John Kerry to Starving Africans: ‘Don’t Build New Farms, Just Plant More GMO’

| |

Top Tier Gear USA


“You better eat everything on your plate, dear. There are children starving in Africa.”

How many kids in first world countries have likely heard their mom utter that phrase at the dinner table at least once? It may be an overused image, but that doesn’t make it any less valid. There really are lots of starving children in Africa.

Well, this week Secretary of State John Kerry took to the podium at the U.S.—Africa Leaders Summit to say that Africans shouldn’t build more farms because that would contribute to man-made global warming through a process that “releases significant amounts of carbon pollution”.

No, instead, they should just make existing lands “more productive”:

Kerry said:

“And now another part of this story is that certain agricultural processes can actually release carbon pollution and help contribute to the problem in the first place — it’s a twisted circle… But we also know there are ways to change that. For example, rather than convert natural areas to new farmland, a process that typically releases significant amounts of carbon pollution, we can instead concentrate our efforts on making existing farmlands more productive. This is an area where African leaders have actually been ahead, and significantly ahead of the game for some time.”

On the surface, what Kerry is proposing sounds almost passable as a potentially smart idea, doesn’t it? Don’t build any new farms which may not be very productive and instead, just put all existing resources into making existing farms “more productive”.

If only it was that simple and that advice was coming from someone who wasn’t a Skull and Bones tool of the U.S. corporate establishment, it might be easier to even attempt to consider it in a positive light.

However, when dealing with anything modern agriculture, it’s been made all too clear that the phrase “more productive” has been hijacked and is just another way of saying genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Setting the Agenda 21 slant embedded in Kerry’s statement aside for the moment, the U.S.-oriented emphasis on genetically modified big agribusiness is just what Kerry and the rest of the Obama Administration are pushing here.

In 2012, the White House and USAID introduced the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition at the G8, ostensibly to end hunger in Africa — though critics quickly slammed it for slashing aid funds and promoting corporate agriculture interests (such as Monsanto and Syngenta).

Critics in Africa dubbed it a new form of colonialism, horrified at the rewriting of laws to favor private agribusiness investment. According to the [Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation-supported] London Guardian, “African governments agreed to change seed, land and tax laws to favour private investors over small farmers.” In essence, the brunt of the program would result in “assisted” small farmers being forced into dependence on purchasing private GMO seeds and boutique hybrids, unable to save seeds and in debt to purchases for farming equipment, training, etc.

The Organic Consumers Association tore apart the 2012 agreement, pointing out the basic flaws in the program, and its uneven gains for corporate partners:

“Study after study has shown that organic, agro-ecological farming practices on small diverse farms can boost yields in Africa and the developing world from 100-1000% over the yields of chemical-intensive or genetically engineered mono-crop farms. To help the world’s two billion small farmers and rural villagers survive and prosper we need to help them gain access, not to genetically engineered seeds and expensive chemical inputs; but rather access to land, water, and the tools and techniques of traditional, sustainable farming: non-patented open-pollinated seeds, crop rotation, natural compost production, beneficial insects, and access to local markets. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) reduce crop yields, and increase pesticide use, even according to USDA statistics. Bill Gates, Monsanto, and Barack Obama may believe that genetic engineering and chemical-intensive agriculture are the tools to feed the world, but a look at the fatal harvest of modern agribusiness tells a different story. Not only can climate-friendly, healthy organic agriculture practices feed the world, but in fact organic farming is the only way we are going to be able to feed the world.”

Moreover, the governmental New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition is essentially only mirroring the aims of the Bill Gates and Rockefeller Foundation aims, which are inherently tied to these corporate agribusiness “solutions”. Their AGRA Alliance (Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa) — co-founded by the Gates Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation in 2006 — uses the Trojan Horse of philanthropic aid to break government and societal barriers to the entrance of Big Agra, along with adoption of their genetically modified technological as “the” solution to poverty.

Of course, it goes without saying that these “do-gooder” billionaires are some of the biggest shareholders in these very firms. It was publicized, for starters, that Bill Gates owns some 500,000 shares in Monsanto. The Rockefeller involvement and ownership in agriculture, biotech, vaccines, and medicine is deep indeed, and could be the subject of endless study of their philanthropy and foreign policy intervention over the past century. To point out one qualifier of this claim, here is an open letter Monsanto sent to the Rockefeller Foundation in 1999 (when their GMO grip on the world’s agriculture was still solidifying) thanking them for advising the biotech giant on the creation of terminator seed technology, and more generally in pushing genetically modified crops as a “solution” to feeding the world.

Worse, African farmers are being violently pushed off their land and having their houses burned to the ground, thereby being further impoverished and all in order to grow biofuels for “renewable” energy, and even worse, to plant trees to offset carbon emissions and assuage First World green guilt!

