CIVIS Foundation Report 10, Autumn-Winter 1990-1991

 

 

THE POLLUTED POLLUTER

 

by Prof. Pietro Croce, M.D.

 

If the environmentalist warns us that the progressive heating of the atmosphere will cause the expansion of deserts, drought and famine, and if he affirms that a few more degrees centigrade will melt so much polar ice as to submerge cities like New York, Rio de Janeiro and Venice, he is accused of catastrophism; if he warns us that systematic deforestation will reduce the concentration of atmospheric oxygen enough to lessen the working capacity of an entire active population, or if he predicts that the thinning out of the ozone belt will increase oncological pathology to limits impossible to control, or that the extinction of an increasing number of animal species and plants could produce a chain reaction type of degradation leading to the total destruction within a short time of life on our planet, he will find himself accused of ecological terrorism, and will come into conflict with scientists backed up by "well balanced men", who consider themselves objective, impartial distributors of consent, always present on the pages of newspapers to thicken the smoke that prevents us to see, to hear, and to speak.

 

Copernicus and Galileo dispelled our geocentric illusion, but a few decades later Illuminism gave us back the same illusion, only worsened. Worsened, because it removed, from the center of the Universe, the Earth, which is after all a "macrocosmos", comprising all forms of living and non-living beings - coordinated, interdependent and indispensable to one another - and substituted to it the "microcosmos Man", who in order to remain the absolute dominator is making a desert around himself. And in this desert, with the velocity made possible by his marvelous machines, he is blithely proceeding towards extinction.

 

Pollution of "Macrocosmos Earth"

 

To pollute means to defile a system with one or more foreign elements that modify it in a negative way, that is, increasing its entropy (or "grade of internal disorganization").

 

For four billion years the "System Earth" has changed its order slowly, coordinately and continuously, passing from one balance to a successive one, until the present one, which is also temporary, and which allows provisional existence of humanity and coeval species. But now we are facing a real possibility, so real that it is already in action, that the present balance which, according to the universal design, should have lasted many more millennia, be upset and thrown into disorder within a few decades, that is - translated into geological language - in a few instants.

 

The philosopher John Lovelock perceives our ecosystem as an "organism", in the biological meaning of the word. Like animals and plants, it has fundamental aptitudes; first of all the "will to live", and to defend itself against aggression. Like all living organisms it defends itself by producing "specific antibodies", that is, adapted to the model and the quality of the aggressor. From where do the aggressions come? The aggressions that render doubtful the survival of the "Organism Earth" and force it to show menacingly its defensive capacities? If the hypothesis of Lovelock is correct, it will not be difficult to individualize those' 'antibodies" that the "Great Organism", the "macrocosmos", is shaping against its principal, perhaps its only aggressor, Man: famine, wars, massacres and new mortal diseases.

 

Pollution by "Microcosmos Man"

 

In human pathology there exist "autoimmune" diseases in which the organism refuses to acknowledge its own organ or tissue, and entrusts the task of "rejecting" it to the immune system, to that cellular complex which normally defends us from most aggressions. On a planetary scale, we are discovering the existence of something similar: the "macrocosmos Earth" seems to have entrusted the human species with the task of carrying out an auto rejection, which, by sacrificing one part, ensures the survival of the whole. Humanity has always produced antibodies against itself, but only to check its own growth, without damaging the general balance. Today, however, Man has devised such powerful ways of self-pollution as to endanger the entire ecosystem and stimulate it to a reaction of rejection. One of the sneakiest ways is the production of completely new chemical molecules, which are foreign to both the Great Organism ("macrocosmos"), and the Organism Man (' 'microcosmos").

 

And he disseminates these molecules in the ecosystem, besides introducing them into himself in the form of drugs and pharmacological products. Maybe he has forgotten that' 'Pharmakon", in ancient Greek, means poison.

 

Animal Experimentation

 

Man isn't satisfied with being different, but claims to be superior. If he had a sound concept of "difference", he wouldn't fall into the contradiction of considering animals inferior when he uses them for his own ends, but equal when he considers them experimental models to vivisect.

 

This gross contradiction has systematically taken medical science onto the wrong path and introduced the use of thousands of drugs toxic to man, but harmless for the animals that were the parameter or test stand for these experiments. A mistake - since animals are wrong experimental models. Some official statistical data: Within ten years, the Italian Ministry of Health has withdrawn from the market 22,621 drugs, of which an unspecified number were withdrawn due to toxic side effects, as it admitted in its Bulletin of August 8, 1983. According to another Bulletin, within three years 14,836 "side-effects" (euphemism for "toxic damages") from drugs were reported. Obviously, all those drugs had been conscientiously "safety-tested" on animals.

 

These figures justify an extreme conclusion: that today's medicine and pharmacology represent a creeping danger, daily and incessant, no less dangerous than many others with which Man is preparing his own rejection. Must we consider this phenomenon a simple "methodological error" in scientific research? Or one of the many prearranged ways of the "Great Organism" for re-establishing planetary balance?

