I know this sounds like General Ripper from Dr. Strangelove - but it happens to be true that Fluoridation of Our Drinking Water has NOTHING to do with the government's concern with kid's cavities! Do you really believe that one!?
More about Stanley Kubrick later.
Do you think he might have been . . . connected?
More about that later. Meanwhile: get educated. Get Healthy!
It is an interesting fact of history that three other members of the Board of American I.G. Farben were tried and convicted as German “war criminals” for their “crimes against humanity” during World War II, while serving on the I.G. Farben Board of Governors. None of the Americans who sat on the same board as those convicted was ever tried as a “war criminal”.
Throughout the entire second World War conflict, not one bomb fell on the I.G. Farben headquarters in Frankfurt, Germany, allegedly as a consequence of Allied orders.
In 1938, I.G. Farben borrowed 500 tons of tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive, from Standard Oil.
During 1939, the year Germany invaded Austria and Poland, the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey loaned I.G. Farben US$20,000,000 worth of high-grade gasoline.
In 1939 the American Aluminum Company (Alcoa), then probably the world’s largest producer of sodium fluoride, transferred its technology to Germany (the Alted Agreement). The Dow Chemical Company transmitted its experience and technology in that same period.
Germany’s two largest tank manufacturers were Opel, a subsidiary of General Motors (J.P. Morgan), and the German subsidiary of the Ford Motor Company.
Even with the purchase of oil from non-German sources, the major supplier of oil was still the Farben cartel. The I.G. Farben cartel a monopoly on German gasoline production. Just under one half of the Germans’ high-octane gasoline in 1945 was produced directly by I.G. Farben, and most of the balance by its affiliated companies.
So, in 1941 when cylinders of Zyklon B, the deadly cyanide-based extermination gas made by I.G. Farben, were lethally unvalved on inmates of Auschwitz, Bitterfeld, Walfen, Hoechst, Agfa, Ludwigshafen and Buchenwald, there were more than substantial links between huge American technology and German manufacturers.
Two questions must be asked here: (a) Was I.G. Farben associated with the formulation of Sarin and/or Soman, the German-developed fluorinated nerve gases that made Zyklon B little more than an underarm deodorant by comparison?; and (b) What of I.G. Farben today?
The answer to (a) is an unequivocal yes! As for (b), I.G. Farben signed cartel agreements with such companies as Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), Borden , Carnation, General Mill, M.W. Kellogg Co., Nestlé and Pet Milk, and I. G. Farben either owns outright, has had a substantial interest in or has had other cartel agreements with Owl Drug, Parke-Davis and Co., Bayer and Co., Whitehall Laboratories, Chef-Boy-Ar-Dee Foods, Bristol Meyers and Squibb and Sons. The list goes on and on and on and includes Proctor and Gamble who ‘domesticated’ the word “fluoride” with official encouragement in 1958, being the originators of the infamous “Crest” fluoridated toothpaste campaign.
The only reference to “Farben” traceable in a limited search of modern literature was in 25th Edition of Martindale, under “F.B.A. Pharmaceutical Limited; Products of Farbenfabriken Bayer”.
All corporate traces of the Hugh I.G. cartel have been absorbed by the hundreds, if not thousands, of one-time cartel members, but the ‘malady lingers on’ …
FOUNDATIONS
In Australia, the Dental Health and Research Foundation which has such names as Colgate, Kellogg and the ex-I.G. Farben associates listed among its governors and contributors has been irreverently but accurate dubbed “the fluoride mafia”. Closely allied with this Sydney University ‘foundation’ into the halogen fluoride, its benefits and its hazards, have never been made available despite numerous appeals. An ABC science show’s examination of the scientific integrity of Foundation 41 may explain the elusive (or is the word illusory?) data.
America is literally bursting at the seams with such foundations, were The Rockefeller Foundation, The Carnegie Foundation and The Ford Foundation. It is necessary to mention these specifically because they were the first foundations to make grants in the population (control) field, and the Carnegie family merged with the Mellon family Institute to create the Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh in 1967.