So, instead of Africans building any new small farms and perhaps finding a way to become self-sustaining, they should rely on the U.S. government’s targeted building up of industrial mega farms there, just like we have here in the U.S., and fill those babies up to the brim with GMO.

Because, by the way, that model of zero self-sufficiency is also working out just swell here, where only 2% of the country grows all the food for the other 98%, Big Ag companies like Monsanto are self-regulated and practically own our government, our grocery stores are filled with heavily processed, chemical-laden garbage, and it’s hard to find anything that hasn’t been grown with a multitude of synthetic, carcinogenic pesticides or, in the case of livestock, been injected with antibiotics and endocrine-disrupting hormones before being stuffed full of GMO in the ethical nightmare that is a CAFO lot.

The word “sustainable” has been hijacked too, but regardless, the heavily industrialized, chemical-dependent way America farms is anything but the definition of sustainable. “Bigger is better” is a total myth when it comes to farm efficiency. Studies have shown that smaller farms actually produce more output with less (ever-increasing) chemical inputs. The giant farms we have here are growing mostly GMO corn and soybeans, the majority of which is going to feed livestock on CAFO lots and for biofuel production, not direct nutrition on dinner plates. Check out the article Small Farms, Not Monsanto, Are Key to Global Food Security for more on that.

Not to mention that America is a country that outspends every other nation on Earth for healthcare by far — we spend 18% or more of our entire GDP on it — and yet, somehow the nation has now fallen to 42nd for life expectancy at birth when compared to the rest of the world. The numbers of cases of type II diabetes, obesity, auto-immune disorders and cancer are all rising on a perpetual J curve. The sick are getting sicker and there are more sick people here all the time.

Maybe the U.S. isn’t the model the rest of the world should follow when it comes to farming and eating. Although, obviously the United States, with all its corporate-backed GMO “food aid” has absolutely zero interest in any nation it “helps” (including itself) ever gaining food security.

(H/T Aaron Dykes and Scott Lopez)

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Melissa Dykes of The Daily Sheeple.

Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa and Aaron also recently launched Revolution of the Method and Informed Dissent. Wake the flock up!

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • markww

    GMO KILLS AND RESTARTS YOUR DNA AND IT CHANGES YOUR BODY. Again Kerry with his non proven global warming. His unproven science and trashy outlook.

    • disqus_3BrONUAJno

      Doing what ones handlers tell one has never involved science.

  • Johnson

    An idiot, giving bad advise.
    Grow “Organic” food using “Heirloom” seeds only,
    Stay away from GMO GARBAGE!!!!!

    • disqus_3BrONUAJno

      And make sure you isolate the heirloom crops from the pollen of the highly invasive GMOs. The same greenhouse that prevents the invasion of the GMO pollen can also exclude the weeds and pests, and provide a way to provide an enriched carbon dioxide atmosphere to plants. Then there is also a platform for watef-saving hydroponics.

  • jim_robert

    Just a few quotes for your reference, relative to global warming:

    “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor
    receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain
    skeptical.” – Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman
    in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has
    authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent
    scientists of the last 100 years.”

    Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When
    people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and
    scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning
    PhD environmental physical chemist.

    “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen
    to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace
    Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are
    not geologists,” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and
    a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the

    “The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC “are incorrect
    because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at
    scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” – Victor
    Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the
    National Autonomous University of Mexico

    “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem
    there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global
    warming.” – U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of
    the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

    “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will
    virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles
    as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – .
    Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials
    Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

    “After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri’s asinine comment
    [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it’s hard to remain quiet.” –
    Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics
    of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society’s
    Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly
    Weather Review.

    “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to
    understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go
    on?” – Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science
    committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130
    plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in

    “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I
    quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be
    useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” –
    Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming
    to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

    “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly
    (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers
    ruined.” – Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space
    Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

    “Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous
    nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social
    control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an
    ideology, which is concerning.” – Environmental Scientist
    Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather
    Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

    “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or
    another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global
    warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and
    developing nations walking barefoot.” – Dr. Takeda Kunihiko,
    vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu
    University in Japan.

    “The [global warming]
    scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that
    generates funds.” – Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the
    Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department
    at the University of La Plata.

