Fake food alert: the global mafia's new assault on our health

The global mafia is trying to replace our real food with a fake gene-edited variety, without even telling us it is doing so.

It wants to change regulations so that natural food and GM lab food are legally regarded as the same thing!

This is not some “conspiracy theory”, but a very real proposal currently being pushed through by corporate-controlled authorities.

It is happening in Australia and New Zealand – longstanding colonies of the dark enslaving empire which are often used as testbeds for new forms of oppression.

But you can be sure that – if they get away with it – this will then be rolled out everywhere.

Researcher Kate Mason is sounding the alarm and urging people in Australia and New Zealand to send in their objections before the fast-approaching deadline of Tuesday September 10 (6pm Canberra time). You can read her report here and watch her video here.

She explains that FSANZ, Australia and New Zealand’s Food Authority, is proposing changes to the Food Standard which would deregulate gene-edited foods and deny customers any labelling.

Kate warns that this would allow the global processed food industry to self-regulate all gene-edited foods!

“Yet the gene-edited foods made with CRISPR, that FSANZ calls NBTs (New Breeding Techniques), have scant history of safe use as food and unknown future impacts on health and wellbeing”.

“FSANZ asserts that genetically edited food is the same as natural-conventional food, that it has the same ‘characteristics’. Under this definition lab meat may be seen as the same as meat, as the lab meat has added synthetic vitamins and minerals which match the natural levels of vitamins and minerals in meat.

“The public is being asked to go along with a hypothesis that Synthetic is the same as Natural. It’s not!”

Adds Bob Phelps, director of campaign group GeneEthics: “FSANZ would amend the definitions of ‘food produced using gene technology’ and ‘gene technology’ in the Food Standards Code, to exempt from any regulation the gene-modified organisms, fermentations, and chemicals, used to make synthetic foods.

“The food industry would not be required to notify FSANZ, so can avoid any assessment, regulation, and labelling.

“So gene-edited fake meat, mock milk, synthetic seafood, processing aids, additives, nutritive substances, colourings, and flavourings – even those not yet invented – would be sold in secret.

“Shoppers would entirely lose our right to know and choose what to feed our families.

“Gene-edited foods would also greatly expand the supply of highly refined and ultra-processed foods (UPFs) which are rightly blamed for rising rates of disease – obesity; diabetes; colorectal cancer; and heart trouble – even in young people.

“FSANZ disregards the health, well-being and safety of families, with decisions that unfairly favour the global junk food industry and its addictive, gene-edited, highly-refined, and ultra-processed fake food”.

An official document quite blatantly sets out the motive behind this assault on our health, listing “benefits” to the food industry such as “increased production efficiencies” and – crucially! – “increased profits”.

FSANZ notes, from its surveys, a “lack of knowledge” amongst the public about the regulation of GM foods, but does not seem keen to put that right.

Asks Kate: “If FSANZ is aware the vast majority of Australians and New Zealanders are uneducated on NBTs, why are they pushing ahead with a community consultation?

“If consumers do not agree that genetically edited food will mitigate climate change, why has FSANZ included this as a benefit to consumers in their costs and benefits document?

“If consumers want regulation, why is FSANZ proposing to remove regulation of genetically edited food?”

People can answer questions on the FSANZ portal here or email FSANZ their own submission – submissions@foodstandards.gov.au.

Please pass on this information to any contacts in the countries concerned.

We are talking about a criminal assault on the health and happiness of humankind.

I would add that the official language used in presenting these sinister proposals is very familiar for anyone who has delved into the world of the global criminocracy.

Take, for example, this sentence quoted by Kate: “Adopting an approach that is forward-looking and agile with respect to technology development will facilitate industry innovation”.

With regard to the word “agile”, Klaus Schwab of the WEF – that notorious public-facing front for the global mafia – has written about the need for “agile governance” in which he claims that “the pace of technological development and a number of characteristics of technologies render previous policy-making cycles and processes inadequate”.

He says: “The idea of reforming governance models to cope with new technologies is not
new, but the urgency of doing so is far greater in light of the power of today’s emerging technologies… the concept of agile governance seeks to match the nimbleness, fluidity, flexibility and adaptiveness of the technologies themselves and the private-sector actors adopting them”.

And the word “innovation” is rolled out all the time by the global Leviathan.

As I explain in my 2023 book The Great Racket, it is repeatedly used by The Commonwealth (Empire), which even had a Commonwealth Innovation platform, boasting 27 “partner” organisations.

That now seems to have disappeared, or been hidden, but you can still see the archived page here.

Sitting proudly at the top of the list is the World Health Organization, followed by the African Development Bank Group, the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data, the United Nations and five of its various sub-organisations.

We also find the likes of Bloomberg Philanthropies (founded by US billionaire Michael Bloomberg), the International Trade Centre (“a multilateral agency with a joint mandate with the World Trade Organization and the United Nations through the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development”), Global Innovation Fund, an impact investment specialist, and NDC Partnership, a big player in the world of “climate finance”.

In Converging Against the Criminocracy I report that the term “innovation” has been used by the WEF, the United Nations Development Programme, the Global System for Mobile Communications Association, the Church of England’s Social Impact Investment Programme and British International Investment.

I also note that the Swiss-based Edmond de Rothschild entity, which pushes the whole Fourth Industrial Revolution agenda, has established a strategic partnership in the realm of “innovative food”, technology linked to “alternative proteins”, new agricultural systems and the creation of “digital solutions” to nutrition.

In my latest book, Against the Dark Enslaving Empire!, I mention Israel’s Peres Center for Peace and Innovation, whose international governors have included the likes of liquor-trade “philanthropist” Charles Bronfman, Baroness Ariane de Rothschild and the late Sir Evelyn de Rothschild.

If you can’t see what we’re up against here, you’re really not paying attention!

[Audio version]