IMPERATRICE NUDA revisited

8 views

Skip to first unread message

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 3, 2006, 9:40:09 PM11/3/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

=======================

IMPERATRICE NUDA

=======================

The following is extracted from IMPERATRICE NUDA by Hans
Ruesch, first published in Rome in 1976, and also know by the
title "Slaughter of the Innocent."

IMPERATRICE NUDA is not out of date in the twenty-first
century. It is timeless.

Although IMPERATRICE NUDA must be considered an act of creative
genius on the part of Hans Ruesch, nevertheless in its essence
it was not saying anything new. The truth about this tragic
farce was well known in the time of Hippocrates in ancient
Greece. Even back then, Galen was too stupid to see it. Galen
liked to play to the gallery by disembowelling pregnant bitches
in his operating THEATRE (THEATER in USA), to the applause of
the mob who noted with interest that the dying bitch was much
more concerned about her puppies plucked prematurely from her
womb than she was about her own agony. Claude Bernard, the
apostle of vivisection in modern times, resurrected Galen's
errors, for which we are about to pay a terrible price.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin extract from IMPERATRICE NUDA by Hans Ruesch, also
titled "Slaughter of the Innocent," pages 9 to 11, upon which
further comment would be superfluous:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Great Drug Deception" by Dr Ralph Adam Fine (Stein and
Day, New York, 1972) is just one of the many books published in
the last decade on the subject of dangerous and often lethal
drugs, but it achieved no practical results. Health
authorities, as well as the public, stubbornly refused to take
cognizance of the fact that all those drugs had been okayed and
marketed after having been proved safe for animals. Actually it
is unfair to single out just a few dangerous drugs, since there
are thousands of them.

Of course the fallacy works both ways, precluding the
acceptance of useful drugs. There is the great example of
penicillin - if we want to consider this a useful drug. Its
discoverers said they were fortunate. No guinea pigs were
available for the toxicity tests, so they used mice instead.
Penicillin kills guinea pigs. But the same guinea pigs can
safely eat strychnine, one of the deadliest poisons for humans
- but not for monkeys.

Certain wild berries are deadly for human beings, but birds
thrive on them. A dose of belladona that would kill a man is
harmless for rabbits and goats. Calomelan doesn't influence the
secretion of bile in dogs, but can treble it in man.

The use of digitalis - the main remedy for cardiac patients and
the saviour of countless lives the world over - was retarded
for a long time because it was first tested on dogs, in which
it dangerously raises blood pressure. And chloroform is so
toxic to dogs that for many years this valuable anesthetic was
not employed on patients. On the other hand a dose of opium
that would kill a man is harmless to dogs and chickens.

Datura and henbane are poison for man, but food for the snail.
The mushroom *amanita phalloides*, a small dose of which can
wipe out a whole human family, is consumed without ill effects
by the rabbit, one of the most common laboratory animals. A
porcupine can eat in one lump without discomfort as much opium
as a human addict smokes in two weeks, and wash it down with
enough prussic acid to poison a regiment of soldiers.

The sheep can swallow enormous quantities of arsenic, once the
murderers' favourite poison.

Potassium cyanide, deadly for us, is harmless for the owl, but
one of our common field pumpkins can put a horse into a serious
state of agitation. Morphine, which calms and anesthetizes man,
causes maniacal excitement in cats and mice, but dogs can stand
doses up to 20 times higher than man. On the other hand, our
sweet almonds can kill foxes and chickens, and our common
parsley is poison to parrots.

Robert Koch's Tuberkulin, once hailed as a vaccine against
tuberculosis because it cures TB in guinea pigs, was found
later on to CAUSE TB in man.

There are enough such instances to fill a book - all proving
that it would be difficult to find a more absurd and less
scientific method of medical research (than animal
experimentation).

Moreover, the anguish and sufferings of the animals, deprived
of their natural habitat or habitual surroundings, terrorized
by what they see in the laboratories and the brutalities they
are subjected to, alter their mental balance and organic
reactions to such an extent that ANY result is a priori
valueless.

The laboratory animal is a monster, made so by the
experimenters.

Physically and mentally it has very little in common with a
normal animal, and much less with man.

As even Claude Bernard (1813-1878), founder of the modern
vivisectionist method, wrote in his Physiologie Operatoire
(page 152): "The experimental animal is never in a normal
state. The normal state is merely a supposition, an
assumption."

......................
......................

Somebody launched the idea of breeding strains of
bacteriologically sterile laboratory animals...................

One delusion spawned another. Consistent failure made certain
of those misguided scientists realize - some haven't realized
it yet - that organic "material" raised under such abnormal
conditions differs more than ever from normal organisms.
Animals so raised never develop the natural defence mechanism,
the so-called immunological reaction, which is a salient
characteristic of every living organism. So it would be
difficult to devise a less reliable experimental material.
Besides, animals are by nature immune to most human infections
- diphtheria, thyphus, scarlet fever, German measles, smallpox,
cholera, yellow fever, leprosy and bubonic plague - while other
infections, such as TB and various septicemias, take up
different forms in animals. So the claim that through animals
we can learn to control human diseases could seem a sign of
madness if we didn't know that it is just a pretext for
carrying on "experiments" which, however dangerously misleading
for medical science, are either intimately satisfying for those
who execute them, or highly lucrative.

The Swiss nation illustrates well to what extent the profit
motive promotes vivisection: with a population of less than 6
million, Switzerland uses up annually many times as many
laboratory animals as does all of Soviet Russia with its 250
million inhabitants, but where there is no money in the making
of medicines.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

-End of extract from IMPERATRICE NUDA / "Slaughter of the
Innocent" by Hans Ruesch, pages 9-11.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I said further comment on Hans Ruesch's words would be
superfluous.

Nevertheless I just want to reiterate what I've stated earlier:

.........that to toss a coin would be a MUCH more reliable method of
testing a new substance for its safety for human beings than to
shove it down an animal's throat.

If we toss a coin, we'll get it right fifty per cent of the
time.

Heads it's safe, tails it's unsafe.

By contrast, if we grant our permission to our ****head
imbecile scientists to carry out animal tests, the errors
multiply in geometric progression until we don't know whether
we are coming or going. The result is the avalanche of "animal
tested" poisons flooding into the environment at an
accelerating rate which will soon strangle the earth's life
support system

Just read your newspaper (with your eyes open this time) to see
what vivisection is doing to you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 5, 2006, 4:43:07 PM11/5/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

TO HANS RUESCH

Hans,

For what it's worth, that new piece has been accepted by
Article Planet, and maybe some similar sites.
See
http://www.article-planet.com/index.php?page=article&article_id=6382

The internet has been around in its present form for about ten
years.
I don't know why your work is not competently represented on
the web.
Why is it not teeming with such articles, together with a
competent official site for you, considering what's at stake?

I don't know much about what happened after 1990, mainly
because no one would tell me, then or now.
This is because I was always an embarrassment. You all wanted
to go the way of politeness and diplomacy, which would gain you
approval with the intelligensia.
But what exactly do we want - societal change or glory?
Politeness and diplomacy are a recipe for stagnation, although
they have their place, in tandem with direct action.
By direct action I mean mainly the Citizens Arrest approach.
See
http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

If our civilisation holds together for a while longer, then the
true history of the scientific antivivisection movement will be
written. I will have to mentioned in that true history, on
account of my 'direct' approach in terrorising the infiltrators
in England in 1986, so that Jan Creamer of NAVS was shitting in
her knickers and placing those full-page advertisements in the
London Times ...... and also on account of the Citizens Arrest
Initiative in 1990, which would have changed everything if we
had put it into effect back then.

The collective failure to implement the Citizens Arrest
proposal left me bewildered. I had to find some explanation for
it. I finally got wise to what was going on in 2005, with a bit
of help from Immanuel Velikovsky.
See
http://www.article-planet.com/index.php?page=article&article_id=314

What it comes down to is that the vivisection swindle cannot be
viewed in isolation nor overcome in isolation.
The vivisection swindle is connected to the rest of our
collective psychological inadequacies. Vivisection is a major
tool of our repetition compulsion, our urge to relive the
forgotten survivalist emergencies in which all human behaviour
is rooted, by pumping that avalanche of 'animal tested' poisons
into the environment so as to bring about a new worldwide
survivalist emergency, so as to relive our forgotten past.

Therefore we have to confront the vivisection swindle in tandem
with confronting the collective amnesia which conceals the
memory of the survivalist emergencies in which our strange
behaviour is rooted.

In that way the vivisection swindle can and must be an
important vehicle for societal healing. It cannot be dealt with
in a tunnel, disconnected from the wider context. Confronting
the vivisection swindle has to be part of an overall healing
process which will include overcoming the collective amnesia
which blinds us to the forgotten series of worldwide
survivalist emergencies within historical times (the last one
having occurred only 2,700 years ago, when terrible apparitions
appeared in the sky again and stripped the earth of its
vegetation again), in which all our aberrant behaviour is
rooted.

Conversely, the failure of the scientific antivivisection
movement, including the suppression of the Citizens Arrest
Initiative since 1990, cannot be separated from our overall
psychological imbalance which is tied in with our pain-
generating societal structures which need to be abolished as
soon as we can heal sufficiently to arrange it.

This isn't easy. Javier Burgos used to arrange 'reorientation
sessions' in Los Angeles in the 1980s. In fact a much more
comprehensive re-education / reorientation programme is needed,
which will include the real meaning and relevance of the
vivisection swindle, but will also address the collective
amnesia / scotoma and the pain generating societal structures
rooted in the forgotten survivalist emergencies.

Your books are of huge importance, Hans. (The pale imitations
by Vernon Coleman and Milly Schaer-Manzoli around 1990 were
only disinformation / damage limitation by the ruling group -
an attempt to eclipse you with a watered-down version of your
writings). They force us to confront our collective
psychological inadequacies which have let this monster of
vivisection grow up among us and contaminate our lives and
cause us so much pain. But confronting the vivisection swindle
has to go in tandem with confronting the other healing issues.

The suppression of the Citizens Arrest Initiative and the
collective failure to represent your work competently on the
web have to be seen as part of a more general psychological
inadequacy.

Finaly, I would like people to understand that I am not a
problem but was always part of the solution, both in 1986 and
today. (Not that I want glory. There is only one thing I want,
and I can never have it because it never happens in a
survivalist-mode civilisation.)

The way forward always was for everybody else to forget the
glory-seeking bit and to become a 'loose cannon' with an
overall sense of direction, just like me.

Remember all and you will be saved.

-Mr Bop
================================================

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 5, 2006, 5:26:32 PM11/5/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

=================================

HANS RUESCH AND VIVISECTION

=================================

If not me, who?

If not now, when? (1)

=====================================================

=====================================================
One needs to be slow to form convictions, but once formed they
must be defended against the heaviest odds.
-Mahatma Gandhi
=====================================================

Slaughter of The Innocent (IMPERATRICE NUDA)
by Hans Ruesch

Slaughter of the Innocent: The use of animals in medical
research. London, England. (2003), 450 pages. ISBN 0 9519646 3
1. Cover design Andy Dark.

Printing history; The Slingshot edition was the seventh
printing in the English language of Slaughter. It was published
previously by Bantam in North America (1978) and a year later
by Futura in England (1979). The other issues of the book were
printed by Civitas Publications (1983,1985,1986,1991).
Slaughter of the Innocent £12.00 plus postage.

All previous printings of the book had used copies of the first
Bantam edition but for the new Slingshot edition an electronic
manuscript was created enabling us to print with a slightly
larger type face and page size.

------------------------------------------------

There are some books, that if you could wave a magic want you
would wish to produce in sufficient number for everyone on the
planet to read. For me, Slaughter of the Innocent is one of
those books. From early on in the history of Slingshot, I had
it in mind to re-publish it. I contacted Hans Ruesch and got
permission. The most serious difficulty was the fact that the
design and lay out of the book had become severely prejudiced
after years of being copied from the first Bantam edition. With
character recognition technology we created a new electronic
manuscript, available not just for this edition, but for anyone
else who offered to reprint the book in the future.

Marco Mamone Capria, PhD, University of Perugia, Italy
Martin J Walker, MA, London, England
May 2003

=====================================================

If not me, then who? If not now, then when? (1)

=====================================================

In January 1976, the book IMPERATRICE NUDA (2) was published,
with the subtitle 'An indictment of contemporary medical
science'.(3) Its author, Hans Ruesch, had until that time led
an unusually rich and successful life. A Swiss citizen, born in
Naples of Swiss parents, he was, during the thirties, a world
class racing driver; in the same years he also started writing
fiction. In 1937 the first of his novels appeared in
Switzerland; in 1953 this novel was made into the movie The
Racers, starring Kirk Douglas. In 1938 Ruesch moved to the
United States in order to devote himself exclusively to a
literary career.

In 1950 his first best-seller, and still the most famous of his
novels, Top of the World, was published. The book deals with
the world of the Inuit, or Eskimos, and their conflicting
relationships with white men; it is an imaginative and
fascinating story, but one which rests, as does all Ruesch's
fiction, on a sound documentation of the country and its
denizens. Top of the World was followed by four other novels,
South of the Heart or The Great Thirst, The Stealers, The Game,
Back to Top of the World, and several short stories published
in some of the main US and European magazines. In 1960 Top of
the World became a movie, starring Anthony Quinn.

Apart from the very first novel, which in its English version
was entitled The Racer, all Ruesch's books were first written
in English, and then translated into several other languages.
In some cases these translations were in fact re-writes, since
the author actually re-wrote the original books, taking
advantage of his fluency in four languages.

