"Of all the creatures that were made, man is the most detestable. Of the entire brood he is the only one - the solitary one - that possesses malice. That is the basest of all instincts, passions, vices - the most hateful. He is the only creature that has pain for sport, knowing it to be pain. Also - in all the list he is the only creature that has a nasty mind." - Mark Twain's AutobiographyIS PETER SINGER A PAID PUPPET OF THE DRUG TRUST?
from - Campaign Against Fraud in Medical Research
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/newsl/singer.htmlAn Open Letter to The Greens, members and sympathizers.
In the 1996 Australian Federal Election The Greens undoubtedly lost many votes and suffered a tarnished public image, due in large part to the views and actions of Peter Singer who ran as a Greens candidate in Victoria. Numerous politicians and media had a field day citing Singer's past statements where he proposed that it would be "ethical" to abort six-month old infants. This was an easy target for Greens opponents to draw attention to, and imply that because Singer was a Greens candidate, therefore these views must be shared by all members of The Greens. This bad press no doubt made many voters reluctant to vote Green and more likely to vote for an industry-beholden major Party. As documented on ABC-TV's "Four Corners" (5/3/96) Singer's actions during the election campaign also contributed greatly to the split between The Greens and the Australian Democrats - a split which may last for many years.
It is pretty clear that having Singer as a candidate was a major public relations setback for The Greens in the March 1996 election. In light of the following evidence about Singer's dubious connections, one might ask, was Singer's campaign as a Greens candidate deliberately designed to setback The Greens?
It may shock many Greens to discover that Peter Singer admitted in 1993 in an Italian Court that he had been funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. (1)
What is the Rockefeller Foundation? It is an arm of one of, if not the largest, industrial empires ever to exist! For instance, the Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank and Citicorp intertwine with all major U.S. industry, banks, utilities, insurance, transportation, such as Exxon, AT&T, ITT, Metropolitan Life, Equitable Life, U.S. Steel, et al. Chase Manhattan controls Eastern Airlines, Pan Am Airways, Boeing, TWA, Mobile Oil, Sperry Rand, as well as all major U.S. media such as ABC, RCA, CBS, New York Times, Washington Post, L.A. Times etc. (2) David Rockefeller was a long-term chairman of the board of the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), as well as the founder and driving force of the Trilateral Commission; these bodies are considered by many to be the real governing forces of the United States. (3)
Furthermore, with most of the world's major drug companies under its control, the Rockefeller organisation has, since the early part of this century, been the largest single private source of funding for medical science and education in the United States, Great Britain and other Western countries. For instance, in the forty-four years up to 1948, the "gifts" the Rockefeller Foundation made to universities, medical colleges and public health agencies in the U.S.A. alone totalled over half-a-billion dollars. (4) Of course, as a result, all those universities and colleges inculcate their students with the belief that the only way to achieve health is through the use of pharmaceutical drugs and chemicals! (ie. the pharmaceutical industry profits immensely from its "charitable donations" to our educational institutions.)
Doesn't it strike you as odd that Peter Singer, dubbed by the Rockefeller controlled press as the "Animal Rights Guru", has been funded by one of the worst perpetrators of suffering against animals? Namely, the pharmaceutical-chemical industry. Note that Peter Singer's arguments against vivisection are solely moral-ethical arguments. These are very easily combated by the pharmaceutical empire in a media debate. All they have to do is parade a professor in a white coat who blurts out that "Animal experiments cure sick babies!" and the vast majority of the public are swayed in favour of animal research. Indeed, Peter Singer has actually made many public statements where he approves of animal research. What better "opposition" could the pharmaceutical industry wish for?
Doesn't it strike you as odd that Peter Singer, who claims to abide by Green values, has accepted funding from one of the worst perpetrators of the destruction of the environment? Namely, the petro-chemical industry.
It may surprise you that all of the genuine anti-vivisection organisations, leagues of doctors against vivisection, and many grass-roots health-advocacy organisations around the world, have repeatedly denounced Peter Singer as misinformed, a phoney, or a puppet of the pharmaceutical-chemical industry.
It may interest you that the above-mentioned Italian court case was between Peter Singer and Swiss medical historian, Hans Ruesch. Singer took Ruesch to court because Ruesch called Singer "a big phoney" in an article in the journal of the Italian Lega Anti-Vivisezione (LAV). (Under Italian law it is forbidden to call a phoney "a phoney".)