 

Maybe the moment of revelation of the great enigma of our place in Nature has arrived: are we so powerful as to bend Nature to our will, or is Nature ("The Great Organism") so powerful and ironic as to entrust just us - unaware instruments of a design which transcends us with the task of ridding herself of a child whom she has decided to disinherit?

 

 

"JOYFUL EXCITEMENT".  CHILLING ANALOGIES: DR. CARADEC, PROF. DE CYON, MICHAEL BALLS, CLAUDE BERNARD

 

If any further proofs were needed that vivisection springs from the darkest recesses of gravely disturbed minds, here are some examples of what some of its practitioners have themselves unconsciously revealed about it.

 

DR CARADEC This vivisector is quoted in the celebrated American anthology, The Millennium Guild, by M. R. L. Freshel (1933, 1937, 1954): "Let us leave aside the unwholesome theory of the utility or the application of Science. Let us cultivate it (vivisection) purely for itself, for the joy, for the discipline, the enlargement of the mind it gives the intelligence."

 

ELIA DE CYON Similar noises were made by one of Claude Bemard's most famous pupils, Elia de Cyon, who later became Professor of Physiology in Moscow. His unabashed descriptions of how he took unanesthetized dogs systematically apart, in operations that lasted several days, make up good part of his famed physiological treatise, Methodik der Vivisectionen, published in German, which was for some time the vivisectors' official language before the advent of English as the language of Scientism. Wrote de Cyon: "The true vivisector must approach a difficult vivisection with the same joyful excitement, with the same delight, with which a surgeon undertakes a difficult operation from which he expects extraordinary consequences."

 

MICHAEL BALLS A chilling analogy with this expression of "joyful excitement" that Cyon used to feel at the thought of cutting up his unanesthetised victims was found again by us in a recent article by Dr Michael Balls, the Bible-quoting vivisector, who described his own joyful state of mind when the infamous new British bill on vivisection of 1986, also referred to as "The Vivisectors' Charter", which he had helped to draft together with Judith Hampson of RSPCA and Cliff Hollands of Edinburgh' s AV's society, was about to become law in the United Kingdom, anchoring the practice of vivisection and ensuring its relentless spreading throughout the Common Market countries for many decades to come.

 

Wrote Dr. Michael Balls (who solicits contributions to his purported "Fund For the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments"), in that year's March issue of his FRAME News: "It was with feelings of excitement and anticipation that we approached the House of Commons on Monday, 17 February, the occasion of the second reading debate on the Government's Bill to reform [sic!] the Cruelty to Animals' Act of 1876. We had earlier witnessed the passage through the House of Lords."

 

This new 1986 Bill represented a considerable worsening of the one it was replacing, the one that had been enacted in Queen Victoria's time and had helped vivisection to grow, from a few hundred cases a year, to a macabre five and a half million in Great Britain alone! For example, the new Act now explicitly legalizes, for the first time in history, the use of one and the same animal more than once in cruel, surgical experiments. And Bible-thumbing Michael Balls actually looked forward to the passage of this new bill, which he was nursing on its way with "feelings of excitement and anticipation!"

 

CLAUDE BERNARD. For the fairly sane average citizen who might find it hard to understand what it is that causes some vivisectors, apart and beyond the money angle, to get pleasantly excited about their activity, let us recall the alibi of France's Claude Bernard, the Apostle of these scientistic exercises, in his most famous work, cited in SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENT, and proving to what extent vivisection is the manifestation of a worrisome mental condition. Wrote the Apostle:

 

"The physiologist is not a man of the world, he is a scientist, a man caught and absorbed by a scientific idea that he pursues; he no longer hears the cries of the animals, no longer sees the flowing blood, he sees only his idea: organisms that hide from him problems that he wants to discover. He doesn't feel that he is in a horrible carnage; under the influence of a scientific idea, he pursues with delight a nervous filament inside stinking and livid flesh that for any other person would be an object of disgust and horror."

 

Quite right, Claude.  And Mike.

 

 

WORLD SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF ANIMALS (WSPA)

 

The vivisectionist leanings of the executives of this largest animalist organisation, founded in 1979, and claiming to represent over 350 conservation and animal welfare societies, were first exposed in our NAKED EMPRESS (1982, p.43-45), then in various other CIVIS publications. Ever since, it became well nigh impossible to keep track entirely of the officers' musical chairs games, as they keep changing roles and/or titles when, after having been unfrocked by CIVIS, they start shivering in the public view: Director, Director General, President, Vice-President, Regional Director, Commissioner, Deputy President, Field Representative, Field Service Administrator, Advisory Director: H. J. Weichert, Trevor Scott, David Claflin, John Walsh, Harry Rowsell, Colin Platt, George Drysdale, J. A. Hoyt, Richard Steiner, Rosalind Lawes, J. C. Remfry, Gordon Walwyn, Diana Vescovo, Wim J. de Kok, and many, many more. The dozens of names of officers listed on WSPA letter paper read like an Almanach de Gotha of infiltrators and vivisectionists.