Ruesch's novels are both captivating and subtle, and full of
fact-ual information about their widely different settings.
Their main con-cern seems to be to illustrate the clash of
cultures in all of its forms, from simple misunderstanding to
imperialism and the revolt against it. The author's viewpoint
is a broadly humanistic one, within which each culture must be
understood on its own terms and in its own geo-graphic and
historical context, before any attempt is made to introd-uce
foreign cultural contents and values. Clearly, these themes are
now more timely than ever. To re-read Ruesch's fiction - in
particular his South of the Heart, an impressive account of the
Islamic world-view - could only have a beneficial effect on a
contemporary public and their political leaders.

One of the reasons Ruesch's novels are not as well known as
they were (apart from Top of the World, a modern classic which,
at least in the Italian version, is still reprinted after fifty
years) has to do with the change in their author's life which
eventually led to the publication of his essays on contemporary
medical research and industry.

===============================================
At the beginning of the nineteen seventies, Ruesch was living
in Rome. One day he was shown a black kitten by an
acquaintance; the cat had scars all over its small body. He was
told that the little animal, which was to die after a few days
notwithstanding the care tended to it, had been rescued from a
medical laboratory. Immediately it dawned on him that it was
exceedingly unlikely that medical progress could ever be, or
have been, achieved by doing such things to a small cat.
==============================================

Recently Ruesch has said (4) that another factor which
influenced him to take up the cause of anti-vivisection was the
death fifty years before, in Zurich, of his year old baby
brother, Konrad. Konrad had been affected by common milk crusts
which is sometimes caused in babies by the intake of excessive
protein, during breast feeding. Fifty years later, Ruesch was
to read about Salvarsan. Developed by Paul Ehrlich, for which '
Magic Bullet' he was awarded the Nobel Prize, Salvarsan was
known during its development as 606, the six hund-redth and
sixth arsenic and mercury preparation tested on animals, in
this case, a dog named Hata. The drug was dropped by its German
manufacturers after it was discovered that, used as a cure for
syphilis, it often succeeded in killing the patient. It was by
a preparation containing also arsenic and mercury that Konrad
had been 'treated' in 1917.(5)

Up to this time, in the nineteen seventies, Ruesch, who had
always had a strong interest in medicine, and indeed had edited
an Italian series of popular medical books called The Health's
Hand-books,(6) had been unaware that a large number of self-
styled medical researchers had been trying for centuries to
develop treatments for human illnesses by performing
experiments, many of them very cruel and intellectually
despicable, on animals of different species. This discovery
affected him deeply, and when in 1973 Ruesch gave to his
publisher his last novel he publicly stated that 'he was never
going to write fiction again so long as the fraud of
vivisection was not generally exposed.' From then on he devoted
himself resolutely to this task, and in 1974 he founded the
Center for Scientific Information on Vivisection (CIVIS).(7)

The book he published two years later, IMPERATRICE NUDA, was
accordingly something quite new in Ruesch's production, being
an historical and scientific essay on vivisection, which
provided a wide documentation on the many disasters provoked by
the widespread reliance on, and legal recognition of, this
variety of pseudoscience. The American version of the book,
published in 1978 with the title Slaughter of the Innocent, was
much longer and fuller than the original work. It is this
version of the book that was to be translated in the following
years into many languages, including Japanese and Hebrew, and
is presented in this volume, in its seventh English language
edition, which includes all the additions made by the author
since the first one.

The larger context

Great books are never exceptional in isolation: they are
created and produced within and into a social context. They
arrive on the cusp of their changing times and help motivate
individuals and coalesce movements. Often, although authors may
think that they are working in isolation, in the case of a
truly important book they are riding on the crest of an unseen
wave which materialises only with the comple-tion of their
work. Legions of unannounced followers are waiting for great
books to give articulation to their own thoughtful
explorations, and lend authority to their actions. Great books,
although they often appear before their time, are always of
their time.

Hans Ruesch's Slaughter of the Innocent (IMPERATRICE NUDA) proves to
be a great book by all the above criteria. When it was first published,

it
was both of its time in its clamour for radical change, and
before its time in its uncompromising commitment to absolute
abolition. The book be-came a lodestar and a guide to those who
had always suspected that vivisection was a cruel, unscientific
and unhealthy practice but had lacked the detailed analysis and
understanding of science with which to argue.

The decades on either side of the late sixties provided the
found-ations for a whole new political analysis. Rather than
the relationship between industry, capital and worker, which
were the basic tenets of Marxist thinking, this new analysis
examined inequalities of power in all forms: between
multinationals and indigenous workers, between psychiatric
patients and State institutions, between male doctors and their
female patients, between men and women both domestically and at
work, between black and white, between apparently able and 'dis-
abled' - and between humans and non-human animals.

A revitalised interest in animals and their habitat grew out of
an ecology movement which developed after the second world war.
Slaughter of the Innocent slipped into a historical continuum
which had been re-writing social history since the early
sixties. In 1962, Rachel Carson's ground-breaking book Silent
Spring, signalled the way that the new environmental and
ecological criticism was to be written. Strongly stating the
case against man's industrial incursions into the world of
nature, it also pointed to the health-damaging effects to
humans of the new farming chemicals. Even before it was publish-
ed it drew fire from the chemical companies which produced pest-
icides. In 1964, Ruth Harrison's brilliantly pre-emptive Animal
Machines (8) was published in England. Harrison's book,
together with a long article about it in the Observer
newspaper, stirred up such wrath amongst the British people
that the Government was forced to set up an Inquiry into '
factory farming'.

Amongst the plethora of books which dealt with the welfare and
treatment of animals, (9) Ruesch did find two books by one
author which showed that he was not alone in believing in the
importance of sustained anti-vivisection writing.

John Vyvyan had spent the majority of his life as a
Shakespearean scholar (10) but in retirement he wrote two
seminal books which looked at vivisection and the anti-
vivisection movement, In Pity and in Anger (11) and The Dark
Face of Science. (12) Ruesch spoke to Vyvyan, who complained
that his two books had met with a considerable and unfair
opposition. Vyvyan died just before the first publication of
Imperatrice nuda.

Other works were published in the sixties and mid-seventies,
which enjoyed a wide circulation and contributed in a decisive
way to the emergence of a new climate of opinion concerning
modern med-icine. Among them one must remember Maurice
Pappworth's Human Guinea Pigs, which shed a sinister light on
the way experimental medicine was operating in western
societies, apparently heedless of the Nuremberg code
established to provide a legal grounding for the Nazi doctors'
trials; (13) Thomas McKeown's historical studies, which
detailed the true, non-medical causes of the main advances in
human life expectancy during the last centuries; (14) and Ivan
Illich's Limits to Medicine, which developed with consummate
scholarship and phil-osophical sensitivity the claim contained
in its memorable first line: 'The medical establishment has
become a major threat to health.' (15)

With this new writing, for the first time since the turn of the
cent-ury, 'muckraking' journalism in America, writers and
campaigners held companies, governments and individuals
responsible for what they were doing to workers, consumers and
the environment.

These books were also providing a radical criticism of one of
the unquestioned myths of modernity - scientific medicine and
the progress in the standards of living which it supposedly
achieved. Slaughter of the Innocent is one of the best examples
of this modern 'muckraking' and critical genre. It names names,
analyses the motives of all participants in the dirty game of
vivisection, and dares to say that the empress is naked.

Notwithstanding the repeated attempts to suppress them and
silence their author, Ruesch's books against vivisection,(16)
and part-icularly Slaughter of the Innocent, are landmarks in
the journey to end both the oppression of animals and the
control of health by the ind-ustrial science monopoly.

One reason for the enduring importance of Slaughter of the
Innocent is that, when researching it, Ruesch worked his way
through the original scientific literature in German, English,
Italian, and French. His purpose was to verify the authority of
the endless series of benefits that vivisectors claimed for
their methodology. His dis-covery, which was to form the
historical core of the book, was that this was just a pretence:
not a single one of the important medical discoveries credited
to vivisection was in fact due to it. The opposite view - which
unfortunately is still by and large the orthodox one in the bio-
medical community - depended on accepting historical
falsification and/or muddled thinking on the link between
scientific conjectures and their confirming evidence.

Publication in Italy

In Italy, Ruesch's arguments discrediting the scientific
grounds of ani-mal experimentation had the dramatic and
paradoxical effect of top-pling the only anti-vivisection
society existing at the time, the UAI.(17) In its debris,
several grass-roots new societies blossomed during the year
following the publication of Imperatrice nuda. The popular up-
roar and rational questioning of vivisection originating from
Ruesch's book prompted some town councils to outlaw vivisection
inside the city area during the Seventies. These decrees
contained supporting information from Imperatrice nuda.

The greatest result, however, was probably the enactment of a
law permitting the conscientious objection to animal
experimentation in all laboratories or research institutes,
both public and private. This law,(18) devised by a group of
people who had a long-standing connec-tion with Ruesch,(19)
should be considered as a model for most other countries. In
particular, its approval by the European Parliament should be
given a high priority by the European anti-vivisectionist
movement.

Unfortunately, in Italy the anti-vivisectionist societies have
not strongly enough opposed the efforts by the vivisectionist
lobby, inside the universities and elsewhere, to illegally hide
the law from those to whom it applies - particularly students -
or threaten them when they wish to avail themselves of it.
Clearly, if both the very existence of such a law and the
powerful arguments against vivisection presented in Ruesch's
books had been more widely known among Italian students and
researchers, vivisection would have been ended in a matter of
years.

The response to the book in Britain

Although there were positive results from the publication of
Slaught-er of the Innocent in Britain, unlike in Italy, these
positive results did not come from city authorities or the
Government. The book produc-ed further progressive changes in
the animal rights movement and provoked a radical confrontation
between abolitionists and Britain's established reformist anti-
vivisection movement.

The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) came into being in Britain in
1976.(20) The organisation grew out of a small direct action
group called The Band of Mercy, formed in 1972, and responsible
amongst other actions for a successful burglary at the offices
of the London-based Research Defence Society.(21) By the end of
the nineteen seventies, hundreds of people were taking part in
ALF operations.

In 1977, Animal Aid was founded in England. This organisation
was the first 'life style anti-cruelty' organisation in the
world; its aims covered the protection of all animals whether
they were tortured by vivisectors or exploited and ill-treated
in circuses. The previously moribund 'animal sympathetic'
organisations, such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) and the historical anti-vivisection
organisations National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) (22) and
the British Union for the Abolition Vivisection (BUAV), (23)
were left behind in the wake of the first signs of a truly
critical assault on industrial society's oppression of
animals.

When, in the mid-seventies, these older moribund organisations
were overtaken by a new wave of radical and less compromised
org-anisations, industrial science and medicine found some
difficulty, for a short time, in de-railing them.

Apart from the more general books about the oppression of
animals, one of anti-vivisection book which appeared around
this period was Richard Ryder's Victims of Science: the use of
animals in research. (24) This book was first published in 1975
and then again in 1983 by the National Anti-Vivisection
Society. Ryder's book was a polite affair befitting a man who
had been thoroughly versed in the abuse of laboratory animals
at Cambridge and Columbia and then at Oxford Hospitals. In
1969, Ryder had 'seen the light' and become an activist who
went on to be Chairman of the RSPCA.

Richard Ryder was a reformist and, in the 'summary of main find-
ings' at the end of his book, he states three conclusions which
adequately clarify the position of gradualists at this time.
Firstly, he suggested the prohibition of all painful non-
medical experiments, secondly he suggested government support
for the development of alternatives to animals in research, and
finally he asked for greater public accountability.

In Hans Ruesch's view the first two reforms suggested by Ryder
were inadequate, but more importantly, any support for such
reforms could actually be seen as a barrier to abolishing
vivisection. The first reform leaves untouched all vivisection
for 'apparently' medical pur-poses, while the second seemed to
promote 'an alternative to animal research', but in Ruesch's
view only promoted animal research as the scientific 'gold
standard'. Ryder and others, despite being anti-vivi-
sectionists, still claimed vivisection was somehow useful to
science. The antipathy of the reformists to Ruesch's
abolitionist views was evident when Ruesch travelled to England
on the publication of his book.

Hans Ruesch travelled to England twice in 1979 to lead marches
in both Cambridge and Oxford and take part in debates in these
university towns. In early May Ruesch travelled especially from
Switzerland to lead more than 500 anti-vivisectionists in the
then biggest demonstration against vivisection, organised in
England to Cambridge University. The event was organised by the
newly formed Animal Aid, and the demonstration was considered a
considerable success by its organisers and participants. Five
months later, Ruesch was in Oxford heading a demonstration
which had more than double the participants, so many in fact
that the large auditorium of the University could not hold all
the demonstrators.

While the Cambridge event had been an unqualified success,
however, by October 1979, the opposition had had time to
organise. When Hans Ruesch spoke, he referred to the
suppression of his book in Italy and the United States and the
attempts by prominent people in the British anti-vivisection
movement to stop the book. Ruesch also spoke about how John
Pitt, the editor of the BUAV journal Animal Welfare, had
responded to his book in a review. Pitt had lambasted the book
while defending vivisectionists and even their laboratory
equipment.(25) (26) No sooner had Ruesch begun this critique of
the established British anti-vivisection societies, than he was
heckled from the floor.

A voice lashing out viciously from the audience interrupted me
in midsentence: 'You are backbiting, Mister Ruesch! Mister Pitt
isn't here and can't defend himself! Shame on you!' - or words
to that effect.

They came from a sharp-looking young woman. I responded asking
just as angrily why she wanted to silence me, and soon a verbal
slugfest was under way, briskly interrupted by a mature man who
angrily ordered the woman to shut up because he had come to
hear the foreign guest and not some loutish heckler in the
crowd. The stormy approval those words received from the
audience discouraged the woman from opening her mouth again. At
least for that night.(27)

The two hecklers turned out to be Gill Langley (28) and Richard
Ryder. The Oxford meeting was a foretaste of how Ruesch's
important books were to be treated over the next twenty years
in Britain. The meeting was also a clear sign of the turbulence
which was to settle upon the British anti-vivisection movement
over the new two decades.