    “Climate is not responding to greenhouse
    gases in the way we thought it might. If increasing carbon dioxide is in fact
    increasing climate change, its impact is smaller than natural variation.”Prof
    Christopher de Freitas, of the University of Auckland, NZ said there was no
    evidence to suggest carbon dioxide was the major driver of climate change (see

    “I appreciate the
    opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man
    John Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works
    Committee on January 15, 2009. “I was, in effect, Hansen’s supervisor because I
    had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results,” Theon is former
    Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA Headquarters and former
    Chief of the Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch. [1]
    Mr. Theon also noted in a Jan. 28, 2008 report that computer models used to determine future climate are not
    scientific, in part, because researchers resist “making their work transparent
    so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists.” This violates
    a fundamental tenet of the scientific principle. J. Scott Armstrong, founder of the
    “International Journal of Forecasting,” confirmed Theon’s statement, noting,
    “The computer models underpinning the work of many scientific institutions
    concerned with global warming are fundamentally flawed,” and Theon and
    Armstrong both noted the 1995 IPPC report contained only opinions, no scientific forecasts, and revealed an audit of the
    procedures used to come to their conclusion “clearly violated 72 scientific
    principles of forecasting,” with the forecasts following this one simply
    again repeating the same procedural errors. (Apparently, it was not only the
    French nobility of the 1700s of whom it might be said “they learned nothing,
    and they forgot nothing.)”

    climate science has become political science…: “It is tragic that some perhaps
    well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have
    whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomenon which is statistically
    questionable at best.”” Award-winning Princeton physicist Dr. Robert Austin,
    member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, speaking to Senate minority
    staff March 2, 2009.

    Anastasios Tsonis of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said the global
    temperature “has flattened and is actually going down. We are seeing a new shift
    toward cooler temperatures that will last for probably about three decades.”

    recent ‘panic’ to control GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions and billions of
    dollars being dedicated for the task has me deeply concerned that the U.S. and
    other countries are spending precious global funds to stop global warming, when
    it is primarily being driven by natural forcing mechanisms.” – Dr.
    Diane Douglas, a climatologist who has worked for the Department of Energy

    “I am
    appalled at the state of discord in the field of climate science . . . There is
    no observational evidence that the addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gas
    emissions have caused any temperature perturbations in the atmosphere.”

    — Award-winning
    atmospheric scientist Dr. George T. Wolff, a former member of the EPA’s Science
    Advisory Board who served on a committee of the National Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Administration

    “The sky is not burning, and to claim that it
    is amounts to journalistic malpractice . . . The press only promotes the global
    warming alarmists and ignores or minimizes those of us who are skeptical.” — Dr. Mark L. Campbell,
    a professor of chemistry at the U.S. Naval Academy.

    “The cause of these global changes is
    fundamentally due to the sun and its effect on the Earth as it moves about in
    its orbit, not from man-made activities.” — Retired NASA
    atmospheric scientist Dr. William W. Vaughan, recipient of the NASA Exceptional
    Service Medal

    “The most recent
    global warming that began in 1977 is over, and the Earth has entered a new
    phase of global cooling.” Don Easterbrook, professor of geology at
    Western Washington University in Bellingham, He also notes a switch in Pacific Ocean currents “assures
    about three decades of global cooling. New solar data showing unusual absence
    of sun spots and changes in the sun’s magnetic field suggest … the present
    episode of global cooling may be more severe than the cooling of 1945 to 1977.”

    Climatologist Joe
    D’Aleo of the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment
    Project, says new data “show that in five of the last seven
    decades since World War II, including this one, global temperatures have cooled
    while carbon dioxide has continued to rise….The data suggest cooling not
    warming in Earth’s future.”

    Other scientists, for
    whom I do not have quotes, but who feel that global warming doubtful enough to
    have spoken at 2009 International Conference on Climate Change: Syun Akasofu,
    U. of Alaska, Fairbanks, J. Scott Armstrong, U. of Pennsylvania, Dennis Avery,
    Hudson Inst., Joseph L. Bast, Heartland Inst., Robert Bradley, Inst. for Energy
    Research, Yoron Brock, Ayn Rand Inst., Frank Clemente, Penn State Univ.,
    William Cotton, Colorado State Univ., Jo D’Aleo, Int’l Climate and
    Environmental Change Assessment Project, David Douglas, Univ. of Rochester,
    Terry Dunleavy, In’tl Science Climate Coalition, Myron Ebell, Competitive Enterprise
    Inst., Christopher Essex, Univ. of Western Ontario, David Evans, Science Speak
    (scientific modeling company), Michael Foss, Univ. of Texas, Fred Goldberg,
    Royal School of Technology, Sweden, Laurence Gould, Univ. of Hartford, Kesten
    Green, Univ. of Connecticut, Craig Idso, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
    and Global Change, Richard Keen, Univ. of Colorado, William Kininmonth, former
    head of the Australian National Climate Centre, Craig Loehle, Nat’l Council for
    Air and Stream Improvement, Antony Lupo, U. of Missouri, Ross McKitrick, U. of
    Guelph, Canada, Kevin Murphy, U. of Chicago, Joanne Nova, Author, the Skeptics
    Handbook, Jim O’Brien, Florida State, Benny Peiser, Liverpool John Moores
    University, UK., ,Tom Segalstad, Univ. of Oslo, Norway, George Taylor, Oregon
    State Univ., jan Veizer, U. of Ottawa, Canada, and Anthony Watts of About the
    only consensus I see is that the scientific community does not buy into Al Gore’s global warming circus.

