Big Biotech – Breakaway Consciousness

Bayer Hunts Down Journalists

Source: Mercola.com
Dr. Mecola
June 4, 2019

When Bayer acquired Monsanto in 2018 for about $63 billion, you have to wonder whether executives knew the extent of the liabilities they were inheriting. The latest debacle is a collection of veritable hit lists compiled by Monsanto, containing hundreds of names and other personal information about journalists, politicians and scientists, including their opinions about pesticides and genetic engineering.¹

Monsanto’s so-called “stakeholder mapping project”² was first uncovered in France, but now it appears Monsanto likely had multiple lists to track people in countries throughout Europe. Matthias Berninger, Bayer’s head of public affairs and sustainability, told reporters, “It’s safe to say that other countries in Europe were affected by lists … I assume that all EU member states could potentially be affected.”³

Bayer Opens Investigation Into Monsanto Surveillance Project

In May 2019, French prosecutors said they had opened an investigation into Monsanto’s alleged watch lists full of private information pertaining to about 200 people. Bayer stated that it intends to fully support France in its investigations while conducting one of its own.

The seed and pesticide giant hired law firm Sidley Austin LLP for the investigation, which began informing people who were stalked by Monsanto of the issue in late May.⁴

According to Bayer, “Currently, we have no indication that the preparation of the lists under discussion violated any legal provisions,”⁵ although Berninger also said, “We consider what we have seen so far to be completely inappropriate.”⁶ In a conference call, he further stated:⁷

“There have been a number of cases where — as they would say in football — not the ball was played but the man, or woman, was tackled. When you collect non-publicly available data about individuals a Rubicon is clearly crossed.”

In addition to hiring law firm Sidley Austin to investigate Monsanto’s privacy breaches, Bayer said it had stopped communications and public affairs activity with the public relations agency FleishmanHillard, which was reportedly involved in creating Monsanto’s hit lists — at least for the time being.⁸ As for their role, FleishmanHillard defended their work, saying it’s been “mischaracterized,” and adding:⁹

“Corporations, NGOs and other clients rightfully expect our firm to help them understand diverse perspectives before they engage. To do so, we and every other professional communications agency gather relevant information from publicly available sources.

Those planning documents are fundamental to outreach efforts. They help our clients best engage in the dialogue relevant to their business and societal objectives.”

Bayer Inherits Billions in Monsanto Lawsuit Damages

More than 13,400 cases are currently pending against Bayer, alleging that Monsanto’s Roundup caused their cancer and the company failed to warn consumers about cancer risks. In the first three cases to go to trial, jury verdicts have overwhelmingly favored the plaintiffs, leaving Bayer saddled with billions in damages.

In the first trial involving Dewayne Johnson, it was found Monsanto “acted with malice or oppression” and was responsible for “negligent failure” by not warning consumers about Roundup’s carcinogenicity.¹⁰ Johnson, who is terminally ill, claimed Roundup caused his Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and the jury agreed.

Monsanto was ordered to pay $289 million in damages to Johnson, although the award was later reduced to $78 million. Bayer appealed the case, asking a court to throw out the judgment on the grounds that Johnson may not live long enough to experience the full pain and suffering that they’re compensating him for. The appeal states:¹¹

“‘[D]amages for future pain and suffering are based upon plaintiff’s probable life expectancy in his or her injured condition … [C]ompensation for pain and suffering is recompense for pain and suffering actually experienced, and to the extent that premature death terminates the pain and suffering, compensation should be terminated’] …”

In the second case, a judge ruled in favor of plaintiff Edwin Hardeman, who alleged his repeated exposures to Roundup, which he used to kill weeds on his 56-acre property, caused him to develop cancer. Bayer was ordered to pay more than $80 million in the case, which also found Monsanto failed to warn consumers that the product carried a cancer risk.¹²

Hardeman was awarded $75 million in punitive damages, $5.6 million in compensatory damages and $200,000 for medical expenses,¹³ but Bayer, again, plans to appeal. In the third case, heard before the Alameda County Superior Court of California, a married couple, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, claimed they both developed Non-Hodgkin lymphoma after regular use of Roundup.

