March 24, 2016 By Joseph P. Farrell

Mr. V.T. shared this arrticle, and it's a whopper doozie, even though at first glance it may not seem to be too significant.

Buut first, a little background. Do you all recall that, beginning in the 1990s, we began to hear of the sudden fall in the populations of honey bees, first in the USSA, then in Canada, and  then in Europe?  At the time, this "colony collapse disorder" had everyone mystified: there was no apparent explanation, but everyone, myself included, knew something was amiss: we were seeing far fewer bees buzzing around our flower gardens, and, for those of us who live in more southern climes, even a drop in little hummingbirds.

So what was going on?

As the phenomenon began to be talked about - largely on alternative media and talk shows such as the USA's "Coast to Coast AM," some people began to connect it with the rise, at around the same time, of GMOs and their acocmpanying glyphosphate herbicide. And one bee keeper noticed the same thing, and decided to investigate:

Illinois Department of Agriculture destroys beekeeper’s hives, equipment and research proving Monsanto’s Roundup to be the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD)

Now, beyond the obvious and glaring fact that the government structure no longer serves the body politic, nor free and open investigation of scientific claims, but trumps up excuses to seize property and documentation challenging the official corporate sponsored narrative, there's a huge problem here. And it's not simply Mr. Ingram's allegations regarding his suspicion that Mon(ster)santo may have been behind the ruination of his hives and research.

I don't doubt for a moment that these corporations are so corrupt that they would do such a thing, not for a moment do I doubt it. After all, they championed the mercantilist policy, i.e., championed their own privilieged status, by advocating their looney doctrine of "substantial equivalence": if our GMO corn looks like corn and tastes like corn, then nevermind the possible health consequences of its genetic composition or the fact that it was designed to withstand saturation with glyphosphate. If it looks and tastes like corn, it's corn, and we don't need years and years of scientific, intergenerational testing and environmental impact and human health studies. Buy a few politicians, place our company personnel in government agencies overseeing the food and drug supply, and its a solved problem. But then, in spite of that "substantial equivalence," let us have our glyphosphate cake and eat it too, and demand the protection, and profits, of patent law. Woops!  How can one patent plain old corn?

And that has always been the problem, one can't.

But the whole process is a textbook example of creating special priviliege.

The problem with the special priviliege of this sort is the utter lack of transparency and truth, for the truth of the matter is as plain as common sense, of rationality: there are now studies backing up that initial common sense correlation of colony collapse disorder and the range of "agricultural products" that began to be used at approximately the same time. The plain fact of the matter is there needs to be a moratorium on this product, for without honeybees, the food cycle itself is in danger.

See you on the flip side...