Ruesch was to find the British anti-vivisection scene dominated
by reformists and establishment-minded older organisations
which had lain on their laurels for long periods. As well as
having a natural antipathy to militancy, these organisations
were riddled with 'agents' placed there by industrial and
medical science. Their institutional organisation often
depended upon a system of advisory boards which sought the
opinion of vivisectors (those being the individuals who knew
most about the value of vivisection!) when deciding policy.

The contemporary situation in Britain

In contemporary Britain, the division between those who argue
that 'vivisection is scientific fraud' and those who argue that
the camp-aigning emphasis should be placed upon 'cruelty to
animals', fuels a constant battle. That these two strategic
positions have developed separately is understandable. That the
two strategies should become engaged in conflict is less easy
to understand. One reason is that the anti-cruelty campaigns
tend to be all inclusive in their strategies, demanding of
participants a life style which eschews all-evidence of animal
exploitation. This is despite the fact that people can consist-
ently and effectively oppose vivisection without committing
them-selves to this life style, including being vegetarians or
vegans, for all the good reasons that exist in favour of this
choice.(29) When animalist and, indeed, self-defined anti-
vivisectionist groups insist on never mentioning the good
scientific reasons against vivisection, they inev-itably make
life more difficult for themselves. It is a moot point just why
they should do so.

Perhaps because the number of animals used in Britain for the
purposes of classical vivisection has declined since the mid-
seventies - though biotechnologies are probably leading just
now to a new increase - even the focus for the anti-vivisection
campaigns has shift-ed to include the use of animals for
testing chemicals. In America, Japan and Europe, millions of
animals are being used to newly test chemicals, the toxicity of
which has been known for years. Of course such experiments are
not only cruel, but unreliable, and so they open the door for
future damage to the health of humans. Ruesch's arg-uments
apply to chemical testing just as they do to pharmaceuticals,
surgical procedures and research into psychological responses.
(30)

Ronnie Lee, one of the founders of the ALF, has written that he
is pleased to see that new tactics had emerged in the battle
against all kinds of animal abuse. The original strategies of
the ALF had been, he suggested, haphazard and diffuse.(31) In
the event of the new strategies of direct action, arguments
about how to persuade scientists and policy makers are being re-
appraised.

The strategies which have superseded those initially used by
the ALF are highly focused and geared to hurting the enemy
economic-ally. They have been refined over three major
campaigns against Consort Kennels, Hill Grove cat farm and the
campaign to shut down Huntingdon Life Sciences Laboratory.
Consort, near Ross-on-Wye in Herefordshire, bred beagles for
vivisection. After a nine-month campaign by the Consort Beagles
Campaign, the premises were shut down and 200 dogs were re-
homed.

The campaign against Hill Grove cat farm, near Oxford,
followed. The cat farm was shut down in August 1999. The
campaign against the farm, where kittens were reared for
vivisection, had been begun in an unfocused way by the ALF in
1981, re-invigorated and consolidat-ed in earnest by Cynthia O'
Neill and a small group of campaigners in 1991, and finally
conjoined with the organisers of the successful Consort
campaign in 1997.(32) This group was to move on after the Hill-
grove campaign to be involved in the campaign against
Huntingdon Life Sciences Laboratories, now in its fifth year of
organisation. (33)

The Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) (34) campaign, while
keeping and depending upon the mass demonstration and the more
established strategies used since the nineteenth century, has
develop-ed a whole new armoury of guerrilla tactics. After
research and anal-ysis, they 'hit' insurers, financiers, and
linked transport and logistic companies. They have developed a
very personal response to comp-any directors and executives
whom they have named and shamed and then tried to drive from
the company.

Although the campaign against Huntingdon Life Sciences Lab-
oratory includes the word cruelty in its title, the
organisation is clearly informed about the scientific arguments
against vivisection. In 2002, SHAC began approaching healthcare
professionals to record first hand testimonies 'of people who
have witnessed the untold human suffering caused by drugs '
safety tested' on animals.' (35)

In today's highly integrated global economy, campaigning
against animal testing no longer means going up against
individual vivi-sectors, but now involves taking on corporate
industrial science and, in contemporary Britain, its zealous
Government backers. (36)

Even with the present energetic and successful campaigns in
England and the evident hostility of public opinion, there is
still a long way to go before total victory against the
vivisectionist lobby. Scientists are still trying to push
through escalating programmes of vivisection. Cambridge
University (37) planned a human brain research centre, on a
green belt site, where researchers would carry out vivi-section
work on marmoset monkeys. (38) Despite the fact that the Uni-
versity's original application for the centre was turned down
by the South Cambridgeshire District Council in 2001, and a
revised ap-plication was refused in February 2002, the
University gained a public inquiry before a government-
appointed Planning Inspector. This Inquiry finished in 2003,
however, a final decision will be made unilaterally by the
Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott. (39)

The confidence for continuing slaughter is afforded to
scientists by both the present Government and by the 1986
Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act. Hans Ruesch qualified this
Act as 'worse than the preceding one of 1876.' To see why this
should be so, it is useful to quote the opinion of a well-known
vivisector, Colin Blakemore, as related in the Minutes of
Evidence of the Animals In Scientific Procedures Committee of
the House of Lords, which held its sessions between 2001 and
2002 (40)

As far as the scientists are concerned I think that there has
been wide and sustained recognition that the 1986 Act is the
most comprehensive and the strictest legislation regulating the
use of animals in research anywhere in the world. There is, as
far as I know, universal respect for that. I do not know of
anyone who would want to change that situation.

After some exchanges Blakemore expands on this point and
clarifies its real meaning:

The Act, I think, is very good in this respect in that it rules
out nothing in advance and requires everything to be judged on
its merits ... One of the great strengths of the Act is that it
is not prescriptive, in a sense it started with a clean piece
of paper, anything might be possible if it could be justified
in terms of potential benefits and in the mitigation of pain
and suffering. (41)

Needless to say, the very reasons Blakemore is so happy about
the 1986 Act fully account for Ruesch's scornful references to
it. As in many other countries (e.g. Italy) the legislation
defers to the vivi-sectors' own judgment as to the 'benefit'
and 'mitigation of pain and suffering.' No radical doubt is
allowed as to the rationale of looking for medical advances by
performing such experiments as - for ins-tance - sewing up 'the
eyes of 35 kittens, allegedly to find a way to cure squints',
as Blakemore himself did in the nineteen seventies. (42) So the
need remains to expose again and again the sheer absurdity of
this pseudoscience, and to constantly remind laypersons that
what looks like nonsense to them is also thought of as such by
highly competent professionals.

Why and how vivisection survives

One product of Ruesch's prodigious research was to prove
definit-ively that scientific doubts about vivisection had been
voiced by liter-ally hundreds of scientists and doctors, a fact
which had been carefully concealed from the wider public by the
vivisectionist lobby and also, most regrettably, by the so-
called 'humane societies'. In Slaughter of the Innocent, a
large selection of such statements is prov-ided, but it is the
subsequent volume, One Thousand Doctors (and many more) Against
Vivisection, that fully documents the extent and quality of
this opposition by chronologically listing quotations of
medical doctors who criticize vivisection as a useless and
dangerous practice.(43) This book has been widely used and
sometimes pillaged by subsequent authors, not always with an
adequate acknowledgment of their source. Though this fact may
well be deplored, it bears further evidence of the influence
and of the authoritativeness of our author.

Vivisection had not only failed to deliver the goods its
practition-ers had been promising - and boasting - for two
centuries. It had seriously misled the medical profession and
undermined health care, causing in many instances severe damage
to patients. So the oppos-ition to the practice of 'testing' on
animals drugs, substances or ther-apies was not to be based
just on compassion towards animals - it was as well,
indissolubly, a plea for the human sufferer's right to
effective treatments.

One important question remains. Why and how has vivisection
survived so many failures, some of them gigantic, and weathered
the scientific and humanitarian protests which have accompanied
it throughout its history? Apart from academic dogmatism and op-
portunism, the fundamental reason, which Ruesch expounds and
exemplifies at special length in the second of his books, Naked
Em-press, is that for as long as animal experimentation is
officially recognized as a valid ground for inference to
humans, the pharma-ceutical industry will be able to market a
never-ending flow of highly profitable but only marginally
useful, useless, or even dangerous drugs.

There is hardly another method that could be used as
effectively to this end: the very ambiguity of the answers
given by vivisection, while an unmistakable mark of its
pseudoscientific character, is ad-vantageous to the industry
when the time comes for it to excuse the 'collateral damages'
its products have caused to people.

At this point, a common misunderstanding about Ruesch's po-
sition must be dispelled. Contrary to widespread
misinformation, Ruesch has from the very beginning of his
activism as an abolitionist stressed the importance of the
moral argument against vivisection. This should be clear to
anybody who reads the first few pages of Slaughter of the
Innocent. It is also spelled out forcibly further on in the
book:

The first objection is a moral one. If vivisection were useful
instead of damaging, that would be an aggravating rather that
an extenuating circumstance, for it would sanction the
principle that the end justifies the means - that well-worn
picklock which has always opened all doors to wickedness,
including those to Auschwitz and Buchenwald. If man accepts
this principle, he can no longer consider himself a morally
superior being. [p. 146]

But what Ruesch has always refused to do is to reduce the case
against vivisection to ethics.

Those whom Ruesch accuses of using only ethical arguments
against vivisection in a detrimental manner, are those who he
cons-iders are trying to obfuscate the situation, those who
appear tolerant of reform but intolerant of total abolition. In

1983, Ruesch wrote:

So far the common denominator of the British AV societies has
been their exclusive use of lofty - and perfectly valid -
ethical arguments, to the system-atic exclusion of all the
powerful scientific arguments and evidence with which Abolition
should be demanded and could be obtained, and whose list keeps
growing day by day. They deliberately overlook all the massive
evidence of widespread damage caused to human health by the
erroneous method of animal based research.

By his insistence on scientific arguments, Ruesch has proved
more long-sighted than his critics. In fact, from a historical
perspective, there is little questioning that appeal to ethics
or humanity has never succeeded in doing more than enact
superficial improvements, if any, in the rearing and keeping of
the laboratory animals. This is not surprising: so long as
experiments on animals are recognized as an es-sential step
towards the enhancing of the human condition, the sufferings of
laboratory animals will always be considered as the les-ser
evil by most of the people - and those who just want to put an
end to it will be accordingly labelled as sentimental
misanthropists. To insist on defending the rights of animals
while conceding that animal experimentation does in fact help
medicine to progress, is politically self-defeating. To quote
again one of Ruesch's pithy statements:

In fact, moral mumblings of the type 'A respect for all life'
stand no better chance against the rhetorical shout 'It's
either your baby or a dog', than a mouse in a lab.(44)

Worse yet, any 'reform' to cages, for example, may perhaps help
the laboratory animals to lead a less uncomfortable life, but
it will not succeed in protecting the health of the real,
irreplaceable and un-protected guinea-pigs at the end of the
process - ourselves. And to insist that the point is to find '
alternative methods' is tantamount to covertly endorsing that
vivisection is scientifically acceptable:

It is our opinion that all organisations that promise to '
develop alternatives' suffer from the 'in-built fraud-clause'
which is the assumption that animal experimentation cannot be
profitably abolished today without causing great harm to
medical progress and human health, whereas just the opposite is
true. (45)

In sum, to separate the well-being of humans from the respect
for the (other) animals as far as medical research is concerned
means en-dangering both.(46) The scientific arguments against
vivisection are in fact the only ones which are likely to make
a lasting impression on present or future biomedical
researchers, legislators and public.(47) For this reason to
make Ruesch's books available again is an important
contribution in the struggle against both pseudoscientific
misinformation and cruelty to sentient, human and non-human,
beings.

The relevance of Slaughter of the Innocent (IMPERATRICE NUDA) in 2003

Slaughter of the Innocent presented much more than a bill of
indict-ment against the modern world's mad vivisectors; it
accused the bourgeoning scientific medical industry, its system
of education, its multinational agencies, the pharmaceutical
companies, medical science and its researchers of basing the
development of drugs and medical practices on the ultimately
harmful, completely useless and cruel premise of vivisection.

It would of course be ridiculous to expect too much from
scientists and their conscience. Together with the enactment
and the enforcement of laws allowing for the conscientious
objection to vivisection, it is high time a new popular
movement rose up to dem-and abolition of all the practices
associated with vivisection, and for a real concern for human
health to be shown by both researchers and the public
authorities. What is at stake is not some aspect of the ethical
and emotional sensitivity of a minority group: at stake is the
future of the whole biosphere.

All three of Hans Ruesch's books about medicine and vivisection
are political; they are not just about the politics of
vivisection, they are about the relations of power. All such
discourses are difficult to understand, their subtleties often
incomprehensible to the outsider who naively sees a clear and
uncluttered objective somewhere in the mid distance. However,
principally because of Hans Ruesch's work, his constant
determination to face up to every challenge to his ideas and
his research, his refusal to lie comfortable in some middle
ground while the battle rages about him, it is easier today to
understand the opposing power and the political dynamics around
science and vivisection in particular and the oppression of
animals in general.

Since the first appearance of IMPERATRICE NUDA, Ruesch's books
and articles against vivisection have repeatedly been
suppressed by the media and many attempts have been made to
silence their author and his CIVIS Foundation by media
censorship and judicial means.(48) In fact, as hinted above,
also his past literary output became soon un-available, because
the very name of such a dangerous enemy of the 'Chemical-
Medical-Vivisectionist Kombinat' had to be removed completely
from the public discourse.