The jury decided in the Pilliods’ favor, ordering the chemical giant to pay $2 billion to its victims. Bayer plans to appeal the verdict, and the damages may ultimately be reduced, as it’s generally upheld that punitive damages shouldn’t be more than 10 times higher than compensatory damages. However, the zero for 3 record for Bayer has experts suggesting settlement talks may be in order.¹⁴

Continue Reading at: Mercola.com

The Bayer-Monsanto Buy Out Mystery

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
April 29, 2019

Well… this is interesting. It seems that the CEO of one of the corporations that gave the world Zyklon B is under scrutiny and fire for his role in his corporation’s buyout of the corporation that gave the world Agent Orange and Roundup with its carcinogenic and soil-nutrient-killing glyphosate; I.G. Farben meets Mon(ster)santo to become I.G. Farbensanto. And just in time, too, because we were being bombarded by the business schools and news that “bigger is better” and “economies of scale” and so on and so forth. Well, the last incarnation of I.G. Farben wasn’t too pleasant, and its current manifestation appears to be little better. It is better in one major respect, and that is that in its current manifestation, I.G. Farbensanto can at least be taken to court and sued for the harm it is doing to people, and eventually I suppose, the harm it is doing the environment.

But there’s a mystery here, and it prompts today’s high octane speculation, based on the following article from Zero Hedge that many of you sent along this past week:

In “Stunning Decision” Bayer Shareholders Dump CEO Over Disastrous Monsanto Purchase

Normally I would not cite so much of an article, but here it is essential to do so, in order to highlight the strange mystery lying at the heart of the Bayer buy out of Mon(ster)santo:

Bayer, also known as IG Farben back in the day, survived World War II (which it helped fund for Hitler’s war effort while recruiting a an army of slave workers), but it may not survive the worst acquisition in its history: the disastrous $63 billion purchase of Monsanto in 2018, which also brought over the infamous carcinogenic weed-killer Roundup, and with it countless lawsuits and legal charges.

And while the future of the iconic company which brought “cough medicine” Heroin to the world remains in question, as it is slowly been buried under an avalanche of lawsuits emerging from Monsanto’s legacy misdeeds which have slammed its stock to 7 year lows…

Late on Friday, in what Bloomberg called a “stunning development” for the German drugs and chemicals company, a majority, or about 55% of shareholders, voted against absolving CEO Werner Baumann and other managers of responsibility for their actions in the Monsanto takeover last year. Though the result isn’t legally binding, it throws his future into question and prompted an immediate supervisory board session. Similar rejections have cost German CEOs their jobs.

“Mr. Baumann, what have you done with our stable company?,” said Joachim Kregel, a representative of German shareholders association SdK. In just two years, “the erstwhile pharma giant has mutated into a dwarf,” said Ingo Speich, chief of sustainability and corporate governance at Deka Investment.

Bayer Chairman Werner Wenning said the board is taking the vote “very seriously” and would “do everything to win back the trust of shareholders as quickly and completely as possible” adding that “we regret this exceedingly.”

“Nevertheless, the voting results show that the stockholders’ meeting wanted to send a clear signal.”

The vote, which took place at around 10 p.m. local time, capped a tumultuous meeting in Bonn, with investors berating Baumann, arguing with Wenning and demanding explanations for the erasure of some 35 billion euros ($39 billion) in market value since the deal.At the heart of the debate was whether Baumann, Wenning and other leaders properly assessed the legal risks of Roundup, the controversial weedkiller it acquired together with Monsanto, according to Bloomberg. (Boldface emphasis in the original, bold-italics emphasis added)

It’s that last sentence that exposes the heart of the mystery, and that mystery has been hovering in the background ever since the buy-out occurred. We can sum up that mystery by putting it “country simple”: why on earth did Bayer buy Mon(ster)santo in the first place, when the lawsuits pending against it were so numerous and potentially risky? What on earth possessed Bayer’s executives not only to go through with the deal, but to pay cash for the headaches they bought themselves?

