Farmers guilty of destroying our natural food supplies. The unchecked evils in the world

Can you tell which crops are genetically modified?

corn field
corn field | Source
Corn fields ready to harvest
Corn fields ready to harvest
Brocolli field
Brocolli field
broccoli ready to harvest
broccoli ready to harvest
Source
tomatoes ready to harvest
tomatoes ready to harvest
soy field
soy field
soy beans at harvest
soy beans at harvest
wheat field
wheat field
wheat ready to harves
wheat ready to harves

Genocide in the U.S.A.

Monsanto controls our food supplies, poisons our lands, and corrupts all three branches of our government.

This company should be tried for treason and crimes against the American people, instead of being protected by our politicians who represent Corporate America.

Is this the new age holocaust?

Genetically modified foods are being banned in every country except the USA where it is being shamelessly promoted without any objections from the government and surprisingly few objections by the general public in spite of its inherently potential deadly effects on humans.

In fact, this government is paving the way for GM (genetically modified) foods to be crammed down the throats of unsuspecting citizens without any concern at all for the possible and deadly side effects.

An act of terrorism

This is the perfect way for terrorists to get rid of millions of American citizens by deliberately altering their genetic makeup.

These GM foods may have the side effect of sterilizing, maiming, causing birth defects, massive tumors, increased cancer deaths, multiple organ failures in humans to name a few.

And still yet to come, are more virulent and newer disorders, that may be seen in the current generation as we age, or in generations to come as a direct result of genetic shifting from these "genetically modified" natural foods.

Altering natural foods by mother nature is a recipe for disaster.

It would be no surprise if this process causes catastrophic genetic shifting as early as the next generation.

There is some speculation that it already has been showing its effects.

Since the 'Genetic Modification' of cows to produce more milk, there have been increased incidences of autism, and arrested development in people that seem to be causing a greater number of pedophiles, and violent behavior.

Danger is escalating

The madness in Washington seems to be escalating:

1. Monsanto's next target? ''Frankenapple: Bad News No Matter How You Slice It''. And sanctioned by the U.S. government.

Monsanto's next target

Frankenapple - Coming to a supermarket near you.
Frankenapple - Coming to a supermarket near you. | Source

Why Monsanto is fighting food labeling: Do we really want to eat this or feed it to our children

GMO sterility in animals who eat GM foods being passed on to humans

2. The number of idiots in Washington seem to be growing exponentially.

We seem to also be having an increase in politicians with no discernible intelligence at all.

This is a perfect example: Sen. Blunt is the loudest, most obnoxious, most ignorant politician, and Monsanto's greatest ally in U.S. politics.

Money certainly can buy political favors.

The Good news:

Like the spending bill it’s attached to, the Monsanto Protection Act expires on Sept. 30, 2013. The best way to make sure it doesn’t survive is to force Sen. Blunt to resign.
What depths have our congressmen/women sunken to for selling their votes to Corporate America?

Sen. Blunt, republican from Missouri

We need to start booting these crazies out of Washington. Monsanto's greatest ally in Washington
We need to start booting these crazies out of Washington. Monsanto's greatest ally in Washington | Source

''Mad human'' greed disease

This world has gone completely mad with unfettered greed.
The day is yet to come when some idiot finds a way to patent the air, and we will have to pay per breath, or be put to death.

Patenting nature.

3. Patenting nature? Really?

Email received and forwarded to share with you:

Hi d.william:

We never expected this. In just a few days, over 160,000 people have signed our petition to Nestlé, calling for the company to stop trying to patent the traditional curative powers of nigella sativa. What's more, over 50,000 of you have shared the campaign with your friends -- and all this action is clearly having an effect on Nestlé.

Nestlé has written up an official response to our our demands on its site, but the conglomerate's defense is ridiculous: Nestlé claims everything is OK because it is not patenting the flower itself, just the flower's traditional medicinal use. Nestlé's official patent, filed in countries around the world, claims that it "invented" use of nigella sativa to treat allergic reactions, despite the fact that the flower has been used for this very purpose across the Middle East and Asia for over a millennium.

Nestlé's greedy grab at nigella sativa's curative power is not an error, it is part of a recurrent strategy by a corporation with a pattern of seeking to privatize and profit from traditional knowledge and other public resources.

We’re demanding that Nestlé give up its bid to control the anti-allergenic use of nigella sativa so that the company realizes it cannot get away with its public resource grab:

Thank you for standing up against corporate patent-grabs,

Kaytee and the rest of us ( thesumofus.org )

by d.william 4/25/13

How GMO foods affect our organs

Seeds of Death - the documentary

More by this Author


Comments 30 comments

nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Do you eat corn? Do you have a dog?


