Mr. A.F. saw this article on the next step in the ongoing GMO crime syndicate's gallant struggle against clear thinking and non-corporate science, and I have to talk about this one, because it's by our friend and colleague Jon Rappoport:

The next huge GMO crime is here

So why am I bothering to call this review of Mr. Rappoport's article "substantial equivalence on steroids"? Well, go back for a moment to Dr. Scott deHart's and my book, Transhumanism: A Grimoire of Alchemical Agendas. In that book, we noted not only the overall resemblance of transhumanism to the old alchemical agenda of "transforming man", but that one of the ways this was to be achieved was through food, the "frankenfoods" of GMOs. Digging into the subject, we quickly came across Mr. F. William Engdahl's book Seeds of Destruction, in which he detailed the doctrine of "substantial equivalence". This was the doctrine concocted by the agribusiness giants to argue that, since GMO corn was "substantially" the same as non-GMO corn, that no special long-term studies of human or environmental impact needed to be done, since the verdict, so to speak, was already in; since GMO corn looked like ordinary corn and tasted like ordinary corn, so in effect, it was corn and could be treated as such. Except, of course, when it came to the idea of patents and royalties, in which case, it wasn't ordinary corn any more, but had magically transubstantiated into something else, but retained all the accidents of ordinary corn. One can almost hear the medieval scholastics arguing this case to the Food and Drug Administration: "By substantial equivalence, we mean the bundle of cornish accidents in which the substantial corn is, for the purposes of regulation and testing, but since the cornish accidents themselves are of private confecture and not owing to the substance of corn sub specie naturae, we hold that a rent is due on the accidents, and not the substance of the corn."

Boy, the Fourth Lateran Council had nothing on these people.

So, with that little transubstantiatory background in mind, consider the latest "update" on the theory of "substantial equivalence" and the flaw in the doctrine as reported by Mr. Rappoport:

We’re on the cusp of a new level of GMO crime-business, and the man in charge of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Sonny Perdue, is cheerleading from the sidelines.

Perdue says the newest gene-edited plants won’t be any different from those developed by traditional non-GMO breeding methods.

Which is like saying a missile fired from a tank is identical to an arrow shot from a bow.

Here is the brand new policy from the USDA: “Under its biotechnology regulations, USDA does not regulate or have any plans to regulate plants that could otherwise have been developed through traditional breeding techniques…This includes a set of new [gene-editing] techniques that are increasingly being used by plant breeders to produce new plant varieties that are indistinguishable from those developed through traditional breeding methods.”

Yes, indistinguishable, if you’re wearing a blindfold and wandering around in a pitch-black lab.

Yup... "indistinguishable" simply means that the same old doctrine of substantial equivalence is still in effect, and is being actively extended to include technologies not in evidence when the doctrine was first proposed. The USDA's statement is basically informing us that its ordinary magisterium has already pronounced on the matter and traditional agronomical means of breeding characteristics into or out of plants are "indistinguishable" (and therefore, substantially equivalent) to methods of direct genetic alteration and engineering.  And of course, that is precisely what is in play:

Claire Robinson, the relentless and sharp publisher of gmwatch.org, goes for the throat:

“If by some miracle the USDA should turn out to be correct when it claims that genome-edited plants are indistinguishable from naturally bred plants, then the whole genome-editing commercial venture is over. That’s because the driving force behind all genetic engineering of plants, including genome editing, is patents. And to get a patent on a genome-edited plant you have to show that it is a man-made invention that is completely different from anything that you might find in nature.”

“Therefore the GMO industry is telling the public and regulators that genome-edited plants are indistinguishable from naturally bred plants, and yet at the same time it is telling patent offices that genome-edited plants are completely different from naturally bred plants.”

“Both claims cannot be true. So one is a lie. There are no prizes for guessing which one.”

But Mr. Rappoport has seen yet another implication here that few others have. Ponder this insight very carefully:

To grasp this situation at ground level, imagine a bevy of food police came into your house and said: “We’re going to take all the food out of your refrigerator, we’re going to fool around with the genes, not really knowing what changes are occurring as we cut and paste, having no idea how this will affect your health, and then we’ll come back and put the gene-edited food in the fridge. Don’t worry, be happy.”

If this new generation of edited food is accepted by a sleeping public, there is yet another step coming on the road to full food control. We’ve seen hints of it already. The companies doing the gene-editing will claim they’ve got varieties of food crops that don’t need pesticides, because the DNA-editing protects the plants from pests and weeds. With blasts of PR, the companies will say these crops should have the status and label, ORGANIC.

There will eventually be a big push in that direction. An organic apple grown in an orchard where the farmer has taken years to clean up the soil and institute natural pest/weed control—that organic apple will be considered identical to an apple whose genes were tweaked and re-tweaked with gene-editing.

The USDA will call these two apples “indistinguishable” from each other.

How do you like them apples?

And as Mr. Rappoport also observes, when people start getting sick from the new apples in this serpentine garden of delights, science will again slither in and hiss in our ear that this problem can be solved by "a snip here and and snip there" in the human genetic code... genetically modified humans, for genetically modified frankenfoods.

See you on the flip side...



Posted in

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. Robert Barricklow on April 13, 2018 at 11:35 am

    What a truly inspired Orwellian term: substantial equivalence. As if southern American dialects and New Yorker English are similarly genetically engineered and therefore easily comprehensively digested. Of course these accents are patented and their wifi wallet phones debited as they speak: A whole sarcastic novel could be written w/such metaphors to ridicule this hocus-pocus so-called equivalent science for buck$.
    This will bleed into other arenas of commerce.
    You can bet your last fiat buck on it.