This question has not only troubled me ever since the acquisition was announced, but it has bothered others too. Catherine Austin Fitts and I have discussed it many times, both in her wrap up reports, and privately. I have discussed it with members of this website and with a few friends, and none of us can figure out what was going through the minds of Bayer’s executives when they made this deal, for in the final analysis, it makes no sense.

If there is an answer to that question, it has to lie somewhere on the spectrum between “just plain stupidity” (perhaps mixed with a hefty bit of “corporate it-can’t-happen-to-us-because-we’re-good-and-smart-people hubris”) to an admittedly high octane speculative scenario, which I advance here today for the first time: What if the whole thing was a deliberate act of sabotage of Bayer by agents provocateur carefully infiltrated into the company to influence its policy and direction? What if the whole thing was a part of some deliberate and wider “plan” of economic warfare between the USA and Germany, unloading an increasingly (and deservedly) unpopular American company on a German mega-corporation, and making the latter foot the bill for the lawsuits? All that money flows from Bayer and Germany into the USA to pay for lawyers, and lawsuit settlements, leaving the stockholders in Bonn rightfully asking the same questions we are: why on earth did they do the buy-out in the first place?

Of course, that scenario sounds nutty, and like I’ve run completely off the end of the High Octane Speculation twig once again. I freely acknowledge how nutty it sounds.

But consider: we’re told over and over by Mr. Globaloney that the nation-state is obsolete, and that mega-transnational corporations are doing end runs around national sovereignty, and that the world should be run by these corporations. In effect, they are saying that these corporations are the “new sovereignties” in the world. If so, then it stands to reason that they will start doing what sovereign nations have always done: they will spy on each other, they will infiltrate long-term sleeper agents into each other’s organizations as agents provocateur, and seek to influence their competition’s policies and decisions to the detriment of their competition, and to the advantage of themselves. They will raise mercenary armies and do battle with each other; they will hire assassins, and do all the other covert things that sovereign nations have done and still do.If you don’t believe me, just recall the first example of such behavior, when the bankers of the Rialto helped to manipulate the crisis that put an end to the 14th century Florentine “mega-companies”. So perhaps, just perhaps, some major global competitor of Bayer infiltrated such agents provocateur into the very top echelon of that company’s leadership, and that leadership in turn bought, or was advised to buy, Mon(ster)santo, effectively hanging a millstone around Bayer’s neck, and taking much needed funds from its R & D and shoveling them into non-productive, non-competitive activities like defending against lawsuits… It’s a stunningly efficient way to take out a competitor and use up its liquidity.

We’ll know in good time, of course, whether that scenario is true or not, for I strongly suspect that those Bayer shareholders are going to demand an investigation, or conduct one of their own because they won’t be in the mood to accept any explanations from the leadership that created the mess, and the precipitous drop in their share value.

And if that scenario to any degree should be born out by coming disclosures and investigations, then its a reminder of a general principle that my nutty scenario can apply to other corporations, and may rationalize corporate behavior that otherwise makes no sense from conventional analysis.

See you on the flip side…

3D Printing Scrapbook: The First Human Heart 3D Printed

GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
May 4th, 2019

If you’ve been following the three-d printing/additive manufacturing story, and the genetic engineering story, you’ll be interested in this one. Frankly, I view it with a mixture of ambivalence, as being something that could be profoundly good, and profoundly bad. The story, as you can guess from the headline, is about the fact that some scientists have now 3-d printed the first artificial human heart. But there’s a catch here, and it’s a profound one, in this article shared by V.T.:

Major Medical Breakthrough: 3D Heart Printed Using Patient’s Own Cells and Materials

The engineered heart completely matches the immunological, cellular, biochemical and anatomical properties of the patient

In a major medical breakthrough, Tel Aviv University researchers have “printed” the world’s first 3D vascularised engineered heart using a patient’s own cells and biological materials. Their findings were published on April 15 in a study in Advanced Science.