In fact, one of the reasons Ruesch's voice has not been heard
as frequently as would have been desirable in recent years,
apart for censorship, is that in the last decade he had to
fight against a long and enervating series of suits for '
defamation'. Their origin lies in his consistent refusal to
follow the general tactics adopted by most well-known critics
of the establishment, namely to expose the sin without also
exposing the sinner.

Though Ruesch's claims have never been proven false in a trial,
and though provably false allegations have been made against
him in lawsuits, he has been repeatedly condemned to costly
fines, in Italy and especially in Switzerland. This is a
disquieting fact which deser-ves to be more widely known, since
it throws a very long shadow on the workings of our judicial
system, and on the reality of freedom of speech in our
democracies.

Marco Mamone Capria, PhD, University of Perugia, Italy
Martin J Walker, MA, London, England
May 2003
===============================================
===============================================

1 Possibly originating with the Rabbi Hillel: 'If I am not for
myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself,
what am I? And if not now, when?'

2 Not to be confused with Ruesch's second published book in
English, Naked Empress or the Great Medical Fraud, which was
first published in 1982 by CIVIS.

3 La scienza medica attuale sotto accusa.

4 Interview with Martin J. Walker.

5 Baby Cured to Death with Arsenic and Mercury. International
Foundation Report 16, CIVIS For the Abolition of Vivisection,
1994.

6 I manuali della salute.

7 Centro Informazione Vivisezionista Internazionale Scientifica.
8 Ruth Harrison, Animal Machines: The new factory farming
industry, with an introduction by Rachel Carson, Vincent
Stuart, London 1964.

9 One of the most advertised books of this kind, Singer's book
Animal Liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals,
came out in 1975, when Imperatrice nuda was already in press.
Although the book boosted the animal liberation movement, it
was not an anti-vivisection text. In this book and later,
Singer expressed the view that vivisectors should be the ones
to have control over their experiments. In 1991, Singer sued
Ruesch when Ruesch described him disparagingly in an article
for the journal of the Lega Anti-Vivisezione (LAV), Italy's
main anti-vivisection society. On July 5th 1993, a Court in
Perugia fined both CIVIS and LAV for writing and publishing the
article. Four months before the sentence, it was revealed in
Rome's La Repubblica that Singer's animal rights lecture tour
of Italy, in 1989 at the time of the publication of Slaughter
of the Innocent, had been sponsored by the Rockefeller
Foundation, one of the world's biggest sponsors of self-styled '
scientific medicine', i. e. medicine based on animal
experimentation. Despite the fact that Ruesch and his lawyers
considered that this article had a bearing on the case, the
court refused to allow the information to be submitted in
evidence.

10 John Vyvyan, 1908-1975.

11 John Vyvyan, In Pity and in Anger, Michael Joseph, London
1969.

12 John Vyvyan, The Dark Face of Science, Michael Joseph,
London 1971.

13 M. H. Pappworth, Human Guinea Pigs - here and now.
Experimentation on Man, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967.

14 T. McKeown, The Modern Rise of Population, New York,
Academic Press, 1976.

15 I. Illich, Limits to Medicine. Medical Nemesis: The
Expropriation of Health. First edition: 1975; Definitive
edition: 1976 (Marion Boyars).

16 These are Slaughter of the Innocent, Naked Empress or The
Great medical Fraud and 1000 Doctors (and many more) Against
Vivisection.

17 Unione Antivivisezionista Italiana. This society had been
founded in 1929 by the medical doctor Gennaro Ciaburri, but
after Ciaburri's death in 1970, it had fallen under the control
of a group of lawyers, who used it mainly as a strategic
resource for self-promotion.

18 DL n. 413, of October 12, 1993.

19 For the story of this law, see:
http://www.antivivisezione.it/story%20of%20a%20law.html.24

20 In the 1983 CIVIS version of Slaughter of the Innocent,
Ruesch praises the activists of the ALF with the words: 'While
others talked and wept, ALF acted in an unprecedented direct
action campaign, with nothing to be gained for its members,
much to be lost.' In fact ALF activists, when caught, were
often sentenced to disproportionate penalties, which shows that
they were perceived as a real threat to the establishment.
Barry Horne, the ALF activist who died at 49 on November 5,
2001, after two weeks of hunger strike, had been sentenced to
18 years for a couple of arson attacks on companies financing
tests on animals.

21 Set up in 1908, the aim of the Research Defence Society was
to counter the arguments of anti-vivisectionists and
particularly at the time, the writing and campaigning of L.
Lind-Af-Hageby.

22 NAVS was founded in 1875 by Francis Power Cobbe, as the
Victorian Street Society. In 1898, Cobbe left the National Anti-
Vivisection Society, finally disgusted at the approach adopted
by reformists and founded the British Union for the Abolition
of Vivisection. (Rebecca Hall, Voiceless Victims, Wildwood
House, Middlesex, 1984).

23 BUAV was founded in June 1898 as an absolutist anti-
vivisection organisation. Its aims were to 'oppose vivisection
absolutely and entirely, and to demand its complete prohibition
by law, without attempts at compromise of any kind'. (Rebecca
Hall. Ibid.).

24 Published by Davis-Poynter (England)

25 In an article that followed the 'review' Pitt quoted a pro
vivisection review in the New Scientist which had said: "It
would be good to see no more volumes like Slaughter of the
Innocent, a highly emotive attack on vivisection by someone who
would like to see it abolished, not merely restricted" (cit. in
Hans Ruesch's Bullet-In No.1).

26 This review, together with other factors, was to have
disastrous consequences for BUAV, when the next Annual assembly
of the organisation ousted the long standing president Betty
Earp and swept into her place Jean Pink, the founder of Animal
Aid. Within a couple of years, however, Pink herself lost the
presidency and the post remained unfilled for some years. Pink
soon retired completely from activism, and in 1985 she
announced she had become a follower of a 'Spiritual Master'
called Da Free John, 'a Divine Being, a second Christ.'

27 Hans Ruesch's version of the events in Oxford cited in CIVIS
Report No. 14.

28 Prior to 1981, Dr Gill Langley was the General Secretary of
the Lord Hadwen Trust Fund for Humane Research (LHTF) a
reformist organisation linked to BUAV. In 1981, Animal Aid took
over the LHTF and Dr Gill Langley became a Technical Adviser to
AA. From this position, she criticised and objected to the
distribution of Slaughter of the Innocent and Ruesch's later
book Naked Empress. In 1982, Langley wrote about Naked Empress
in AA's Outrage magazine: 'There are important inaccuracies
scattered throughout the book'. In 1983, Ruesch wrote that she
did not 'name any [of the inaccuracies] - surely an ingenious
ploy for discouraging prospective readers.'

29 Conversely, one should not fall in the trap of considering
that anyone professing to be a vegetarian or a vegan is
necessarily a genuine animal lover or anti-vivisectionist.
People (and particularly scientists!) can opt for this
nutritional regime because it is more healthy than the '
omnivorous' one - and because it may be helpful in improving
one's public image.

30 Ruesch deals with toxicity testing and the notorious LD-50
test on pp. 115-7 of Slaughter of the Innocent. An in-depth
treatment of this topic is provided by Alix Fano in Lethal
Laws: Animal Testing, Human Health and Environmental Policy,
London and New York, Zed Books, 1997.

31 SHAC Newsletter.

32 A Cat In Hell's Chance: The story of the campaign against
Hill Grove cat farm. Written by the campaigners, edited by Anny
Malle. Slingshot Publications. London, 2002.

33 In 1997, Channel 4 showed It's a Dog's Life, which exposed
through covert filming the treatment of beagles at Huntingdon
Life Sciences (HLS) laboratories. In the following furore, £85
million was wiped off the firm's share prices and two former
employees were convicted of cruelty to dogs.

34 SHAC, 6, Boat Lane, Evesham, Worcs. WR11 4BP, England.

35 SHAC leaflet, Autumn 2002.

36 When SHAC managed to persuade capitalising funders to
withdraw loans from Huntingdon, the New Labour Government
stepped in, setting up a special account for them to draw upon,
at the Bank of England.

37 Animal Aid director Andrew Tyler explained objections to the
laboratory on the X-Cape web site:
(http://www.x-cape.org.uk/xcape.htm). Cambridge University wants to
build a massive new laboratory complex in which, every year, the skulls

of hundreds of monkeys would be cut open and their brains deliberately
damaged with chemicals or through surgery. The animals would suffer
post-operative symptoms including seizures, vomiting, diarrhoea,
tremors and bleeding from head wounds. The Universities stated
objective is to advance understanding of human neurological diseases,
such as Alzheimers, Huntingtons, Parkinsons, schizophrenia, depression
and stroke. Yet there are crucial physiological differences between
monkeys and people; and the artificial way in which the disease
symptoms are induced in such experiments also means that the
information obtained will be of no use to human medicine.

38 This work is already done within the University but on a
smaller scale.

39 Tony Blair has already gone public with his support for the
Cambridge Primate Centre. In a speech to the Royal Society -
and in press interviews before and after - the PM characterised
opponents of such projects as driven by ignorance and emotion.

40 These Minutes, which provide a precious and often dismaying
source of information for the British contemporary debate on
vivisection, are available at the House of Lords web address.

41 Minutes of Evidence, Tuesday 22 January 2002. Italics added.

42 Slaughter of the Innocent, pp. 119-120.

43 Today there exist societies of medical doctors explicitly
based on scientific antivivisectionist principles, like Doctors
and Lawyers for Responsible Medicine (DLRM), which "is an
international organisation with 500 professional members
calling for the abolition on medical and scientific grounds of
all animal experiments in human medical research" (http: //www.
dlrm.org). Its honorary president is professor Pietro Croce,
who was inspired by Ruesch's Imperatrice nuda to write his
fundamental essay Vivisection or Science?, London and New York,
Zed 1999 (first Italian edition: 1981).

44 CIVIS Bullet-in 1 (The anti-Hans Ruesch front. The British
Bulwark at Strasbourg), p. 47. Unfortunately Ruesch's lesson
has yet to be learnt by many anti-vivisectionists. This is
clearly shown in some pages of the Minutes of Evidence quoted
above. For instance, in the Tuesday 6 November 2001 session,
the Scientific Adviser to the Dr. Hadwen Trust for Humane
Research, Gill Langley, who was the General Secretary of the
Trust at the time of Ruesch's visits in England, declares when
introducing herself to the Committee: 'We are based on anti-
vivisection principles, so we are opposed on an ethical basis
to all animal experiments . . . The Trust is only interested in
the development of alternative methods.' (Italics added).

45 CIVIS Bullet-in 1, p. 11.

46 The idea that the most rational argument against vivisection
has to do with human health also applies to many other forms of
animal oppression. Although arguments against factory farming
were initially based upon ethical and philosophical arguments,
over the last twenty years it has increasingly been argued that
the industrial production of food (because of the use of
antibiotics, growth enhancers, pesticides and other chemicals)
ultimately has an adverse effect upon human health.

47 Again it is useful to quote from the Minutes of Evidence,
where Michelle Thew, Chief Executive of BUAV (Tuesday 17 July
2001), is reported stating: 'When we are talking about animal
experiments the issue at stake is whether we as humans have a
right to inflict pain and suffering on an animal not for its
benefit,' and she is soon deluged under a series of questions
like: 'What do you mean by a sentient being? How much of the
animal kingdom do you cover? Does it extends to mosquitos? ...
What is the moral authority for your views? Is it St Augustine?
Is it Brahma? Is it Confucius, or is it just your own opinion?'
, etc. Surprisingly, for a Society like BUAV which was once
presided over by Dr. Hadwen of Gloucester (see 1000 doctors
(and many more) against vivisection, p. 276), and for a Trust
which is explicitly named after him, neither Thew nor Langley
ever refer to the medical disasters caused by vivisection; the
harshest statement by Langley in this direction is: 'Animal
tests are very far from being scientifically perfect.'

48 A welcome reversal of this was the publication in 2003, of
an education history anthology, Past to Present Ideas that
Changed our World, by Stuart Hirschberg and Terry Hirschberg,
published on a world wide basis by Pearson Education Inc. This
wide ranging anthology which looks at influential ideas in the
modern world gives fourteen pages to faithful excerpts from
Slaughter of the Innocent which is introduced in the contents
pages with the words: 'An internationally respected critic of
vivisection argues against it on ethical, moral, and practical
grounds.'
of high intelligence, sound but unstuffy scholarship, a strong
capacity for pity and empathy, allied to a striking literary
skill. Slaughter of the Innocent constitutes the 20th century's
single most powerful indictment of 'vivisection' - the
experimentation with and upon living animals.
=======================================
=====================================================
One needs to be slow to form convictions, but once formed they
must be defended against the heaviest odds.
Mahatma Gandhi
=====================================================
=====================================================

If not me, who?
If not now, when?

=====================================================

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 7, 2006, 4:38:41 PM11/7/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

===========================================

VIVISECTION - Its Amazing Significance

===========================================

For a few years I've been sending information to a small number of
email addresses and posting it here and there on the web. The
information is of huge importance. As far as I know is unique, meaning
otherwise unknown and unspoken. If you don't wish me to send
information to you, please block my email address from reaching your
account. Only a few people have done so.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The importance and uniqueness of the information I have been offering
is this:

There are THREE major forbidden subjects along with their subdivisions.

Refusing to face these forbidden subjects is what makes our tragic
civilisation possible.

As soon as we remember our past and understand our psychological state,
the present civilisation will cease to exist. (The purpose of
psychiatry, the therapy industry, and "science" in general,
especially the fraudulent "science" of geology, is to PREVENT us
from attaining this state of awareness, thus perpetuating our pain and
anguish.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Although some highly intelligent writers such as Hans Ruesch and
Immanuel Velikovsky have published fragments of this forbidden
knowledge in beautifully elegant prose, until now nobody had connected
the several strands of arcane scholarship together and articulated the
causal links between them and the conclusions toward which the correct
analysis of our civilisation is pointing.