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Do you eat broccoli, cauliflower or brussel sprouts?


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

Not any more. And i also do not feed my dogs anything with corn products in them. They are healthy and happy pups.

I have several hubs that address the subject of our tainted food supplies. this is the one on corn:

http://hubpages.com/food/THE-DEATH-OF-A-NATION...

It is imperative that we have labeling laws on the foods we buy, so we can make the choice of eating GMO products or selecting more established "safe and natural" products.

This is a dangerous game that this government is allowing Monsanto, et al, to push on uninformed American consumers. This is a national experiment on people that should never have been allowed. We cried about historical human experimentations around the world and somehow think it is OK for it to be done today in this country today?

This practice is insane and so are those who blindly condone it without empirical proof that it will not cause genetic shifting in generations to come. Especially when studies have already been done that prove genetically modified foods cause wide spread tumors in lab animals.

Most European countries are banning GMO products and the US is encouraging them. Why?

I eat broccoli if it is from the state of Maine where i know it is being grown without modifications. I do not know that brussel sprouts, or cauliflower have been contaminated as yet by local growers.

The corruption of our corn, and other natural foods, is a sin against humanity. Corn and its byproducts are used in just about every other food products that we buy in our grocery stores.

There is no justification for this bizarre phenomenon to be occurring on such a global scale.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Corn was GMO'd by the Pilgrims.

Broccoli, cauliflower, and brussel sprouts didn't exist until they were GMO'd from wild kale.

The next time you enjoy a salad... thank a genetic engineer.


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

Apparently you have the wrong concept of what is being done to our foods today.

There is a big difference between splicing, or grafting, one plant to another as opposed to splicing two totally incompatibly different things that cause a new product that humans have never ingested before.

The Genetically modified foods today are quite a bit more complicated. They are splicing genes from something totally foreign into a natural product, thereby totally screwing up the genetic coding of the original, while creating a whole new species.

For instance splicing the genetic make up of fertilizer into a plant to keep bugs away. Or splicing the genes from humans into a cow to make "human cow's milk".

When you graft one natural product with another natural product you get a natural new variety that is still genetically compatible with human consumption. A few years ago they managed to combine genes from broccoli with cauliflower, so a vegetable that looked like cauliflower except it was green, was born.

When you splice two things that have no genetic likeness you are creating a whole new thing that could cause sever genetic shifting in humans leading to all kinds of mutations, new diseases, tumors, or death.

Genetically modifying foods with known poisons to man does not make the poisons magically compatible to humans. Instead it causes tumors, and very basic genetic shifting that leads to mutations in the fetus.

This has never been proven safe for human consumption. It does not matter how many "intelligent" scientists they pay to state it is safe, there is not one human on this planet that can possible know that with any certainty.

So, we are the guinea pigs for modern day farmers. 'Let's try it and see what happens' does not cut it for me. Once these plants contaminate the real foods we eat there can be no reversing the effects they cause in humans. And there can be no retrieving the original plants once they have been contaminated.


Electro-Denizen profile image

Electro-Denizen 3 years ago from Wales, UK

This is a subject that I feel very, very strongly about. Most have no idea what is being done while their attention is being grabbed by various entertainment stupidities. You mention about patenting air. Well, how about water? This is exactly what the CEO of Nestle Peter Brabeck, in his own words, is proposing by saying that water isn't a human right. Check out the interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iGj4GpAbTM


AlexDrinkH2O profile image

AlexDrinkH2O 3 years ago from Southern New England, USA

This really is beyond the pale. A "New Age Holocaust?"

True unchecked evils in the world today? They actually are in opposition to each other but somehow co-exist because of a deep-seated hatred of the Judeo-Christian fundamentals of western civilization. They are radical Islam and secular humanism. The former hopes for a world government based on a totalitarian religion and latter wants civilization to slide into moral decay much as ancient Rome did. I just hope they cancel each other out. If I were you, I worry more about them than genetically-modified rutabagas!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Water isn't a human right. If I build a house in the middle of a desert, is society obligated to build me a water main? Should I sit on my porch and wait for the government to send me a case of bottled water?

If I'm climbing Mt. Everest and I get thirsty, do I have a right to confiscate water from another climber?


