Mike Adams claims Monsanto set up “kill GMO supporters” website, as scientists, journalists face death threats

Knight Science Journalism’s Paul Raeburn has weighed in on the increasingly sordid Mike Adams fiasco.

He writes: An anti-GMO activist has compared some science journalists and publications to the Nazis, saying they are “Monsanto collaborators who have signed on to accelerate heinous crimes being committed against humanity under the false promise of ‘feeding the world’ with toxic GMOs.”

In the post on his Natural News blog, Mike Adams also writes that ” it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity.”

It is not known whether Adams is behind a separate website that appeared called Monsanto Collaborators, which listed more than a dozen science writers as collaborators, including Keith Kloor, Jon Entine, Brooke Borel, and others. It also listed Discover, National Geographic, MIT’s Technology Review, and Forbes.com, among others, as “publisher collaborators.”

NOTE: The GLP has been able to confirm that Adams is indeed the mastermind and financier behind the Monsanto Collaborator’s website. The story has now taken an even more bizarre twist, as Adams, facing multiple investigations from law enforcement officials, including the FBI, is now trying to make it appear that not only did he not oversee the project, but that it was a set up by Monsanto in a twisted plot to discredit anti-GMO critics.

This is Adams’ latest, twisted post on NaturalNews:

UPDATE 2: After careful analysis, I have come to the conclusion that the Monsanto Collaborators website is a bait-and-switch trap engineered by the biotech industry in an effort to lure in support from GMO skeptics and then discredit them with some sort of insane “call to action” of some kind. Click here to see the evidence and reasoning on this. Because of this, I am recommending that members of the GMO skeptics community refrain from linking to or endorsing the Monsanto Collaborators website.

Additionally, immediately upon publication of this article, the usual GMO corporate shills immediately began to spread utterly false and defamatory information about what this article actually stated, inventing false quotes and intentionally citing sentences out of context. We expect nothing less than lies and fabrications from the GMO crowd, of course, but they have taken it to a whole new level in their attempts to silence this powerful story that tells the truth about the agricultural holocaust that has already killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

I have always stated in this story, as you can see below: “For the record, in no way do I condone vigilante violence against anyone, and I believe every condemned criminal deserves a fair trial and a punishment that fits the crime. Do not misinterpret this article as any sort of call for violence, as I wholly disavow any such actions. I am a person who demands due process under the law for all those accused of crimes.”

Adds Raebun: Kloor has been most responsible for calling attention to Adams, reporting in May on his Discover blog Collide-a-Scape that Adams appeared as a guest on The Dr. Oz Show on May 13.Kloor also reported in that post that Adams had threatened Jon Entine, who wrote a profile of Adams headlined, in part, “Most ‘dangerous’ anti-science GMO critic?”, which appeared on the website of The Genetic Literacy Project and was cross-posted to Forbes, where Entine is a contributor. Entine says Adams threatened him and Forbes with legal action over what Adams said were inaccuracies in the profile.

Related article:  Big ag boom - organic food soon to double in revenue

NOTE: Mother Jones reported on this story as well although it provides no response to his allegations. Further, at the bottom of the page carrying the article it goes on to note, if you like this story you might also be interested in:  Monsanto GM Soy Is Scarier Than You Think… 5 Ways Monsanto Wants to Profit Off Climate Change… and other reports attacking Monsanto. One has to wonder whether Mother Jones is part of the problem that encourages the Mike Adamses of the world? A more responsive and responsible reaction from the progressive community can be found in this post in Forward Progressive by Manny Shewitz.

Read the full, original article: Are these science writers and publications facing death threats for covering GMOs?

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Click the link above to read the full, original article.

46 thoughts on “Mike Adams claims Monsanto set up “kill GMO supporters” website, as scientists, journalists face death threats”

  1. I’ve tweeted the Simon Wiesenthal Center on this heinous commandeering of the Holocaust for the purposes of promoting death threats and fear mongering.

    • I hope that’s clever bit of parody suggesting Entine and Raeburn’s arch rhetorical question about MJ smack’s a wee bit of Adamsism.

      I shall answer their question. No, MJ is not part of the problem and does encourage the Adames of the world, as a quick glance at the comment thread under the Mariah Blake report linked above will attest.

      To Jon and Paul:
      This is politics, not science. Allies are good things to have, and MJ is a lot closer to you’re position than to Adams’. (C.f. progressive takes on Creationsim, Hobby Lobby, etc.) These aren’t folks you should scare off (which is to say MJ is NOT HuffPo). You would get a lot more traction against Adams and his ilk by recognizing that “Monsanto is poisoning you. Buy my supplements!” is a very different claim than “Monsanto is messing up the ecology” or “Monsanto’s commercial practices are causing economic harm to poor people in the Third World,” and acknowledging in your writing that while the first claim is baseless pseudo-science, there is enough valid evidence for the other two that they ought neither be dismissed out-of-hand, nor lumped with the former in any way.