Until now, scientists in regenerative medicine — a field positioned at the crossroads of biology and technology — have been successful in printing only simple tissues without blood vessels.

I was struck by the fact that apparently, no babies were aborted, ground up, and fetal stem cell tissue harvested to accomplish the feat, which seems all but par for the course for similar developments elsewhere in the world. And the utility of the accomplishment, using a patient’s own cells, is rather obvious, as the article points out:

For the research, a biopsy of fatty tissue was taken from patients. The cellular and a-cellular materials of the tissue were then separated. While the cells were reprogrammed to become pluripotent stem cells, the extracellular matrix (ECM), a three-dimensional network of extracellular macromolecules such as collagen and glycoproteins, were processed into a personalized hydrogel that served as the printing “ink.”

After being mixed with the hydrogel, the cells were efficiently differentiated to cardiac or endothelial cells to create patient-specific, immune-compatible cardiac patches with blood vessels and, subsequently, an entire heart.

According to Prof. Dvir, the use of “native” patient-specific materials is crucial to successfully engineering tissues and organs.

“The biocompatibility of engineered materials is crucial to eliminating the risk of implant rejection, which jeopardizes the success of such treatments,” Prof. Dvir says. “Ideally, the biomaterial should possess the same biochemical, mechanical and topographical properties of the patient’s own tissues. Here, we can report a simple approach to 3D-printed thick, vascularized and perfusable cardiac tissues that completely match the immunological, cellular, biochemical and anatomical properties of the patient.”

The researchers are now planning on culturing the printed hearts in the lab and “teaching them to behave” like hearts, Prof. Dvir says. They then plan to transplant the 3D-printed heart in animal models.

Of course, the implication here is obvious: if one can do this with hearts, one can do it for almost any organ in the body once they “wear out” and need replacement: “Maybe, in ten years,” the article concludes, “there will be organ printers in the finest hospitals around the world, and these procedures will be conducted routinely.”

Probably so. One can even envision a time or circumstance that the technology becomes so commonplace that the procedure becomes cheap, affordable, and can be done by “licensed organ printers” rather than doctors, in a kind of out patient procedure. And while we’re indulging in all this high octane speculation, one my even envision a kind of “organ dealership” or “Jiffy Lube,” a kind of drive-through organ replacement “garage,” complete with warranties and expiration dates, and so on.

Now, on the one hand, I can see that this developing technology is a good thing, because it extends life, and life is a good thing. Call me old fashioned, but I believe ardently in the sanctity of life. But it’s that, precisely, that also bothers me here, with the article’s own admission that one can envision a whole new branch of medicine emerging: organ-printing and replacement, and with it, a cheapening of life, a view that our bodies are so many collections of organs to be replaced when “worn out.” I wrote about this years ago, at the very end of my first “foray” into this strange alternative research field, in The Giza Death Star. I wrote about it in the context of a view of those ancient texts which record extraordinarily long life spans for our early ancestors. The biblical texts have humans living in some cases from half a millennium to almost a thousand years. In the Mesopotamian and Egyptian king’s lists, these life spans stretch tens of thousands and sometimes even hundreds of thousands of years.

And with the advent of this new “organ-printing and replacement” branch of medicine, once again modern science is providing a context from which to view those ancient claims as perhaps having a basis in a similar technological reality. But as I put it at the end of The Giza Death Star, the danger of viewing organs as so many replaceable “body parts” is what it does to the human spirit. As I warned then, the danger of becoming bored with life to the point of a kind of nihilistic anomie or antinomianism emerges, and one can imagine the emergence of a Hitler or a Stalin with thousands of years to perfect the evil in their souls. On can, of course, imagine a Francis of Assisi or Seraphim of Sarov perfecting their sanctity as well. It’s that potentiality that raises another high octane speculation: imagine also a “board” which must “approve” people to be recipients of such medical-technological boons. To be “approved,” one will have to have demonstrated holding the “correct opinions.” And given the fact that certain state legislatures are openly applauding the passage of full term abortion laws, and that certain state governors in this country are openly and calmly talking about “post-birth abortions” – infanticide – on television, one can fairly guess that people like Seraphim of Sarov or Francis of Assisi won’t be on the list of “acceptable recipients.”