The Mellon family were the founders of the original Mellon Institute whence came the “amazing (but totally fallacious) sodium fluoride/dental caries prevention discovery” – the discovery that literally turned ‘garbage into gold’. The Mellon family also founded the American Aluminum Company (Alcoa), the largest producer of the waste toxin, sodium fluoride, which, up to this point of ‘caries discovery’, had relatively little known commercial or industrial value, was an environmental hazard of great public concern, and was very costly in terms of safe disposal.
So we retrace our steps to the “Dickenson Statement” in Hansard and Chas Eliot Perkins.
In a letter abstracted from Fluoridation and Lawlessness (published by the Committee for Mental Health and National Security) to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on 2nd October 1954, a Charles Eliot Perkins, scientist and author of Washington, DC, and, one must assume, the same Charles Eliot Perkins of the “Dickenson Statement” to the Victorian Parliament, said this (and the words of the last two lines of the second paragraph cannot be overemphasised): “We are told by the fanatical ideologists who are advocating the fluoridation of the water supplies in this country that their purpose is to reduce the incidence of tooth decay in children, and it is the plausibility of this excuse, plus the gullibility of the public and the cupidity of public officials that is responsible for the present spread of artificial water fluoridation in this country.
“However – and I want to make this very definite and positive – the real reason behind water fluoridation not to benefit children’s teeth. If this were the real reason, there are many ways in which it could be done which are much easier, cheaper and far more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty …
“When the Nazis, under Hitler, decided to go into Poland … the German General Staff and the Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans and personnel and the scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to communise the world …
“I say this in all earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years research into the chemistry, Bo-chemistry, physiology and pathology and pathology of fluorine: any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically.”
Mr. Perkins does not involve America, American institutions or individuals in his assertions, but when Major George Racy Jordan was in charge of the massive ‘lend-lease airlift’ operations from Great Falls, Montana, to Russia via Alaska, he queried the transshipment of considerable amounts of sodium fluoride via Fairbanks, Alaska, to Russia. He was told “frankly” that it was to put into the drinking water in the prisoner-of-war camps to take away their will to resist.
The published knowledge that sodium fluoride was known for this mind – and behaviour – changing potential was available at the start of this century, as witness such entries as “Fluoricum Acidum” (Encyclopedia of Pure ‘Materia Medica’, vol. ix, p. 333).
America has long been interested in behaviour and mind control by chemical means. Americans who were at once financiers, industrialists and population – control advocates were intimately involved with Germany where chemical extermination and chemical behaviour control by, inter alia, sodium fluoride, were placed into practice. America transferred this knowledge and material, inter alia, to Russia during its ‘lend-lease’ co-operation. An American major producer of aluminum was the world’s major source of sodium fluoride. American ‘education and research’ funded by (a) the major sodium fluoride producer, and (b) a ‘foundation’ involved in population control, was the origin of ‘the dental caries prevention myth’ associated with sodium fluoride.
A predominantly American company was the first to exploit this concept in dentifrice production, and American ‘medical research’ figured largely in the ‘fluorination’ processes that converted the negative embarrassment of mounting industrial waste to huge positive profit increases – processes that other countries hastened to emulate; processes which include the enormous outlet for fluorides in the fluoridation of water supplies.
Although fertiliser production has not been a part of this thesis, the following ‘connections’ with this point should be made. The manufacturing processes for synthetic dyes, explosives and fertiliser are almost chemically synonymous, and I.G. Farben was expert in all production phases of these ‘necessities’. Sodium silico-fluoride was a waste constituent from the refining of phosphate rock, until a ‘use’ could be found or created for the waste.
A letter (reproduced on page 28) from the United States Environmental Protection Agency throws the spotlight on the unique ‘waste disposal via the public kidney’ concept that was created.
SO WHAT?