 

Baptist Minister John Hoyt became one of WSPA's latest Presidents after he had to leave in tears America's golden-egg-Iaying HSUS as a consequence of the revelations in our Foundation Report Nr 5 - which went like hot cakes, also because it was illustrated with the mug shots of Gill Langley and Judith Hampson (CIVIS is planning to reprint it). Just as the present, long delayed Report is about to go to the presses, we learn that John Hoyt has been removed from his WSPA presidency before he had had time to develop saddle sores, and his seat was awarded instead to Richard Steiner, President of Basel based STS - Schweizerischer Tierschutz, meaning Swiss Animal Protection - which is the umbrella organisation for all the 68 "animal welfare" societies existing in Switzerland and whose main task is to keep their members insulated from the vivisection issue.

 

When in June 1980 Franz Weber launched in Switzerland his Initiative for the Abolition of Vivisection this initiative was officially disavowed by STS, whose 68 regional societies (with one single exception) all urged their members NOT to sign it.

 

In Switzerland it is generally accepted that the STS is an instrument of our chemical industry, but our persistent revelations on an international plane have finally wormed out of WSPA executives the admission, in response to inquiries from members, that they are NOT ANTI VIVISECTION, which in CIVIS language and in any language means they are FOR VIVISECTION.

 

A formidable CIVIS ally, Mrs Solveig Wagner of Dronninglund, Denmark, received in November 1988 the following letter from Dr. Jenny Remfry, Ph. D., Vet. MB., MRCVS, who wrote from London:

 

"Mr Drysdale has now retired from the post of Regional Director Europe and I have taken his place. Thank you for telling me about your own initiative in trying to ban vivisection. You probably realise that WSPA is not an anti-vivisection society and so cannot help you. In the UK we now have a new law to protect laboratory animals and to control scientists. "

 

And then the last straw, the one that breaks the traditional camel's back, as Dr Remfry adds: "Some of WSPA's members societies are anti-vivisectionist, and I am passing on your petition, with a copy of this letter, to Clive Hollands of the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Vivisection." (sic!)

 

Who is Clive Hollands?

 

As every CIVlS addict by now knows, he is not just the brother of a vivisector (for which he could not necessarily be held responsible), he is the co-author, together with Michael Balls of FRAME, of the so-called "Vivisectors' Charter" of 1986, which has anchored compulsory vivisection for decades to come throughout the United Kingdom and, by extension, to the EC countries which nowadays serve as examples for the rest of the world.

 

Dr Remfry's answer reveals to what extent infiltration has permeated AV organisations.

 

It also explains why Dr Vernon Coleman, who claims a 20 million readership, funnels his trusting tabloid readers into rotten BUAV, which is directed by vivisector enthusiast Gill Langley. (See our Foundation Report Nr 4).

 

Lawyers

 

Being unable to answer satisfactorily the queries from their members, the WSPA chiefs decided to do the next best thing when the enlarged German edition of NAKED EMPRESS came out in Munich, under the title of Pharma Story, Der Grosse Schwindel: to go to court and force the publisher to modify the book; usually a long-winded and costly procedure, which prompts most publishers to renounce their project.

 

Wrote a lawyers' firm in Bristol, Laytons and Ingham, Clegg & Crowther, Solicitors, to the book's publisher, Franz Hirthammer, on May 21,1985: "We act as Solicitors for the WSPA whose headquarters is in London. We understand that you are the Publishers of a book entitled Die Pharmastory by Buch von H. Rusch. (An amusing Tower of Babel confusion caused the Bristol solicitor to assume that "Buch" is the author's Christian name and "von Rusch" his family name, whereas "Buch von" means "book by.")

 

The solicitor lists a series of objections and concludes:  "Our clients require all unsold copies of the publication to be withdrawn and the matters referred to above to be corrected or deleted in full. If the section... is to be re-written we require to approve the draft before further publication takes place."

 

We advised the publisher not to bother with an answer, in fact he never heard again from Laytons & Co. Instead he heard from Weichert in Munich who started a regular, major court action, which, if lost, would have wiped out Franz Hirthammer for all times from business, because a compensation of 500,000 Deutsche Mark was named, and Hirthammer was, and still is, a publisher of limited financial means.

 

The trial lasted 11 months. It increased my respect and admiration for Franz Hirthammer's integrity and courage incommensurably, especially by comparison with the editorial giants, Italy's Rizzoli and America's Bantam, also Futura Publications in London, who had all given in abjectly to pressures from above without a sign of shame, nor a whisper of apology for the betrayal of an author's trust, or even of respect for their own trade.