See you on the flip side…

_______________________________________________
About The Author:

#Book Review – Rise Of The Fourth Reich, by Jim Marrs

“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”

“The hierarchical organization and the initiation through symbolic rites, that is to say, without bothering the brain but by working on the imagination through magic and the symbols of a cult, all this is the dangerous element, and the element I have taken over.”

– Adolf Hitler

“Since the war was lost, the “enemy lines” meant, quite literally, a new kind of special guerilla warfare was to be waged from a postwar Nazi underground, quite literally, “behind enemy lines” which would in the aftermath of the war, cover the entire globe, and that warfare was deliberately conceived in conjunction with an advanced technology that, in the hands of Weltanschauungskrieg experts, would be used to spread fear, terror, confusion, and thereby to demoralize the enemy, short circuit his world-interpretation and decision making process….But what precisely, was that technology?”

– Joseph P. Farrel, Saucers, Swastikas And PsyOps – A History Of A Breakaway Civilization: Hidden Aerospace Technologies And Psychological Operations

BreakawayIndividual.com
Zy Marquiez
April 6, 2019

In this tour de force, The Rise Of The Fourth Reich – The Secret Societies That Threaten To Take Over America, the late Jim Marrs carried out unparalleled work in exposing an extensive amount of data regarding the Nazis that you will not get taught in school.

As its often said, history is written by the winners, and an odd history it is that most people know very little about the Nazis except for what they have heard about from the mainstream media.

One quick yet notable example of how history is twisted, is the fact that most of the populace is blind to the fact that America, the Vatican, as well as other countries funneled Nazis through ratlines in droves. If that were it, it would be bad enough. However, many of those very high-ranking criminal Nazis were given positions of power within the establishment of the time via Project Paperclip; most notable of those is Dr. Wehrner Von Braun, who in later years became the head of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA]. Other high ranking Nazis brought over in such a manner include Kurt Diebner, Otto Hahn often called “the father of nuclear chemistry” Walter Gerlach, and many others.

Therein, by 1955, nearly a thousand German scientists had been funneled into the United States and given vital positions within the American Scientific community.

Throughout the length of the book, Marrs, like a heat seeking missile locks onto the most keen of aspects in his extensive synopsis of the Nazi abstruse lore, such as the strangeness of Rudolf Hess and his particular case, to an examination of what is oft-termed ‘Nazi Wonder Weapons’, the Nazis search for ancient relics, and much, much more.

Another great topic of note that affects our everyday lives – yet has its nascent stages within the Nazi history – is the one of the toxin Fluoride. Unbeknownst too many is the fact that not only is this toxin put into the water supply, but it also causes extensive detrimental side effects such as lower IQ [as Harvard studies find], mental retardation, brain damage, skeletal fluorosis, increased bone fractures, genetic damage, dental fluorosis, gastrointestinal disturbances. Marrs also covers the noxious Aspartame, which the FDA knows has 92 potential side effects, but still pushed it through since it was Donald Rumsfeld’s Bioweapon Legacy.

Some of the other topics touched upon by Marrs include the Nazi Mind Control programs that aided in the spawning of the infamous MK-Ultra Mind Control program, as well as the elite & corporate ties to the Nazis, the Nazi connections to the pharmaceutical industry, I.G. Farben and their love for eugenics, the pervasive control of mainstream media, and a whole lot more.

Calling this merely a great book would be an understatement. This particular well researched piece belongs in everyone’s library. It is as well rounded as it is incisive. Not having it would be a great disservice to those wishing to understand the current criminals in a plethora of positions powers such as politics, finance, banking, etc. whose ties lead back to these very nefarious roots.

___________________________________________________________