The question raised by the Hansard “Dickinson Statement”, and perhaps aggravated by this dissertation and data, is this: Was the Australian Government, in 1962-3 when it illegally (Australian Constitution, Section 51 [xxiiiA]) introduced “fluoridation of water supplies” to Australia, aware of its grotesque actions and of the grave results? The ‘shonky’ method of introducing, plus legal and official correspondence at that time, indicates in the affirmative.
Was the Crisp Royal Commission, when it ‘found’ in favour in fluoridation, and, incidentally, in favour of the major polluter and producer of fluoride in Tasmania (Electrolytic Zinc Corp., Risdon, Hobart), aware of the consequences of any such favourable findings? Conditions then and since mingle with some incredible documented coincidences, and unbelievable but documented official behaviour, including that of premiers and health ministers, and the paucity of current State parliamentary investigations into fluorine-based environment problems, to convince the most skeptical that it was.
Was the Victorian Premier (Sir Rupert Hamer, who was later to publicly declare the dictatorial credo, “It was always tempting to override the people and impose a new order”), aware of these background facts when he instituted indemnified water fluoridation legislation and a subsequent fraudulently conceived and executed cover-up “inquiry”? (Ballarat Courier, 6 October 1982) Irrespective of the obviously familial supplier advantages, it seems certain that he was certain that he was so aware. Widespread publicity regarding subsequent alleged complex land company fraud transactions would seemingly underwrite the existence of the necessary character attributes to perform as implied.
Are the lies, denials, fabrications and evasions evident in Geelong with two fluoride pollution sources (aluminum smelting and fertiliser production), and Portland with ditto sources, no more than “job protection” and “rate protection” scares as is claimed, or is there a deeper, wider federal or international instructional background behind the unmonitored pollution, with the health detriment there from and the ‘secrecy legislation’ invoked for the Victorian aluminum industry?
[Was] Mrs. Thatcher’s astronomical expenditure of United Kingdom revenue on a fluoridation campaign in Northern Ireland a matronly concern for the youngsters’ teeth, or perhaps an attempt to sedate the people and render them subservient to her autocratic dictates? Remember this. Mrs. Thatcher has a background of academic chemistry and would be far from ignorant of the tranquillising effects of the halogens and their halides.
Similarly, her legal and political shenanigans (that is the only word to describe her behaviour) in the England fluoridation scene offer many avenues for questioning of her motives.
Are the lies, fabrications, omissions, evasions and official hysteria in the federal government and bureaucracy at the very mention of fluorides, fluoride pollution or water fluoridation, also common to the state governments and bureaucracies, and repeatedly backed up by the most lunatic science (as witness, the ministerially approved and internationally derided propaganda from the National Health and Medical Research Council), royal and vice-regal intransigence, a frightening exhibition of this grim foreknowledge, all of which has abundant documentary support, or simply no more than dastardly coincidence?
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Washington , D.C. 20460
MAR 30 1983
OFFICE OF WATER
Leslie A.Russell, D.M.D.
363 Walnut Street
Newtonville, Mass. 02160
Dear Dr Russell:
Thank you for you letter of March 9, 1983, in regard to the fluoridation of drinking water.
The information available to the Environmental Protection Agency is that fluoridation is a safe and effective means for reducing the occurrence of dental caries. The fluoridation process has been endorsed by several Presidents of the United States and by several Surgeons General, including the current Surgeon General, Dr C. Everett Koop. A copy of Dr Koop’s statement on fluoridation is enclosed.
Water treatment chemicals, including fluosilicic acid, have been evaluated for their potential for contributing to the contamination of drinking water. The Water Treatment Chemicals Codex, published by the National Academy of Sciences, prescribes the purity requirement for fluosilicic acid and other fluoridation chemicals.
In regard to the use of fluosilicic acid as a source of fluoride for fluoridation, this Agency regards such use as an ideal environmental solution to a long-standing problem. By recovering by-product fluosilicic acid from fertiliser manufacturing, water and air pollution are minimized, and water utilities have a low-cost source of fluoride available to them. I hope this information adequately responds to your concern.
Sincerely yours,
Rebecca Hanmer
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water
No comments:
Post a Comment