My involvement with Hans Ruesch's work in the 1980s taught me about
some of the realities of human psychology, which you don't learn in
universities. So I was well prepared for the sometimes hostile and
hysterical response to the truth, for example the recent libellous and
unfounded remarks against me by the baby massage people.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

It is useful to clarify a few more causal links between the several
strands of forbidden knowledge and the conclusions toward which the
complete picture is leading us.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In theory, the truth about the vivisection swindle should be easy to
understand. Anyone who reads pages 9 to 11 of Hans Ruesch's
'IMPERATRICE NUDA / Slaughter of the Innocent' with his brain in
gear - or even half a brain, half in gear - should see right away that
vivisection is the greatest disaster to befall humanity for 2,700
years, and that vivisection is the cause of far more human deaths and
suffering than World War Two. Just read it again and draw the
so-obvious conclusions:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162607187/last-1162607187/IMPERATRICE+NUDA+revisited

Next there is a need to understand the true significance of the failure
and decline of the scientific antivivisection movement inspired and
often led by Hans Ruesch since 1976. As I see it, the movement peaked
in 1987. Then, with the suppression of the Citizens Arrest Initiative
in 1990, followed by several baseless and fraudulent lawsuits against
Hans Ruesch by the infiltrators, the movement went into decline and is
now largely a spent force. Many people know the truth, and Hans Ruesch
is greatly admired and respected by those who understand him, on
account of his unique contribution to societal healing. Yet the huge
gulf between the position of confidence and dynamism we had attained in
those heady days of the late 1980s and today's state of obscurity and
inaction - can only be interpreted as the defeat of the scientific
antivivisection movement. If this turns out to be a temporary setback,
a case of losing the battle but not the war, I will be more delighted
than anyone. However, looking at the overall picture, I am not
optimistic.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

One result of the decline of the scientific antivivisection movement is
that our brains are full of **** - by which is meant the avalanche of
"animal tested" poisons pouring into our ecosystem and into our
bodies for the past sixty years. This is a vivid illustration of how
nothing succeeds like success and - as a corollary - nothing fails like
failure. By failing to stem the flow of "animal tested" poisons
into our bodies and our surroundings, we are allowing the vivisection
syndicate and the ruling group as a whole to drain our emotional
strength and courage out of us and to enfeeble our intellects. In this
way failure breeds more failure, and it's a cumulative process. The
dumbing down in the educational system and in the entertainment
industry, so saddening to the older generation, can be attributed in
large measure to the failure of the scientific antivivisection
movement.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

It is important to understand the nature of the relationship between
the ruling group and the ruled in a survivalist-mode civilisation.
Inevitably it takes the form of a conflict of interests, in which the
ruling group will do whatever the ruled allow them to get away with.
The failure of the scientific antivivisection movement and the
subsequent poisoning of our brains emboldened the ruling group. If we
can get away with the vivisection swindle we can get away with anything
was their triumphant prognosis, and they were right. The people are
sheep, they observed, and given that we - the people - were letting the
ruling group get away with the vivisection swindle, they knew we would
also let them get away with the events of 9-11-2003 and the subsequent
legalising of full-scale dictatorship through the Patriot Act and the
European Union.

We need to see the connective and causal relationships between the
different fragments of the overall picture, and how the several strands
of the forbidden knowledge link up with one another.

The suppression of the Citizens Arrest Initiative in 1990 - by the
scientific antivivisectionists themselves - shows that we collectively
have made the decision not to fight effectively against the vivisection
menace, although vivisection continues to poison us - morally,
intellectually and physically, and although vivisection ultimately is
going to destroy us. The essential REASON for our refusal to put a stop
to the vivisection menace is simply that vivisection is a major
facilitating tool for our repetition compulsion. This refers to our
collective amnesia regarding the series of survivalist emergencies in
which all human behaviour is rooted, but which were so traumatic that
we have concealed their memory in the deeper layers of our minds. It is
a basic fact of psychology that amnesia sufferers unconsciously strive
to recreate and thus relive the forgotten trauma, often in a disguised
form. We are striving to recreate and relive the series of survivalist
emergencies, by destroying the earth's life support system, largely
by allowing the ongoing and accelerating avalanche of "animal
tested" poisons into the environment.

An additional component of our repetition compulsion is our unconscious
need to recreate the dictatorship of the Messiah - meaning the
autocratic rule of a powerful and mentally deranged military leader -
which we saw as essential to our staying alive and fighting off
competing tribes in the forgotten survivalist emergencies. Whatever is
associated with physical survival tends to repeat. In addition whatever
significant event we refuse to remember tends to repeat. That is why we
collectively - in spite of our stated commitment to freedom and
progress - are either actively cultivating or blindly acquiescing in
the soon-coming return of the dictatorship of the Messiah.

I've alluded to this scenario before in
"Countdown to Dictatorship"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1142327827/last-1142327827/Countdown+to+Dictatorship

Notice how the vivisection swindle is facilitating BOTH scenarios -
both survivalist emergency AND dictatorship.

Vivisection facilitates the recreation of a global survivalist
emergency by flooding the environment with "animal tested" poisons,
while also vivisection facilitates the return of full-scale
dictatorship by enfeebling our intellects and draining us of our will
to resist the Patriot Act and the European Union, again through filling
our brains and our blood with "animal tested" poisons.

Hence my use of the title "Vivisection and its Crucial Role in the
Scheme of Things."

So that's why the scientific antivivisection movement went into
decline in 1987 and is now moribund.

We are unable to face the memory of the instability in the orbits of
the planets, the last such occurrence being only 2,700 years ago. We
are unable to face the thought of the barren, darkened hell on earth
that followed the visitations of "Ishtar" and the vampirism,
cannibalism and inter-tribal carnage that accompanied those forgotten
survivalist emergencies. Like all amnesia sufferers, we have a
compulsion to recreate the buried trauma. So we are using the
vivisection swindle to bring about another worldwide survivalist
emergency with renewed inter-tribal wars and full-scale dictatorship
within every tribe.

THAT explains why we cannot put a stop to vivisection, despite the fact
that vivisection is rapidly destroying us.

Hence the prophetic slogan I introduced in 1987, which is now close to
its fulfilment:

WE ARE NOT GOING TO ABOLISH VIVISECTION.
VIVISECTION IS GOING TO ABOLISH US.

-------------------------------------------------

-Peter Newman, 6 November 2006

-------------------------------------------------

PS - This knowledge is of such immense importance that I want to spread
it. You can block my email address from reaching your account if you
wish. Only a very few people have done so. The reason I target you is
that I know you are intelligent enough to understand this 'forbidden
knowledge.'

All plain text writings of mine are free of copyright. I don't care
if I'm not named as the source. I always said I would like others to
reproduce these healing ideas, perhaps in a form more acceptable to the
majority of people, although I'm not sure how that could be achieved
without diluting the message to the point of being useless. This thesis
was born out of the all-or-nothing polarity of the Universal Infant. If
you try to water it down, you lose it completely.

Also, I can tell you that if you face up to the truth, if you overcome
the collective amnesia completely, then you will feel emotional pain
for a while. It's hard to articulate the feeling, but it is explained
partly by the opposing tensions between what is happening and what I
know could be happening - if we would just remember our history and our
infancy and apply the obvious healing formula. I use alcohol most days
to ease this emotional pain. I do not want to feel this way, but at the
same time I recognise the emotional pain as a sign that I am healthy
and sane. It is the survivalist-mode civilisation around us that is
sick. Ignorance is the only bliss in a survivalist-mode civilisation.
The ones who say they are happy are the ones who are in big trouble.

Remember, in a survivalist emergency, everything goes into reverse. We
never came out of survivalist mode after the vegetation grew back.
That's why we are such bloody fools. That's why we refuse to oppose
the vivisection menace effectively, although we easily could have put a
stop to it in the early 1990s. Now failure is breeding more failure as
the "animal tested" poisons continue to rot our brains.

The vivisection swindle is a good starting point for personal and
societal healing. Try again with pages 9 to 11 of "IMPERATRICE NUDA /
Slaughter of the Innocent." Take it in fully this time, the enormity of
what the vivisection swindle and the fake debate about it in the media
really signify. It's a good start, a first step on the road back to the
Garden.
=========================================================

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 16, 2006, 1:49:49 PM11/16/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

(text of leaflet issued in Leeds, England, in late 1986:)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Hope for Infiltrators

INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS: The Caring Alternative

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you an infiltrator into the antivivisection movement?

Have you had enough?

Are you sick and tired of living a lie?

Are you running out of variations on the script?

Can you no longer keep a straight face all of the time?

ARE YOU WORRIED THAT YOU MIGHT POSSIBLY BE INSANE?

Do you feel guilty about prolonging the medical fraud by blocking
progress toward the abolition of vivisection?

You do............???

Then INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS is for YOU ! ! !

-----------------------------------

We are a volunteer group of former infiltrators into the
antivivisection movement.
Our only wish is to help present infiltrators to come clean and to
accomplish the long trek back to sanity.
We are all qualified practitioners of Confession Therapy, a
revolutionary NEW treatment for all types of compulsive lying.
We have converted the upper storey of our headquarters into a small
nursing home to house chronic infiltrators who have been living a lie
for ten years or more.
Our ultimate aim is to place all former infiltrators in productive
employment back in the community.
We provide full back up, monitoring and befriending services until the
infiltrator is fully rehabilitated.

-----------------------------------------

YOU TOO CAN MAKE THE BREAK !

Don't go to antivivisection HQ tomorrow morning.
Instead come along to the IA office, where our trained cousellors and
therapists are waiting for you.

We have the patience, we have the caring, we have the commitment....

WE'LL SOON HAVE YOU RIGHT !

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Infiltrators Anonymous
13b Drain Grove
Crooksborough
N7 HAA

IA confidential helpline: freephone 00-00-00-00-00

Administrator: Tim Smallman, author of the sensational expose
"Confessions of an Infiltrator"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Infiltrators Anonymous CARES !

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 24, 2006, 4:21:59 PM11/24/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

=========================================

This is the text of a leaflet issued in Leeds, Yorkshire, in 1986, with
repercussions at the time that seem unbelievable today:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Ryder is a phoney antivivisectionist, an infiltrator employed
by the vivisection industry.

Ryder cannot name any benefits of vivisection because there are no
benefits of vivisection and there never can be any benefits from
vivisection.

You can verify this by writing to people like Ryder, or to the Research
Defence Society, and asking them to name the benefits of vivisection.

If they have invented a new "smokescreen" reply, then (a certain group)
will be happy to translate it for you.

You could also ask them how much money the vivisection industry is
paying them for telling their lies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(end of quoted leaflet from 1986)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE TOUCHES EVERYBODY'S LIFE.

ULTIMATELY THE PEOPLE OF THIS WORLD WILL HAVE TO FACE UP TO THIS DEMON
THAT IS PROPPING UP THEIR SHIT CIVILISATION.

OUR CIVILISATION IS WRAPPED AROUND THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE AND HAS COME
TO DEPEND ON THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE.

IT'S A DANGEROUS GAME TO PLAY.

OUR CIVILISATION HAS SOLD ITS SOUL BY LOCKING ITSELF INTO THE
VIVISECTION SWINDLE.

VIVISECTION IS A FAKE AND A FRAUD.

YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FACE UP TO THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE SOONER OR
LATER, ALL OF YOU.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 25, 2006, 12:40:22 PM11/25/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

By the way, does anybody have a copy of one of those full page
advertisements that Jan Creamer was placing in the London 'Times' in
late 1986? Remember, the London 'Times' was 'broadsheet' in 1986, so
you can imagine how big those full page advertisements were.

The background to how a corrupt criminal called Jan Creamer suddenly
became an antivivisectionist for a few months in 1986-87 - now there's
a book I'd like to write.

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 27, 2006, 10:24:52 AM11/27/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

=========================================================

VIVISECTION - the latest twist to a sad, sad story

=========================================================

Peter Singer and Robin Webb:

"With friends like these............."

========================================

>From 'Daily Mail,' London, 27 November 2006, page 40 (abridged):

"ANIMAL RIGHTS GURU SUPPORTS USE OF MONKEYS BY RESEARCHERS

By Dan Newling

A man regarded as the spiritual father of animal liberation has backed
medical experiments on monkeys.
Professor Peter Singer, one of whose books is considered the
'philosophical foundation' of the movement, said medical tests on
primates are justified in some cases.
He made the dramatic admission in a TV documentary after being shown
how the health of a boy with a disease similar to Parkinson's
improved when he was given a treatment tested on monkeys. 'It is
clear that at least some animal research has some benefits,' he said.

'I would certainly not say that no animal research could be
justified.'

Australia-born Professor Singer, 60, is a respected bioethical
philosopher at Princeton University. Published in 1975, his book Animal
Liberation argued that animals should not be used for medical testing
when a human, of equivalent intellectual capacity, might be used
instead. In the documentary, to be screened tonight at 9pm on BBC2,
Oxford University neurosurgeon Tipu Aziz shows the professor how a
Parkinson's disease treatment he tested on macaques had a dramatic
effect on a boy of 13.
Sean Gardner, from Paisley in Renfrewshire (Scotland), suffers from a
rare movement disorder called dystonia. It has similar symptoms to
Parkinson's disease and both conditions originate from the same area
of the brain.
Before treatment by Professor Aziz he was almost completely paralysed,
even though his mind worked perfectly. Now he is expected to recover
most of his motor skills and possibly to be able to walk again. The
professor said the treatment - which involves attaching electrodes to
the sufferer's brain - had so far helped around 40,000 people while
only 100 monkeys were used in its development.
Professor Aziz is an outspoken critic of the animal liberation
movement, which has been characterised by violent protests, sabotage,
intimidation and terror tactics. He said that Professor Singer's
apparent U-turn is 'a very encouraging sign.'
Pro-testing campaigners added that the professor's comments would
come as an 'intellectual hammer-blow' to Britain's animal
liberation movement, which is the most violent in the world..........