    • Robert Barricklow on April 13, 2018 at 11:53 am

      …continuing on this theme:
      They are talking[debited] & walking down the sidewalk[debited/sidewalk is now owned by Spanish conglomerate[who charges you to use its sidewalk by the time you literally now spend on it; as it was privatized – as was all public infrastructure in the current USA, Inc.]

      • Robert Barricklow on April 13, 2018 at 11:59 am

        Yes I picked Spain because it has privatized sunlight.
        just google a title of an article/
        Spain Privatizes the Sun: Multi Million Dollar Penalties For Collecting Sunlight.
        Welcome to the 21 Century[1984 on Steroids!]
        There’s your substantial equivalence on steroids.

    • Robert Barricklow on April 13, 2018 at 9:50 pm

      Just as an aside I’ve noticed more censorship.
      A review I did on an amazon book would not publish Given a real Orwellian reason. At rt.com/ I’m now running into the 502 gateway block. There’s more; but that suffices to say they’re ratcheting up censorship IMO.

  2. marcos toledo on April 13, 2018 at 12:09 am

    What do you and can you expect from our control freak elites they want to be our masters. They live in a bubble fantasy of their own making unaware and not caring what happens when their dreams turn into deadly nightmares. Their machinations will kill them in the end but they think they can escape the consequences of their acts they think their gods.

  3. zendogbreath on April 12, 2018 at 11:15 pm

    A few ideas to see the planned progression here. First, they will have their cake n eat it several different ways as long as courts support that diet. As they moatly so far have.. remember the farmers losing to monsanto in n out of court for infringing on patent by not keeping gmo seeds from contaminaring their non gmo crops?

    Which way until recently did courts go on that one? N who controls the courts?

    • zendogbreath on April 12, 2018 at 11:16 pm

      Which way will those courts go on other decisions? N 4 how long?

    • zendogbreath on April 12, 2018 at 11:23 pm

      Does igfarbwnsanto own rights to natural since its so equivalent to their precedented ownership of gmo?

      Does anyone remember when the vast majority of athletes did NOT do steroids? Now pretty much all do. N the science has improved enuf to reduce the downsides so much as to give credence to the idea that done right steroids increase health n longeviry in all of us.

    • zendogbreath on April 12, 2018 at 11:38 pm

      Cake n eat it logic can go forever. Or at least until the surviving remnants of society r convinced that (insert ur aberrant tech here) is best or going to get us stalinized if we resist. Know any good advanced scientists in any field who aren’t concerned 4 their life if they point at the emperor’s naked… hmmm?

      Lets see. bankers? Doctors? Pharma folk? Journalists? Telecomm? Musicians? Any evolving tech really.

    • zendogbreath on April 12, 2018 at 11:40 pm

      So whats a wise person to do?

      • Cate on April 13, 2018 at 4:18 am

        Take responsibility for your own food supply. Plant trees, find heirloom seeds and save them each season to regrow from the next, keep a few animals for eggs and meat. Start soon, it takes a while to get the hang of it all with timing, harvesting, etc.

  4. goshawks on April 12, 2018 at 5:16 pm

    “…this serpentine garden of delights…” Is Joseph making a subtle ‘notification’ here?

    My view is that the GMO-food kerfuffle is just laying the long-term legal/societal groundwork around the genetic-editing of humans. This could have two branches: The “Khan” creating of ‘superior’ genetic-breeds. (Just re-watching the old “Andromeda” SF TV series, where their genetic-breeds are called ‘Nietzscheans’.) And, the slow ‘disclosure’ that we are genetic-breeds from ancient Anunnaki interference. Hence: property…

  5. anakephalaiosis on April 12, 2018 at 11:56 am

    Eve’s garden party.
    Giza gas chamber horror.
    Rotten apple pie.

  6. Sophia on April 12, 2018 at 10:15 am

    A nefarious potential for control of the food supply.

    If gene edited (and therefore patentable) plants are indistinguishable from non-GMO traditionally bred plants, the SPECTRE-like AgriGiants merely have to take the precursor plant strains to the current naturally bred crop varieties, genetically modify these precursor strains to re-create the current crop strains, and then patent. By patenting the GMO strain, they in effect have patented the natural varieties, too, if they are held to be genetically identical.

    In other words, this could be construed as a scheme to patent control existing crops strains that would otherwise be unpatentable. It is a means to undermine natural, non-GMO crops as the competitive alternative to GMO crops.

  7. basta on April 12, 2018 at 9:36 am

    “…new plant varieties that are indistinguishable from those developed through traditional breeding methods” can soon join the hallowed halls of:

    “Well, it all depends on what the meaning of is, is.”
    “We had to destroy the village to save it.”
    “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

    …and other jewels of psychopathic truthiness.

    What else would you expect from a society run (into the ground) by a psychopathic “elite?”

  8. FiatLux on April 12, 2018 at 6:39 am

    Them apples STINK. Even worse than the GMO ones we’ve already got! If they can label gene-edited plants as “organic,” we’re just about sunk, especially those of us who live in cities. It’s getting to the point that if you don’t grow food yourself (assuming you can still get “heirloom” seeds, have the land to grow things, and still have a legal right to grow your own food), you’ll have no way at all to know what you might be ingesting.

    What has become of the United States? If the institutions of government have such crass disregard for the well-being of their own people–I’d go so far as to say disregard for life in general–have we not descended into total barbarity?

  9. DanaThomas on April 12, 2018 at 5:11 am

    Bravo Rappaport – these industries want to “have their cake and eat it”. (For a long time now I have (regretfully) stopped buying supermarket “cornish” nachos etc. and only get specifically organic cornflour products).

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events