Hans Ruesch is the author of the books Slaughter of the Innocent (1978, 1991), Naked Empress - or The Great Medical Fraud (1982, 1992), and 1000 Doctors (and many more) Against Vivisection (1989). In these books Ruesch has accumulated a vast amount of scientific evidence which shows that vivisectionist experimentation has not only NOT been responsible for any true medical breakthrough, but has actually retarded the progress of medicine repeatedly, due to its misleading methodology and results. Ruesch shows, through the use of testimonials from ex-animal researchers, medical practitioners, and studies published in medical journals, that vivisection is an unscientific method of research which is responsible for countless human deaths and injuries. These occur through the numerous drugs and chemicals, as well as operative procedures, which found to be "safe" for the animal individuals and species tested on, were later found when marketed to be dangerous and/or deadly to humans.
Ruesch's organization CIVIS has also published other monumental works such as former animal researcher Professor Pietro Croce's book Vivisection or Science - A Choice to Make (1991). These books seriously threaten the financial profits and credibility of the pharmaceutical industry.
In court, Peter Singer, who, funded by the pharmaceutical-vivisection industry and who gives lip-service to the "usefulness" of vivisection whilst pretending to be against it, was represented by one of the top and most expensive penal lawyers in Italy; a lawyer who has amongst his clients the Industrialists Association of Italy, meaning all the automakers and the pharmaceutical industries! (5) Who paid the expensive lawyers bill?
If you care about the future of The Greens credibility in Australia please read the attached information and do all you can to ensure that Peter Singer does not again have the opportunity to undermine your hard work. Don't let him undermine the green-environmental movement in the way that he has been used to undermine the worldwide human health advocacy and scientific anti-vivisectionist movements over the past 20 years.
Supporting Articles:
"Now It's Official: Peter Singer's Lecture Tours Sponsored by Rockefeller's Drug Lobby" and "The Drug Story: the Rockefeller Foundation" - Published in the Fall-Winter 1993 issue of the CIVIS International Foundation Report, Hans Ruesch (Ed.), CIVIS, POB 152, via Motta 51, CH 6900, Massagno-Lugano, Switzerland. Available from CAFMR for $2.
Why do Pharmaceutical Drugs Injure & Kill? Because They Are Fraudulently Tested? - By Robert Ryan
Animal Experimentation: The Hidden Cause of Environmental Pollution? - By Hoorik Davoudian
Doctors Against Vivisection - Excerpts from the book 1000 Doctors (and many more) Against Vivisection, (Ed. Hans Ruesch), CIVIS, 1989. Published in the Spring 1996 issue of the CAFMR Newsletter.
Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research, P.O. Box 234, Lawson NSW 2783, Australia. Phone +61 (0)2-4758-6822. www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr
This information may be downloaded, copied, printed or otherwise distributed without seeking permission from CAFMR. However, printed acknowledgement is required when this is done.
References:
"Now it's official: Peter Singer's lecture tours sponsored by Rockefeller's Drug Lobby", CIVIS International Foundation Report, Hans Ruesch (Ed.), CIVIS, Massagno, Switzerland, Fall-Winter 1993, Nr 15, pp. 1-7.
"How infiltration prevents information", CIVIS International Foundation Report, Hans Ruesch (Ed.), CIVIS, Massagno, Switzerland, Summer-Spring 1990, Nr 9, p. 6: "According to the CFR s 1991 Annual Report, a whopping 382 of its members were serving the Bush Administration as U.S. government officials. The organization's total membership numbers only 2,790, meaning that 14 percent of those who have joined this leading 'Insider' group hold high government positions. No other remotely similar organization can claim such clout within the government. This startling dominance over the nation's affairs ought to be a burning issue, but similar CFR dominance of the mass media keeps most Americans totally unaware of who is really running the U.S. government. The Insiders, of course, hope that they remain unaware."
John F. McManus, The Insiders: Architects of the New World Order, John Birch Society, Wisconsin, US, 1992.
Bealle, Morris, The Super Drug Story, Columbia Publishing Co., Washington D.C., 1949, pp. 22-23.
"Now it's official: Peter Singer's lecture tours sponsored by Rockefeller's Drug Lobby", CIVIS International Foundation Report, p. 3.
"The reason why I am against animal research is because it doesn't work. It has no scientific value. One cannot extrapolate the results of animal research to human beings and every good scientist knows that. Doctors themselves will admit that animal experimentation is no good. For example, if you say to the doctors, these experiments on animals show that this drug is dangerous, it can cause cancer, it can cause all kinds of side effects. The doctors will say, oh that's just animal experimentation. You can't extrapolate that to human beings. They themselves admit that it's no good. As far as I am concerned since animal experiments have no validity and since they lead to quackery inside medicine, I have to be opposed to quackery and therefore I have to be opposed to the animal experiments as a SCIENTIST. Regardless of what my moral feelings are about animals." - Prof. Robert S. Mendelsohn, MD, 1986, in the video Hidden Crimes. This video may be borrowed or purchased from ADAV