ALF spokesman Robin Webb said:
"The animal liberation movement as perceived by the ALF is that no
animal abuse is acceptable. It is quite clear that many experiments on
animals would be of benefit to humans, but it doesn't mean they are
morally acceptable.""

d.ne...@dailymail.co.uk

(End of extract from Daily Mail, London.)
===============================================
===============================================

Comments:

The Pete Singer story has already been told. Sadly, not many know about
it. The mass media ignored it, because mainstream newspaper editors and
TV and radio executives have strict orders never to mention the name
Hans Ruesch. Also, Hans Ruesch's work is not competently represented
on the internet up to now, at least not in the English language.

Leaving aside Pete Singer, what's going on with Robin Webb, the
illustrious spokesman for ALF? Is Robin Webb a fool or an infiltrator,
or has he just led a very sheltered life?

I don't know.

I've already stated my opinion that SHAC is a fake organisation
founded by the vivisection syndicate for the purpose of sabotaging the
antivivisection movement by screaming about animal liberation so as to
drown out the scientific case for immediate abolition of vivisection
and to lead astray the many who feel passionately about the matter,
dissipating their positive zeal in futile gestures which are not only
doomed to fail, but in fact are a delight and a propaganda coup for the
vivisection industry!

SHAC is succeeding very well at discrediting the entire notion of
antivivisectionism by leading the genuine AVs into foolish,
counterproductive violence and terrorism against people on the fringes
of the vivisection industry, including their relatives who have no
involvement - for example targeting that hapless guinea pig farmer and
his extended family in England - in other words, sneaky, cowardly
attacks against soft targets. This delights the vivisection syndicate
and totally alienates public support for the very concept of
antivivisectionism and eclipses further the solid case for immediate
abolition on medical grounds for the benefit of humanity, not least
because a major benefit of abolition would be to put a stop to the
avalanche of "animal tested" poisons flooding into the environment
which soon will strangle the earth's life support system completely
and destroy us all.

So SHAC / ALF have been a total disaster for the antivivisection
movement in recent years and a boon to the vivisection industry, and it
is reasonable to hold the opinion that SHAC was founded outright by the
vivisection industry for that very purpose. Meanwhile ALF has been
thoroughly infiltrated at all levels by vivisectionist double agents.

In the 1980s Javier Burgos described the animal liberationists as
having 'a pathological fear of confronting anything that comes under
the heading of medical science, no matter how ridiculous or
fraudulent' (quoted approximately from memory). The illustrious Robin
Webb, spokesman for ALF, may fit into that category, and may not be an
infiltrator.

I've made some public statements recently about the likes of Kathryn
Reynolds and Carole Hayman, because they were the foot soldiers of the
vivisection syndicate who confronted me in 1986. These two women are
intellectually and emotionally deficient and are pathological liars -
and the lies they told about the vivisection swindle have contributed
to the deaths of many thousands of human beings - as we know and as
Kathryn Reynolds and Carole Hayman have known themselves since I made
it crystal clear to them in 1986.

However, I am not going to use my emotional intensity and my writing
skills to respond directly to Pete Singer. It's not worth it. Nobody
cared much about Hans Ruesch when Pete Singer and Milly Schaer-Manzoli
were undermining him, although much could have been done in the 1990s
to turn the tables and to make the series of fake lawsuits against Hans
a propaganda coup for us. It didn't happen. As for me, if Pete Singer
and his kind were to target me - oh I'd make things mighty
embarrassing for them, yes, and I'd give them hell, not just in court
but for the rest of my life - but I expect I'd be doing it all on my
own.... because nobody, NOBODY in the whole world - least of all the
other scientific antivivisectionists - would care about me in such an
event or lift a finger or utter one word in my support.

Remember, I asked my colleagues in the scientific antivivisection
movement to give me a small loan in 1993 when I was detained in an
Asian immigration detention centre. Total silence was your response.
The British consul phoned you about it and you just put down the phone.
Another friend outside the antivivisection movement quickly stepped in
with the loan, but the lesson was well learned. If I had been depending
on other antivivisectionists to bail me out, I would still today be
rotting in that Asian hellhole. That experience prompted me to put the
following two questions to antivivsectionists, especially the
scientific brand of antivivisectionists who regard themselves as the
elite, the two questions being:

----------------------------------------------------------------

Q: If the members of the antivivisection movement have no compassion
for one another, then are we really any further on?

Q: Would the (animal and human) victims of vivisection feel safe after
being liberated by a group of people who have no compassion for one
another?

Those two questions have always been ignored, just as the Citizens'
Arrest Initiative has always been ignored.

----------------------------------------------------------------

THE CITIZENS' ARREST INITIATIVE

The suppression of the Citizens' Arrest Initiative since 1990 demands
of us a complete reappraisal of the scientific antivivisection
movement. I was bewildered by the wall of silence in 1990 and spent the
next fifteen years trying to figure it out. I was wrong in my initial
explanation, when I accused antivivisectionists of being only glory
seekers. The fact is the Citizens' Arrest proposal would have
enhanced your glory rating. You would have had the opportunity to
pronounce on the scientific facts to the courts and to the media, in
defence of the ALF and others who would have been carrying out the
physical Citizens' Arrests of vivisectors. The media, in such an
event, would not have been able to ignore your scientific case for
immediate abolition as they otherwise do. So there was plenty of
potential glory in it for you. Yet the Citizens' Arrest proposal has
consistently been given the silent treatment for the past fifteen
years.

It was only in 2005 that I finally understood what is really going on
with regard to the vivisection swindle and the DELIBERATELY INEFFECTIVE
"opposition" to vivisection by people who call themselves
antivivisectionists - even those with the best of intentions. For the
full explanation see the following articles:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

"Imperatrice Nuda revisited"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162607187/last-1162607187/IMPERATRICE+NUDA+revisited

"The Abolition of Vivisection - how it is going to happen"
http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

"Vivisection and its Crucial Role in the Scheme of Things"

http://www.article-planet.com/index.php?page=article&article_id=314

"Vivisection - its amazing significance"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162877691/last-1162877691/Vivisection+-+its+Amazing+Significance

http://www.hansruesch.net/ (partly under construction)

http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1125352319/last-1125352319/Hans+Ruesch

---------------------------------------------------------------------

As for Pete Singer, Robin Webb, Jan Creamer and all that gang - they
can just get on with it as far as I'm concerned. Jan Creamer is doing
her work well, with her petitions to members of the European Parliament
and all those other futile gestures designed to lead the punters around
in circles for all eternity. However, apart from what is stated here, I
have little to say to these people, because I'd be saying it alone
and therefore it's not worth it, just as it was not worth it in 1986
and in 1990.

As I said twenty years ago, when I had to get away from you to protect
my sanity:

WE ARE NOT GOING TO ABOLISH VIVISECTION;

VIVISECTION IS GOING TO ABOLISH US.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

-Peter Newman, 27 November 2006

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Related links again:

"Imperatrice Nuda revisited"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162607187/last-1162607187/IMPERATRICE+NUDA+revisited

"The Abolition of Vivisection - how it is going to happen"
http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

"Vivisection and its Crucial Role in the Scheme of Things"

http://www.article-planet.com/index.php?page=article&article_id=314

"Vivisection - its amazing significance"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162877691/last-1162877691/Vivisection+-+its+Amazing+Significance

http://www.hansruesch.net/ (partly under construction)

http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1125352319/last-1125352319/Hans+Ruesch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 28, 2006, 2:34:09 PM11/28/06

to The Voice of the Voiceless

============================

THE PETE SINGER SHOW

============================

No one else is going to say this.

============================

Someone has to say it.

============================

If not me........WHO?

If not now......WHEN?

============================

The Pete Singer Show on BBC TV last night was quite heartbreaking.

I can explain in much detail and at great length the exact meaning of
The Pete Singer Show. But why? What good would it do? The small number
of people who could understand The Pete Singer Show already understand.
Those who don't understand The Pete Singer Show will never
understand...... judging by their past performance.

And yet there is the feeling that something needs to be said. Somebody
has to speak out against the outrage perpetrated by BBC TV last night.

============================

Pete Singer is the societal descendant and heir of Kathryn Reynolds.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back in 1986, when I was trying to explain to the people in the north
of England the importance of Hans Ruesch's revelations and the need
to expose Kathryn Reynolds as an infiltrator, there was still a need to
take a break now and then. My girlfriend in Leeds in 1986 was a
wrestling fan. The 1980s was the heyday of wrestling in England. She
and I used to attend the wrestling shows in the auditorium adjacent to
Leeds town hall every few months. We witnessed Big Daddy and Giant
Haystacks in their prime. It was quite thrilling, because they really
put on quite a show. There was no pretence that Big Daddy and Giant
Haystacks were fighting with each other. There was no fight, there was
no contest. This was a wrestling show. But there was the pretence of a
fight, for drama, and it was quite entertaining and exciting.... a game
of pretending..... Big Daddy and Giant Haystacks..... and my girl and I
really enjoyed the show, and for me it was a welcome break from the
Kathryn Reynolds' Arse show.

It wasn't easy for me to look at The Pete Singer Show last night.
Actually I had asked my daughter to record it for me and it was this
morning when I viewed it, so thanks to my daughter I was able to turn
down the sound and fast forward at times to cut out some of the old
predictable bullshit. We've been here before. We've been recycling
the same script for so many years.

Why not just get a tape recording of Kathryn Reynolds in Todmorden,
West Yorkshire, in 1986 and keep playing it over a loudspeaker
throughout Yorkshire for all eternity? Why pretend, why save face, by
getting Pete Singer to recycle the same old script, and then dignifying
it with an answer?

As I suffered that recording of The Pete Singer Show, I often thought
of Big Daddy and Giant Haystacks, the heroes of the wrestling scene in
Yorkshire in the 1980s..............

Because that's all The Pete Singer Show is.

There is no fight. The Pete Singer Show is just a friendly wrestling
show.

It was agreed in advance that there would be no winner and no loser in
The Pete Singer Show..... Pete Singer would wrestle a little bit with
that very strange man Mel Broughton..... no one would win and no one
would lose...... but the punters would be entertained and each side -
both Pete Singer and Mel Broughton with their respective sycophants -
could claim to have achieved a wonderful victory and greater personal
glory for their leader.

How very nice.

How very English.

How very stable.

---------------------------------------------------------------

There were the occasional amusing ironies in The Pete Singer Show last
night. For example, some of the demonstrators pictured in Oxford held
up placards consisting of an enlarged A1-size reproduction of the front
cover of Hans Ruesch's booklet of 1986 - "Vivisection is Scientific
Fraud."

Oh well, private joke.

Then we had another idiot holding up a placard saying

"RSPCA against animal experiments."

Yeah. Private joke again.

But why private? Why do only a few people see the joke?

---------------------------------------------------------------

Then we had that funny man, some vivisector called Tipu Aziz. He was
quite hilarious. He said he came to England from Asia and regarded
England as an exemplary democracy. Then he complained that the animal
rights fanatics like Mel Broughton were denying freedom of expression
to the so-called "scientists" in Oxford.

This is a fake debate. This is Alice in Wonderland stuff.

If Tipu Aziz is so fond of democracy and freedom of expression, why is
he not campaigning for Hans Ruesch to be given equal time on BBC TV as
he is being given. Does Tipu Aziz not know that the director general of
the BBC has strict instructions that the name Hans Ruesch is never to
be mentioned on BBC TV or radio, and that all mainstream newspaper
editors have similar instructions that the name Hans Ruesch is never to
appear in print in their publications?

So much for freedom of speech in England.

So The Pete Singer Show on BBC last night was a fake debate, completely
divorced from reality.

======================================================

Mel Broughton and his colleagues who were demonstrating against the new
primate research centre at Oxford University were the equivalent of the
wrestler Big Daddy. And Pete Singer was playing the role of the
wrestler Giant Haystacks - Big Daddy's nemesis in the wrestling scene
in Yorkshire in 1986. They were just putting on a show, Pete Singer and
Mel Broughton. There was no fight, and no winner and no loser. Just
stagnation by agreement of the wrestlers.

--------------------------------------------------

Admittedly I can see a little of myself in Mel Broughton. Perhaps I was
the Mel Broughton of Yorkshire 1986. But I was progressive. I moved on
from there. By contrast, Mel Broughton - on his own admission - has
been doing approximately the same thing for thirty years. That says a
lot about the Mel Broughtons of this world. No progress. No victory. No
defeat. Just a permanent wrestling show for all eternity between Mel
Broughton and Pete Singer. Mel Broughton is Big Daddy. Pete Singer is
Giant Haystacks. A permanent wrestling show for all eternity, with
never any progress and never any change, but lots of entertainment for
the punters and lots of personal glory for the wrestlers.

======================================================

I am not - emphatically NOT - planning to get in touch with Mel
Broughton to try to explain the truth to him.

No.

I tried that in Leeds in 1986.

They said *no* to me in Leeds in 1986.

They effectively said to me:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"HEY! LOOK AT ME! SEE HOW DEEP I'VE GOT MY NOSE SHOVED UP KATHRYN
REYNOLD'S ARSEHOLE!

SEE!

YOU'LL NEVER, NEVER GET YOUR NOSE STUCK UP KATHRYN REYNOLDS'
ARSEHOLE AS DEEPLY AS MINE!

