GMOs Food – How the West intends to re-colonize Africa

Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.

These words packed with a prophetic meaning were spoken by Henry Kissinger in 1970. Henry Kissinger was a national security advisor, the Secretary of State to Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford of the US. He is well known for the carpet bombing of Cambodia in 1969 and 1970 which resulted in Cambodia gaining the dubious honor of being the most bombed country in human history.

Partly for this “noble” act in defense of empire, he was awarded the Noble Prize for Peace in 1973 although officially, it was claimed that the prize was awarded for achieving a ceasefire in the Vietnam War. But interestingly his co-Noble Peace Prize winner General Le Duc Tho of Vietnam had the decency and moral dignity to decline it.

But Mr. Kissinger’s Noble Peace Prize for Carpet Bombing is not what concerns us in this article. We are interested in a classified report he ordered prepared on December 10, 1974, roughly a year after his Nobel Prize. The report in question is the National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 200) titled, “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests,” which is also known as the Kissinger Report.

This document was declassified by executive order 11652 of the White House on December 31, 1980. Who would be interested in such a report declassified on New Year’s Eve? This report synchronizes precisely with Kissinger’s words of “…control food and you control the people” spoken in 1970 as we will see.

We will discuss the connection between the chilling implications of this policy and the GMO catastrophe also known as the GMOcalypse currently been implemented around the world and being pushed in Africa. Fasten your intellectual seatbelts as we take a ride to unravel the GMOcalypse and the vital necessity to enforce Food Soverignization in Africa.

The policy recommendations in the NSSM 200 paper states as follows;

There is no single approach which will “solve” the population problem. The complex social and economic factors involved call for a comprehensive strategy with both bilateral and multilateral elements. At the same time actions and programs must be tailored to specific countries and groups. Above all, LDCs themselves must play the most important role to achieve success… Coordination among the bilateral donors and multilateral organizations is vital to any effort to moderate population growth. Each kind of effort will be needed for worldwide results.

While specific goals in this area are difficult to state, our aim should be for the world to achieve a replacement level of fertility, (a two- child family on the average), by about the year 2000. This will require the present 2 percent growth rate to decline to 1.7 percent within a decade and to 1.1 percent by 2000 compared to the U.N medium projection, this goal would result in 500 million fewer people in 2000 and about 3 billion fewer in 2050. Attainment of this goal will require greatly intensified population programs. A basis for developing national population growth control targets to achieve this world target is contained in the World Population Plan of Action.

Why the need to control population growth? The classified report in a sleight of hand said the aim was to help developing countries or the least developed countries (LDC) as they called them deal with population increases as those countries would not have the agriculture resources to deal with a large increase in population. But if the aim was so innocuous, then why the need to classify it? We begin to gain the first outlines of the real aim in the words from the NSSM 200 report as written below;

Assistance for population moderation should give primary emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is special U.S. political and strategic interest. Those countries are: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, the Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Columbia.

We read further below the role of the US President and the Secretary of State in furthering this policy:

The U.S. should encourage LDC leaders to take the lead in advancing family planning and population stabilization both within multilateral organizations and through bilateral contacts with other LDCs. This will require that the President and the Secretary of State treat the subject of population growth control as a matter of paramount importance and address it specifically in their regular contacts with leaders of other governments, particularly LDCs.

The important question now is why such high level policy implementation by persons no less than the US President and the Secretary of State? We read embedded deep in the report the following words directly quoted:

Whatever may be done to guard against interruptions of supply and to develop domestic alternatives, the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.

The report also goes on to mention that food aid is an instrument of national power. We also now wonder, it is okay for the US and the West to maintain and increase their populations, but others have to reduce their populations because too many people in the developing world will create problems of stability for the US and her western vassals in stealing their resources to maintain their revoltingly immoral economic wellbeing.

This report was kept classified until declassified in the late hours of December 31, 1980. Why was this report declassified? We presume that another more subtle way was been developed to achieve the same policy aims of population control. The subtle approach was the much more benign introduction of GMOS. This started again in that fateful year of 1980.

The US Supreme Court in 1980 in a 5-4 decision extended patent law to cover “a live human-made live microorganism.” The American Company, Monsanto, the company that had made Agent Orange for Mr. Kissinger to use to firebomb Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia using the decision of the US Supreme Court patented the first genetically modified plant in the world. This was 1982. The scientific outcomes were promising by 1980 that the western establishment could now see another more powerful way of population control through genetically modified crops. This resulted in the alarming fact that by the early decades of the 21’st century, majority of the world supply of cereals were under the control of major US companies. In addition, Monsanto, Novartis, Dow Chemical and DuPont, the four largest biotech companies controlled more than 75 percent of corn seed sales and 60 percent of soybean seed sales in the US. Remember again the remark in the NSSM 200 that food aid was an instrument of national power. We leave the reader to draw the conclusions.