Electro-Denizen profile image

Electro-Denizen 3 years ago from Wales, UK

nicomp I think these projections you're working on are veering off the issue. My background is in Economics, and I know first hand how everything can be quantified economically (even emotions - emotional damages and so on); on the other hand, I've learned that various things that look good on paper, actually distort reality, and a sense of humanity. Sometimes these economic approaches work, sometimes they don't. But in Nestle's case, you can rest assured that getting some kind of patent over the delivery of water, won't be in the interest of humanity (in much the same way they've sold formula milk to third world counties, convincing them that it's better than a mother's breast milk, which is absurd). The reasoning Peter Brabeck uses, is kind of sound, but just in the wrong hands. That is the issue, I think. We always used to laugh about the 'marginal revenue curve' - which kind of meant, ***k the consequences and everyone else, as long as it makes money and feeds the shareholders.


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

http://hubpages.com/@electro-denizen

thanks for reading and commenting. And this time i watched the video before commenting. (L.O.L.)

It is rather frightening that the powerful wealthy think they have the right to control everything that effects the rest of us - not out of any altruistic sense but strictly for profit. In Florida some wealthy individuals are trying to buy up all the water rights, and if the current administration prevails they well do just that.

The supreme court has just made a ruling that the "Human Gene" can no longer be patented. NO LONGER? Who knew it was being patented?

The pharmaceutical companies have been patenting any new genes they discover saying because they discovered it, it belongs to them. Their purpose? They are finding genes responsible for some illness, and if it is not patented, they will lose trillions of dollars per year in profits from the drugs they sell to ''treat'' those "illnessess".

Back when it was discovered that certain genes were the direct cause of certain illness, or human traits, there was an article that came out in the AMA journal of medicine stating that they had found a gene responsible for people being born gay.

Realizing the social ramifications of that discovery - (proving religions wrong), and the possibility of someone trying to ('cure' homosexuality), and to prevent the possibility of adopting a policy that would allow the genetic testing of fetuses ( that would give the mother the option of aborting a fetus that has the "gay" gene), but worse than that it would label a person from birth if they were not aborted.

Now it will be interesting to see how society deals with all their hatred and intolerance when they find out that homosexuality is truly not a choice one makes at all.

Do we simply still kill them off, and where do we draw the line? Should all babies born with birth defects be terminated before they are born? Should we be able to pick and choose which fetuses we want to keep (male or female)?

With this new finding of the supreme court, can they now justify continuing the discrimination of gays because of religious ignorance?

To allow anyone, or any corporation, for any reason, to be able to "patent" what nature provides as necessities for life is a true crime against humanity.

The GM of natural foods with poisons is a recipe for disaster, and certainly a great way for terrorist to kill off billions of unsuspecting people.

As long as our government officials are in those "elected" positions for their own personal financial profits above the safety of people in general we all are at risk of elimination.

We learned nothing by the attempt to exterminate the jews, and all the other countries who have tried genocide tactics for their own misguided reasons.


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

http://hubpages.com/@nicomp

I appreciate your comments and my response is exactly the same as those of electro-denizen. He said it better than i could have.


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

http://hubpages.com/@alexdrinkh2o

Now in your case, although i appreciate your reading and adding your comments; it is great to see that you are true to your convictions regardless of how far from reality they are.

Putting anything in the hands of any kind of extremists is a dangerous practice. We have to consider what is best for humanity before considering what is best for corporate America. Corp. Amer certainly does not have the best interest of anyone but themselves.

Our best hope for a future that is conducive to human life is to change our way of thinking - placing emphasis on what is right for the majority - and not the excessive profits of the greedy. And your incessant interjection of religious rhetoric must be eliminated from society altogether. It serves no practical purpose.


AlexDrinkH2O profile image

AlexDrinkH2O 3 years ago from Southern New England, USA

" And your incessant interjection of religious rhetoric must be eliminated from society altogether. It serves no practical purpose." Your statements get more and more ridiculous. There is no point in arguing with an obvious atheist - closed minds cannot be changed. By the way, being against gay "marriage" does NOT mean hatred of homosexuals. It is an opposition to behavior, equal to disapproving of people who sleep around, people who cheat on their spouses, etc. Are we going to see demonstrations in favor of "adulterers rights" now? By the way, believing in basic morality does not have to be religious in nature. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." First Amendment to the US Constitution - please pay attention to the SECOND part of that phrase as well as the first.


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

http://hubpages.com/@alexdrinkh2o

thanks for your illuminating explanations. Obviously you are not familiar with my writings or you would know better than make a comment that i am an atheist. You could not be further from the truth. visit my hub: http://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/I-AM-a-Bel

I do dislike how organized religions control the lives of others, and for obvious reasons - and those reasons include its claim to have the power of saving the soul of another.