AND THAT MEANS THAT I AM A BETTER MAN THAN YOU ARE.....BECAUSE THE
MEASURE OF A MAN IN YORKSHIRE IN 1986 IS THE DEPTH TO WHICH HIS NOSE IS
SHOVED UP KATHRYN REYNOLDS' ARSEHOLE!"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you don't understand it, I'm not going to explain it any
further, except to say to you that if I were to try to make contact
with Mel Broughton right now and to persuade him to quit the wrestling
show with Pete Singer and to go for the Citizens Arrest Initiative, the
abolition of vivisection withing two months from now, victory and
societal change - then Mel Broughton would only say to me the very same
thing as the punters said to me in 1986:

"HEY! LOOK AT ME! SEE HOW DEEP I'VE GOT MY NOSE STUCK UP KATHRYN
REYNOLD'S ARSEHOLE!

SEE!

YOU'LL NEVER, NEVER GET YOUR NOSE STUCK UP KATHRYN REYNOLDS'
ARSEHOLE AS DEEPLY AS MINE!

AND THAT MEANS THAT I AM A BETTER MAN THAN YOU ARE.....BECAUSE THE
MEASURE OF A MAN IN YORKSHIRE IN 1986 IS THE DEPTH TO WHICH HIS NOSE IS
SHOVED UP KATHRYN REYNOLDS' ARSEHOLE!"

--------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, OK, so maybe Kathryn Reynolds of West Yorkshire is retired now
and living it up in the Algarve on her pension from the vivisection
syndicate. Kathryn Reynolds certainly has earned her pension from the
vivisection syndicate. Kathryn was working her arse off in 1986,
mouthing from Gill Langley's script.

So now maybe the vivisection syndicate has some other big fat woman for
Mel Broughton and his cronies to shove their noses up her arsehole to
prove how much better they are than those other men who can't get their
noses shoved so deeply up an infiltrator's arsehole.

============================================================

A COMPETITION IMPLIES A WINNER

A COMPETITION IMPLIES A PRIZE

**********************************************************

Given that the situation in Yorkshire in 1986 was that every Yorkshire
man was engaged in a fierce competiton to see which man in the county
could get his nose stuck up Kathryn Reynolds' arsehole more deeply than
any other man in the county........... well that implies that there
must have been a winner. Yorkshire folk are very gracious at applauding
the winner of a contest, even if their man didn't win. So who was the
lucky bloke? Who won that contest in 1986?

Elsie van der Steen and I were the only ones qualified to be the
adjudicators of that contest regarding Kathryn Reynolds' Arse.

I well remember the discussion between Elsie and myself in early 1987
in which we made the final decision.

So who was the winner?

Who was the illustrious hero of the Region of Yorkshire who won that
contest in 1986, by getting his nose more deeply embedded inside
Kathryn Reynolds' anus than any other man in Yorkshire?

I'm being completely honest when I say to you:

I don't remember his name.

Elsie and I decided he was the winner. He had his nose stuck more
deeply than any other Yorkshre man up Kathryn Reynolds' arsehole.

But I honestly can't remember his name.

How appropriate.

He was the hero of the Universe - the man who got his nose stuck up
Kathryn Reynolds' Arse even more deeply than any of the other other
punters in Yorkshire.

But his name is lost to history, because I honestly can't remember who
he was.

Ask Elsie if you like, but I doubt if she'll remember his name either.

But he was a mighty big man. The Yorkshire man who got his nose further
up Kathryn Reynolds' Arse than any other man in Yorkshire.

........so that heaven and earth and the sun and the stars might stand
up and say to all the world:

THIS was a MAN ! !

------------------------------------------------------------------

-Peter Newman, 28 November 2006

------------------------------------------------------------------
For explanatory information see:

"Imperatrice Nuda revisited"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162607187/last-116260718...

"The Abolition of Vivisection - how it is going to happen"
http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

"Vivisection and its Crucial Role in the Scheme of Things"
http://www.article-planet.com/index.php?page=article&article_id=314

"Vivisection - its amazing significance"

http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1162877691/last-116287769...

http://www.hansruesch.net/ (partly under construction)

http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1125352319/last-112535231...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

mr....@ntlworld.com

unread,

Jan 8, 2007, 11:56:51 AM1/8/07

to The Voice of the Voiceless

COPY OF RECENT EMAIL:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

To:
Gill Langley,
Dr Hadwen Trust
-----------------

Dear Mrs Langley,

I thought I should say something to you at this stage.

The first thing is that you are operating a fraudulent charity
by telling naive people that you are campaigning for
'alternatives' to vivisection. The only alternative to
vivisection was found many years ago; it is total abolition now
to save human lives. Yet your fake charity is a great success
financially. More about that later.

The other thing is that I called you a mass murderer in 1986
and that still stands. Vivisection is killing people in vast
numbers; you promote this murdrer by giving plausibility to
vivisection by pretending there is no alternative to it until
we 'find' alternatives, when the alternative is total abolition
now to save human lives.

Pages 9 to 11 of 'IMPERATRICE NUDA / Slaughter of the Innocent'
offer simple proof that Gill Langley and her type are mass
murderers:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

......................
......................

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfortunately, that is not the end of the story.

You and Jan Creamer and Terry Hunt and the gang were
dumbfounded and bewildered when I resigned from antivivisection
activity in 1987. It was the last thing any of you expected and
all your activities such as the fake 'Eleventh Hour Group' and
Jan Creamer's full-page advertisements in the London 'Times'
were built around the assumption that I would keep going
forever.

So why did I abruptly withdraw when we seemed to have you on
the run?

Well, 'The Kathryn Reynolds Show' in the north of England
affected me powerfully. Not Kathryn herself, but her clients. I
could see that they WANTED Kathryn to lead them around in
circles for all eternity to prevent any progress toward the
abolition of vivisection. At the same time they hated me
because I wanted progress. There was no 'market' for what I was
offering.

It was only in 2005 that I finally understood why
antivivisectionists are dedicated to permanent failure of the
antivivisection movement, thus providing ample customers for
your services, Mrs Langley.
We are suffering from collective amnesia resulting in
collective *repetition compulsion* - causing us to strive
unconsciously to recreate the forgotten survivalist emergencies
in which all human behaviour is secretly rooted. And to return
ourselves to a new survivalist emergency, we NEED the avalanche
of 'animal tested' poisons which soon will strangle the earth's
life support system and enable us to relive our terrifying,
forgotten past.

That, briefly, is the explanation for the amazing success of
fraudulent charities such as the Dr Hadwen Trust.

If you had any decency at all, Mrs Langley, you would not take
the blood money. You would instead help people to remember the
hidden wellsprings of human behaviour, help them to understand
why we all indirectly demand the destruction of the ecosystem,
largely via the avalanche of 'animal tested' poisons.

It is clear that bogus antivivisectionists like you, Mrs Langley, are
suffering from a form of *multiple personality disorder* so
that your minds are divided into *idea-tight compartments* and
when you are telling your lies you are cut off from the rest of
your personality and then you transfer to another 'personality'
in which you have no clear memory of what you were doing in the other
compartment of your mind. So the infiltrators in the
antivivisection movement are more mentally ill than the rest of
us. However, you are not going to accept help, so there's not
much more to say.

-----------

I have to go now. I just wanted to say that to you, and also to
say that the charge that you are a mass murderer still stands,
along with all else I've said about your type. You never
answered that charge, because you know it is true. However, I
understand now that the subject is complex, as explained in
those articles. You wont be needing your 'false beard,' Mrs
Langley, although back in 1986 you were terrified that at some
stage you would be sneaking out your back door in a false
beard. We had a bit of a laugh at that. You have to laugh amid
all the tears. But you wont need your false beard, Mrs Langley;
you will just share in the consequences of vivisection when
they start to bite really hard, and you will have to live with
the knowledge that you helped to make it happen and you profited
from torture and murder and from the destruction of the earth's
life support system.

------------------

Just get on with it. Your work will bear fruit soon as the
avalanche of 'animal tested' poisons starts to bite and returns
the human species to a re-run of the forgotten survivalist
emergencies in which all our behaviour is rooted. That's what
we all unconsciously seek. But most of us would not stoop so
low as to profit from it.

mr_b...@yahoo.co.uk

unread,

Feb 3, 2007, 4:58:39 AM2/3/07

to The Voice of the Voiceless

================================================

VIVISECTION and Alternative History

================================================

THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE

and what it tells us about
Alternative (=True) History

================================================

For a while I lost sight of the importance of The Vivisection Swindle
and its relationship to the analysis of the human condition and the
overall healing formula. The Vivisection Swindle was not mentioned
directly in the printed book dated mid-2005. I want to rectify that
omission by stating clearly the relationship between The Vivisection
Swindle and the other Forbidden Subjects .
There is so much to say that it is impossible to be brief and 'pithy.'
However, I know some of you are interested in the information offered
here and I thank you for your support.

================================================

THE SCIENTIFIC ANTIVIVISECTION MOVEMENT

and its potential role in societal healing

================================================

An Essay in Alternative History - meaning Historical Truth

================================================

The suppression of the Citizens' Arrest Initiative in 1990 is the
defining moment in the history of the scientific antivivisection
movement.

After that pivotal event, the scientific antivivisection movement
should have ceased all its previous activities and should have engaged
in a long period of soul searching.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ANTIVIVISECTIONIST

It was only in 2005 that I fully understood what is going on.

As explained elsewhere, all human beings suffer from a collective
mental illness, which can politely be termed collective amnesia
resulting in collective repetition compulsion . What this means
essentially is that the deeper layers of our minds are compelling us
to recreate and to relive the forgotten series of survivalist
emergencies in which all human behaviour is rooted and which are the
starting point for our tragic civilisation. In order to recreate a
global survivalist emergency, we need the avalanche of "animal tested"
poisons flowing out of the vivisection laboratories, which soon will
strangle the earth's life support system completely. The Vivisection
Swindle will definitely SUCCEED in destroying us, even if all our
other suicidal activities fail. That is why no one will oppose
vivisection effectively.
This is so embarrassing that we conceal our collective suicide from
our conscious perceptions via our amazing fake debate about
vivisection in the media. And everybody gladly accepts the fake debate
on vivisection in the media, because we are determined to return the
human race to a global survivalist emergency, to fulfil our repetition
compulsion .

The scientific antivivisectionists have the same irrational death wish
inside them as the rest of humanity, hence their 'cut-off point'
whenever victory is at hand. They could not accept the Citizens'
Arrest Initiative because it would have been a huge setback to our
efforts to destroy the earth and to relive the forgotten survivalist
emergencies.........
complete with the forgotten worldwide orgy of vampirism and
cannibalism on a darkened, barren earth stripped of its vegetation for
twenty years - which was the REAL starting point, the REAL genesis of
today's madness, and which we 'act out' as the Christian "communion"
and our obsession with the Dracula stories. We all have an unconscious
urge to do it for real again. And we will. Sooner or later the
avalanche of "animal tested" poisons will deprive us of our food
supply and reduce us to vampires and cannibals again, followed by
inter-tribal war on a 'biblical' scale. The Christian 'communion' is
our daily rehearsal for all that. And The Vivisection Swindle with its
avalanche of "animal tested" poisons is our way of being absolutely
sure of getting there.

In the superficial layer of the mind, the 'genuine' scientific
antivivisectionists are opposed to The Vivisection Swindle and say
they want to end vivisection. Yet there is always a cut-off point,
always a ne plus ultra - always an unwillingness to push on over the
hill and do what needs to be done to achieve their declared aim. By
late 1986 I already knew something is horribly wrong with the so-
called antivivisectionists, as I looked on in disbelief at 'The
Kathryn Reynolds Show' in the north of England. Then in 1990, the
suppression of the Citizens' Arrest Initiative demonstrated
conclusively that all antivivisectionists are committed to permanent
failure.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE BELOVED OF THE GLOBAL RULING ELITE

That pivotal event in 1990 gave new confidence to the global ruling
elite. Your submission and surrender gave them the green light. They
shifted into top gear after that. The results are all around you.

Up to 1990, The Vivisection Swindle was their weak spot, their
*Achille's Heel* and they knew it. They were quite terrified of Hans
Ruesch back then, and even more terrified of the 'spin' I had put on
his writings in 1986. They feared it was going to catch on. Above all
they feared that I would attract a large donation, and then flood the
world with information of the truth about The Vivisection Swindle . I
gave notice to people like Gill Langley and her bosses what would
happen when the public became fully aware of The Vivisection
Swindle .
For example I wrote in 1986: "....then the authority structure in the
present civilisation will break down, because the level of cynicism
and disillusionment with all forms of authority will have reached such
a pitch that civil servants, soldiers and police will no longer have
the slightest inclination to obey orders ......"
I knew what I was doing, knew what their sore spots were and which
buttons to press, and I really scared the global ruling elite with
that sort of talk, so much so that they even honoured me with my own
personal infiltrator, Mike J. Cook, whom they sent up to Leeds to try
to do a Jean Pink job on me.

Mike J. Cook couldn't stop me, but you soon drove me away with your
devotion to the chief foot soldier / infiltrator Kathryn Reynolds.
Then a few years later you conceded total defeat, surrendering
completely to the vivisection syndicate and to the Illuminati in 1990
when you suppressed the Citizens' Arrest Initiative.
Following that they knew they could get away with anything. Hence
their unbridled arrogance soon afterwards as they pushed forward with
their long-term agenda through the Treaty of Maastricht, then onward
to 9/11, Patriot Act, EU Constitution, etc.
You gave them the confidence to forge ahead with their vile agenda
when you suppressed the Citizens' Arrest Initiative.