      Monsanto is no more saintly than GM or BP or any multinational corporation. If you want to avoid being labeled as Monsanto shills, criticize them for something. It’s not like you’d have to look that hard…

      • The only difference in those claims you cite are the sophistication with which they are writen. There is no credible evidence Monsanto is screwing up the ecology or damaging third world economies. That’s anti-capitalist nonsense for which Mother Jones is well known. Both arguments are unfounded, use very poor sources, logic,and science. Both are biased agendas barely disguised as legit reporting. Or do you have any evidence to cite in support of the claims against Monsanto? Mother Jones is potentialy even more harmful as they appeal to more people who believe they are a legit news source, people who would never subscribe to the likes of Adams. People who vote.

        • Yeah, people who read MJ vote. For the Rush Holts and against the Paul Brouns. They are also smart enough to know that MJ publishes a certain amount of BS alongside some of the best journalism on the planet, the mag having won numerous awards for investigative journalism. They’re not sheep. They pick and choose. “Bias”? Now THAT’s a nonsensical canard. When you think you’ve found the “un-biased” report, let me know.

          I just called Dionne Warwick’s psychic hotline, and asked the spiritualist to channel Mike Adams’ thoughts about your post. He’s ecstatic! He ESPed me a message to pass on. “Thanks Pam! GREAT job polarizing my potential opponents and getting them OT. Keep up the good work!. xxxooo The Health Ranger”

    • No, he isn’t. No he’s not. He’s fully aware of what he’s doing. He’s in complete control of his faculties, and “reasoning.” He’s a monster, but far from crazy. Look at the backtracking he’s doing.

  2. How has GLP Confirmed that he is behind the collaborators website? You say you confirmed it, but, don’t cite how. Cite please? Or at least something like “an anonymous source” or something?

  3. Christ I hope he gets charged and shut down. The trouble is he would use this as ‘proof’ that there is ‘a conspiracy’ against him, or some such nonsense. He is truly dangerous with the misinformation, fearmongering and pseudoscience he spreads for his own profit and gain. Particularly the anti-vax and anti-fluoride nonsense, the two most effective public health interventions ever, after basic sanitation and hygiene are being derailed due to charlatans like him.

  4. It looks as if the blog post on NaturalNews has been edited to remove the violence rhetoric. Does anyone have an original copy of the blog post before it was (allegedly) edited and sterilized?

      • Thank you!

        After reading the original, there’s no way he could spin that as not being a call to arms against GMO supporters. He bolded the whole thing about killing Nazi supporters, and then immediately followed it up with a comparison between Nazis and pro GMO supporters. Good luck with the FBI, Mike!

        • He’s a very bad liar, trying to pass off “it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings
          everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged
          in heinous crimes against humanity” as “the paraphrased words of the German government, not my statement.” Sorry Mike, I can read.

          What actually happened was that German President Joachim Gauck attended a ceremony honoring the German resistance movement, and called the failed Wolf’s Lair plot to assassinate Hitler a “significant day in German history” as by demonstrating that not all Germans supported the Nazis, and “It was from this legacy that the newly founded Federal Republic was
          able to draw legitimacy,”

          The bold-faced text is not a paraphrase of anything Gauck or any other German official said. It is entirely Adams fanciful interpretation of what Gauck’s appearance at the ceremony means. An accurate paraphrase of Gauck’s remark would be, “Nobody would have believed Germany could become a free democratic state if some German’s hadn’t scarificed their lives to oppose Hitler.” Moral obligation of humans everywhere to plan and carry out the killing of perpetrators of the-on-so-vaguely-not-defined “crimes against humanity”? No.

          • This is the official Government news release in German: http://tinyurl.com/ke64bns

            The link at the top of the right column goes to a .pdf of what appears to be a transcript of the ceremony. The remarks by Gauck that Adams misused may not have been given as part of his public address, but as a statement to reporters. There are other links on the page above that may be useful to people who can read German.

            The official English translation of the news release is at: http://tinyurl.com/nft4zls There are no links to other material, which I assume only exist in German.

  5. Hopefully this will help get through the well meaning misinformed folks who honestly believe the anti G.E. rhetoric. How’s about a blog article listing all the criminal acts committed by the enviro-terrorists. I remember the thugs destroying the golden rice in P.I. and a factory being occupied in S. America. Who’s got a list? Mary M, my pizza and beer says you already have one.