We are the guardians of our own souls, and our own destinies. What is right for you does not mean it is right for someone else, and the same goes for your imposing the sin factor on yourself and knowing you do not have the authority to impose your judgment of the same sins onto another

Our creator does not belong to any religion. those businesses are man made for self serving only. Their professing to be doing God's work is nothing but a smoke screen for their own inadequacies and self serving.

There are a lot of behaviors that i do not approve of, but it is not my place to judge others, speak against them for something i know nothing about, or try to make them change what they are born to be.

What i do dislike are people who oppose others without reason because they do not like who someone is, or what they do.

I never could understand how the intimacy of others could actually effect anyone not participating in those activities. Psychology would say that those who speak the loudest against any behavior indicates the speaker's desire to practice that same behavior, whether subconsciously, or as a means of denial.

You may find my views of your ideas ridiculous, but that works both ways. Mine are based on logic and common sense, and a profound connection with the Creator of all things - and yours?

I speak about the evils of organized religions and i am damned for that by people who disagree, But when those who disagree speak about how evil i am that is OK for it is being done in the name of their God. How hypocritical is that?

And just to further clarify about adulterers - that is only a sin in the eyes of man. There is no sin in sexual intimacy. The sexual pleasure humans enjoy is a gift from the Creator and cannot be judged by man. The only fault i have with adultery is the act of unfaithfulness by the person that breaches a solemn promise they have made to another. It has nothing to do with sex. There are no sexual sins, but there might be Karma to pay for lying, sneaking around, and betraying someone who you have betrothed yourself too.

But you are right about one thing, morality has nothing to do with religion - it is a state of mind that tells each of us what is right from wrong.

Abusing children in any fashion, forcing ones self on another, putting physical or mental restraints on another, physical abuse, threatening and intimidating are morally wrong. We do not need a middle man in the form of religion or government to define what is common decency and common sense.


AlexDrinkH2O profile image

AlexDrinkH2O 3 years ago from Southern New England, USA

"And just to further clarify about adulterers - that is only a sin in the eyes of man. There is no sin in sexual intimacy. "

THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT - THOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

And there we are - back to believing in superstitious fairy tales. All that is written is not truth, or reality, especially when the author is unknown, unseen, and unheard.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Wow. I missed a lot today... not sure what, but certainly something.


Electro-Denizen profile image

Electro-Denizen 3 years ago from Wales, UK

Bible bashers make my brain ache and I just want to go home!! ha ha. Especially when their bible says Thou Shalt Not Kill and they merrily eat their burgers made from animals that died in pain and fear, without one inch of compassion extended to them.

On my 'Religions of the Future' Chart, Buddhism and Hinduism gets +10 and Christianity at the moment gets about -15, since both Hinduism and Buddhism have a no-kill ethic embedded in their practice (i.e. vegetarian) and Christianity does not.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Like PETA says... a dog is a rat is a boy, right Electro?


Electro-Denizen profile image

Electro-Denizen 3 years ago from Wales, UK

haha nicomp, is that what they say? Well, if that is their way of expressing the concept of the sanctity of all life, then yeah! Putting a rat in the equation, seen as a common pest and carrier of disease, doesn't sit comfortably though, does it? In fact, it kind of helps nullify the whole argument, as who is going to talk nice to a rat colony that is busy destroying the whole loft?


Electro-Denizen profile image

Electro-Denizen 3 years ago from Wales, UK

On second thoughts, it doesn't exactly nullify the argument - the idea is about not killing anything you don't need to. Most of us eat meat when we don't even need to and hence make animals suffer when it's not necessary.

And bringing this all back to the original article of this excellent hub, humanity is being hoodwinked on a wide scale - which includes being implanted with ideas as what constitutes decent nutrition - from meat to GM and so on.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

I eat meat because it tastes good.


Electro-Denizen profile image

Electro-Denizen 3 years ago from Wales, UK

Salts, sugars and sauces can make anything taste good :-)) I recommend a gigantic pile of oven roasted vegetables, cut into largish chunks, as blackened as you want, they taste amazing! Yum yum. Well, that's my preference anyway.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

I hide my greens in a big turkey sandwich.


AlexDrinkH2O profile image

AlexDrinkH2O 3 years ago from Southern New England, USA

If you believe the Ten Commandments are " superstitious fairy tales," then we truly have no common ground. 'Nuff said.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Wait, what? I never said that.


