning is of course the responsibility of both partners. "There's a lot of gender education saying "Set girls free, set women free." But what is the role of men? If men are seen as the ones who incapacitate women, then the men need to be educated alongside the women." Gladys Mwiti from the Oasis Counselling Centre, Nairobi. Taken from People Count Tear Fund information brochure, 1995. 

[31] Dewar, Michael The Art of Deception in Warfare, David and Charles Publications, 1989

[32] www.africa2000.com. A comprehensive resource for information on population and demographic issues; race, class, and competitive fertility; international 'aid' & economic development; reproductive freedom v. control; covert activities & military strategy. Presents research and analysis by journalists from all over the world, as well as information from hundreds of formerly classified documents that are available from no other source.

[33] More than twenty articles, many written by WHO researchers, document WHO's attempts to create an anti-fertility vaccine utilising tetanus toxoid as a carrier. Some leading articles include: "Vaccines for Fertility Regulation," Chapter 11, pp.177-198, Research in Human Reproduction, Biennial Report (1986-1987), WHO Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (WHO, Geneva 1988). "Observations on the antigenicity and clinical effects of a candidate anti-pregnancy vaccine: B-sub unit of human chorionic gonadotrophin linked to tetanus toxoid," Fertility and Sterility, October 1980, pp.328-335

[34] Human Life International, www.hli.org, January 2000

[35] For an excellent insight into the art of using the media as a means of psychological warfare, please visit: http://www.africa2000.com/PNDX/pndx.htm This page explains the variety of ways in which cultures and societies are having their ideologies unsuspectingly reshaped by interested parties intent on implementing their own specific agenda.

[36] The Ecologist, "The Mustard Oil Conspiracy", June, 2001

[37] The Ecologist, ibid.

[38] The Ecologist, ibid.

[39] The following extract is from a Swiss Federal Health Service publication entitled 'Toxiques Naturels', Bulletin de office federal de la sonte Division Science des aliments: Experts on Safety Publique", No 28, 20th July 1992.  3.3  Substances with an oestrogenic action: As is clear from their definition, these substances have a hormonal effect similar to that of oestrogen in animals and humans.  Their concentration in these foodstuffs is fairly high and can reach a few grams per kilogram in soya beans, for example. The method of preparing the foodstuff does not appear to influence this content in any significant manner. The constant absorption of such quantities of these substances could clearly cause effects in humans: through the consumption of 100 g of the foodstuff, 1 g of isoflavone would be absorbed, corresponding to 100 ug 'of equivalents to oestrogen'. This quantity is within the range of the oestrogen content of the 'pill'.


[40] Monsanto Corporation, "Let The Harvest Begin", at:

[41] Health Tribune, Wednesday, 23rd September 1998

[42] Norberg-Hodge, Merrifield, Gorelick, Bringing The Food Economy Home, Isec Press, October 2000

[43] Bringing The Food Economy Home, ibid.

[44] The Ecologist Report, June 2001

[45]   The Ecologist, "The Monsanto Files", Vol 28, No 5, 1998