I was not the only one who looked on in disbelief during the last
months of 1990, as it became clear that the Citizens' Arrest
Initiative was being ignored by all antivivisectionists. Bear in mind
that the global ruling elite were greatly alarmed when they read that
article in 'MOBILIZE!' in June 1990, and they were anxiously
monitoring your activities and your publications throughout the world,
fearful that you would act on that proposal and do what needs to be
done to abolish vivisection, perhaps inviting my renewed
participation.

But the global ruling elite were even more bewildered than I was as
the months passed and you all remained silent. The Citizens' Arrest
Initiative was the one plan which not only could have reversed the
decline and fall of your movement, but also would have stopped the
global ruling elite in their tracks and made them afraid to press on
with Maastricht, 9/11, Patriot Act, EU Constitution, etc.

We still had the necessary 'troops in the trenches' back then in 1990;
we had contacts with ALF; we had lots of articulate speakers who could
have defended in court the activists carrying out the citizens'
arrests - in such a way that the media and the infiltrators could no
longer misrepresent us. Within one year, such tactics would have
transformed the situation beyond recognition in our favour, and
vivisection would have been abolished by law in Europe, USA etc. by
the mid-1990s. Furthermore, our demonstration of People Power would
have given encouragement to other progressive movements, thus changing
the face of human society and altering in our favour the balance of
power between rulers and ruled.
The global elite knew we had them on the run and they were already
preparing their face-saving / damage limitation scripts through their
agents and dupes such as Terry Hunt, Carole Hayman, Milly Schaer,
Vernon Coleman. We only had to keep going. Yet it never happened. The
Citizens' Arrest Initiative was met with total silence worldwide, the
opportunity was lost, and the movement today is truncated and
demoralised as never before. And the potential 'knock-on' effect on
other progressive movements never materialised.

So the ruling elite went into top gear. In 1991, when I saw the way
the wind was blowing, I offered you another article titled *Sinister
Summit - The Meaning of Maastricht* which again you ignored. Now the
legislation for full-scale dictatorship is already on the statute book
in EU and USA. All they need is the excuse to activate such
legislation fully. And increasingly we have all these apocalyptic
movies and tv series like "The Day After Tomorrow," "Jericho," etc.,
to soften us up for the terrible thing that is coming.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE SEVEN-HUNDRED-YEAR PERIODICITY OF FRENZY

Much more needs to be said about the Periodicity of Frenzy identified
by Immanuel Velikovsky in "Mankind in Amnesia." I'll refer only
briefly to it here.

3,400 years BP (before present):
First visitations of "Ishtar" /
Parting of Red Sea and other seas worldwide by "Ishtar's"
gravitational anomaly /
Hindus and Hebrews begin worshipping cows because of "Ishtar's" cow-
like image in sky /
cult of "The Queen of Heaven" (later Virgin Mary) emerges because of
"Ishtar's" other main configuration in the sky as a giant woman
hovering briefly above the crescent / Later, statues of 'Mary' in
Christian churches will retain the crescent or 'the horns of Ishtar'
at 'Mary's' feet /
Civilisations collapse or rapidly decay all over the globe /
Destitute tribes roam in search of 'promised land' on every continent,
causing escalation of vicious inter-tribal wars for limited
resources /
mother-infant relationship deteriorates further as the causal link
between child abuse and the ferocity of the tribe's soldiers becomes
increasing clear... etc.

2,700 years BP:
Series of worldwide catastrophes in rapid succession as two of the
major planets repeatedly cross the earth's orbit at approximately 15-
year intervals /
terrifying series of images in the sky as "Ishtar" and "Nergal" first
'embrace' and then 'bounce off' each other as electrical discharges
are exchanged /
new calendars are devised on every continent simultaneously as the
number of days in the year increases abruptly from 360 to 365 and
number of months in year increases abruptly from ten to twelve /
After the final 'embrace' and 'rejection' between "Ishtar" and
"Nergal," the orbits of the planets finally stabilise to their present
positions /
Roman Empire emerges while all over the globe civilisations fall or
decline rapidly, and new religious motifs appear on every continent,
to reflect the latest terrifying images in the sky, etc.

2,000 years BP:
Frenzy grips all humanity as 'archetypal clock' inside us sounded the
alarm for another castastrophe in a supposed 700-year cycle /
"Jesus" and his competitors predict return of "Ishtar" in that
generation and the collapse of Rome /
Failure of prophecy generates religious chaos and instability /
numerous 'gospels' published as damage limitation exercises after
Jesus fled to Kashmir to escape the wrath of his own apostles who had
given all their goods to the poor /
major Jewish sect in Palestine later shaped by Paul and Constantine
into a new and chaotic compilation religion /

1,400 years BP:
Dark Age in Europe /
Emergence of Islamic religion, with the elongated crescent (the horns
of "Ishtar") as its most prominent symbol, and familiar 'doomsday'
predictions in Koran which in fact are describing the past /
Escalation of inter-tribal war for its own sake (repetition
compulsion), etc.

700 years BP:
Chaos in Europe / Black Death /
Doomsday predictions / hysterical flagellant sects /
frenzied overreaction to harmless comets in sky, etc.

Present century:

This time - one way or another - we're determined to do it for real,
determined to recreate FULLY the horrors of the forgotten series of
worldwide survivalist emergencies:-

So -

The Vivisection Swindle takes off in earnest in the 1950s, because we
(unconsciously) intend to poison the earth's life support system in
time for the 700-year cycle to fulfil itself with a repetition of the
forgotten survivalist emergency in the twenty-first century /
Suppression of Citizens' Arrest Initiative in 1990 ensures our
eventual destruction by the avalanche of "animal tested" poisons
pouring out of the vivisection laboratories, under cover of the fake
debate on vivisection in the media, which almost everybody accepts
blindly /
Doomsday cults and non-religious anticipation of end time increase /
Apocalyptic Hollywood movies and tv series appear to be preparing us
for something , etc.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IT REALLY DOES SEEM THAT *THIS TIME IT'S FOR REAL* .
WE ARE DETERMINED TO "GET IT RIGHT" THIS TIME, DETERMINED TO FULFIL
OUR REPETITION COMPULSION IN THE PRESENT CENTURY, IN LINE WITH THE 700-
YEAR PERIODICITY OF FRENZY, AND WITH THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE AND ITS
AVALANCHE OF "ANIMAL TESTED" POISONS AS OUR MOST RELIABLE TOOL OF
COLLECTIVE SUICIDE TO IMPEL US TOWARD OUR DOOM.
EVEN IF ALL ELSE FAILS, THE UNSTOPPABLE AVALANCHE OF "ANIMAL TESTED"
POISONS FLOWING OUT OF THE VIVISECTION LABORATORIES WILL EVENTUALLY
SUCCEED IN RETURNING THE HUMAN RACE TO ANOTHER GLOBAL SURVIVALIST
EMERGENCY, WITH THE CHRISTIAN "COMMUNION" RITUAL FINDING ITS
REALISATION YET AGAIN IN A NEW WORLDWIDE ORGY OF VAMPIRISM AND
CANNIBALISM FOLLOWED BY DESTITUTE TRIBES FIGHTING EACH OTHER TO THE
DEATH ALL OVER AGAIN.

APART FROM THE MONEY ANGLE, THE ABOVE IS THE REAL AND ULTIMATE PURPOSE
OF THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE AND THE FAKE DEBATE ON VIVISECTION IN THE
MEDIA.

THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE IS OUR GUARANTEE THAT *THIS TIME IT'S FOR
REAL* - OUR GUARANTEE OF SUICIDE.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So the suppression of the Citizens' Arrest Initiative was of pivotal
importance and was one of the major historical events of the late
twentieth century - for those who have the knack of reading between
the lines and discerning the currents of alternative history . It was
the best thing that nearly happened to us, our last chance which we
threw away; it was our final surrender to the Illuminati.
And, as this pivotal event in human history pertained largely to the
Forbidden Subjects - it was never mentioned in what we mistakenly call
the 'news media.'

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REPETITION COMPULSION - BOTH PERSONAL AND COLLECTIVE

Amnesia demands repetition of what we refuse to remember
'consciously.' Interestingly, The Vivisection Swindle assists in
another prominent feature of our sick repetition compulsion - the
needless tragedy of the nursing homes. Just as we do not remember our
early collective history as a tribe, so also we do not remember our
early personal history as infants,
BECAUSE INFANCY IS SUCH A TERRIBLE TRAUMA IN THIS CIVILISATION THAT WE
CANNOT BEAR TO ALLOW THE THOUGHT OF WHAT MOTHERS ARE DOING TO THEIR
BABIES TO ENTER OUR CONSCIOUSNESS.
Amnesia demands repetition, and again it is largely the avalanche of
"animal tested" poisons from the vivisection laboratories which
facilitate our compulsion to cripple our bodies and wreck our health
so as to get ourselves into a nursing home, where we will recreate and
relive some of the forgotten horrors of infancy.

HANS RUESCH AND OTHER HEALING WRITERS

Acknowledging the truth about our mental state, which makes it
impossible for us to oppose vivisection effectively - does not mean
that Hans Ruesch was wasting his time. It means quite the opposite.
The correct analysis of the failure of scientific antivivisectionism
only enhances that man's stature and underlines the importance of his
amazing work and the urgent need to confront it - but this time in its
proper context .
Hans Ruesch's writings fit into a vital continuum of successive
revelatory documents of the twentieth century - a series of
unprecedented insights which supplied us with the then unconnected
fragments of the true analysis of the human condition and the ultimate
long-term healing formula for our tragic civilisation.

In the 1930s Wilhelm Reich,
in the 1940s Paul Brunton,
in the 1950s Immanuel Velikovsky,
in the 1960s an immature cacophony betrayed our limitations,
then in the 1970s Hans Ruesch.....
That list is not exhaustive; Aterhov and Kulvinkas cannot be ignored...

All of these great writers supplied successive fragments of the jigsaw
- also known as The Forbidden Subjects - which when fitted together
and understood in relation to one another and their interacting causal
links, provide the correct analysis of the human condition and the
only workable long-term healing formula for our tragic civilisation.

THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS

When I argue that my book

"THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS - The Universal Infant talks back to the

mothers of this civilisation" and related articles
have fitted the pieces of that jigsaw together and articulated as
never before the correct analysis of the human condition and the
correct long-term healing formula - I say so because I want to
contribute to societal healing, which is sorely needed after eleven
thousand years of this madness.
My writings are not copyrighted in their plain text form.
Use them as you wish.
As long as your motive is pure I will not accuse anybody of
plagiarism.
The agenda is healing.
I don't want glory - or even recognition.
There is only one thing I desire, and I can never have it because it

never happens in a survivalist-mode civilisation.

---------------------------------------------------------------

COSA FARE?

What now?

As Malcolm Godwin lamented in his book "The Holy Grail" -

"We are chronically caught within the programmes of a self-
perpetuating... pattern which prevents us from either seeing our true
predicament or doing anything about it.......The Grail legends indicate a
way of breaking through that programme. The heroic act today, of
giving up our lives for something bigger than ourselves, is the only
way back.....to simply allow the greater part of what has been severed
within us to fill the vacuum left when the false self is left
behind...."

Like all amnesia sufferers, we have an irresistible compulsion to
repeat our forgotten past, both collectively and personally, without
being aware of what we are doing or why we are doing it. Collectively
we are determined to recreate a global survivalist emergency with the
help of The Vivisection Swindle and its avalanche of "animal tested"
poisons; then on a personal level we recreate the forgotten horrors of
the mother-infant relationship in our adult interactions, culminating
in the grotesque farce of the nursing homes where we arrange to relive
the worst torments of infancy.

And still most people do not understand what is going on in the
nursing homes!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The other elaboration on Mr Godwin's verdict is the fact that our
ridiculous societal arrangements are associated in our brains and in
our archetypes with physical survival .

EVERY ORGANISM AND EVERY TRIBAL GROUP HAS A COMPULSION TO REPEAT
BEHAVIOUR ASSOCIATED WITH PHYSICAL SURVIVAL, NO MATTER HOW DESTRUCTIVE
OR PAIN-GENERATING OR IRRATIONAL SUCH BEHAVIOUR MAY BE.

So we are not as clever and not as competent as we thought we were.
And - paradoxically - to be able to face up fully to our sad
limitations is indicative of the highest wisdom and is the key to
eventual healing, which has to include our liberation from
the curse of the *shame-hauteur reflex* .
The truly wise man understands that no matter how much you think you
have learned, you will always be a fool from the next higher
standpoint .
Those who understand that principle and shed their *shame-hauteur
reflex* have travelled far.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The full implications of the suppression of the Citizens' Arrest
Initiative in 1990 represent an invitation to healing for all
scientific antivivisectionists, and ultimately for all humanity. Yet
the subject remains shrouded in silence and taboo. Meanwhile the
avalanche of "animal tested" poisons continues to flow relentlessly,
crippling our bodies, rotting our brains, poisoning our children and
our grandchildren, sapping our will to resist and progressively
strangling the earth's life support system. You had the means to halt
the vivisection menace in the 1990s and you refused. When you
suppressed the Citizens' Arrest Initiative, you demonstrated that the
scientific antivivisection movement is a sham and a lie when it comes
to achieving its stated aim. It's not your fault. The death-wish
repetition compulsion is in all of us. And it doesn't mean you have to
be wrong in the final analysis.

What it comes down to is this:

ACKNOWLEDGING THE REAL REASONS FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF THE CITIZENS'
ARREST INITIATIVE - AND UNDERSTANDING OUR AMBIVALENT ATTITUDE TOWARD
THE VIVISECTION MENACE, EVEN AMONG THOSE OF US WHO CAN SEE THROUGH THE
FAKE DEBATE IN THE MEDIA - COMPRISE A MAJOR MILESTONE ON OUR JOURNEY
TOWARD SELF KNOWLEDGE AND COLLECTIVE HEALING.

-------------------------------------------------------