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

http://hubpages.com/@alexdrinkh2o

My dear naive Alex. I have added a new capsule at the end of this article just for you. These are only a few of the versions of the original 10 commandments that you obviously cannot read without a translator. So pick one of the translated versions that you like the best and run with that one.

Let's look at those 10 commandments and where they came from.

One man some 3000+ years ago went into isolation and came back with rules that he attributed to God himself. Let's be realistic. Why would God appear to one man in secret for any reason? (Like our government secretly making laws behind the backs of common folks). Lets take a closer look at those 10 rules to live by:

1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other God before me. 2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing in heaven above, or things which are in the earth beneath. 3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

5. Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife.

8. Thous shalt not covet they neighbors goods.

9. Thou shalt not steal.

10. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Some of the 10 commandments are common sense things that merit being followed with punishments for those who break those laws: (murder, stealing, bearing false witness that causes harm to others), etc. But, really, the rest were designed to stop the loose life styles of the people of the times and are a wee bit superfluous even for those times.

Don't project your beliefs on others. You can live by any rules you desire, but you cannot impose those laws on others, not judge anyone else for their common sense reality.


AlexDrinkH2O profile image

AlexDrinkH2O 3 years ago from Southern New England, USA

Now I'm naive. What else have you called me, I forgot? Re: Ten Commandments - I subscribe to the Roman Catholic version. I am not projecting my beliefs on others - I am trying to make a point. You're one of these people that thinks they have all the answers so what is the point of arguing with you? You're too far in left field. And don't even dare to lecture me about politics, a subject I have 2 degrees in and have followed my whole life. You just go ahead and live in your little world of conspiracy theories and "new-age" religious beliefs and leave me out of it.


AlexDrinkH2O profile image

AlexDrinkH2O 3 years ago from Southern New England, USA

BTW - I just read this on your profile page: "Some of my articles are fiction based on some facts and my own personal point of view. " I didn't realize this but I guess this hub was fictional, right? That's the only way it makes any sense . . .


d.william profile image

d.william 3 years ago from Somewhere in the south Author

Alex: It does not matter which version you subscribe to, the point is that when people take their teachings on a literal basis they are narrowing their field of vision and closing their minds to new concepts.

There are no rules for living written and handed down by our Creators.

The rules and regulations imposed on humanity were at the hands of men who took that authority upon themselves and fooled people into believing that they were told to do so by God himself.

Satan was introduced to humanity as a counter balance (a catch 22 position) by those men who wrote those rules and regulations to prevent anyone from questioning their validity.

Fear and guilt are two powerful tools of control. But they are unfounded and certainly not based in any logic, rationality, or common sense.

I know i do not have all the answers to most things, but i do know that i have an obligation to write about other possibilities and hope the hearing of another point of view, will help some people broaden their perspectives, and allow themselves the luxury of living a life in a spiritual way without fear or guilt. When a mind and heart is free of the burdens of unfounded guilt and/or fear it is more open to feeling the presence of that connection between all other humans and that wonderful universal oneness that we incorrectly see as God - the father figure.

It does not matter how many degrees anyone has in any field, when their minds are closed and their vision is tunneled to one point of view, all the degrees in the world will make no difference at all.

My "new age" religion, as you describe it, is based on logic, common sense, and a deep reverence for the Creator of all things. I have a deep spiritual connection to that Creator without all the earthly baggage that organized religions burden people with.

You are making life way more complicated than it needs to be by maintaining your belief in words written by ancients who had a greater agenda than i ever will.

And lastly NO this hub is not fictional. The threat of the possibilities of negative side effects caused by the likes of people like Monsanto, et al, is real. When the unproven safety factor is ignored for the sake of profit, and people are not given a choice whether they want to participate in this experiment it is truly a crime against humanity and should never have been sanctioned by a government elected to protect the people - not protect corporations for profit.

When one understands the synchronistic connections between our genetic make up and the foods we eat to maintain a healthy body, and the proven facts that GM foods cause genetic shifting and what that means for our future generations, we must stop this from happening. It is willful, against nature, against God, and unnatural. Profits must not outweigh human safety.

Thanks for pointing out the wording in my profile. That was true when i first joined H.P. but needs to be updated. I will take care of that oversight post haste.

I apologize for upsetting your belief system, but when people get riled up at the possibility of a viable alternative they become defensive, threatening, judgmental and angry.

But those attributes are not bad things if they can open up someone's mind to the possibility that what they were brainwashed into believing in, as any unwilling child was when they were taught their basic religious beliefs, just might not be based in reality or logic after all.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working