Infanticide Advocate Pushes GMO Golden Rice: More to the Story

peter singer

peter singer(NaturalSociety) An advocate of infanticide for disabled babies is the latest addition to those claiming the moral high ground over golden rice for poor, vitamin-A deficient children.

Prior to pointing out the idiocy of a known infanticide advocate pushing GMO Golden Rice, you should know its origins. The promotion of this single grain may seem like a small thing, but it is steeped in a dark history that many would be surprised to learn of. There is no moral high ground here for those who ‘play God’. They have one agenda and one agenda only, and it isn’t to save the world’s dying babies.

The Rockefeller’s Fund Golden Rice

In the 1990s, the Rockefeller Foundation approached one Swiss Doctor, Ingo Potrykus of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, who specialized in plant engineering, specifically of GMO rice. It was in that lab that some of the first genetically modified rice was produced. This scientist and his team infused rice with daffodil genes in order to increase its beta-carotene. At first glance, this seemed like a benevolent enterprise. This bio-fortified rice was meant to feed starving nations and be a solution to the ‘world food crisis.’

With supposed added Vitamin A accessed through the genetic alteration with daffodil genes, this rice would also help with declining nutrition in third world countries. But this Golden Rice may not be so safe.

Peter Singer the Eugenicist & Transhumanist

An infanticide advocate, Peter Singer is a Princeton University Professor who wrote Animal Liberation. You would think someone who advocated animal rights would have the human race’s back, but he gives a nod to articles written by one Patrick Moore, who helped to promote golden rice.

Singer pretends to be the voice of reason – ever cautious of genetically modified foods:

“In the 1990’s, as a Senate candidate for the Australian Greens, I was among those who argued for strong regulations to prevent biotech companies putting our health, or that of the environment, at risk in order to increase their profits.”

This may be the case, but he has lost all sanity when it comes to GMO now. His true philosophical slant seems evident in this quote of James Hughes:

Singer’s “writings on the permissibility of euthanizing certain disabled newborns (Kuhse and Singer, 1985)… inspired howls of outrage, and accusations of fascism” but Singer also “‘argues, we must employ the new genetic and neurological sciences to identify and modify the aspects of human nature that cause conflict and competition.’”

Transhumanists Wants to Alter Genes in Unborn Babies

Transhumanism is something the general public isn’t even aware of, but it colors the trajectory of our future in alarming ways. Just ask Julian Savulescu, the controversial bioethicist and neo-eugenicist, who has been described as ‘one of Singer’s most distinguished disciples’. He says we have a moral duty to genetically modify our children. Indeed, Savulescu claims we will simply have to “genetically enhance” humanity or face extinction.

What these mad scientists believe is that everything must be genetically manipulated – not just corn, soy, and sugar beets, but bees, frogs, and even people. While these corporate interests kill off the natural world, they are creating a technological one – a transhumanist world:

“Something is killing off up to half of America’s bees–terrible news for bees and the vegetation that depends on them for pollination. Fewer bees not only means less honey, it means less food. Researchers at Harvard are working on a partial solution — tiny drones the size of bees (not to be confused with drone bees, the mostly useless males of a bee colony).”

Singer, Savulescu, and others of this mindset are promoting eugenical gene selection and modification of human embryos using drugs and biotech tools. No wonder he likes GMO golden rice.

Singer writes that it “has not been shown to pose any risk at all to human health or the environment” and yet it “still cannot be released.”

The IRRI disagrees, stating, “it has not yet been determined whether daily consumption of Golden Rice does improve the vitamin A status of people who are vitamin A deficient and could therefore reduce related conditions such as night blindness.”

Propaganda Masters

Other lie-tellers in Singer’s company (about just golden rice) include:

  • Patrick Moore – A man who makes his living as an apologist for some of the most environmentally damaging industries in the world.
  • Matt Ridley – Owen’s Patterson’s brains.
  • Biotech Corporations (including Monsanto, Dow, Merck, Biogen, Regeneron, Novo Nordisk, Amgen, Celgene, and others companies) that help create some of the most toxic and environmentally damaging products known to man, and that have a lenthy and dubious history of corporate crimes.

An advocate of infanticide for disabled babies seems an appropriate addition to the list of those claiming the moral high ground over golden rice.
These are not recent plans for world devolution.

As evidenced in a keynote speech given in October of 2007 by Judith Rodin, who stated that research concerning genetically modified rice had been underway for over 65 years. Rodin told the Foundations audience:

In the sixty-five years since they began, we’ve funded the work of Golden Rice’s engineers, Dr. Peter Beyer, Dr. Ingo Potrykus, and others for more than fifteen of them. I’m delighted to announce, today, that we will be providing funding to the International Rice Research Institute – which we helped establish almost fifty years ago – to shepherd Golden Rice through national, regulatory approval processes in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, and the Philippines. And we hope this is just the beginning.”

This means that GMO foods and eugenic-like tactics have been in the making for more than half a century. It can be stopped in an instant, though. Knowing the truth is half the battle.