    [1] Mr. Theon also noted
    the reliance on computer models is woefully lacking, Theon declared “climate
    models are useless.” “My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is
    that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there
    are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either
    replicate poorly or completely omit,” Theon explained. “Furthermore, some
    scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In
    doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor
    explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so
    that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly
    contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification
    for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy,”
    he added.

    • disqus_3BrONUAJno

      Don’t forget the tens of thousands of skeptical scientists listed at

    • whitefeather

      Add Patrick Moore to that list. Original founder of Green Peace. There was someone else who just came out about 2 wks ago that is an Environmental Evangalist, that said the same thing.

  • jim_robert

    Oh yes. That whole “consensus” scam is just that. Frederick Seitz Past President of the National Academy of Sciences sponsored a petition against the whole global warming façade at Over 19,000 scientist have signed this petition as opposed to the 600 the U.N. could scrounge up, and some of these 600 have since reconsidered their past agreement, such as Nobel Prize winning physicist
    Ivar Glaever who stated in an update to the U.S. Senate Minority report for 2007 that “Global warming has become a new religion” and “I am a skeptic,”.Japanese scientist Kiniori Itoh, another former IPCC member who has called Gorian warming a “scientific scandal,” while noting that people “will feel deceived by
    science and scientists” when they learn the truth. For a complete list of signees to the OISM petition – which includes a simply staggering number of Ph.Ds, – see, where they are arranged in alphabetical order. Meanwhile a similar petition at http://www.petitionproject –has over 32,000 signatories, including 9,021 with Ph.Ds last time I checked, disagreeing with anthropogenic global warming.

  • jim_robert

    But… let’s grant that “consensus” scam for the gullible. Tell me…. since WHEN has science been decided by consensus? Since Galileo? Since Copernicus? Since Columbus? Since Hitler has published “100 Scientists Against Einstein?” Since Ignaz Semmelweis was drummed out of the medical field after he insisted in the 1800s that doctors wash their hands between patients???? The truth is that science is decided by *experimentation and hypothesis testing* and that consensus argument is not only a blatant lie, as proven below, but also utterly ignorant about the true nature of science. But hey, leave it to the left to LIE. They do about everything else, so why change now?!!

  • CharlesH

    You skeptics about global warming just don’t get it. If money – lots of it too – can’t be made by positing that global warming is real – then anyone who thinks differently simply must be wrong. See?

  • Sooriamoorthy

    Do African leaders really have no option but to bow to US pressure?
    Note that this new scramble is not exactly being imposed upon Africa. African leaders too will have to be held responsible for the rape and looting of the continent.

    • QV3

      No. African leaders wooed by 0bama recently at the

      US-African summit Leaders in WDC, trying play catch up with china and EU is to salvage lost ground.

      African leaders smile, but all indicators point to China as a true and tested partner while the US is highly suspect. Hence, we see the results.
      European Union trade volumes with Africa reached $200 billion in 2013.
      China’s soared from $10 billion in 2000 to more than $170 billion in 2013.
      US-Africa trade has dropped to about $60 billion.

      US knows only method: invade, lie, plunder, murder.

  • Joseph Lizak

    While watching the Adams Family in the 60’s Lerch said only two words…”you rang”…..and then he grunted. He makes more sense than John Kerry ever did.

  • QV3

    Ketchup Kerry is a paid for advocate for Agenda Depopulation. He himself stays away from GMO food. Don’t buy Heinz ketchup either. Made from GMO tomatoes. To better kill you.

  • micronuke

    Kerry should crawl into his Yale Skull & Bones coffin and let the American people pee on him like his frat brothers did during his initiation. Did you know that Kerry and Shrub, our two “Presidential candidates” in the 2004 election, were frat brothers in this Yale satanic cult? A choice you can believe in /sarc

  • Justin OB

    The Skull & Bones Ketchup King at it again… what a fuckhead

  • Advice to third world farmers is a conspiracy involving Bill Gates and whoever else. Sounds legit.

  • Jon Oppedahl

    dolts, you know who you are……………sad

  • John Kerry is nuts and knows doodle squat about real science. However, those promoting organic agriculture as a means to feed the world are much more ignorant than poor Mr. Kerry, especially his main Scientific Advisor John Holdren who in the late 60s made the prediction (along with is mentor Paul Ehrlich) that the world would be starving to death by the year 2000, and millions of people in the USA would have died of hunger in the USA by 1978.