Monsanto, by changing the genome of the seeds of major food crops created new genetically modified seeds which were resistant to its own herbicide Roundup.

Let us explain the implications of this.

A farmer will buy genetically modified seeds from Monsanto and plant these seeds on his/her farm. Weeds in general attack plants. Therefore to protect the growing plants from the weeds, the farmer will again have to go to Monsanto to buy the Roundup herbicide which will kill the weeds but not the plant.

Now note that the seeds that the farmer plants are sterile. This means that the farmer cannot use the seeds from his or her harvest to plant for the next season. He/she will have to go back to Monsanto to buy new seeds to plant for the next planting season and then buy the Roundup herbicide again to protect the plants. Apart from the health care implications of the herbicide been absorbed by the plant and making its way into the human body, of which there has been a lot of documentation, we have an implication much more chilling.

A nation that begins to depend on GMO seeds for its agriculture is now dependent and under the control of companies like Monsanto and their western shareholders. The supply of these sterile seeds can be used as a means of political control to limit food production in these countries and thereby as a means of population control.

Remember again the policy remark in NSSM 200 paper that food aid is an instrument of national power. This will then make it easier for the policy objectives of the NSSM 200 classified paper in gaining unimpeded access to the mineral wealth of the so called least developing countries. We again remember the quote of Mr. Kissinger at the beginning, “control food and you control the people.”

We have seen the actualization of these words in India where thousands of farmers have been driven to suicide due to the adoption of GMOS and their being locked in a debt trap to companies like Monsanto as their crops have failed despite the promise of high crop yields and the effectiveness of the herbicide roundup. The government in India had made a grave mistake.

In Ghana, companies like Monsanto under the aegis of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the US Department of Agriculture are working very hard to push the adoption of GMOS in the country. They are trying to push through parliament a bill called the Plant Breeders Bill which will allow GMOS in Ghana.

The Bill says that the rights of the producers of these GMOS seeds supersedes the constitution and laws of Ghana. We know there are no Ghanaian biotech firms making GMOS seeds. This means that companies like Monsanto with their so-called ‘ecologically safe practices,’ such as killing people through Agent Orange will have their rights superseding the rights of Ghana and Ghanaians.

We can only wonder if Africans and African companies can have their rights superseding the constitution and laws of the United States. I leave that to the reader’s imagination. The sad and grievously pathetic note is that many Ghanaian scientists like Professor Walter Sandow Alhassan or should we say Mr. Sandow Alhassan, former head of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) is leading the crusade on the adoption of GMOS in Ghana on behalf of companies like Monsanto and Syngenta. The CSIR was established by Kwame Nkrumah to spearhead research into the sciences to empower Africans.

Mr. Sandow Alhassan heading such an institution is a profanity.

Organizations like Food Sovereignty Ghana (FSG) and Samia Nkrumah chairperson of her father Kwame Nkrumah’s party the Convention Peoples Party (CPP) are in the forefront to fight against the adoption of GMOS in Ghana. They recently succeeded in winning an injunction at a fast track Accra High Court to prevent the commercialization of GMOS in Ghana. They are at the forefront on the education of the public in Ghana against the danger of GMOS and its adoption in Ghana.

Major nations like Russia, China, Germany, Argentina and others have placed very severe restraints on the adoption of GMOS and in particular on GMOS from the West. But in Africa, some ‘scientists’ like Mr. Walter Sandow Alhassan are openly supporting the adoption of GMOS and raining contempt and insults on organizations like FSG. You wonder what kind of scientist is Mr. Alhassan? We hope that one day, his name and his public position on this issue will be deservedly thrown into the rubbish dump of compradors and traitors to the African world.

The GMOcalypse being prepared by the western world for the non-western world has only one goal – ultimate control over the vast mineral resources of the non-western world for the continued economic dominance of the west and the continued impoverishment and underdevelopment of the non-western world.

GMOs for food, is how the west intends to re-colonize Africa!

The policy of Food Soverignization in Africa where Africa controls its own production of non-sterile seeds and crops to self-sufficiently feed its people is a major supra national security issue for the African Union. Failure to do this will result in the fulfillment of the logical consequences of the remark in NSSM 200 that food aid is an instrument of national power and more importantly the chilling words of Mr. Kissinger, “control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.”