    • Anti G.E. rhetoric? Like the fact that Round-Up is carcinogenic?
      The IARC has just classified Monsanto Round-Up as a PROBABLE CARCINOGEN: u=29cbc7e6c21e0a8fd2a82aeb8&id=c58fe01d66&e=718aa1f3fa

      • Except its not, which is why they provided no evidence to support that claim.

        Indeed, Germany, acting as the European Union rapporteur member state (RMS) submitted their glyphosate renewal assessment report (RAR) to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in January 2014, recommending re-approval of glyphosate for use in Europe with increase in the acceptable daily intake (ADI) from 0.3 to 0.5 mg per kg body weight per day.

        The overall findings of the RAR are that glyphosate poses no unacceptable risks. Glyphosate is not metabolized or accumulated in the body, not genotoxic, not carcinogenic, not endocrine disrupting, and not considered persistent or bioaccumulative; it has no reproductive toxicity, no toxic effects on hormone-producing or hormone-dependent organs, and no unacceptable effect on bees. Therefore any risks are within acceptable standards. The only risks noted were that glyphosate is a severe eye irritant and is persistent in soil.

      • See what you have done here. You have commented in a thread in a manner that could be considered support for mikey the nut case. Used all caps in your second sentence to contradict your first sentence. “is” ,,,, “PROBABLE” So, you want to argue about a claim, contradict yourself, and support mikey? Why? Are you trying to look as bad as he does?

  6. It is interesting that today I was also threatened because of my posts supporting the science behind GMO.

    FederalReserveBrown 4:43 a.m., Saturday July 26

    considering how americant’s have behaved over the last 13 yrs THAT is a laugh,,, but actually it is more like 200 yrs of Isaac & benjamin
    Monsanto nygeer sellers Inc in control of my country & attempting to
    control the world,,, the laws set down after WW II are what legitimize
    your hanging arthur. I know, grand dad & brothers set foot across japan
    & germany. the day of the rope is coming,, & I am buying.

    http://listverse.com/2013/06/22/10-problems-genetically-modified-foods-are-already-causing/

      • Except its not a carcinogen, which is why they provided no evidence to support that claim.

        Indeed, Germany, acting as the European Union rapporteur member state (RMS) submitted their glyphosate renewal assessment report (RAR) to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in January 2014, recommending re-approval of glyphosate for use in Europe with increase in the acceptable daily intake (ADI) from 0.3 to 0.5 mg per kg body weight per day.

        The overall findings of the RAR are that glyphosate poses no unacceptable risks. Glyphosate is not metabolized or accumulated in the body, not genotoxic, not carcinogenic, not endocrine disrupting, and not considered persistent or bioaccumulative; it has no reproductive toxicity, no toxic effects on hormone-producing or hormone-dependent organs, and no unacceptable effect on bees. Therefore any risks are within acceptable standards. The only risks noted were that glyphosate is a severe eye irritant and is persistent in soil.

  7. It will be a great day when Mike Adams is complaining to the world about the GMO-laden, non-‘organic’ food he has to eat in his new digs. I also think he is going to look so much better in his new orange coloured BT-cotton threads too. I just hope they remember to give him all his shots before throwing him in with the general population.

      • Except its not carcinogenic, which is why they could provide no evidence to support that claim.

        Indeed, Germany, acting as the European Union rapporteur member state (RMS) submitted their glyphosate renewal assessment report (RAR) to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in January 2014, recommending re-approval of glyphosate for use in Europe with increase in the acceptable daily intake (ADI) from 0.3 to 0.5 mg per kg body weight per day.

        The overall findings of the RAR are that glyphosate poses no unacceptable risks. Glyphosate is not metabolized or accumulated in the body, not genotoxic, not carcinogenic, not endocrine disrupting, and not considered persistent or bioaccumulative; it has no reproductive toxicity, no toxic effects on hormone-producing or hormone-dependent organs, and no unacceptable effect on bees. Therefore any risks are within acceptable standards. The only risks noted were that glyphosate is a severe eye irritant and is persistent in soil.

  8. If you look at his website, you will find more people writing in saying, “sign me up as a collaborator” than you will see supporting his position (at least until he can get around to deleting the posts). If he had hundreds of ‘Nazi hunters’ signing up, do you think he would have been so quick to disavow his position?

  9. Mike Adams is the worst of the worst, inciting fear and misinformation to sell his products . He attempts to discredit real science and claim it’s all a big conspiracy to control humanity, though he is the one trying to fool his followers.

Leave a Comment

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend