Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

Improve Standards of Animal Welfare in European Laboratories

40 views

Skip to first unread message

TONY-GAL

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 9:27:09 AM11/11/07

TO: All People Who Care

The European Commission is currently reviewing Directive 86/609/EEC,
which sets out the rules for animal experimentation across the whole
of Europe. There is still time to make a difference to the final
draft.

A new European Chemical Testing Policy called REACH proposes to Test
30,000 Chemicals of every kind - from those used in industrial
processes to the ingredients of consumer products - on Millions of
animals from mice to fish to dogs, causing untold suffering. This
Directive should help these animals while still improving standards.

The European Commission itself acknowledges that non-animal
replacements "...have the potential to provide robust information
through quality-controlled, state-of-the-art tests which are faster
and less cost-intensive than classical animal-based tests".

It has launched a Community Action Plan for the Protection and Welfare
of Animals. This explicitly states "The final aim is to replace animal
experiments with methods not entailing the use of an animal."

It is in all our interest that Animal Testing is replaced with
Alternatives based on Human Biology not Animals.

For evidence that superior Alternative Research & Testing is replacing
Animal Testing visit
http://www.drhadwentrust.org/

Please sign "Replace all Animal Experiments in Europe"
http://www.endeuanimaltests.org/

Now political pressure is needed to encourage EU legislators to do
everything they can to maximise non-animal replacement efforts.

Contact your MEPs and urge them to use the revision process of
Directive 86/609/EEC as an opportunity to improve the Standards of
Animal Welfare in European Laboratories and make replacing with
Alternatives a priority.

For contact details of your MEPs visit
http://www.europarl.europa.eu

If you want to do more:-
Over 10,000 primates are used in experiments in Europe every year with
the UK being Europe's largest single user followed by France and
Germany.

Please write to the European Commission and ask them to ban primate
tests. To help, a prepared letter can be found at
http://www.eceae.org/saveprimates/en/action.html

Please tell your friends and colleagues to do the same.

More information on Animal Testing from
http://www.peta.org/
http://www.buav.org

For information on Revision of Directive 86/609/EEC
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/revision_en.htm

Everyone can help and you can make a difference.

Thank You

Tony, Nottingham, England

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 10:31:01 AM11/11/07

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.

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 10:34:34 AM11/11/07

VIVISECTION
and its crucial role in the scheme of things
=======================================
This article is elaborating on previous articles such as "Remember Or
Die," "Healing Our Tragic Civilisation," and the book "The Voice of
the Voiceless - the Universal Infant talks back to the mothers of this
civilisation."
=======================================
=======================================
=======================================
As part of the global healing process, it is essential to understand
the truth about vivisection and about why we have been unable to put a
stop to it. If we are to heal genuinely we must confront the truth
about vivisection, because vivisection is intimately locked into our
illness - our illness being a double amnesia. Therefore the following
needs to be said.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Most people nervously dispose of the problem of vivisection by saying:
well, I don't like it, but it's necessary for medical progress and for
testing new substances. The truth is the exact opposite. Vivisection
exists only because there is MONEY to be made from it. Vivisection is
the main CAUSE of disease today; also, animal tests have no scientific
validity and are facilitating the destruction of our ecosystem by
passing as 'safe' the avalanche of poisons being poured into the
environment.

The important point here is that vivisection is necessary if we are
going to destroy our planet's life support system with all these
poisons. Conversely, if animal tests did not exist, then accurate and
valid tests would have to be performed, with the result that all these
poisons could not be released into the environment.

So the vivisection swindle is playing a crucial role in the
destruction of the ecosystem.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The truth is so far removed from the fake debates on vivisection
presented in the media, that it takes time to get your brain around
this. It took me a couple of years to get my brain around it fully
back in the 1980s. I never thought at the time that I'd still be
writing articles like this twenty years later.
--------------------------------------------------------------
As the global human family, we collectively acquiesce in vivisection.
Opposition to vivisection has always been muted and deliberately
ineffective (even with the best of intentions).

Why? Why have we let this monster take root in our midst and spread
its slimy tentacles throughout our civilisation, when vivisection is
responsible for wrecking our health and destroying our ecosystem?

It's not just the money angle - the fact that vivisection is the most
lucrative moneyspinner in history. And it's not because we are selfish
or indifferent. It's just that we can't help what we do. We are
amnesia victims, doing what amnesia victims always do: striving to
relive the horrors we are afraid to remember consciously. We are
striving to recreate an ancient catastrophe which was followed by a
global survivalist emergency which degenerated into an orgy of
vampirism and cannibalism, as that was the only way to survive for
about twenty years - until the vegetation grew back. As stated in
"Remember Or Die," there is a dignified way of coping with a
survivalist emergency: the voluntary application of 'the Law of the
Sea.' We are deeply ashamed of that orgy of uncontrolled vampirism and
cannibalism which is the starting point for our civilisation. We have
taken refuge in amnesia, although we ritualise the buried memory every
day as the Christian 'communion.' Stealing the blood and later the
bodies of our gentler brothers and sisters in order to stay alive at
the expense of their deaths - that is the ultimate in exploitation.
It's also the source, the imprint, the template for our civilisation.
That is why exploitation is everywhere. We had to forget. And so, like
all amnesia sufferers, we are striving to relive what we have
forgotten. And the only way to relive it is to produce another global
survivalist emergency, by destroying our ecosystem. And to destroy our
ecosystem we need fraudulent animal tests which facilitate the
ceaseless flow of poisons into the environment.

That explains why we accept the lies about vivisection propagated by
the media and politicians, presenting vivisection as the opposite of
what it actually is. That explains why opposition to vivisection has
always been muted and deliberately ineffective.
-------------------------------------------------------------
To save the environment from destruction, we must abolish vivisection
as a matter of urgency. But we cannot abolish vivisection unless and
until we remember our past and stop trying to relive that ancient
survivalist emergency and that ancient orgy of vampirism and
cannibalism. So everything is connected; everything runs into
everything else.

THUS, CONFRONTING THE TRUTH ABOUT VIVISECTION IS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF
THE HEALING PROCESS, BOTH PERSONAL HEALING AND SOCIETAL HEALING.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Because there is so much money at stake, some 'antivivisection'
organisations are infiltrated by the ruling group and deal only in
deliberately ineffective half-truths.
For reliable information about vivisection, see Hans Ruesch's writings
and those organisations which honestly promote his work.
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
If I send this message to you, take it as a compliment. It is being
sent to you because I judge you to be big enough to understand this
knowledge and to help to spread it - on the basis that confronting the
truth about vivisection is inseparable from both personal healing and
global healing.
------------------------------------------------
related links:

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

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

http://www.nzavs.org.nz/

http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 10:40:40 AM11/11/07

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 10:48:33 AM11/11/07

Exact text of leaflet issued in Leeds, England, in late 1986, which
has stood the test of time:

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

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 !

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 10:55:58 AM11/11/07

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.newl...@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-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...

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

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-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...

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 11:06:02 AM11/11/07

COPY OF EMAIL, November 2006:

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

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.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 11:15:53 AM11/11/07

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.

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 11:24:59 AM11/11/07

Extract from
CIVIS Bulletin Nr 2, New Year 1988 (Part Two)

LIGHTNING RODS

When governments want to infiltrate, say, a Communist cell, they don't
send in uniformed policemen for the task, but much rather carefully
disguised, fist-swinging and slogan-shouting proletarians. Similarly,
when the governments - meaning the Powers-that-be, always closely
allied with the big, job providing industries and the tentacular
"health" organisations - proceed to infiltrate a new, upcoming Animal
Welfare society, they first build up some "recognized, fearless animal
defenders" - who get specially groomed for the task; men or women who
must establish a reputation for themselves by doing all that the
sincere protectors do: vibrantly denouncing the culling of baby seals
on Arctic ice fields, the cruel corridas in exotic Spain, the
massacres of kangaroos in remote Australia, the extermination of
whales in far-flung oceans, the capture of monkeys in African forests,
the shooting of wolves in the Canadian wilds, the hunting of animals
wherever game is left; and when they then even protest the bobbing of
the dogs' ears and tails at home, they are bound to win the gratitude,
respect and loyalty of all true animal defenders.

When then these same men, by now certified animal protectors,
sanctimoniously declare that they would love to see the end of
vivisection, but that to demand abolition is just "unrealistic" for
the time being, how many of their sincere followers would question
their motives? These have been the tactics used by the vivisection and
allied syndicates ever since strict "regulations" have been imposed by
laws which pretended to protect the laboratory animals but in effect
have protected vivisectors only.

In this way all the big animal welfare societies are organized to
function as lightning rods, as magnets that attract the sincere anti-
vivisectionists into their ranks, the easier to lull and paralyze them
with misinformation and false promises: misinformation as to the still
ineluctable necessity of vivisection, and the false promise that it
will be stopped only if and when those animal defenders will lavishly
pour money into the newfangled "funds for alternative, humane
research" - as if animal-based medical research had any scientific
value for which a "replacement" has as yet to be "found".

The first of these fraudulent business enterprises was Britain's FRAME
(Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Research), founded and
directed by British vivisectors. Seeing AV contributions pouring
generously into their coffers, they concluded that they may have hit
on the greatest scientific discovery since skinless frankfurters, so
those "funds for finding alternatives" quickly proliferated and grew,
to the delight of the international vivisection family - in
Switzerland, West Germany, Austria, Italy, etc. They serve a double
purpose. They syphon off money that should be spent informing the
public about the uselessness and counter-productiveness of
vivisection, and then direct these moneys straight into the
vivisectors' pockets, with which to buy pleasure yachts and more
laboratory animals with which to be able to continue traditional
pseudo-research.

In fact the huge funds the Revlon company "donated" (from its
advertising budget) to the University of New York as far back as 1980,
publicizing its intention of "developing alternatives" to the
notorious Draize test on rabbits' eyes for the production of
cosmetics, (as reported in our CIVIS Bulletin Nr 1) has to this day
achieved nothing else but to persuade the animal welfare societies,
who had launched the boycott against Revlon, to call it off again.
Jean Pink's and Gill Langley's AA was one of them. Meanwhile the sale
of Revlon products continued unabated - and so did the Draize tests on
rabbits' eyes. Vivisectors have grown richer thanks to those funds for
"alternatives", and the heads of the welfare societies who called off
the boycott just when it was beginning to worry the manufacturers have
not grown any poorer either.

Wrote Italy's Prof. Pietro Croce, MD, well known pathologist,
microbiologist, researcher, lecturer at Milan University and author of
medical treatises, in his book Vivisection or Science - a Choice:

"There is no alternative to vivisection, because any other method, to
be called an alternative to it, should have its same qualities; but it
is impossible to find anything in biomedical research that is, and
always was, equally misleading, false, deceitful and dishonest as
vivisection. That is why the methods we propose to medical research
must be called scientific methods rather than alternatives." And the
professor goes on showing in his book what these scientific methods
are.

BRITAIN FIRST IN INFILTRATION

Because Great Britain was the first country in the world to introduce,
as far back as 1876, an apparently very strict legislation, designed
to curb vivisection drastically - at a time when the practice was
still in its infancy - it was also the country where the vivisection
interests have had more time and reason to develop and perfect
countermeasures. The first of these was infiltration into, and
subsequent take-over of, the protectionist societies, whose duty if
was to make sure that those strict laws be ruthlessly enforced,
instead of being systematically circumvented, as has been the case.

In the USA there are no laws capable of seriously interfering with the
activities of the vivisectors and of their natural allies - the
medical, chemical and animal breeders' syndicates - because even the
cruelest experiments, including those that any layman can recognize as
utterly senseless, are permitted there in the name of a "Science" that
is being revered as a national divinity, whose motives it would be
boorish and unpatriotic to question. So what little infiltration
exists in American societies is amateurish, compared to some of its
European counterparts.

In Great Britain the entire "anti-vivisection" movement is bogus,
solidly controlled by experienced professionals, mostly veterans of
the research laboratories, who claim to have recanted their former
trade, like Richard Ryder and Gill Langley, or are still engaged in
it, like Michael Balls and some of the other directors of FRAME (Fund
for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments). Let us examine
some of them.

RICHARD D RYDER

To rate the definition of "greatest and sincerest anti-vivisectionist
in the UK", Mr Richard D Ryder, Senior Clinical Psychologist at
Warneford Hospital, Oxford, had first of all to stop working on
animals, as he admitted having done for his confessedly useless
"psychological" studies, and then to write a book, Victims of Science,
in which he chidingly described the long series of horrors he had
"witnessed" in laboratories on both sides of the Atlantic. He only
described his colleagues' experiments, not his own. Also missing from
all his written and spoken denunciations is any indication of the
damaging, tragic counter-productivity of vivisection; instead, there
are innumerable, indirect and very subtle endorsements of it - the
kind that most uninformed readers or listeners won't recognise as
such.

In 1979, in an address to a hopeful A V crowd at Oxford University, he
assured the audience that "not all animal experiments can be dispensed
with". If a repentant, so outspoken and "sincere" scientist sets up
such a claim, how many "unscientific" laymen would dare doubt his
word?

In fact, in his role as Britain's topmost "anti-vivisectionist",
endorsed as such by all the leading A V societies, he represents
British anti-vivisectionism in all national and international
discussions and political hearings - as in the European Council at
Strasbourg. In these hearings he let all the traditional untruths of
the vivisection propagandists - mostly British Parliamentarians like
Lord Adrian, a lobbyist for the chemical interests, and University
professors like assiduous vivisector W.D.M. Paton of Oxford - go
undisputed, thus validating them by silence, although he was accorded
plenty of time and occasions to refute them authoritatively.

Details of the proceedings at the European Council at Strasbourg -
which were organized and dominated by the British chemo-medical
combine and culminated into the acceptance in Brussels of the
scandalous "new" Convention which imposes the cruelest alibi tests on
animals for many decades to come, even to countries where no such
experiments had been
compulsory before, like Spain - are to be found in the CIVIS Bulletin
Nr 1, published in 1983 and repeatedly reprinted since.

We present a few more examples of Richard Ryder's covert propaganda
for vivisection, too subtle to be recognized as such by unalerted
readers. In Victims of Science we find statements like the following
ones (and many more of the same kind, always in reference to
vivisection):

p. 11: "A large amount of the research which is done is trivial and
the knowledge gained has no medical importance". (This implies that
some animal research has medical importance.)

p. 11: "It must not be forgotten that this knowledge could often have
been acquired by other means." (This suggests that sometimes this
(unspecified) knowledge could only have been acquired through
vivisection.)

p. 57: "Very often the validity of much of the research can be
questioned." (This short sentence, a classic of its kind, suggests
that sometimes the validity of this research is indisputable. But one
cannot dispute where no examples are given.)

p. 57: "In the examples of medical research I have cited (tobacco
experiments, infliction of bums, monkey head transplants) the validity
of much of the work is certainly dubious." (This implies that the
validity of some of this work is not dubious.)

Ryder's book as well as his numerous conferences, many of which are
still being published and circulated by the British A V societies, are
generously endowed with similar statements that can only be regarded
as plugs for vivisection, the more effective for being voiced by a
leading "anti-vivisectionists", in fact the Number One in Great
Britain; to wit, from his pamphlet, titled Scientific Cruelty for
Commercial Profits:

p. 1: "Physiologists doing fundamental research that could and dill
sometimes produce striking benefits for mankind."

p. 2: "The really high-grade medical research work being done..." (The
reader is left to wonder what this might be.)

Dr GILL LANGLEY, MA, PHD, FRSM, MIBIOL

Another trained vivisector, who at the time of this writing (Summer
1987) was still directing the scientific information of a major
British A V society and soliciting funds for "alternative" research,
is Dr Gill Langley of Animal Aid (AA). In the early '80s, after being
fired - for incompetence - as Technical Adviser from BUAV, she managed
in some undisclosed way to take over the advisory department of AA,
Britain's youngest and fastest growing A V society, replacing Jean
Pink, who had founded it in 1977.

At one time, Jean Pink had been considered The Great White Hope of
anti-vivisectionism in Great Britain, to the point of becoming known,
at home and abroad, as la pasionaria, thanks to her drive and
uncompromising ways. But one day she surprised everybody by suddenly
deciding to get out of it all, to surrender the most important
department of her and any other AV society, the Information, to Dr
Gill Langley, whom she had previously taken on as "Technical Advisor",
and to withdraw to private life without any explanation, to the
disappointment and dismay of her many devoted followers, some of whom
had poured considerable sums of money into her kitty. One more
blighted hope of British anti-vivisectionists.

Having acquired a free hand in AA, Gill Langley lost no time plugging
the Fund for Alternative research that she was running from her home
and palming off to gullible AA members this fund for "alternative"
methods as their only hope for an "eventual" end to vivisection.

Alternative funds can only thrive so long as the laymen can be made to
believe that vivisection is useful and saves human lives. Besides
asserting this innumerable times, Dr Gill Langley made great efforts
to discredit Naked Empress in the eyes of the anti-vivisectionists
when it came out in 1983, by calling it "filled with inaccuracies" in
the book review she published in Outrage, AA's organ, but very
shrewdly failing to name any. What she wanted to pass off as
"inaccurate" was of course the mass of precisely documented health
damages, incontrovertibly due to animal experimentation, which the
book listed.

Meanwhile she conducted an intense private correspondence designed to
discredit Hans Ruesch and the scientific works of CIVIS still further,
while propagandizing alleged blessings derived from vivisection.

In a letter about us but sent to Norman Giffard of Greater Manchester
she wrote among other things:

"There are three main areas where I disagree with HaIls Ruesch.
Firstly I do not believe that any advance made in medicine is quite
independent of animal experiments. Secondly I disagree with Ruesch
that there are enough validated and applied non-animal research
techniques to replace animal experiments." (She could not keep up her
begging organization if she stated differently, ie the truth. H.R.).

"Thirdly I think Ruesch is wrong about the so-called infiltration of
the British anti-vivisection movement. We have been subjected to a
lengthy campaign of misinformation and vilification by Ruesch and his
supporters, which has caused me to lose any respect for him."

In the same letter she makes a deliberate misstatement when she says:

"So I believe that as a tactic, concentrating solely on the medical
irrelevance of animal experiments rather than the ethical argument
against them, will not be effective."

But we never said that "A Vs must concentrate solely on medical
arguments." Instead, we always said that "A Vs must not concentrate
solely on ethical arguments", meaning they must not deliberately
ignore the enormous arsenal of medical arguments that is at their
disposal. Ignoring it is treason to the A V cause.

And obviously Gill Langley does not like this reasoning. But now a
question arises: what is such a firm believer in vivisection as Gill
Langley doing at the head of an A V society? Is it only to draw money
into the fund for alternatives that she runs from her home? And
otherwise to misinform the members?

-----------------------------
End of extract from Bulletin Number 2, by Hans Ruesch.

ishta...@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 12:08:31 PM11/11/07

Copy of email sent 11 Nov 2007
-------------------------------------------------------

Old Jinglebollocks to bava, nzavs, hera, sue marston, etc.

Please fwd this to other half-awake people such as Bina Robinson,
Javier Burgos, Bette Overell etc.

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

This was a futile gesture.
Flooding the internet with our message, the way Islamic fascists are
doing, would not be enough in itself. Only the Citizens Arrest
proposal could have brought any success, and in fact it *could* have
achieved total success, a total end to the avalanche of "animal
tested" (=untested) poisons by the mid-1990s.
http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

The suppression of the Citizens Arrest Initiative in 1990 marked the
end of the scientific antivivisection movement.
You surrendered formally to the vivisection syndicate in 1990,
declaring yourselves to be vivisectionists by default.

We need to be honest about this now, and take a look at the
psychological impairment in us which caused us to refuse to put an end
to that avalanche of "animal tested" (=untested) poisons that will
soon destroy us.
Some of us have children.
To bequeath to our children a continually expanding ocean of "animal
tested" (=untested) poisons which will wreck their lives and their
civilisation - this shows us to be very severely mentall ill, given
that the means to stop the flow of "animal tested" (=untested) poisons
was there, meaning the Citizens Arrest proposal of 1990.

For me, the old habits die hard, so I've appended a few items under
this silly post on uk.legal.
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.legal/browse_thread/thread/eace1e810c9fa428/c28893ae6b7fabf2#c28893ae6b7fabf2

I'll post this email on the same thread, just for completeness.

-for healing,

Peter Newman
"All Our Songs Are Sad" / "I Still Miss Someone"
http://www.network54.com/Forum/57466/thread/1193285565/last-1193285565/I+Still+Miss+Someone
=======================================

ishta...@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 1:04:53 PM11/11/07

REPLY TO ORIGINAL POST:
------------------------------------------------

On Nov 11, 2:27 pm, TONY-GAL <from_...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> TO: All People Who Care
>
> The European Commission is currently reviewing Directive 86/609/EEC,
> which sets out the rules for animal experimentation across the whole
> of Europe. There is still time to make a difference to the final
> draft.
>
> A new European Chemical Testing Policy called REACH proposes to Test
> 30,000 Chemicals of every kind - from those used in industrial
> processes to the ingredients of consumer products - on Millions of
> animals from mice to fish to dogs, causing untold suffering. This
> Directive should help these animals while still improving standards.
>
> The European Commission itself acknowledges that non-animal
> replacements "...have the potential to provide robust information
> through quality-controlled, state-of-the-art tests which are faster
> and less cost-intensive than classical animal-based tests".
>
> It has launched a Community Action Plan for the Protection and Welfare
> of Animals. This explicitly states "The final aim is to replace animal
> experiments with methods not entailing the use of an animal."
>
> It is in all our interest that Animal Testing is replaced with
> Alternatives based on Human Biology not Animals.
>
> For evidence that superior Alternative Research & Testing is replacing

> Animal Testing visithttp://www.drhadwentrust.org/

>
> Please sign "Replace all Animal Experiments in Europe"http://www.endeuanimaltests.org/
>
> Now political pressure is needed to encourage EU legislators to do
> everything they can to maximise non-animal replacement efforts.
>
> Contact your MEPs and urge them to use the revision process of
> Directive 86/609/EEC as an opportunity to improve the Standards of
> Animal Welfare in European Laboratories and make replacing with
> Alternatives a priority.
>

> For contact details of your MEPs visithttp://www.europarl.europa.eu

>
> If you want to do more:-
> Over 10,000 primates are used in experiments in Europe every year with
> the UK being Europe's largest single user followed by France and
> Germany.
>
> Please write to the European Commission and ask them to ban primate

> tests. To help, a prepared letter can be found athttp://www.eceae.org/saveprimates/en/action.html

>
> Please tell your friends and colleagues to do the same.
>

> More information on Animal Testing fromhttp://www.peta.org/http://www.buav.org
>
> For information on Revision of Directive 86/609/EEChttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/revision_en.htm

>
> Everyone can help and you can make a difference.
>
> Thank You
>
> Tony, Nottingham, England

======================================
From: "ishta...@ntlworld.com" <ishta...@ntlworld.com>
To: "TONY-GAL" <from...@hotmail.co.uk>
CC: (withheld)
Subject: Re: Improve Standards of Animal Welfare in European
Laboratories
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:52:00 -0000
=============================================

Dear Tony,

This is a lost cause, as they all surrendered in 1990. The
antivivisection movement came to an end in 1990, as explained in the
messages I've appended to your uk.legal post.

Assuming you are genuine, you need to familiarise yourself with the
complexities of the anitvivisection movement, and the *FAKE DEBATES*
promoted by people like Gill Langley, that keep the gravy train
rolling.

PETA are not to be trusted either. They're just a repeat performance
of "The Kathryn Reynolds Show."

If you want to get real, start with Hans Ruesch's "bulletins," of
which crucial extracts are quoted at the BAVA website.

You can't be serious when you suggest that writing to MEPs is
useful....... ?
By the 1980s at the very latest, we knew that was wholly futile.

The only way to fight vivisection WAS through the Citizens Arrest
Inititative of 1990, which was rejected by all antivivisectionists
worldwide, thus showing that we are suffering from a severe mental
impairment, which we need to analyse now.

Your present activity became recognised as futile decades ago.

I hope this is helpful.

for healing,

-Peter Newman
=============================
See information in my above posts.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 11, 2007, 5:49:20 PM11/11/07

And of course if we push this too hard, Vernon Coleman will re-emerge
from the shadows and start putting prominent adverts in the London
newspapers. These people are so predictable.

+++He who comes closest to telling the truth is the worst liar of all,
because he will lead many astray.+++

Mark Hazelwood had them sussed all right:
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Anytime the disinfo crew wants to cover up a story, they decide to
back it, own it, and create it the way they would want you to see it.
They do this by setting up their own to-become so-called experts to
write and talk about a subject, form e-groups and websites, and then
take you on their journey of mainly phoney watered-down information,
all the while claiming to inform you of the best information
available. In their tactics they will call what they are trying to
cover up extreme, radical, and the people that are giving out real
info will be blocked and ridiculed. They hate when any mention of
their tactics is brought forth like this and will blatantly protest
against it, revealing who they are."

--Mark Hazelwood, July 2004.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 12, 2007, 2:44:27 AM11/12/07

Extract from "CIVIS Bulletin number 1" by Hans Ruesch:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

BRITAIN'S ANTI-HANS RUESCH FRONT

Colin Smith, former Secretary of the London-based NAVS, current
director of its international offshoot, IAAPEA, reviewing Hans
Ruesch's 1982 AV book, NAKED EMPRESS, in NAVS' bi-monthly Animals'
Defender: "HANS RUESCH DOES THE AV MOVEMENT MUCH HARM"

Thus the roster of milquetoasts, incompetents, infiltrators, and
vivisectors who have been running the British AV movement in a way
that has enabled Great Britain to emerge as the Bulwark of Vivisection
at the recent Hearings of the European Council in Strasbourg, have
officially completed their united front against the AV works of Hans
Ruesch, the internationally known novelist. The British front was
started when his first AV book Slaughter of the Innocent appeared in
New York in 1978 under the imprint of America's biggest publishing
house, Bantam Books. It was the first book that abandoned the
traditionally apologetic and defensive stand of antivivisectionism in
favor of a lucid and formidably documented attack on animal-based
medical research, accusing such research as being not only useless,
but damaging to the point where modern medicine is widely being
regarded as the principal cause of disease today.

As the first AV book to win the praise of a large number of medical
people, Slaughter gave new hopes to thousands of frustrated anti-
vivisectionists, and brought the message of abolitionism to uncounted
thousands of English-speaking people all over the world, as it had
done in Italy two years earlier, where the original edition had
appeared in Rizzoli's publishing empire.

But like all novelty, Slaughter alarmed the entrenched, and by the
time the book came out in England in 1979 under the imprint of Futura
Publications, Britain's rich, old established AV societies were fully
prepared against the calamity: they stonewalled it with total silence,
except BUAV, the oldest and richest of the lot, which launched a
furious diatribe against it.

WHY?

Question: Why would any AV society want to discredit an AV book that
was making converts by the thousands, including, for the first time,
many medical people? Answer: Obviously, an honest, sterling society
wouldn't. Only an infiltrated society would. Because Slaughter was the
first of close to a hundred previous books on vivisection that
exploded the myth of the utility of the practice. It brought massive
evidence - corroborated by an abstract of the history of medicine and
the opinions of hundreds of medical authorities - that animal
experimentation could be stopped today, and medical science and human
health would not suffer from its elimination, but much rather greatly
benefit by it.

WHO WOULD SUFFER THROUGH ABOLITION?

1) The various animal breeders associations, like the multinational
Charles River Breeding Laboratories, Inc., one of the fastest growing
stocks over the past few years;

2) The manufacturers of accessories to the immense carnage: feed,
cages, restraining and stereotaxic devices, and the vast arsenal of
surgical and torture instruments;

3) The politicians who keep pocketing large sums from the vivisections
lobbies, bent on keeping the profitable system alive and growing;

4) The pharmaceutical companies, of course, who require scapegoats for
the poisons they manage to palm off on a gullible world population as
indispensable for health, whereas they are indispensable only for
their own profit;

5) The self-styled Humane societies, including most, if not all, the
largest old established and therefore totally infiltrated SPCAs in the
UK: the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, whose
patron is the Queen, and the majority, if not the totality, of the
sclerotic AV organisations whose various "Funds for Alternative
Research" are their most profitable nest egg.

In fact, those AV societies' favorite appeal today reads: "The more
money you contribute to our Fund for Alternatives, the quicker will
vivisection vanish." It sounds like stringent logic to the simple-
minded, who fail to realize that advocating the necessity of finding
"alternatives" merely confirms the validity of animal-based research,
which in fact has no validity at all.

Obviously, the fact that vivisection could be stopped today, thereby
greatly benefiting human health, should be widely and stentorously
advertised by the AV societies, who should instruct their members
accordingly, organize marches on Parliament and Downing Street. But
then their "Funds for Replacement" would make no sense. To persuade
the uninformed AVs to contribute generously to those unnecessary but
lucrative Funds and Trusts, it is necessary first of all to convince
the members that animal experimentation is useful, indeed
indispensable - at least "for the time being". And in this the British
(and many other) societies have been eminently successful.

No "alternative" could ever be developed to "study" crap like this:

"An attempt has been made to assess the effect of injury (limb
ischaemia, scald) on the central serotoninergic system of the rat by
studying the effect of these injuries on the tryptophan concentration,
the tryptophan hydroxylase activity and the metabolism of serotonin in
the hypothalamus, mid-brain and hind-brain. The effects of a serotin
uptake inhibitor and an antagonist on the survival time and mortality
rate after limb ischaemia have been examined as well as the effects of
central lesions produced by the injection of 5,6- and
5,7dihydroxytryptamine into a lateral cerebral ventricle and the i.p.
injection (+)4-cloroamphetamine . . ."

It goes on and on, indicating that millions of rats have been
traumatized, scalded, injured in every way ever devised by mad
scientists, who then continue to be fascinated and baffled at the same
time at the sight of what they did: "No definite conclusion can be
drawn. . . The functional state of 5HT neurons cannot be assessed. . .
The interpretation of these tests may be difficult. . . They can
probably provide the best biochemical evidence. . ."

In coming Bulletins, CIVIS will translate cryptic sample passages from
such prestigious, pseudo-scientific publications as British
Experimental Pathology into everyday English. They will demonstrate,
even to the least discriminating reader, that, like the squid, today's
laboratory laborers surround themselves with clouds of ink just to
escape their pursuers, but produce nothing else. Even the most naive
layperson will then recognize that the Empress that passes for medical
research today is naked indeed.

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 12, 2007, 9:53:36 AM11/12/07

THE VIVISECTION SWINDLE - its paradoxical healing potential

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

For a full understanding of the human condition and of the
increasingly strange reports in our newspapers, you need to make a
brief but intensive study of The Vivisection Swindle.

It became clear to me back in the 1980s that The Vivisection Swindle
must be interpreted as a prominent symptom of a very severe mental
illness afflicting all human beings. It also became clear that The
Vivisection Swindle indicates a collective death wish on the part of
humanity - a collective determination to destroy the earth's life
support system and return ourselves to the state of survivalist
emergency.

The majority of human beings are not going to face this. It's too
embarrassing for a start. The Vivisection Swindle takes away from us
the world we thought we were living in. The Vivisection Swindle also
takes from us what we thought was our self-respect and makes it
impossible for us to have any respect for other human beings. It
reveals the human species to be pathetic, to be very severely mentally
ill, to be extremely stupid, to be lacking in moral courage, and to be
automatons who can be programmed to believe anything, yes literally
anything.

Not many will go there. Not many will be willing to face up to seeing
ourselves as we really are.

In other terms, The Vivisection Swindle is our mirror.

Do you have the guts to look in a REAL mirror, to see ourselves as we
REALLY are?

If you are willing to confront and analyse the human condition, the
best place to start is at pages 9 to 11 of 'IMPERATRICE NUDA' - see
"IMPERATRICE NUDA revisited" - reproduced below and elsewhere. It is
obvious to anyone who reads pages 9 to 11 of 'IMPERATRICE NUDA' that
The Vivisection Swindle is the greatest disaster to befall humanity in
the past 2,700 years - a far greater disaster than World War Two -
because The Vivisection Swindle is steadily poisoning our bodies,
enfeebling our brains and is now close to destroying the earth's life
support system and plunging us back into a state of survivalist
emergency. Hence my slogan of 1987:
WE ARE NOT GOING TO ABOLISH VIVISECTION,
VIVISECTION IS GOING TO ABOLISH US!

Next - think of the *fake debate* on The Vivisection Swindle in the
media, the *fake debate* which eclipses the truth: "animal experiments
have brought great benefits to humanity, but we want bigger cages for
these poor animals, and perhaps some of these experiments may not
really be necessary, and are these poor animals anethesised.... and so
on...." Everyone is colluding in this *fake debate* , including the so-
called 'antivivisection' groups. In fact there is no such thing as an
antivivisectionist. Nobody, anywhere in the world, is opposed to
vivisection. I have demonstrated that conclusively, both in 1986 and
in 1990.

I did not understand the psychology behind The Vivisection Swindle
until 2005. It's explained at the link below titled "Vivisection and
its Crucial Role in the Scheme of Things." The collective amnesia and
collective repetition compulsion revealed by Immanuel Velikovsky
connects intimately with The Vivisection Swindle. The avalanche of
"animal tested" (=UNTESTED) poisons pouring out of the vivisection
laboratories is the major tool being employed by humanity to destroy
the earth's life support system so as to return us to a state of
survivalist emergency, thus enabling us to recreate and relive the
forgotten series of traumas which sent us into amnesia in the first
place.

If we are honest, we'll take it further than that. You can never solve
a problem until you first state the problem exactly as it is. It is
best to call everything by its proper name.

It is necessary to say the following. All human beings, without any
exception anywhere, are very severely mentally ill. Collectively we
are hopelessly stupid and pathetically inadequate and cowardly.

'Cowardly' does not refer to fear of physical pain.
It's about our terror of seeing ourselves as we actually are.
Our insanity, our stupidity, our inadequacy can be 'excused,' if you
feel the need to do so, by recalling the terrifying nature of the near-
collisions between the earth and other planets which drove us insane
and drained our emotional strength out of us. How could our minds have
endured such horrors without succumbing to the collective insanity and
collective stupidity that is evident in our history books and still
today in our newspapers? How else could we have reacted to such
'unthinkable' traumas?

THE PARADOXICAL CURE FOR OUR MENTAL ILLNESS

The job will not do itself.

Our immediate purpose in life, our major evolutionary task, is to cure
ourselves of our mental illness and our stupidity and our cowardice.
That is also our practical imperative, if we want to end the terrible
pain we are inflicting on ourselves as a result of our insanity and
our stupidity and our cowardice.

The first step has to be to state the problem as it is, in stark and
realistic language. We have to admit that we collectively are very
severely mentally ill, that we collectively are hopelessly stupid,
that we collectively have been cowardly and inadequate in our approach
to life and its problems.

If you can't see that yet, the surest way to force yourself into
reality is to study The Vivisection Swindle and the universally
accepted *fake debate* on vivisection in the media and in the bogus
"antivivisection" groups. After that you will have no respect for
yourself and no respect for other human beings, in the sense that it
is difficult to respect a species that is severely mentally ill,
extremely stupid, and lacks the moral backbone to see itself as it
really is and to make a start at the healing process.

HOPE

If we can face up to what has just been stated, then, paradoxically,
in doing so, we have regained some of our sanity, wisdom and moral
courage.

'Schoolboy poetry' in iambic tetrameter is known to be an effective
tool for 'reprogramming' the human mind. The 'Prayer to Ishtar' is not
outstanding literature, but its healing potential is enormous....

"...But when you're asked to make a start
You turn away too faint of heart
And run to hire a bogus "seer"
Who'll tell you what you want to hear
'THE JOB WILL DO ITSELF!' he'll say
And you'll forget you have to pay
With labour and the loss of pride
The only way to turn the tide..... "

"Loss of pride" is a major key to healing.

And nothing is more effective for draining your hauteur out of you
than a study of The Vivisection Swindle and the *fake debate* on
vivisection in the media and in the fake and fraudulent
"antivivisection" groups and websites.

(The *fake debate* takes on a certain subtlety at times. The maxim is:
'he who comes closest to telling the truth is the worst liar of all,
because he will mislead the many.')

When you understand clearly that The Vivisection Swindle, and the
universal *fake debate* which keeps The Vivisection Swindle alive, are
symptoms of very severe mental illness and also proof of extreme
stupidity and absence of any moral courage on the part of the entire
human race - when you understand that clearly, you are halfway home,
halfway to regaining your ancient purity, decency and sanity.

And then we can go back to the Garden.
==========================================

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

IMPERATRICE NUDA REVISITED

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 12, 2007, 4:25:46 PM11/12/07

THE HANS RUESCH STORY by Douglas Leith

In June 2003 I had the honour of meeting a man who is truly the
founder of scientific anti-vivisectionism and the most effective anti-
vivisectionist in the world, Hans Ruesch. He has been accepted
recently alongside Marx, Darwin, Plato and others in a recent book
called "Ideas that Changed the World".

I admit I was unaware that he was still alive until shortly before
then. I was travelling in Europe and decided I would go through Lugano
in Switzerland for the purpose of meeting the man who is a hero to me
and would be to anyone who knows the truth about vivisection and his
tireless efforts to expose and stop it.

I met an 89 year old man, very modest and not requiring my compliments
and still writing a book in four languages without help despite ill
health and constant persecution which caused him to leave his country
for years.

After writing to him I had the good fortune to receive a reply, which
is unusual for such a busy man. In it he said that at eighty nine he
was reaching the end of his rainbow and I replied that if anyone's
life could be described as such then his could.

Let me paraphrase from "1000 Doctors (and many more) Against
Vivisection".

"Born in 1913 as a Swiss citizen to a Swiss couple who was living in
Naples, Italy. He grew up multilingual, studying first in Italy and
then both in the German and French speaking parts of Switzerland -
Zurich and Geneva. As a very young man he embarked in a car racing
career which took him all over Europe and Africa. He established two
world records at nineteen and went on to win the British Grand Prix of
the time.

But he felt that literature was his calling, and in 1938 he sailed to
the USA, where he was one of the few European writers to succeed in
publishing short stories and articles in Americas leading magazines
and newspapers of the time. In 1950 Harper Brothers published his
first American novel, set among the Eskimos: "Top of the World", which
in 1989 sold over 3 million copies world wide and was also filmed,
starring Anthony Quinn. Kirk Douglas starred in another film taken
from one of Ruesch's novels, "The Racer".

Having also studied medicine, he worked in the 1950s as a medical
editor. It was in this capacity that he gradually discovered the fraud
inherent to the industrialized, money spinning, disease producing
vivisectionist practice.

In 1973 when his latest novel, "Back to the Top of the World" was
released, Ruesch announced that he was never going to write fiction
again so long as the fraud of vivisection was not generally exposed,
and from then on he dedicated all his efforts to this end.

His first book about the cruelty and counterproductivity of the
practice, "Slaughter of the Innocent", first appeared in Italy's
publishing empire of Rizzoli in 1976 and in New York (Bantam) in
1978."Naked Empress" (1982) exposed the dire consequences that
medicine and humanity have derived from an erroneous method of
"research", and "1000 Doctors..." shows that a growing number of
people share his views. Vivisection based medicine is in fact being
increasingly recognised as the principal cause of disease today."

Bette Overell, former leader of the New Zealand Anti-Vivisection
Society said in her excellent book "Animal Research Takes Lives",
1993, (available from www.nzavs.org.nz), "Shocked by what he
discovered, in 1974 Ruesch founded his own Center for Scientific
Information on Vivisection (CIVIS), a publishing house dedicated
exclusively to the fight against vivisection, from which he despatches
regular foundation reports in many languages. In 1979 Ruesch's
'Slaughter of the Innocent" was the breakthrough which altered the
whole concept and course of the 'anti-vivisection movement'. Revealing
that vivisection is not merely a question of cruelty to animals, but
also the vital international alibi which paves the way, through fraud
and conspiracy, to solid gold profits. In Great Britain the book
lasted a few short weeks before being banned from the shelves.

Abandoning his lucrative literary career Ruesch pledged to devote the
remainder of his life to this cause. He has been highly successful,
not only in becoming the recognised father of the new abolitionist
movement, but for his many subsequent powerful works on the subject.

In 1985 Ruesch was a key figure in the Swiss Referendum Against
Vivisection, when on December 18 of that year a third of the Swiss
population voted in favour of abolition. In October 1987 he helped
launch the first ever International League of Doctors Against
Vivisection of which he was made Honourary President. The worlds most
sought after exponent of abolition, Ruesch undertakes a gruelling
lecture circuit, debates with adversaries at symposia, addresses
internatioinal congresses and is a well known figure on European and
American radio and television.

He is the draw card which leads marches and addresses rallies, always
dispensing the facts as they are. Many organisations worldwide have
been formed to support Hans Ruesch, whose name, and rightly so, since
we and future generations are in his debt, is already carved in
history".

If you have never heard of him I am not surprised for his books and
work have been kept out of the public eye very effectively since his
first anti-vivisection book "Slaughter of the Innocent" was published
in 1978.

This book exposed vivisection for what it is, a massive hidden fraud
which not only kills 300 million (nearly all unanaesthetised) animals
a year but is also the largest cause of human illness and death, a
fact which has been very well hidden from all of us. Why is it so well
hidden?

Primarily because extremely powerful industries rely on fraudulent
animal "tests" to pass their products as "safe" so as to avoid
litigation for the damage which they cause constantly, the careers of
many "academics" rely on vivisection as an alibi for publishing papers
and the "medical research" business relies on it for constant
"breakthjroughs" without ever curing a disease and thereby ensuring
constant business. The media relies on these for advertising income
and often outright ownership and the government receives "donations"
from them so influencing the education and legal systems. They also
infiltrate groups who claim to be opposed to vivisection.

So we have some very powerful enemies. We can defeat them by
expressing the truth about vivisection. To do this firstly we must
inform ourselves and the works of Hans Ruesch are essential reading
for anyone who is opposed to what Mahatma Gandhi called "the blackest
of all of the black crimes ever committed against God and his fair
creation." Do not let the vivisectors succeed in stopping the truth
from being heard as they have done by stopping his books. These books
are more empowering than disturbing. If you have ever had no answer
when someone has said "What would you rather kill, a baby or a rat?"
then you must read these books before they are completely suppressed.

For Hans Ruesch anti-viv books please contact him at the address
below. The site which was selling his books has gone and my writing to
them has received no response. Please go to www.nzavs.org.nz for Bette
Overells excellent book, www.dlrm.org for other excellent books or
contact Mr Ruesch at Fondazione Hans Ruesch, POB 152, Via Motta 51,
6900 Massagno - Switzerland to receive his newsletter

Vivisection is not only an unspeakable crime within itself but it is
the basis of virtually all environmental and human pollutants on earth
and its industries (particularly the petro chemical and pharmaceutical
industries which vivisect 150 million animals a year) are fundamental
in causing war and bringing about the end of life on earth. Yet
virtually no one is aware of vivisection, so successful has been the
fraud. Please empower yourself to stop vivisection now for the sake of
all living things.

"Conclusions drawn from animal research, when applied to humans are
likely to delay progress, mislead and do harm to the patient.
Vivisection, or animal experimentation, should be abolished." Dr
Moniem A Fadali. For over a thousand more quotes against vivisection
by eminent doctors and scientists see "1000 Doctors and many more
Against Vivisection" by Hans Ruesch.
--------------------------

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 12, 2007, 7:27:37 PM11/12/07

CIVIS Foundation Report 5, Spring 1989 (Part 2)

THE ONE BILLION DOLLARS AVAILABLE TO ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUPS COULD STOP
VIVISECTION IF POOLED TO PUBLICIZE THE FRAUD IT REPRESENTS INSTEAD OF
UNDERHANDEDLY SUSTAINING IT (continued)

BRITISH FUNDS

While the shameful "Vivisectors' Charter", officially known as The
Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act of 1986 was quietly being pushed
through Parliament, and it would have been the duty of every British
AV society to publicize what was happening, few Brits even heard of
it. An article in the Guardian of Feb. 28, 1986 revealed that NAVS,
one of Britain's major AV societies, had allocated only £10,000 for a
national campaign against the bill!

However, a set of bank statements addressed to Ms Jan Creamer, NAVS
Gen. Secretary, on June 20, 1988 by the firm of Leopold Joseph & Sons
LTD, 31-45 Gresham Street, London, and signed by Michael F. Quicke,
Joint Managing Director, revealed that the total value of funds
available to NAVS at June, 17, 1988 was at least £939,975.22, plus
accrued interest.

For many years the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals (RSPCA) was the worldwide symbol of Britain's much touted love
for animals, but at the same time the staunchest though covert
upholder of vivisection. (Patrons: Her Gracious Majesty the Queen and
the Queen Mother.)

On December 1st, 1988 the Times reported: "In 1988 Dorothy Walker left
£2.7 million to the RSPCA. It was the largest legacy the RSPCA had
ever received. Legacies provided £12 million of the RSPCA's income of
£18 million last year, the sixth year running in which its financial
position has strengthened."

What does the RSPCA do with the money at its disposal? It invests it
mainly in profitable enterprises, which happen to use laboratory
animals. As an article in Time Out of May 23-29, 1985 revealed: '...
Details of the investments are contained in a narrowly circulated
securities valuation compiled by Lazard Securities Ltd...holdings in
Glaxo, Beechams, Boots, Fisons, Unilever, British Petroleum and ICI -
all substantial consumers of lab animals....The revelation is certain
to cause the society extreme embarrassment, coming as it does in the
week it is due to pronounce upon the Government's controversial White
Paper, "Scientific Experiments on Living Animals." The RSPCA's own
chief scientific officer Judith Hampson was among the 16-strong team
that helped frame the proposed legislation...'

Another article in the Daily Mail of June 7, 1988, opened with this
sentence: 'The RSPCA has been accused by its own members of hoarding
more than £40 million. The fortune,

amassed over the last six years, came largely from the will of
dedicated animal lovers who left legacies to help combat cruelty. '

CIVIS was unable to find in any of those articles, filled primarily
with money talks and the word "cruelty", the slightest hint at the
word "vivisection", and its counter-productivity.

To complete our One Billion Dollar estimate, let us keep in mind the
moneys continuously poured into the "Alternative" fraud funds, not
only in GB but also on the Continent, all established by well known,
long-time supporters of vivisection, like the many big national
associations affiliated to the WSPA.

FUND BALANCES

The Fifteen Wealthiest Animal Organizations (from available records)

Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals -
$43,769,227

North Shore Animal League (New York) - $15,130,772

Animal Rescue League (Boston) (1982) - $12,906,693

Humane Society of the United States (D.C.) - $11,406,544

Bide-a-Wee Home Association (New York) - $11,003,265

Connecticut Humane Society - $8,477,529

San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals -
$7,778,632

Anti-Cruelty Society (Chicago) - $6,553,285

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (New York) -
$6,089,178

Los Angeles Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals -
$4,442,562

American Anti-Vivisection Society (Pennsylvania) - $2,899,974

New England Anti-Vivisection Society (Boston) - $2,835,643

Peninsula Humane Society (California) - $2,734,770

National Anti-Vivisection Society (Chicago) - $2,394,408

American Humane Association (Denver) - $2,275,286

ANNUAL COMPENSATION

Employees of Organizations earning over $40,000 per year (from
available records)

John Hoyt (President, Humane Society of the United States) - $100,965

Belton Mouras (President, Animal Protection Institute) - $100,035

David Claflin (Executive Director, Massachusetts SPCA) - $77,120

Paul lrwin (Treasurer, Humane Society of the United States) $72,417

Murdaugh Madden (Vice President, Humane Society of the United States)
- $69,219

George Trapp (Managing Director, National Anti-Vivisection Society) -
$66,444

John Kullberg (Executive Director, American Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals) - $64,849

Richard Avanzino (President, San Francisco SPCA) - $60,200

Martin Passaglia (Executive Director, American Humane Association) -
$56,404

John Grandy (Vice President, Humane Society of the United States)-
$53,740

Patrick Parkes (Vice President, Humane Society of the United States) -
$50,335

Michael Fox (Scientific Director, Humane Society of the United States)
(1982) - $46,692

Patricia Forkan (Vice President, Humane Society of the United States)
- $46,659

Arthur Slade (President, Animal Rescue League) - $45,200

Alice Herrington (President, Friends of Animals) - $44,000

UK AV SCANDAL HITS ROCK BOTTOM: FROM GILL LANGLEY'S THREATS TO MICHAEL
BALL'S BLASPHEMIES

THE LANGLEYS

For years the former vivisector, Dr Gill Langley, has been running the
once AV society Animal Aid, squeezing money out of its members by
assuring them that only by contributing generously to her Alternative
Fraud Fund could they hope to see vivisection disappear "eventually",
as for the time being it was still "saving their children's lives."

Meanwhile Gill and her accomplice, John Bryant, Chairman of Animal
Aid, were carefully concealing from their members and the public all
the existing evidence that thousands of MDs were disgusted with the
fraud of vivisection and were demanding its total abolition by law.

Even more talented in deceiving the usually gullible British "animal
lovers" is Gill's husband, Dr Christopher K. Langley. Concealing his
past as a vivisector, his current employ at ClBA GEIGY, and by
foisting himself off as an animal loving vegan, he managed in a short
time and with pull from above, to escalate to the presidency of the
Vegan Society of Great Britain.

Last August we learned that this Christopher Langley and his wife Gill
had one or two more things to hide about themselves: that he had been
for some years a member of the Medical Research Council, (which is
practically vivisection itself), and that Gill Langley had turned AV
money from the Hadwen Trust that she was running, over to the MRC!
Thereupon we asked Mr Henry Turtle to make inquiries in London, the
den of the Research Defence Society and the British Vivisection
Syndicate. Having failed to obtain any answer from Chistopher Langley,
Mr Turtle wrote to Gill Langley, on December 14, 1988:

"Dear Dr Gill Langley, as it is believed that your husband, Dr
Christopher K. Langley, was once an employee of the Medical Research
Council, I wrote in letters dated 14 August, 8 and 20 November 1988 to
ask him whether he could confirm this (or not as the case might be)
and, if so, when. It is thought that he was with the MRC from 1979 -
82, EMPLOYED IN PROCESSING GRANTS TO VIVISECTORS. As after three
enquiries I have still received no response from your husband I find
his silence surprising as the MRC is a prestigious body and you will
appreciate that I feel obliged to turn to you for an answer. As I am a
member of the SSPV one of whose stated aims is the abolition of
vivisection and which has links with you as a member of CRAE and your
Dr Hadwen Trust which made a donation of £1000 of anti-
vivisectionists' money to the MRC, I feel I am entitled to know
whether your husband was once employed by the MRC. I would be obliged
for a prompt response from you to my enquiry. Yours sincerely, Henry
Turtle."

Although Mr Turtle's earlier questions posed to Dr Christopher L. had
been ignored for months, this latest letter, addressed to his wife on
December 14 and containing precise allegations, elicited from her an
immediate, worried response, dated Jan. 17:

"Dear Mr Turtle, with reference to your letter of 14th December 1988,
you are not entitled on the grounds you proposed nor, indeed, on any
grounds I can think of, to know what my husband did between 1979 and
1982. I should warn you that, if you publish any information contained
in material which was stolen from our house in December 1987 by
******* certain questions concerning the legality of your action would
have to be investigated. Yours sincerely, Gill Langley (Dr)."

This response tells volumes. Mainly, that the intelligence received by
CIVIS was once again correct. Not at all correct was Gill's inference
that we received it from ******. Langley and her accomplices within
the British leagues had repeatedly claimed that ****** had not found
any compromising documents at all when he raided Gill's office at the
end of 1988. Contradicting herself, Gill now reveals that embarrassing
documents were indeed found. So embarrassing as to try to prevent
their publication by using threats.

We openly disavowed ****** and his alleged raid at the time, being
convinced that he was an "agent provocateur" placed by the British
leagues, when we saw the unanimity with which all of them hastened to
blame the incident on the "evil influence" of CIVIS.

We changed our mind about ****** only recently, when we saw a Ietter
of thanks Jean Pink had sent him at the time she was still genuine -
when we ourselves spent considerable means and energies boosting her
newly founded AA, (with our two marches on Cambridge and Oxford
Universities and thousands of circulars), helping AA to become the
fastest growing AV society ever. That was in 1979/80 - just before
Gill Langley moved into AA with her accomplices, and took over.

If we had been apprised of Dr Chris Langley's former involvement with
the MRC by ******, following his alleged 1987 raid, as the Langleys
evidently suspect, we wouldn't have waited all this time to publicize
this very hot bit of news.

The fortunate truth is that while on one hand Britain's official AV
organization owes allegiance to the Vivisection Syndicate, on the
other CIVIS has a mole of its own within the Home Office, where the
thriving fraud of vivisection has its roots. And also in other high
places in Britain and abroad.

DR MICHAEL BALLS: VIVISECTOR IN THE NAME OF JESUS

Some readers were so fascinated by the news in our preceding Report
that Michael Balls, "Chairman of FRAME Trustees and Director of
Research," (as the long time vivisector likes to call himself) had
quoted the Bible in order to "prove" in a round about way that Jesus
Christ himself would have endorsed, or did endorse, vivisection, that
they wanted to hear more.

Aiming at the editors of the host of small religious publications
(sample: 'The Cornwall Christian') in the anglophone world, Balls
recently started concocting unique circulars, hypocritically titled
'On Seeking an End to Animal Experimentation', another, 'A Christian
Approach to Ending Animal Experimentation', and similar ones, which
included sanctimonious thoughts like the following:

"As a medical school teacher, research scientist and Chairman of FRAME
(Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments), I have
sought guidance in what Jesus said and did, as told to us in the
Gospels, in considering how I should seek to bring about the end of
animal experimentation.

"Jesus eschewed extreme positions, choosing to associate himself
neither with the Chief Priests and the Pharisees, nor with the
Zealots, but preached a practical moral code of ever lasting relevance
to the lives of ordinary people. As stewards of God's creation, we
should take a similarly selective and discriminating approach to our
responsibilities to animals...Recognising that whilst animals matter,
some animals matter more than others, and when conflicts of interests
are unavoidable, human beings matter more than animals (for which I
can claim the support of Jesus in Matthew 6.26 - 'Look at the birds of
the air; they do not sow and reap and store in barns, yet your
Heavenly Father feeds them. You are worth more than the birds!')
Following Jesus' example in the Gospels, we must avoid extreme
reactions to those whom we oppose. We should not violently attack,
verbally or in our writings, and certainly not physically, those to
whose activities we are opposed."

The "activities" Balls hints at, and which he pretends to oppose,
while being himself engaged in them, are vivisections, of course. And
for their perpetrators, as well as for his principals in the Home
Office, he prudently preaches patience and tolerance, invoking Jesus,
dreading the day when the public will wake up to reality at last, and
the safety-belt of silence and deceit the governments and media have
built up around themselves will break with one big bang.

Balls goes on and on, citing selectively from the Scriptures, which
can notoriously be used to affirm or deny anything at all; but
consistently committing the sin of omission. He fails to mention that
he and all his fellow vivisectors keep presenting alleged benefits
derived from vivisection as proven facts, whereas just the opposite
applies: not one indisputable proof exists of an animal experiment
having ever benefited medical science, whereas scientific proofs of
their undisputable damages can no longer be counted, nor denied.

Although his recent circulars pretend that he "seeks an end to animal
experimentation", he keeps affirming, in contradiction to thousands of
intelligent doctors, that it just cannot be renounced. He writes:

"As a FRAME Trustee, I recognize that we are forced to accept that
animal experimentation will continue for some time to come."

Since vivisector Balls seeks Biblical guidance, we remind him that
Jesus chased the merchants and money-changers from the Temple (Matthew
21:12,), as he himself mentions once; evidently not realizing that in
the Temple of Modern Medicine the money-changers are called Balls,
Hampson, Langleys & Co.

Said Dr Werner Hartinger, M. D., President of ILDAV, in one of his
recent speeches: "There are only two types of doctors who say yes to
vivisection: those who don't know enough about it, and those who make
money from it."

Vivisector Michael Balls belongs to the second category. He and his
colleagues use every conceivable means to sustain their Alternative
Fraud enterprises: even the Bible.

FROM OUR ROGUES' GALLERY (1)

Dr Judith Hampson is responsible for the elaboration and acceptance in
the EC countries, in GB, in Australia, and in New Zealand, of the very
worst and most hypocritical legislation ever enacted in the world for
the continued torture of laboratory animals; a legislation designed to
provide an alibi for highly lucrative but health damaging medical
practices financed by the taxpayer; a legislation which for the first
time in history authorizes vivisectors to use the same animal more
than once in cruel experiments, "as a humanitarian measure"; under the
phoney pretext that "fewer animals would be sacrificed this way,"
Hampson was thus described in a Spring 1987 news-sheet of the Royal
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (the famed RSPCA,
patronized by the Queen, whose avowed purpose it is to keep
vivisection alive in the interest of the drug industry); "Dr Hampson
has succeeded in providing the RSPCA Society and Eurogroup with an
expert, credible and persuasive voice during the procedure of
negotiating new legislation through both the UK and the European
Parliament, The respect in which Dr Hampson is held is reflected in
her invitation to be a member of the old Home Office (British
Government - CIVIS note) Advisory Committee.

FROM OUR ROGUES' GALLERY (2)

Dr Gill Langley, who vivisected animals for 8 years by her own
eventual admission (under pressure from CIVIS), instituted in the name
of the anti-vivisection society, Animal Aid, an Alternative Fraud
fund, which for years enabled her to extort, from British animal
friends, large amounts of money that she recycled to her cronies in
the vivisection industry, as indicated in our Foundation Reports 3 and
4, which are kept available. Prominent among her numerous accomplices
are John Bryant, chairman of AA, and Lord Houghton of Sowerby, who for
decades has been defending the vivisectionist and thus chemical
interests in British Parliament while foisting himself off as a
humanitarian.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 12, 2007, 7:49:00 PM11/12/07

Animal Experimentation: The Hidden Cause of Environmental Pollution

by Hoorik Davoudian

Writing for the United States anti-vivisection organisation called
SUPRESS the author makes a direct and comprehensive connection between
animal research, chemical testing and production, and environmental
pollution. Ms Davoudian who is a Hazardous Materials Manager for a
government agency in California, exposes the scientific fraudulence of
animal research and shows how it is routinely used and manipulated to
make toxicants appear "safe" for human consumption. This concise 10-
page booklet further shows how the inherently erroneous nature of
vivisection renders environmental laws and regulations ineffective in
controlling environmental pollution.

Ms Davoudian came to the conclusion that vivisection is a scientific
fraud when the very professors and researchers at the University of
California, Los Angeles (where the author received her Science degree)
admitted that "they were faced with great difficulties in
extrapolating the results of their animal tests to human beings".
After researching the issue, she determined that rather than a
"difficult" task, these "scientists" were faced with a total
impossibility.

In explaining the REAL motives behind industry and government's
insistence on using unscientific animal testing, Ms Davoudian reveals:
"The non-conclusive, erroneous nature of animal testing creates a
smoke screen - an alibi which permits the continued manufacture of all
kinds of toxic and hazardous chemicals. Vivisection conveys a false
illusion of safety, but all it ensures is a continued demand for ever
'newer' and 'improved' products. The tragic result is that these
seemingly 'safety tested' poisons are the very ones which pollute our
air, water, food, and planet."

On further explaining the role of vivisection, the author says: "From
these 'studies', staggering amounts of ambiguous, contradictory, and
invalid data are compiled. It is from these data that the 'scientist'
draw their 'scientific' conclusions. And, of course, animal
experimentation suits their purposes perfectly, because its non-
conclusive and contradictory nature allows both the scientists and the
chemical manufacturers to arrive at any kind of conclusion they
desire.

"For example, if they want to 'prove' that a particular chemical is
not carcinogen, all they have to do is present the evidence from those
animal tests that support this view. On the other hand, if they wish
to prove that the same chemical is a carcinogen, then, with just as
much conviction, they can present other laboratory tests that show the
product to be carcinogenic."

In addition to this, Ms Davoudian explains that the fraud of
vivisection reaches beyond the process of chemical production and
marketing and applies to the entire field of "environmental
protection." Giving an example she says that "if a hazardous waste
incinerator is to be built, the Environmental Impact Report
(incorporating findings of animal studies), conducted by those in
favor of the incinerator, will prove the 'harmlessness' of its air
emissions with little difficulty. Yet a different Environmental Impact
Report, conducted by the opposition, will prove the risks associated
with the same incinerator to be unacceptable."

The booklet is timely considering that recently the United States
Institute of Environmental Health Services after reviewing their tests
on laboratory animals has concluded that the Government should no
longer rely on these tests because chemicals frequently have wholly
different effects on animals and humans. Consequently the US
environmental regulation has been thrown into question.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 12, 2007, 9:18:16 PM11/12/07

Hans Ruesch / Imperatrice Nuda

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

Biografia

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

Nato a Napoli nel maggio 1913. Entrambi i genitori erano di
nazionalità elvetica, figli di industriali svizzeri stabilitisi a
Napoli. La madre Ginevra, figlia di Filippo Büchy del cantone di
Argovia, si era italianizzata, il padre era rimasto svizzero e aveva
prontamente iscritto il figlio al consolato svizzero di Napoli, il che
faceva di Hans fin dalla nascita un cittadino svizzero a tutti gli
effetti, secondo un accordo vigente tra i due Paesi.

Dopo aver frequentato le scuole a Napoli fino all'età di 12 anni, Hans
è stato mandato in patria a finire i suoi studi, sia nella Svizzera
francese che in quella tedesca, diventando così poliglotta
(multilingue). Dopo un interludio di 8 anni, in cui ha scorrazzato per
tutta l'Europa e l'Africa (Tripolitania e Africa del Sud) e si è
impegnato nella sua passione giovanile per le gare automobilistiche di
Formula 1 dove ha corso anche per la Scuderia Ferrari, nell'ottobre
del '38 emigrò negli Stati Uniti, per proseguirvi una carriera
letteraria da lui già iniziata al tempo delle corse. Difatti nel 1937
era apparso in Svizzera il suo primo romanzo, scritto in tedesco,
proprio sulle corse d'auto. Romanzo da lui stesso tradotto in inglese
alcuni anni dopo e nel 1953 portato sullo schermo da Darryl Zanuck
della Twentieth Century Fox con Kirk Douglas nel ruolo del
protagonista. Il titolo americano del film fu The Racers, in Italia
Destino sull'asfalto.

Subito dopo la guerra è ritornato in Europa, sbarcando nel gennaio del
1946 nella sua città natale devastata dai bombardamenti alleati, nel
periodo in cui alcuni anni più tardi ambienterà il suo I mammà e papà.
Questo romanzo, da lui prima scritto in inglese, era poi stato
dall'autore stesso tradotto in italiano. Ma nel frattempo, nel1950,
era apparso negli Stati Uniti il suo primo bestseller, TOP OF THE
WORLD; noto in Italia come Paese dalle ombre lunghe, portato sullo
schermo dieci anni dopo col titolo Ombre Bianche e con Anthony Quinn
nel ruolo dell'eschimese.

Dopo aver pubblicato ancora Paese dalle ombre corte, Partita di
Caccia, Com'esser poveri, I mammà e papà e Ritorno alle ombre lunghe ,
tutti scritti dapprima in inglese e poi da lui stesso tradotti in
italiano, smise di scrivere romanzi per dedicarsi interamente alla
lotta contro la truffa della vivisezione, condotta sotto il pretesto
della ricerca medica. Avendo anche già studiato medicina per anni e
curato per una casa editrice una collana medica denominata "I manuali
della salute", è convinto, come tanti altri, che la vivisezione non è
altro che una lucrosissima truffa, finalizzata a una continua raccolta
d'ingenti fondi per una presunta "ricerca medica" da molti medici
considerata non solo inutile ma fuorviante. Tanto è vero che le
malattie tuttora nominate come le principali cause di morte - cancro,
diabete, mali cardio-circolatori - non sono sparite, ma sono aumentate
da quando è stata introdotta la vivisezione come unico mezzo di
"ricerca medica".

Queste idee, esposte in Imperatrice nuda, il primo libro che Hans
Ruesch ha scritto fin dall'inizio direttamente in italiano, suscitando
scandalo in Italia al suo apparire nel gennaio 1976, segnò anche la
fine della carriera letteraria di questo autore fuori dagli schemi.
Allora ebbe inizio il suo pellegrinaggio da un tribunale all'altro in
vari paesi, trascinatovi non apertamente dall'industria farmaceutica
come taluni logicamente assumono, ma al contrario da finti alleati. E'
questo il soggetto del suo successivo libro, intitolato I falsari
della Giustizia , che egli spera ancora di poter terminare.

Ma intanto la Prentice Hall, la primaria casa americana di opere
didattiche, ha pubblicato nel 2003 una nuova antologia di quasi 800
pagine, destinata all'insegnamento universitario e intitolata Dal
passato al presente: idee che hanno cambiato il nostro mondo. Tra i 73
autori di cui sono citati ampi stralci figura anche Hans Ruesch . Per
quale opera? Per quella che finora era stata la più soppressa in tutti
i 9 paesi in cui era apparsa: Imperatrice Nuda.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 13, 2007, 12:04:25 AM11/13/07

The following article is a shortened version of one which appeared in
a 1988 issue of the newsletter of the US anti-vivisection organisation
SUPRESS (Students United Protesting Research on Sentient Subjects).

At the time the article caused some controversy and heated debate in
the UK where the article circulated amongst animal rights people,
resulting in something of a division being created between those who
believed that the only way to achieve abolition of vivisection was by
stressing, above all else, the counter-productiveness of animal
experiments in regards to human health (people sometimes referred to
as "scientific anti-vivisectionists"), and those who believed that the
moral arguments alone, or virtually alone, would end it ("animal
rightists").

The scientific AVs closely aligned with the writings of Hans Ruesch,
and is naturally the camp in which the BAVA has its foundation. This
split, it could be argued, has never been totally healed. However,
anyone attending an anti-vivisection demo today, or looking at an AV
website, book or leaflet, will see clearly that those "scientific" AV
campaigners who so forcibly spoke out some twenty years ago (and
more!) have clearly been vindicated.

Most AVs today will, hopefully, realise the importance of using that
vast arsenal at our disposal - the scientific and medical arguments
against vivisection - and which will one day, in conjunction with the
moral arguments, see vivisection consigned to the history books.

However, it is the belief of the BAVA that these arguments are still
not being forcibly brought home to the public to the degree in which
they should. AVs, of any persuasion, are still largely labeled "animal
rightists", in no small part due to the media for whom this term, used
in a derogatory way, suits the purposes of their agenda, which is to
form in the mind of the public the idea that AVs/animal rightists, are
animal-obsessed, violent extremists who are happy to put the lives of
animals before people. By still largely ignoring the human interest
angle, we continue to allow this idea to take hold in the mind of the
public, whom it must be said should, if they have any concern at all
for their own self-interest - even if only financial - be marching
shoulder to shoulder with us in our demand for an end to vivisection.
That they aren't is for a matter of each of us to ponder on.

Because of this current climate, which despite the slow progress is
looking much better than nearly twenty years ago when Burgos wrote
this article, and far-sighted AVs were desperately trying to get
people to take notice of Ruesch's books, the BAVA believes that the
time is right for the resurfacing and distribution of this article. It
will no doubt once again upset some, but which will hopefully add to
the progress so far made in the advancement of the scientific anti-
vivisectionism which will one day end the atrocity of vivisection.

We ask that all concerned people make copies of this article, and to
circulate amongst friends, family and fellow campaigners.

ANIMAL RIGHTS: THE SUICIDE OF A MOVEMENT

There are good and bad news to report from the anti-vivisectionist
front. Let me begin with the bad news: the movement that has allegedly
been fighting vivisection is dead. It is dead because it has committed
collective suicide. The pulling of the trigger began when the
"leaders" of the movement decided to tackle the biomedical empire and
its powerful allies with the idiotic slogan of "animal rights". The
destruction of the movement continued when the "animal rights"
movement stubbornly refused to confront the animal researchers with
medical and scientific facts, the only weapons which can destroy once
and for all the medical and scientific facts the vivisectors have been
perpetuating for decades without any meaningful opposition.

It should be pointed out, of course, that by adopting the name of
"animal rights" and by placing the issue of vivisection under its all-
encompassing umbrella, the movement prevented itself from ever being
able to use medical and scientific arguments with any degree of
credibility.

But the "animal rights" people do much worse than refusing to use the
medical and scientific facts. They actually agree with the vivisectors
that at least some animal research has been beneficial to humankind.
Their opposition is just on moral and philosophical grounds which, of
course, have nothing to do with the issue of vivisection. This was
made abundantly clear one more time in Dr Robert White's devastating
article which appeared in Reader's Digest in March 1988.

The "animal rights" people spend most of their conveying two messages
not only to their members and supporters, but also to the general
public. The direct message is that animal research and testing work -
at least to some extent - a position rabidly defended by the
overwhelming majority of the "animal rights" organizations. (Even Kim
Bartlett, Editor of The Animals' Agenda, stated in a letter dated
September 23, 1988: "Certainly, animal experimentation is bad science,
and it has undoubtedly retarded biomedical progress. But that is not
the same as saying that nothing was ever learned from it. The ANIMALS'
AGENDA has not taken an official position on the 'scientific fraud'
argument; our position is ethical.")

The indirect message is even more suicidal: "animal rights" people
will risk the health of human beings in order to "liberate" animals.
By failing to destroy the medical and scientific myths which make the
existence of vivisection possible, and by insisting further on the
"liberation" of the very animals who are perceived by the public as
the only hope to finding cures, "animal rights activists" become
automatically anti-human since they are perceived as wanting to
liberate animals at the expense of human health.

It should be painfully evident to anyone that the suicidal slogan of
"animal rights" has been a godsend for the vivisectors and the
beholden media whose only job consists of pitting tiny sick babies
against dirty rats and an occasional dog or cat: The constant
bombardment of the public with the notions of medical "advances" and
"breakthroughs" due to animal experimentation has accomplished two
very important goals: besides making the "animal rights" people look
like a bunch of anti-human fools, it has also managed to strengthen
the vivisectors' main cliches by repeating all the medical and
scientific lies that nobody in the "animal rights" movement is able or
willing to destroy. The "animal rights" people seem to suffer from an
incurable case of masochism. Despite having been soundly defeated
countless times by allowing the researchers to play the oldest and
most puerile tricks in the book over and over again, the "animal
rights" leaders go back for more and more as if they wanted to make
sure that the possibilities of abolishing vivisection are completely
and permanently destroyed.

The attitude on the part of the largest and wealthiest organizations
to stick to morality, ethics, and philosophy, and to denounce those
who seek to expose the mind-boggling scientific fraud that is part and
parcel of all experimental research with life, can only be attributed
to the incredible degree of infiltration to which most of the "animal
rights" and self-proclaimed anti-vivisection organizations have been
subjected.

While millions of dollars sit idle in the coffers of these
organizations, their philosophers and "ex-vivisectors" criss-cross the
country urging people not to ever use the medical and scientific
arguments which, as a famous "ex-vivisector" put it, "you cannot win".

The good news is that you do not have to commit suicide. You can
choose to join the real anti-vivisectionist movement and expose the
corrupt ways of those who seek to keep the efforts of millions of well-
meaning people paralyzed. We must get rid of the slogan "animal
rights", force the infiltrators out from their positions of leadership
and use the millions of dollars to expose the massive damage to human
health as a result of vivisection. We must also be willing to inform
ourselves so we can understand and accept the most basic medical and
scientific realities, which prove that all experimental research using
life is a medical and scientific fraud.

If people in the movement decide not to make waves and go along with
the present party line, we will all be forced to look at the putrid
face of vivisection until the end of time.

Javier Burgos/SUPRESS 1988

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 13, 2007, 4:21:16 PM11/13/07

What is the NZAVS Policy on Vivisection?

NZAVS campaigns for the aboltion of vivisection on the grounds of
medical and scientific fraud. The geographical location of where
animal experiments are performed is irrelevant; vivisection performed
in New Zealand must be banned, and the contracting out of vivisection
to overseas vivisectors must be prohibited; as well as for the New
Zealand and international regulations to demand that results from
animal experiments not be permitted, in matters determining the safety
or efficacy for humans, of substances or procedures.

The New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society Incorporated has adopted the
following principles, written by our Patron, Hans Ruesch, as our
policy on vivisection:

CIVIS Principles

All animal experimentation must be rejected both on ethical and
medical grounds.
Animal experiments destroy respect for life and harden the
experimenter against the suffering of human patients.
Experiments on animals are not a proper way to diagnose, research or
heal human ailments. The organic, anatomical, biological, metabolic,
genetic and psychic differences between humans and animals are so
substantial that knowledge obtained from animals is not only worthless
but misleading.
Animal experiments are carried out only to the advantage of the
experimenters themselves, of their commercial backers, and of the
laboratory animal breeding industry. They perform an alibi function.
There has never been a scientific statistical proof that their results
are applicable to human beings.
Most of today's diseases are not organic in origin but have
psychological, social, dietary, environmental, and malpractice causes.
Official medical science therefore has no causal treatment to offer.
It can't even cure a common cold, rheumatism, arthritis, cancer, nor
any other of the millenarian ills, which much rather it has
multiplied, adding always new diseases (SMON, Herpes, AIDS). By trying
only to get rid of the symptoms, it prevents recognition and
elimination of the causes.
With its highest consumption of laboratory animals in the world
America 'should' be the healthiest nation, but it is one of the
sickest and ranks only 17th in life expectancy, behind several
'underdeveloped' countries where such experimentation is unknown.
Health care requires first of all prevention, furthermore the
application of one or several disciplines that have been ignored by
official medicine because of its obsession with animal
experimentation, for example dietetics, psychosomatics, psychotherapy,
clinical observation, environmentalism, epidemiology, vegetarianism,
rehabilitation, homeopathy, osteopathy, chiropractic, naturopathy,
naprapathy, macrobiotics, diathermy, oligotherapy, electrotherapy,
hydrotherapy, heliotherapy, aromatherapy, faith healing, herbalism,
acupuncture, fasting and more, which have proven effective, and
economical to boot.
Medicine must concern itself with the entire person, adopt methods
that relate to the causes and the patients, instead of a veterinary
medicine applied to humans, which at best replaces acute symptoms with
chronic illness, but often creates new ills.
The veterinary schools must follow the same humane principles: no
artificial, violent interventions on healthy animals to inflict
maladies and mutilations and to desensitise the students, but careful
study and sympathetic treatment of spontaneous diseases and natural
accidents.
For all these reasons, to demand the total abolition of all animal
experimentation is not only possible but necessary.
New Zealanders who are in agreement with these principles and wishing
to campaign for the abolition of vivisection on the grounds of medical
and scientific fraud are encouraged to join the New Zealand Anti-
Vivisection Society Incorporated by sending $15 annual membership fee
(members receive copies of the Society's newsletter Mobilise!), along
with name, address, occupation, phone number (optional), and e-mail
address (optional) to NZ Anti-Vivisection Society Inc, PO Box 9387,
Addington, Christchurch 8243.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 10:38:41 AM11/14/07

CIVIS Bulletin Nr 1, 1983 (page nine)

>From Among More Than a Thousand Medical Opinions 1900 - 1980

"In spite of their scientific value, animal tests of medications have
remained totally fruitless in the treatment of diseases, and the
practicing physician hasn't learned anything useful for his patients
that he didn't know fifty years ago". (Prof Dr. Felix von Niemeyer,
Germany's most respected medical authority at the turn of the century,
in his manual Handbuch der praktischen Medizin)

"The discovery of anaesthetics owes nothing to experiments on
animals." (Report of the Royal Commission on Vivisection, 1912)

"I have never known a single good surgeon who had learned anything
from vivisection." (Dr Abel Desjardins, president of the Society of
Surgeons of Paris, foremost surgeon of his time in France and
professor of surgery at the Sorbonne)

"My own conviction is that the study of human physiology by way of
experiments on animals is the most grotesque and fantastic error ever
committed in the whole range of human intellectual activity." (Dr.
G.F. Walker, Medical World, Dec. 8, 1933.)

"The wasted time and energy over the modern lines of cancer research
are greatly to be deplored. We are sorry to think that so many able
research workers are being tricked into believing that the cause and
cure of cancer will be discovered by animal experiments." (Medical
Times, Jan 1936)

"As the years pass, cancer seems to be on the increase. The search for
the cause has up till now met with a very poor result, largely owing
to the fact that cancer research has been and is being conducted on
laboratory animals." (Medical Review, Feb 1951)

"The folly of founding the actions of drugs on animal experiments
cannot be over emphasized." (Editorial, Medical Review, Sept 1953)

"No experimental worker can provide a single fact about human
disease." (Dr D. A Long,, London, from the National Institute for
Medical Research, Lancet, Mar 13, 1954)

"There really exists no logical basis for translating the results of
animals to man." (Dr L Goldberg, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm,
Quantitative Method in Human Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Pergamon
Press, London, 1959)

"It is not possible to apply to the human species experimental
information derived from inducing cancer in animals." (Dr Kenneth
Starr, Honorary Director of the special unit for investigation and
treatment of cancer for the New South Wales Cancer Council, Sidney
Morning Herald, April 7, 1960)

"Thalidomide is not the first nor the last drug to have brought
heartbreak where it was meant to bring help. There have been quite a
number of other tragedies since Thalidomide went wrong thirteen years
ago." (An editorial in The Economist, London, Jan 6, 1973.)

"Modern medicine is a negation of health. It isn't organized to serve
human-health, but only itself, as an institution. It makes more people
sick than it heals." (Sociologist Ivan IlIich, author of Medical
Nemesis, Pantheon Books, New York, 1976)

"In praxis all animal experiments are scientifically indefensible, as
they lack scientific validity and reliability in regard to humans.
They only serve as an alibi for the drug manufacturers, who hope to
protect themselves thereby." (Dr H Stiller and Dr M Stiller in
Tierversuch und Tierexperimentator, Hirthammer Verlag, Munich, 1976)

"Animal experiments should be forbidden everywhere." (Dr Julius
Hackenthal, one of the best known German surgeons and author of
medical books, in an interview with Die Zeit, Oct 13, 1978)

"It is about time that doctors should demand the replacement of animal
experiments by other methods." (Dr F Schenk, Schweizeische
Aerztezeitung, Nov 29, 1978)

"As a cancer specialist engaged in clinical practice, I can't agree
with the researchers who believe that results obtained with laboratory
animals are applicable to human beings." (Prof Dr Heinz Oeser, in one
of the leading German weeklies, Quick, March 15, 1979)

"Normally, animal experiments not only fail to contribute to the
safety of medications, but they even have the opposite effect." (Prof
Dr Kurt Fickentscher of the Pharmacological Institute of the
University of Bonn, Germany, in Diagnosen, March 1980)

"Our entire medicine today is dominated, practically terrorized, by
analytical science, which is insensitive and heartless. Its medical
research has nothing at all to do with health. The elimination of
symptoms is being misrepresented as a restoration to health, but it
has nothing to do with health. On the contrary, it impairs and
prevents true healthiness. A child whose fever has been hastily
eliminated by administration of antibiotics is sicker than before,
becomes susceptible to disease, chronically ill. Analytical science
has formed doctors whose mental faculties don't go beyond the 2 x 2 =
4 principle. They are blind to elementary observation, which they
disdain as "subjective." This unenlightened attitude is also
responsible for the revolting animal experiments, which are a sign of
mental inadequacy." (Prof Dr Helmut Mommsen, pediatrist in Frankfurt,
Germany, in Civis-Schweiz Aktuell, Zurich, December 1981)

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

REVIEWS OF SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENT

First published as a Bantam Book Original in 1978. Reprinted by
Civitas Publications, Inc. 1983, and Slingshot Publications, UK, 2004

Dr Robert S Mendelsohn, MD, Professor of Preventive Medicine at the
University of Illinois (Chicago), Chairman of the Medical Licensing
Committee for the State of Illinois, recipient of numerous awards for
excellence in medicine and medical instruction, best selling author of
Confessions of a Medical Heretic and Malepractice, in his Foreword to
the CIVITAS reprint of Slaughter of the Innocent:

"Hans Ruesch's magnificent book washes away the thin excuses of doctor-
apologists for animal testing. Comprehensively and carefully
documented, objective, yet emotionally compelling, it serves as the
steel battering ram that can dislodge the cornerstone of Modern
Medicine - vivisection. All of us - including future generations - are
in his debt."

Barry York, in Bowyang Magazine, Sidney University, New South Wales
2006, Australia: "Ruesch provides a refreshing approach to a cause
that is overly identified with Hollywood 'beautiful people' and moral
philosophers. His impressive knowledge of medical science allows for a
conclusiveness sadly lacking in Peter Singer's well-known thesis on
Animal Liberation. Singer relied entirely on ethical questions. Ruesch
constructs an argument based on ethics but cemented by an exposure of
the Western medical system that long ago turned its back on
Hippocratic principles. The great strength of Ruesch's thesis is that
he places vivisection in the context of a corrupt and money hungry
health industry. Animal experimentation is as futile and fraudulent as
the industry it services."

Publishers Weekly: "This study of vivisection aroused a storm of
outrage in Italy, where it was originally published. It could receive
the same reaction here, for Ruesch's findings are shocking and deeply
disturbing...Ruesch builds a well-documented argument and certainly a
controversial one."

American Library Association: "Disturbing probe. Ruesch's discussion
is forthright and reasoned, but he incorporates ample, painfully
explicit evidence from medical and scientific journals to underscore
his charges..."

Chicago's NAVS Bulletin: "Author Hans Ruesch - one of the most
respected names in today's world of science isn't just talking about
the slaughter of cats and rats. He's talking about the slaughter of
people. Slaughter in the sense that vivisectors have completely
blocked off true progress in medical science for more than a century."

Society for Animal Rights, Clarks Summit, PA, Special Report:
"Slaughter of the Innocent can well be the book that brings about
abolition of vivisection."

Vegetarian Times: "Hans Ruesch stands out among the more articulate
anti-vivisectionists of our time. His extremely powerful book should
be read by anyone who is remotely interested in animal rights and
human health."

Chicago Tribune: "Medical editor Ruesch builds a strong and formidably
documented case against laboratory experiments on animals."

AV, the Magazine of the American Anti-Vivisection Society,
Philadelphia: "Most books on laboratory animals simply cannot be read
by the general public. This one they will not be able to lay down."

Our Town, New York's Municipal paper: "Ruesch exposes not only the
vivisectors who are pocketing salaries of $54,000 a year, but he is
fighting to outlaw vivisection: to make it illegal, like the torture
and murder of innocent humans. The fundamental scientific error of all
animal experimentation is that through unnatural, arbitrary
interference, healthy non-humans are deliberately injured and made
sick - the results have nothing in common with a spontaneous disease...
In countering this ghoulish, secret, multi-billion fraud, perpetrated
in the name of science, Ruesch's original analysis and documentation
is a powerful weapon." (Henry Spira)

Kalindra News, London: "Not just a book, but a well-timed explosive
device. The writer is a one-time editor of medical publications. He
categorically shows that even for practical reasons, leaving out
morality, all experiments on animals are useless. This is the first
book which combines not only details of unbelievably horrific abuse of
animals by pseudo-scientists, but also the rebounding effects on
humans from the misleading results of that abuse."

Daily Express, London: "It's a view I'd always taken myself - until I
read Slaughter of the Innocent. As the first nation to restrict
vivisection by law, it's time we looked again at our dubious
record." (Peter Grosvenor)

Nebelspalter, Zurich: "A tremendous persuasiveness and exceptional
competence emanates from this book." (Fritz Bondy)

La Suisse, Geneva: "With this book, Hans Ruesch, the novelist,
launches a bomb that unfortunately is not fictional. He denounces the
crimes of vivisection in terms that for the first time might convince
even people who don't care one whit about animals." (Simone Guye

Tribune de Geneve, Geneva: "This is the most thorough and appalling
indictment that has ever been brought against animal experimentation,
but also against traditional medicine and pharmaceutical research."

Schweizer IIlustrierte, Zurich: "With his newest book, Hans Ruesch has
shocked all of Italy. In the press, on radio and TV, the public is
aroused." (Edith Wieland's Report from Rome)

La Voix des Betes, Paris: "By his documentation as well as by his
fiery, sometimes violent style, Hans Ruesch convinces even the most
reticent. His argumentation is so thorough that at the end of the book
the partisans of animal experimentation are left without a leg to
stand on." (J.J. Barloy)

Lyon-Matin, Lyon, France: "The book demonstrates that the claims of
vivisection are a monstrous fraud, due to the coalition of an almighty
pharmaceutical industry and a certain medicine that has turned its
back on Hippocrates."

Quick, Munich: "A staggering document."

Westermanns Monatshefte, West Germany's leading literary monthly:
"Nobody has dared tackling the Science taboo so forcefully before.
Henceforth, vivisectionists will have a hard time finding a single
argument in favor of animal experimentation."

Ferdinando de Leo, professor of surgery at the University of Naples,
Italy, and chief surgeon at the Pellegrini Hospital: "The validity of
its documentation is the strong point of this book, which should be
thoughtfully pondered by all who, for the sake of mankind, have chosen
the difficult path of medical study."

Pietro Croce, M.D., researcher and chief pathologist at the Hospital L
Sacco of Milan, Italy, member of both major American medical
associations, author of several medical treatises on tubercolosis, in
his book Vivisezione O Scienza - una Scelta: "This fundamental work on
vivisection reveals the secrets of the practice, its pecuniary
interests, the damage it causes to the progress of medicine, the lies
that keep it going."

Stampa Sera, Turin: "A violent and well-documented indictment against
vivisection and its erroneous findings...resulting in a manufactory of
diseases. An exceptional and courageous book."

L'Unita, Rome and Milan: "No wonder that these sorcerers apprentices
produce medications that cause cancer."

Corriere della Sera, Milan: "A vibrant denunciation of the atrocities
committed in the name of science."

II Piccolo, Triest: "We can fight against those who use our money and
abuse our health for the sake of their careers and pecuniary gain, and
we ought to do it quickly."

Roma, Naples: "A merciless analysis, 'a vivisection of vivisection,'
Fascinating and appalling, horrible and exalting."

Epoca, Milan: "This book is a noble battle against the two principal
forces in the world, human greed and stupidity."

Il Giornale Nuovo, Milan: "The cruelty of vivisectors has no end and
no limits...The book's solidity rests on its documentation, on the
statements of people who are eminent in the world of science and
industry."

L' Espresso, Milan: "A violent and well-documented indictment."

Il Giornale d'ltalia, Rome: "This pitiless analysis topples idols from
their pedestals and dispenses terrific blows. It has the value of
revelation."

International Herald Tribune, Paris: "Mr Ruesch's book has so far been
published only in Italy, hardly a country known for its concern for
animals. The uproar was so intense that even in the agitated period
before the Italian elections, a deputy raised the question of
vivisection in Parliament." (Mary Blume)

Medizinische Wochenzeitung, Switzerland's Medical Journal: "This
impressive, shattering work on animal experimentation should prompt us
doctors to reappraise this burning, important subject." (Balz Widmer,
M.D.)

Spotlight (No. 13 of April 1978 of the German language publication of
the World Society for the Protection of Animals): "This book is a
pitiless, extremely well documented indictment of the major research
methods in today's medical science, which the author, and with him an
entire row of important physicians and scientists, considers not only
inhumane but also unscientific. This publication is a singular
medical, sociological and philosophical treatise."

REVIEWS OF NAKED EMPRESS (Buchverlag CIVIS, 1982)

Mobilise! The newsletter of the New-Zealand Antivivisection Society,
Wellington: "Hans Ruesch does it again! In Naked Empress he blows the
lid off the health racket."

The Vegetarian, Great Britain: "I found this a very disturbing book.
Part of my mind is afraid to believe it is true because it shatters so
many ideas we have always assumed to be correct."

Society for Animal Rights Report, Clarks Summit, PA USA: "The long-
awaited follow-up to Slaughter of the Innocent is not more of the same...
Naked Empress is at once easier to read than Slaughter, and more
disturbing...What one feels is fear and anger at the depth of the
intertwining - and up-to-now hidden - economic roots of vivisection.
This is a source-book of eye-opening information. Ruesch's main
argument is that the public's equation of medical care and health is a
lie, established as truth by the medical-pharmaceutical industry's
control over the media. In fact, he claims that it is the nature of
current medical practice that is responsible for much sickness. As a
clinician, I can attest that this is true." (Steven Tiger, PA-C)

Vegetarian Times, USA: "Ruesch provides a whole arsenal of ammunition
for those who are fighting to eliminate vivisection on humanitarian
grounds by documenting reasons why it should be eliminated on medical
and scientific grounds."

NAVS Journal, Chicago, and AV Magazine, Jenkintown, PA: "Your health -
as much as your life - may very well depend on what you learn from
this explosive expose on modern medical research and science because
it unearths some information that many powerful individuals in America
and abroad would prefer to keep buried forever." (Laura A Moretti)

Agenda - News magazine of the Animal Rights Network, Westport, Ct.:
"Citing animal experiments as alibis for the drug manufacturers,
Ruesch documents case after case in which it has been proven that
"science", ignoring the results of its own experiments, continues to
furnish treatment after treatment, drug after drug, into the
unsuspecting, misguided hand of consumers, who later become the
victims of fraudulent medical research, better known as the multi
billion dollar business of science and sadism."

New England Anti-Vivisection Society, Boston, USA: "The author's
arguments are compelling. He gives numerous examples (in a style far
more readable than his earlier book Slaughter of the Innocent) of
fraud and corruption in the medical field. The truths, as reported by
the author, are frightening."

The National Humanitarian, Phoenix, Arizona: "Warning: The contents of
this book may be dangerous to your peace of mind if you depend upon
pharmaceutical preparations for your health...This reviewer has read
this sequel to Slaughter of the Innocent twice and has given it a
permanent place on his shelf of reference books. Hans Ruesch is no
ordinary craftsman in the field of literature. He has done a
painstaking job of research and has compiled the most serious
indictment against the world wide Chemo Medical Syndicate ever before
published. This is a valuable book and belongs alongside of Slaughter
of the Innocent, the only book to our knowledge that has ever been
suppressed in this country."

N.B. Not one of Britain's AV societies is carrying these two books on
their "recommended reading" list (apart from the BAVA, of course!)

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 11:08:22 AM11/14/07

CIVIS Bulletin Nr 2, New Year 1988 (Part Ten)

INTERNATIONAL DOCTORS AGAINST VIVISECTION

On April 25, 1987 the Community of Swiss Anti-vivisectionists
(Aktionsgemeinschaft Schweizer Tierversuchsgegner) founded by ATRA and
CIVIS-SCHWEIZ, with Max Keller acting as President, organized the
first International Symposium of Doctors Against Vivisection, in the
wake of the publication of the Civis book 1000 Doctors Against
Vivisection. Medical doctors from Italy, West Germany, Austria and
France read their papers denouncing the counter-productivity of
resorting to animal experimentation for finding cures of human
diseases - papers which will be published in Switzerland's three
national languages, and thereafter also in English.

Swiss MDs were conspicuously absent from this historic event, as was
the Swiss press, as whenever the infallibility of Switzerland's chemo-
medical combine is in question. By contrast, eager visitors came by
busloads from the neighboring countries, and filled the conference
hall of Zurich's Kongresshaus to capacity. In the evening, the showing
of Javier Burgos' video, Hidden Crimes, brought the eventful day to a
climactic end.

The success of this conference inspired our Community to launch
another "first": an International League of Doctors Against
Vivisection (ILDAV), to which all thinking, honest and courageous
members of the medical profession were invited to adhere - with Milly
Schar-Manzoli acting as General Secretary and editor of the league's
official organ called Mitteilungen (Communications), and Hans Ruesch
as Honorary President.

ILDAV's membership is open to doctors, pharmacists, veterinarians and
all people who are, or have ever been, active in the medical fields.
As stated in the by-laws, its purpose is to achieve total abolition of
all animal experimentation, by organizing public debates, conferences,
and symposia on the subject, and the publication and distribution of
books and papers in conformity with the League's aim.

Within a month, 30 MDs had already agreed to adhere, including USA's
Prof. Robert S Mendelsohn, Italy's Prof. Pietro Croce, and Germany's
Dr. Werner Hartinger.

On November 28, 1987 the first Symposium of ILDAV members took place
at the University of Padua, Italy's medical capital. It will be
followed by yet another international Symposium on April 15-16, 1988
scheduled to take place in Amsterdam. Meanwhile, membership is
snowballing.

THE SUMMING UP

Anti-vivisectionism's first political victory anywhere, namely Italy's
Parliamentary vote of 1984 reported in the beginning;

The outlawing of vivisection in the Italian province of Bolzano in
1985; The success obtained in Ireland at the ICTU Congress of 1986;

The repeated showings of the Hidden Crimes film to full houses in
schools and universities and cable TVs in 1986 and 1987, mainly, but
not only, in Southern California and a growing demand for the film
everywhere;

Last but not least the founding in the Spring of 1987 of ILDAV, in
Zurich of all places, the unrecognized capital of the Vivisection
Syndicate.

This whole series of "firsts" is the more remarkable for having been
obtained without great financiat backing, nor even any moral support
from the rich, established societies, but much rather avoiding those
societies entirely. The successes were achieved by very small groups
of dedicated, well-informed people, banking on Slaughter of the
Innocent, Naked Empress and Hidden Crimes. No wonder that the RDS, and
individuals like Judith Hampson and Gill Langley and their likes,
leave no stone un turned trying to suppress those revealing documents.

During this period, unprecedented media coverage was obtained by
small, sometimes new, so-called "grass roots" groups, as distinguished
from, the large, established societies, which however always manage to
cash in on the publicity produced by the grass roots activists,
including the Animal Liberationists.

This is neither surprising nor can it easily be avoided. The small new
groups of activists could surely achieve more if they had more money,
but a wealthy grass roots organisation is a contradiction in terms.
The big money of the societies comes from legacies, and it is
understandable that men and women making out their wills won't legate
their all to small, young groups that might be "here today and gone
tomorrow", but will prefer old, established organisations, with lots
of by-laws, big councils, and a long tradition.

It is understandable but it is wrong. The older and richer a society,
the more likely it is to become corrupted. Human nature being what it
is, the transition from Christ to Caesar is sometimes slow, but is
inevitable.

Experience clearly indicates the way that is to follow: many well-
informed grass roots groups everywhere, too small to be infiltrated,
moving independently towards one and the same goal, letting the big
societies trundle on towards the dinosaurs' cemetery, as is already
happening to Britain's decrepit old BUAV, NAVS, IAAPEA, AA, the
Scottish societies, and their counterparts in other lands, whose
directors invest their big moneys, accumulated from legacies, in
interest-bearing stocks and dividend-paying shares with which to
insure the continuation of lavish salaries and expensive offices,
while the animals invoke the release of death in their restraining
devices.

Whoever wants to leave money after their demise, should leave it to
the grass roots groups of the moment, with the proviso that it must
all be spent within one year in bringing the errors and horrors, the
futility and damage of vivisection to public notice, with large
advertisements in the press, the distribution of pertinent works by A
V scientists and MDs, the projection of films, and the like; and for
no other purpose. And if you don't want to wait for your own demise,
then do your own advertising in the big press while still alive. In
other words, do exactly that which the big societies fail to do, and
what they advise you not to do.

"There is not a crime, there is not a dodge, there is not a trick,
there is not a swindle, there is not a vice which does not live by
secrecy. Get these things out in the open, describe them, attack them,
ridicule them in the press, and sooner or later public opinion will
sweep them away. Publicity may not be the only thing that is needed,
but it is the one thing without which all other agencies will fail."
Joseph Pulitzer

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

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 11:23:33 AM11/14/07

INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative....................

=========

CIVIS Bulletin Nr 2, New Year 1988 (Part Five)

PETER SINGER

Prof. Singer's well-known thesis, Animal Liberation (1975), has
probably persuaded a good number of people to become vegetarians, not
just for sound, selfish reasons of health, but specially to spare
animals suffering, and in that respect it is an admirable book. But as
far as abolition of vivisection is concerned, its influence, seen from
where we sit, is less than nil. In fact, for those who have learned
"how to read" animal rights literature, the book supports vivisection.

Singer doesn't only implicitly concede the possibility of benefits
arising to mankind from vivisection, but he repeatedly, albeit
indirectly, concedes that experiments might be advantageous for
mankind (thus implying, without saying so, that they will never be
abandoned):

"We thought it wrong to inflict needless suffering to another being,
even if that being were not a member of our own species."

The emphasis is supplied, but the statement reveals that Singer, who
as a professor of philosophy should weigh the effect of each word,
stumbles ethically when he distinguishes between "needless" and
"necessary" suffering deliberately inflicted, allegedly for our
material advantage. That is not all.

In the Horizon Lecture on BBC Television in the Spring of 1983, he
said:

"Let me explain that I am not saying that no animal should ever be
used in any experiment. I am saying that the interest of animals must
always be given its full weight within the moral calculus".

Thus Singer does not request, nor even envision, abolition. What does
he envision then? More verbal calisthenics and philosophical exercises
on the ethical trapeze? But where this professor of philosophy really
comes to fall is when he touches the scientific aspect of vivisection,
for which he is clearly not prepared. On page 33 of Animal Liberation
we read:

"Of this vast number of experiments, only a few contribute to
important medical research."

Which ones might they be, Professor? He won't tell us. We scoured half
the globe, sincerely trying to get definite and irrefutable proof from
the researchers themselves that such useful experiments have indeed
existed at one time or other, but they have failed to come up with a
single airtight example. On the following page of Animal Liberation,
Singer further states:

"All that we need to say is that experiments serving no direct and
urgent purpose should stop immediately."

So he thinks that experiments "serving a direct and urgent purpose"
should be allowed to continue. But who is to decide about their
directness and urgency? Vivisectors will always claim that theirs
serve such a purpose, even if armies of experienced MDs and scientists
assure us of the contrary.

In this way Peter Singer, whom the majority of animal welfare
organisations, including Animals' Agenda, have been presenting to the
public for years as the symbol of anti-vivisectionism, enables the
vivisection lobbyists and industrial alibi seekers to proclaim: "Even
Singer concedes the necessity of some animal experiments!"

A Naked Emperor?

For years we assumed that nothing more worrisome than incompetence or
ignorance were responsible for the great moral philosopher's repeated
faux pas. Our illusion was shattered in 1987, the day we learned that
Peter Singer had used all his considerable prestige as an animal
rightist to help Dr Judith Hampson in her Government-appointed task to
establish the new Australian and New Zealand Federation of Animal
Welfare, along the guidelines elaborated by the same Dr Hampson on
behalf of the Home Office, i.e. Britain's chemical conglomerate, and
that he had even become the Federation's Vice-President.

It was in this capacity, after members of the Animal Liberation Front
had indignantly protested the creation of this new humbug animal
welfare Federation, that Peter Singer tried to defend it with a letter
dated November 17, 1987, which included a paragraph in defence and
praise of Judith Hampson and Richard Ryder, to wit:

"I'll add a personal remark here. Some of the letters attacked Judith
as a "vivisector", presumably on the basis of some experimentation she
did many years ago as part of her biological training. This, and other
points in the letters, smacks of the personal villification (sic) used
by Hans Ruesch and his followers against people like Richard Ryder,
and for quite a few years now in the case of Barnes. It was Ryder,
after all, who first coined the word 'speciesm' which has helped to
make many people aware of the real meaning of our attitudes to
animals. I strongly object to Ruesch and those who unthinkingly follow
his methods in blackening someone's reputation."

Besides the fact that Ruesch mainly quoted Dr Hampson's own words, so
that it wasn't he but she herself who blackened her face, Singer's
letter is revealing in more ways than one. Characteristically, in the
Professor's eye Richard Ryder's only achievement worthy of mention
seems to be the coining of a word! And in fact we can't think of any
other achievement of RR's either, in his whole long career as a
vivisector first and a league politician afterwards.

Then we are mildly surprised that a university professor, writing in
his mother language, should misspell such a current word as
"vilification", probably in the mistaken belief that it derives from
"villain" rather than "vile" (to make vile, to debase).

But of course what we most strongly object to is that this professed
champion of "animal rights", who by virtue of his book's title has
widely been identified with the whole Animal Liberation movement, now
repudiates its activists and deprecates their actions no less than
Judith Hampson does, and then explicitly extols this woman's
achievements as an animal welfarist, although on her rests the main
responsibility for setting up, propagandizing and legally anchoring
for many decades to come in most of Europe and the anglophone world,
the most shameful "vivisectors' charter" ever concocted in the
interest of Britain's chemical industry in collaboration with the
Swiss industry and government (Dr. Andreas Steiger). No doubt to the
great satisfaction of the animal breeders' lobbyists, whose reps sit
in the RDS and RSPCA councils. And where else, Professor?

In the same year 1987, Peter Singer and Animals' Agenda teamed up for
still another interview about animal experimentation, all of 6 pages
long, in which once more nothing but the 1000 year old, worthless
philosophical arguments cropped up ("Our message is a moral one"),
while the all important message of the scientific failure and damage
of the animal model method remained carefully ignored. No doubt, to
the vast satisfaction of the vivisection and allied lobbies.

In this way thousands of pages of valuable newsprint are being
squandered world-wide on sham debates or vacuous inanities voiced by
the accredited, but bogus animal welfarists, while the many honest,
courageous and intelligent MDs and scientists try in vain to get their
dissenting views known to the public across the wall of censorship and
silence set up by the industry-beholden media.

THE SOCIETIES

As Sherlock Holmes noted in the curious case of the dog that did not
bark in the night, it is not by what they say but by what they leave
unsaid that you can often recognize the infiltrators among the
individuals in charge of the animal welfare societies. They can't
plead ignorance, because the first task of those who are paid to fight
vivisection is to do their homework and get fully informed.

But in the April 1987 issue of the American A V, the journal of the
AAVS, we read this distressing information in the President's Message:

"We continue to support the work of the International Foundation for
Ethical Research (IFER). You will recall this is the public, non-
profit corporation we established in concert with NAVS and NEAVS. It
seeks and encourages the cooperative efforts of scientists to find
alternatives by the refinement, reduction and replacement of animals
in research, education and testing." (Emphasis added).

The above refers to the policy of the "3 R's", devised by the British
chemical interests and palmed off to the Parliamentarians of the
Common Market in Strasbourg and Bruxelles as a progressive step in
animal welfare, instead of a step backward. Its purpose is anesthetic
- designed to fool the Parliamentarians and provide them with an
alibi, and to allude the A Vs that "something is being done." Its
unavowed purpose is of course to perpetuate vivisection, meanwhile
extorting more money from the A Vs; money that is then regularly
funneled into the vivisectors' kitties, through the various "funds for
alternative research" - as has in fact been the case time and time
again, in Italy as well as Germany, in Britain as well as America.

Another major American A V organisation is the National Anti-
Vivisection Society (NAVS), its seat being Chicago, near the cradle of
American vivisection, the University of Illinois. Founded in 1929 by
famous stage and movie actor John Arliss, the NAVS in the 1950s
abandoned its scientific stand and joined the philosophical doldrums
of all the other major A V societies.

In 1980 it engaged as Technical Adviser a graduate of Ohio State
University, Donald J Barnes, a psychologist who had to work on monkeys
for 16 years at Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio before he
confessedly awoke to the cruelty and futility of what he was doing and
allegedly got himself fired, so that he had to look for some other
job, which he found at NAVS (see Naked Empress, p. 138).

Recently he authored for the NAVS members a 3,000 word paper titled
"On Debating The Vivisectors", filled with good advice, but marred by
big sins. Sins of omission. Among the 3,000 words, we searched in vain
for two all-important ones, which should also have defined vivisection
as being "useless" and "counterproductive", or any of their synonyms.
But they were all conspicuously missing.

Already in the opening paragraph Barnes declares that "vivisection is
immoral and unethical for it violates the inherent rights of the
vivisected animal." No other objection? None whatever. It just
violates the animals' "rights", whatever they are. From there Barnes
moves on to semantics, discoursing elegantly about how the debaters
should use the word "animal".

Now imagine a lawmaker using Barnes' arguments against vivisection in
Congress or on the Senate Floor! But there is worse. On page 3 Barnes
warns:

"Don't get caught in 'scientific' (technical) arguments which you
cannot win. Beat a hasty retreat to philosophy and brandish your
weapons: Tom Regan's The Case for Animal Rights and Peter Singer's
Animal Liberation."

Then on page 5:

Be prepared to deal with the question of alternatives, for you will be
asked. In my opinion, it is foolish to argue that alternatives exist
for the experiments being conducted today, for they do not.

Well, if a vivisector had written this, we would understand; in fact,
Barnes was a vivisector for years, and we agree that there is no
alternative for the kind of experiments he had been persuaded to
conduct in San Antonio, for the simple reason that it's impossible to
find an "alternative" to stupidity and sadism. But as already Prof.
Croce explained in his book, the very word "alternatives" is a
misnomer, for we should speak of "scientific" methods, meaning
intelligent ones, which do exist, and have been used, and it is
through them that we have learned all that we really know about
medicine, and not through animal experimentation.

In this fleeting survey of some societies, we have purposely ignored
various other important A V or humane societies like the HSUS, whose
lavishly salaried President, John Hoyt, a Baptist minister, does not
object to the vivisection of purpose bred animals, and the two major
Scottish societies who have long ago disqualified themselves by openly
sustaining the shameful British bill of 1986, under the leadership of
Clive Hollands of Edinburgh.

DOUBLE TALK

Particularly harmful to the cause of abolition are the self-styled
scientists who pretend abhorrence of vivisection by reporting
disapprovingly, in all their gory details, some of the sufferings of
the animals, which they denounce from the lofty heights of ethical
pinnacles, but then violently criticize those people who deny any
validity to those experiments.

CATHERINE ROBERTS

One such scientist is Catherine Roberts, a microbiologist and graduate
of the University of California. For a while she fooled even us into
mistaking her for a convinced anti-vivisectionist, after reading her
debate with monkey head transplanter, Robert White, as reported in
Slaughter. That was before we had "learned to read" AV literature, and
before we dug up an admission of this assiduous contributor to A V
journals that she was a true believer in vivisection. (So why on earth
does she contribute to A V journals at all?)

After a particularly convolute philosophical disquisition of hers had
left us groggy, we decided to look into her book, The Scientific
Conscience, (1974), which had been hailed in several A V journals on
both sides of the Atlantic, and we found our fears confirmed. After
duly excoriating the cruelty of vivisection and the callousness of the
experimenters, she surprises and then misleads the reader with
statements like the following:

"We have, on one hand, the idealism arising from man's recently
acquired interest in humaneness... We have, on the other hand, the
idealism inherent in medical research, whose goal it is to acquire by
all available means complete knowledge of the mammalian body in order
to improve, through more enlightened care, the health of man and of
his domesticated animals." (p. 38)

Almost identical words juxtapposing the "idealism" of animal defenders
to the "idealism" of animal experimenters were used in circulars
distributed by Dr Judith Hampson after the Strasbourg Hearings. In
other passages, Dr Roberts' appreciation of the practice becomes more
explicit:

"The benefits of the health of mankind from all this scientific
activity are so well known that they certainly need not be
enumerated." (p. 35)

"Of course, the final decision as to what experiments should be
performed must be made by scientists alone without outside
interference. Anything else would be intolerable and degrading to the
profession." (p. 46)

Compounding the confusion and surprise, the publisher of this book,
Jon Wynne-Tyson, owner of the Centaur Press, is not only the author of
some inspirational books on vegetarianism, but has also repeatedly
professed, in public and private, his abhorrence of vivisection. For
ethical reasons only, of course. Never a word wasted on its scientific
nullity, the one argument that might really put an end to it once and
for all.

But we wanted, then as now, to stick to medical questions and leave
ethics to the philosophers, who all seem to do an excellent job
without our help. So we asked this Dr Roberts to forgo generalizations
for once and mention precise cases of the indispensability of animal
experiments. On March 13, 1981, she cited not one but two cases:

1. Once while walking she picked up a tick which had already burrowed
far into her leg when she discovered it. She was saved from the dire
consequences of an infection by the application of an antibiotic salve
a doctor had prescribed.

2. Her dog had once developed a canine malady called "hot-spot",
caused by a flea bite and accompanied by rapid loss of hair. "The most
effective cure is cortisone," Dr Roberts told us in her letter, and so
of course her dog also was saved.

Now it's this kind of answer that we keep getting by the bucketful
from self-styled scientists that have convinced us of the carefully
organized fraud underlying the propaganda in favor of lucrative animal
experimentation. Ticks and fleas have been existing for thousands of
years, and neither people nor beasts have been dying from them. We
found that out as far back as in the 1920s, when we lived in Southern
Italy where in the summer time all our domestic animals, and people
too, fought fleas and ticks without losses of lives, many decades
before antibiotics and cortisone had been developed; two types of
drugs that have been enriching the manufacturers and causing havoc
among the consumers, ranging from severe mental disorders (Cortisone-
induced madness) to a host of other maladies, one of the last of which
is presumed to be AIDS.

What struck us was Dr Roberts' choice of giving us one example showing
alleged benefits to people, and another showing alleged benefits to
animals, both allegedly derived from animal experimentation;
sustaining the official propaganda line of the vivisection community
that the practice benefits both people and animals. Mere coincidence?

In spite of her confessed, profound conviction of the advantages of
animal experimentation, Catherine Roberts continues to this day to
write inspirational articles for professedly abolitionist society
journals like the Chicago based NAVS.
=========================================

INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.
INFILTRATORS ANONYMOUS - The Caring Alternative.

Message has been deleted

ishta...@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 12:19:19 PM11/14/07

On Nov 14, 4:27 pm, Ed <ed-ro...@nochoppedpork.co.uk> wrote:
> Good.

==========================================================
Hans Ruesch, founder of the modern scientific anti-vivisection
movement, died on Monday 27th August 2007, aged 94.

Though to some people purportedly fighting vivisection this will mean
little, his books having been shielded from them by the leaders of the
big 'anti-vivisection societies', it is very much a truth that a
beacon of light has gone out. The AV movement, largely unaware it may
be, has lost a great and courageous man, a rare genius who stood out
in an ocean of mediocrity that the AV 'movement' today represents.
Though Hans was an animal lover, and pleaded for abolition from a
moral stance, he also fully realised the futility of campaigning
against vivisection on moral grounds alone, and as a virtual one-man
band his CIVIS organisation claimed many successes in its battle
against vivisection.

There is currently little meaningful opposition to vivisection in the
United Kingdom: apathy, short-sightedness and an inability on the part
of most people within the movement to understand the issue of
vivisection has resulted in an anti-vivisection movement that is
unable, or unwilling, to respond effectively to the challenges that it
faces, and the lies as put forward by the pro-vivisection
establishment. It is also very true that vivisection will never end so
long as concerned people believe that the notion of animal rights can
end the organised and state-legalised fraud of animal experimentation.
This has been gone over thoroughly in the article, Time to Face Facts

Furthermore, that many people in the movement continue to offer
support, both financial and vocal, to those organisations and
individuals whose words, actions and policies clearly go against the
interests of an anti-vivisection movement that MUST change tact if it
is to get anywhere, whilst ignoring all evidence as to the rampant
infiltration such organisations have been subjected to, are obviously
major factors in having brought about the current dire state of the AV
movement.

This web site is for the benefit of those who wish to break free from
the web of deception as spun by the major 'anti-vivisection'
organisations out there, including their various phoney 'funds for
alternatives', whose only success has been to relieve gullible
campaigners of their money whilst helping to spread the lie that the
only way to end vivisection is through the development of
'alternatives'. This site will also, I hope, serve as a tribute to a
courageous man, whose dream of abolition was, sadly, not realised in
his life-time, although it is a fact that when abolition does come it
will be Ruesch's name that will take its rightful place in the history
books as having brought about this great leap in humanity's evolution.

As the essential first step, read Slaughter of the Innocent. Written
30 years ago, and still in print, it is as valid a call for abolition
as it ever was. Then read his follow-up, Naked Empress.

Read the two CIVIS Bulletins from 1983 and 1988 (complete on this
site). Though for many people new to the movement some - though not
all - of the names of people and organisations in them will be
unknown, whilst many will no longer be around, the facts within them
are a major document of the history of the AV movement over a 20 or so
year period. They should be read with the following in mind: "He who
forgets the past is doomed to repeat it", the point of which should be
clear to anyone capable of thought. It is my hope that soon a concise
and accurate history of the AV movement to date will be written, and
which will go a long way to opening the eyes of all those who wonder
just why vivisection has continued into the 21st century.

Follow these with the CIVIS Foundation Reports, starting with number
one and read through in sequence.

Read the CIVIS 'Black Booklet'; Vivisection is Scientific Fraud. 42
pages of b/w photos from vivisection labs the world over, and
originally part of the first edition of Naked Empress. Again, a lesson
from history, and perfectly valid as ever, despite the veneer of
respectability that the proponents of vivisection try to place over
the practice in order to hide the ghastly truth from the public. In
reality, despite the intervening years since this booklet came out,
little has changed for lab animals.

Finally there is the CIVIS Questions and Answers booklet, and a few
selected articles.

My advice for those new to the horrors of vivisection, and who
GENUINELY wish to do something about it, rather than dream, would be
to read the CIVIS literature and to treat it as a beacon of light to
guide you. Use it as the standard by which all future so-called AV
campaigners, organisations, books, and articles you come into contact
with are judged. Ideally, any campaigning groups, no matter how small,
would be based upon these works. Remember that a one man outfit can
achieve - indeed, did achieve - much more than the biggest so-called
'anti-vivisection' organisations, with their numerous staff and large
incomes, if run upon genuine lines.

To anyone seriously contemplating joining the fight against
vivisection I respectfully suggest that:

A) The notion of 'animal rights' is consigned to the history books; it
has reduced the level of anti-vivisectionism to the level of
playground squabbling, whilst creating a loathing on the part of most
people for the anti-vivisection movement.

B) Any discussion about 'alternatives' to vivisection, or the
'3Rs' (reduction, replacement, refinement) is not entered into for
reasons that should be obvious to those who have read the material on
this site.

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

The above is reproduced from the BAVA website.

For a more realistic view of what this is all about, see:

http://groups.google.ie/group/The-Voice-of-the-Voiceless/browse_thread/thread/ecfa0106e8c7bbe9?hl=en

Message has been deleted

ishta...@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 1:20:34 PM11/14/07

Why didn't one of you AV shitebags tell me that Hans Ruesch died in
August?

I happened upon the news today, 14 November 2007, when looking for
something else on the BAVA website.

I screamed for Vicky and leaned against her breasts and wept
hysterically....

Hans Ruesch is dead.

I'm still weeping as I write this.

He's worth weeping for.

Why did you not tell me at the time, you shitebags......... ?

I'm not into funerals, but to express my respect for Hans Ruesch I
might have done something ........... if you had told me at the
time........

I suppose you're still feeling guilty about the suppression of the
Citizens Arrest Initiative.

http://www.nzavs.org.nz/mobilise/27/12.html

You are false.

It all ended in 1990.

But we need to evaluate our psychological impairment which caused us
to reject the Citizens Arrest Initiative.

It's not a case of feeling guilty about the suppression of the
Citizens Arrest Initiative.

It's just a case of acknowledging that we are very severely mentally
impaired.

http://www.article-planet.com/article314.html

Why didn't you tell me, when it happened.

Yes, a light has gone out.

He's gone now.

They've all gone.......... Wilhelm Reich, Immanuel Velikovsky, Hans
Ruesch, Paul Brunton.......

And the avalanche of "animal tested" (=untested) poisons is rotting
our brains, so no other men like them can emerge......... because our
brains are made of shit now..... meaning all these "animal
tested" (=untested) poisons are rotting our brains, hence the "dumbing
down" and all the other imbecility you see around you..........
"animal tested" (=untested) poisons are rotting our brains..... so
there will be no more great men like Wilhelm Reich, Immanuel
Velikovsky, Hans Ruesch, Paul Brunton.......... Our brains are made of
shit now, because our brains are filled with "animal
tested" (=untested) poisons....

As I said in 1987:

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

Hans Ruesch is dead.

What now for planet earth?

http://groups.google.com/group/us.legal/browse_thread/thread/3bee94a7f7d25cac/9d5487686a103e9b?hl=en#9d5487686a103e9b

ishta...@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 1:56:07 PM11/14/07

What is it with you shitebags at BAVA?

Why can't you and Patrick and Sue and Bina and Bette and the others
FACE the FACT that it all ENDED in 1990.............?

It finished there and then in 1990.

Yes, the true history should be written, if the present shit
civilisation holds together............. but is BAVA happy about the
true history of the AV movement........... the crucial event being the
suppression of the Citizens Arrest Initiative in 1990.......

That event in 1990 was pivotal.

After you rejected the Citizens Arrest Initiative, the ruling group
knew they had a free hand to do whatever they wanted to do to us.

Next came the Treaty of Maastricht..... and the rest.......

They've got us.

You surrendered to them in 1990, when you remained silent on the
Citizens Arrest Initiative.

I'm willing to help you fuckers at BAVA, and your cohorts, to come
into the real world. But not in writing. Reply only by telephone.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 6:34:04 PM11/14/07

On Nov 14, 6:56 pm, "ishtar.c...@ntlworld.com"

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

Hans Ruesch stepped outside the *fake debates* authorised by the
ruling group.

That's why you've never heard of him.

He's not part of the *fake debates* that the ruling group permits you
to engage in.

Hans Ruesch is dead.

What now for planet earth?

http://groups.google.ie/group/The-Voice-of-the-Voiceless/browse_thread/thread/ecfa0106e8c7bbe9?hl=en

Janitor of Lunacy

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 6:52:02 PM11/14/07

How I miss him! His posts to uk.legal were always pointed, witty, and above
all else, on topic.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 14, 2007, 6:58:28 PM11/14/07

You have never heard of Hans Ruesch.

Hans Ruesch stepped outside the *fake debates* which the ruling group
permit you to engage in.

Hans Ruesch engaged in a debate which is declared non-existent by the
ruling group of the present tragic civilisation...... and their
slaves .... meaning YOU.

Hans Ruesch is dead.

What now for planet earth?

More *fake debates* ?

Or.............
http://groups.google.ie/group/The-Voice-of-the-Voiceless/browse_thread/thread/ecfa0106e8c7bbe9?hl=en

Edric

unread,

Nov 15, 2007, 2:41:21 PM11/15/07

"Janitor of Lunacy" <gh...@attic.info> wrote in message
news:CSL_i.263026$lV4....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

> How I miss him! His posts to uk.legal were always pointed, witty, and
> above all else, on topic.

Who gives a fuck

Janitor of Lunacy

unread,

Nov 15, 2007, 2:59:33 PM11/15/07

"Edric" <edric@> wrote in message news:1destm....@news.alt.net...

Whooooosh!

The Todal

unread,

Nov 15, 2007, 3:52:38 PM11/15/07

"Janitor of Lunacy" <gh...@attic.info> wrote in message
news:CSL_i.263026$lV4....@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

> How I miss him! His posts to uk.legal were always pointed, witty, and
> above all else, on topic.

Never heard of him, never noticed any posts from him. Could you quote one?

Janitor of Lunacy

unread,

Nov 15, 2007, 4:11:08 PM11/15/07

"The Todal" <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote in message
news:5q3pslF...@mid.individual.net...

You probably missed "How to spot irony" ;-))

The Todal

unread,

Nov 15, 2007, 4:59:16 PM11/15/07

"Janitor of Lunacy" <gh...@attic.info> wrote in message

news:MB2%i.265455$lV4.1...@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

Oops.

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 24, 2007, 8:08:00 PM11/24/07

CIVIS Bulletin Nr 2, New Year 1988 (Part Three)

Meanwhile, Gill (Langley) was riding for a fall. Even as she was
propagandizing the need for vivisection and rejecting all allegations
that she was an infiltrator, the shining fortress of humaneness she
had built around herself came unstuck. A vegan, Mr Alfred Bunting of
Uxbridge, while investigating how come a Dr Christopher Langley had
ever managed to escalate into the directorship of the Vegan Society of
Great Britain, made a startling discovery, concerning not only this
Christopher Langley, but also his wife, Gill: both Chris and Gill were
trained vivisectors - and Christopher Langley was an employee of Ciba-
Geigy to boot! This Swiss multinational had conducted a covert,
intense smear propaganda against Hans Ruesch's works in Switzerland.
This gave at last a logical explanation to Gill Langley's persistent
defamation of Hans Ruesch in the anti-vivisectionist press.

Following is an abstract of a letter Mr A Bunting addressed to Mark
Souster of the Sunday Mirror on May 10, 1987, explaining the Langley
case:

"Thank you for your article today, publicising the fiendish cruelty of
Professor Colin Blakemore of Oxford University. But I am surprised to
see your mention that 'Dr Gill Langley' pontificated on "clinical
value", as though she were a physician. She isn't.

"'Dr Gill' had no medical training whatsoever. She is Mrs Gillian Rose
Langley, nee Dymond, of 46 King's Road, Hitchin. She got her PhD for
experimenting on cockroaches. After getting her PhD she worked for
about a year at Nottingham University, experimenting on rabbits.
Though no expert on "clinical value", she certainly knows about
cruelty in laboratories. As an apparently lucrative sideline Mrs
Langley is the boss and sole paid employee of the Dr Hadwen (begging)
Trust for Humane Research. Its leaflets ask for money to be sent to
her home, though she is not the treasurer.

"Although ostensibly opposed to vivisection, Mrs Langley's writings
put in plugs for the alleged benefits of vivisection. And she never
mentions her husband's estimated £35,000 per year Ciba-Geigy
bloodmoney. Ciba-Geigy is one of the largest multinational vivisection-
based pharmaceutical manufacturers. Its nerve centre is the CIBA
FOUNDATION FOR THE PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION IN MEDICAL
AND CHEMICAL RESEARCH, 41 Portland Place, London W1. Senior
Physiologist there is Mr Christopher Kenneth Langley PhD, 'Dr Gill's'
husband. Like his wife he has no medical qualification. Without
revealing his full true name or his Ciba job, 'Dr Chris Langley'
became director of the formerly humanitarian Vegan Society Ltd. In his
first 2 years as director the Society lost £ 75,959."

But don't stop reading yet, folks. The Langley story, like Caesar's
wife, gets more exciting as the night grows older.

When the information unearthed and disseminated by Mr Bunting started
causing considerable ripples in vegan circles, the Langleys resorted
to a trick they must have learned from the confidential vade mecum of
the Swiss multinationals, revealed by the "Group of Berne", a
respectable, watchdog Swiss organisation made up of concerned
businessmen: to discredit Mr Bunting and undermine his credibility,
they started disseminating faked letters that Mr Bunting was supposed
to have written, counterfeiting his signature. This was a trick the
multinationals employed in Switzerland against us, too, at the time of
the Franz-Weber-Initiative. Mr Bunting refused to be intimidated or
disconcerted, and saw to it that in October 1986 Christopher Langley
was served with a writ that said among other things:

"You falsely and maliciously wrote and published to various persons
including Society members defamatory matter concerning me including a
faked letter to 'Dear Glad' purporting to be written by me that you
pretended I had sent you; you falsely passed off the said faked
letters as being my writing."

But meanwhile his wife, Gill, had already broken down in a desperate
attempt to restore her damaged image in the eyes of the naive who had
not yet abandoned AA or cancelled any legacies to her private Hadwen
Trust in their wills. In an amazing circular, reeking with
sanctimoniousness and soggy from crocodile tears, entitled GILL
LANGLEY'S POSITION STATEMENT ON THE McCANN/RUESCH ACCUSATIONS, she
tried to justify her past as a vivisector with the following
confession:

"Tommy McCann accuses me of having been a vivisector. These are the
facts: At university as an undergraduate (1971-74) I took part in
physiology practical classes where decerebrate rabbits were used to
demonstrate known medical facts. I intensely disliked these classes...
These experiments were not legally defined as vivisection and did not
appear in the annual statistics. They are standard practice for
physiology students...I spent nearly 4 years doing a PhD (1971-74) in
which I studied the nervous system of cockroaches. I dissected many
hundreds in research which I gradually came to feel was morally
unjustified. In 1977 I became an anti-vivisectionist, persuaded by the
ethical arguments... In 1979 I could carry on no longer with work
which contradicted my principles..."

So it took this good lady, who already in 1971 "intensely disliked"
what she had been doing with decerebrate rabbits, all of 6 years of
uninterrupted laboratory activity to "become an antivivisectionist,"
and then it took her another two years of more of all that sadistic
idiocy to make her decide that she "could carry on no longer" with
that sort of work!

This document further confirms that surely a good number of cruel
experiments take place without anybody ever learning about them
because they are "not legally defined as vivisection," and thus
neither require a licence nor do they figure in the statistics - one
more "legal" trick designed to circumvent the law. There is no limit
to the inventiveness of vivisectors and their accomplices in the Home
Office.

Another interesting point in the circular is that Gill Langley once
more demonstrates that she toes the Syndicate's line by objecting to
vivisection solely on "ethical" grounds, as if those obscenities
involving animals had the slightest medical value, which she once more
seems to take for granted. And she tactfully refrains from ever
mentioning the CIBA-GEIGY connection of her devoted husband, Chris,
during all the years of anguish she allegedly underwent on witnessing
the suffering she had to inflict to her victims.

Anyway, Gill Langley will hardly last very long as the spiritual head
of AA. An infiltrator, once unmasked, becomes useless to the
Syndicate. Mark Gold, who figures as Editor of AA's organ, Outrage,
once wrote to a South-African correspondent: "If ever I should
discover that AA is infiltrated, I would resign." He discovered it a
year ago - unless he knew it all along - and his correspondents are
still waiting for his resignation.

However, the real wire-puller at AA is neither Langley nor Gold but
one John Bryant, who prefers to remain unobserved and figures only in
small print as one of the various Council members, after he managed to
get rid of all the honest animal welfarists like Jean Fawcett and her
husband, who were once in charge of AA's Ipswich branch.

To whom John Bryant has, in turn, to report, we have not been able to
find out. It is obviously someone much higher up than a modest
employee of a bungling animal welfare society.

THE LANGLEY MANAGEMENT

Now what is the Langley couple's real motive? Well-meaning, naive
animal welfarists assume it is just a matter of ordinary greed, a
successful fee-grabbing operation by unscrupulous pseudo-scientists
who found it convenient to palm themselves off as animal loving
veganists in order to escalate into the lucrative, easy directorship
of "humane" societies. Mr Bunting, an honest gentleman, held this view
as he investigated the odd couple.

However, long familiarity with the trickeries of the Che-Me-Vi
Kombinat, described in Naked Empress, suggested a far more sinister
motive, also because a man who is in the employ of Ciba-Geigy, like
Chris Langley, would hardly need to supplement his salary by creeping
into the directorship of some humane society. So what is the answer?

In Great Britain every active A V must also be a vegetarian, and even
a vegan, to retain his credibility in the movement. So whoever
controls the Vegan Society of Great Britain can also influence its
most dedicated A Vs, and try discouraging and paralyzing them with the
kind of misinformation that Gill Langley and Richard Ryder and Angela
Walder et al, keep spreading, like "all animal experiments can't be
renounced, but if you want to fight vivisection, just keep away from
cosmetics and give us money to find alternatives".

But the Langleys play a far more sinister role than to try influencing
the waning membership of AA, since both have succeeded in escalating
also into the management of the Nature Cure Clinic, Ltd, which was
founded in 1928 as "a non profit-making organisation under medical
supervision for the promotion of health by natural means." An example
shall typify the situation.

In the 1950s, a lady of our acquaintance had been completely cured of
a serious liver ailment within two months in the Nature Cure Clinic of
London, without any drugs, after her doctor had been unable to cure
her with drugs.

Some 30 years later, this lady's daughter was suffering from severe
stomach pains, but being pregnant she was afraid of taking the drugs
her doctor had prescribed. So on her mother's advice she called the
Nature Cure Clinic for an appointment. After stating her case what she
got from the other end of the line was not an appointment but a
scolding: she was told, by a doctor who didn't even visit her, that it
was very dangerous to attempt curing serious ailments with natural
remedies - and she should take the drugs her doctor had prescribed!

It seems clear that by now Big Brother has taken over also
establishments like the formerly prestigious Nature Cure Clinic, which
He directs from the shadows through stooges like the Langleys, who
must make sure that the morons' religious faith in the miraculous
power of the lucrative chemical poisons shall not die.

Dr JUDlTH E. HAMPSON, BSC, PHD, CBIOL, MIBIOL, chief animal
experimentation officer, RSPCA and EUROGROUP FOR ANIMAL WELFARE

This lady represents the main link between the RSPCA, Britain's oldest
among the phoney "animal welfare" societies, and its most recent
international outshoot, the Eurogroup for Animal Welfare, founded in
Brussels in 1979 by the British chemical interest, a few months after
Slaughter of the Innocent had been published in Great Britain.

Hampson's role as defender of vivisection in the international
organisation that pretends to protect the animals instead of the
chemical industry in the European Council at Strasbourg is described
in the CIVIS Bulletin Nr 1 (pp 35 & ff), published in November 1983.

Since then, the shameful Convention of the European Community that is
binding on the majority of Europe's industrialized countries and that
Hampson has helped impose in the name of animal welfare has finally
been accepted, in 1985. As a consequence, animal experimentation is
not only guaranteed to continue at an increased rate in number and
cruelty in the traditional venues, but is also assured to expand and
flourish in countries where animal experimentation is still in its
infancy, like Spain. Common Market rules, which new member-State Spain
is bound to comply with, as will future member-States, now impose
these bogus "safety-tests", to the great delight of the chemical
industry, of the medical organisations, and of the animal-breeders'
lobbies, whose activities we personally witnessed in the European
Parliament at Strasbourg.

Dr Judith Hampson, who led the "Team of Experts" of the Eurogroup, the
only official "animal welfare" organisation at the Strasbourg
Hearings, is personally responsible for letting the European
Parliaplentarians accept as genuine the false information issued by
the Research Defence Society, Britain's vivisection lobby, whose
members were palmed off at the Hearings as being honestly concerned
with the animals' instead of the industry's welfare. She wasn't only
an accomplice by omission, by silence, but by commission, because she
sustained to the Parliamentarians the theses of the industry. The
other members of the team sinned by omission: they kept silent. They
were: Ms Sheila Silcock (RSPCA consultant), Dr Henk Smid (Holland),
Madame Denise Pasternak (Switzerland), Dr Stafley (Holland) and Dr G A
MacGregor (UK).

For the first time in the history of anti-visectionism, a rule was
passed that allows the repeated use of the same animal in cruel
experimental surgery.

The second time was soon to come: when the Animals (Scientific
Procedures) Bill was enacted in British Parliament in 1986. The same
people as in Strasbourg pulled the strings there. Very few
parliamentarians realised what went on, or cared to know.

In The Guardian of April 9, 1985 Hampson wrote an article titled "When
animal rights confront human suffering", and signed it 'Dr Judith
Hampson, Chief Animal Experimentation Research Officer, RSPCA'. The
title of the article itself was tendentiously misleading. Judith
Hampson stated further:

"...Since our society has not yet come to accept holistic values,
animals are in our laboratories and seem likely to remain, Therefore
it will not help them merely to argue that their use is immoral, we
must also campaign vigorously for the alleviation of suffering."

There again talk of immorality, but no hint of the futility and
noxiousness to human health. Another gem was her statement that she
does not believe "that the use of animals in research can be
philosophically justified..." So we are back to philosophy, the great
diversionary playground. But the moment she dares speak scientifically
Dr Hampson doesn't hesitate to proclaim a big lie, knowing full well
it is a lie, and knowing equally well that it will remain undetected
by the overwhelming majority of the uninformed lay public. Says she:

"There will always remain a small core of experiments which do
represent a genuine ethical dilemma. I place in this category the
testing of human and animal vaccines, which, as yet, cannot all be
done without the use of animals."

Thus Hampson doesn't neglect to drag in the "religious" question of
vaccines in her article - the most likely to appeal to a thoroughly
brainwashed public. We can't discuss this vast subject in such limited
space, except to remind the reader that many manufacturers have
stopped vaccine production until the government guarantees to come up
for damages in case of further product liability lawsuits from damaged
consumers, or their survivors. Hampson's deliberate misinformation
resides in the fact that vaccines can be made, and are in fact being
made, without animals, using the much safer methods developed by
Hayflick, Nigrelli and Aygun decades ago.

That Hampson uses every possible lie to keep the consumption of
animals at a high level would seem to bear out the allegations of long
standing that she and her cronies hold substantial shares in the
animal breeders associations.

That would also help explain why she joined Gill Langley in defining
Slaughter of the Innocent and Naked Empress as totally "unreliable",
as the best way to keep readers away from them. On RSPCA stationery,
she wrote on July 24, 1985 to Mr Henry Turtle:

"Both books are littered with inaccuracies and totally unsubstantiated
statements, I do not have time to list them."

Our friends begged her to list them, but she didn't comply. But
meanwhile she made herself guilty of something far worse than a mere
"inaccuracy", in fact a deliberate scientific lie, by writing to the
same Mr Turtle on June 12, 1985:

Childhood leukaemia, previously incurable, is now cured in the
majority of cases by chemotherapy, developed by animal tests.

Here we have one more example of an official "animal welfarist" who
strives to validate the propaganda of the chemical, medico and animal
breeders combine that declare chemotherapy as actually life-saving
instead of death-dealing, as in fact it is. Her statement isn't simply
misleading but criminal in view of the well-known fact that leukaemia
has been dramatically increasing, especially among children, ever
since the various modern "therapies" have been inflicted upon a
frightened, artfully misinformed public.

Urethane has sometimes an inhibitory effect on human leukaemia, in
contrast to what animal experiments had shown.

Prof. Alexander Haddow wrote in the British Medical Journal, Dec. 2,
1950:

"The characteristic effects in leukaemia were detected solely as a
result of clinical observation. The various leukaemias in the mouse
and rat were relatively refractory to the influence of urethane, and
the remarkable effect in the human might have eluded discovery if
attention had been directed to the animal alone."

So while the properties of urethane might never have been discovered
because of animal experimentation, other much-touted therapies, such
as vaccinations and sulfa drugs, have been recognized as being
directly responsible for the production of leukaemia in humans. So Dr
B Duperrat, physician at the hospital St. Louis, France, wrote in
Presse Medica le as far back as March 12, 1955 (in reference to
smallpox vaccination): "The vaccination causes furthermore an
explosion of leukaemia."

The January 1958 issue of another French medical journal, Revue de
Pathologie Generale et de Physiologie Clinique, related: "The vaccine
modifies the terrain of the vaccinated, driving it towards alkaline
and oxydized terrain - the terrain of cancer. The fact can no longer
be denied."

Professors Julian Aleksandrowickz and Boguslav Halileokowski of the
Medical Academy of Cracow, Poland, had written (as reported by The
Lancet, May 6, 1967): "Already published reports as well as our own
observations indicate that smallpox vaccination sometimes produces
manifestations of leukaemia. In children and adults observed in the
clinics of Cracow, smallpox vaccination has been followed by violent
local and general reactions and by leukaemia."

Further, the July 1957 issue of Medical World, Dr Freda Lucas wrote:
"In England and Wales, total death rates from all forms of leukaemia
have increased more than six time between 1920 and 1952... According
to Wilkinson, sulphonamides (an antibiotic - HR) stand convicted as
one of the contributing factors, even when fairly low dosages were
employed. In cases reported in detail, the tragic path from
agranulocytosis to haemolitic anaemia and acute monolytic leukaemia is
revealed in black and white."

These cases represent just a small sample of the kind of reports by
authoritative medical experts listed in Slaughter of the Innocent. And
this explains why phoney "Animal Welfarists" take such pains trying to
discredit a book that is so embarrassing to their employers.

It is their assignment, in the disguise of concerned animal
welfarists, to persuade the ignorant majority that vivisection "cannot
be entirely dispensed with as yet", but certainly will be some day if
people contribute lavishly to the various fraudulent "funds for
alternatives" which they run partly in their and their colleagues'
own, private interests, and partly as a smokescreen designed to divert
from the central issue: the uselessness and noxiousness of animal
experimentation.

Links for this Bulletin Nr 2

Page 1 + Page 2 + Page 3 + Page 4 + Page 5 + Page 6 + Page 7 + Page 8
+ Page 9 + Page 10

Home----Intro----Articles----Books-----Help----Photos

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 24, 2007, 8:14:38 PM11/24/07

CIVIS Bulletin Nr 2, New Year 1988 (Part Three)

Meanwhile, Gill was riding for a fall. Even as she was propagandizing

the need for vivisection and rejecting all allegations that she was an

infiltrator, the shining fortress of humaneness she had built around

herself came unstuck. A vegan, Mr Alfred Bunting of Uxbridge, while
investigating how come a Dr Christopher Langley had ever managed to
escalate into the directorship of the Vegan Society of Great Britain,
made a startling discovery, concerning not only this Christopher
Langley, but also his wife, Gill: both Chris and Gill were trained

vivisectors - and Christopher Langley was an employee of Ciba-Geigy to

Old Jinglebollocks

unread,

Nov 24, 2007, 8:27:08 PM11/24/07

If only we'd had Tony Holland on our side back then in the
1980s............

...........Gill Langley would have been sneaking out her back door at
3am wearing a false beard, never to be heard from again.

Tony Holland would have knocked the shite out of Gill Langley.

ishta...@ntlworld.com

unread,

Nov 26, 2007, 11:43:29 PM11/26/07

On Nov 25, 1:27 am, Old Jinglebollocks

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

The Vivisection Swindle is one of the greatest of taboos. Nobody
wants
to touch it.
The *fake debate* on vivisection eclipses the truth.
And nobody wants to see that truth.
In early 1988, when Hans Ruesch's second "Bulletin" was circulated
(free of charge), the Langleys of this world were worried, even
afraid, afraid that the people would put two and two together and
come
around to the infiltrators' homes and lynch them. In this connection
I
advised Mrs Langley at the time to invest in a false beard.
In actual fact, by 1988, the surge of awareness and realism regarding
the Vivisection Swindle was already on the wane.
In 1990, the new scientific antivivisection movement effectively
signed its death warrant, and it's been downhill all the way since
then.
Even today, Gill Langley is still raking in donations and legacies
for
her fake, fraudulent "Dr Hadwen Trust," which says 'give me your
money
to try to find alternatives to vivisection,' when Mrs Langley knows
well that the only alternative to FAKE science such as the
Vivisection
Swindle is to simply stop using fake science now and revert to
genuine
science - so there never was anything to "find."

In fact a google advertisement for the organised crime scam called
the
"Dr Hadwen Trust" may even pop up alongside this post!

There is a need to say these things.

But Gill Langley will not be needing her false beard.

Nobody wants to tackle the Vivisection Swindle. The *fake debate*
will
continue. There is something about human beings which makes them
determined to commit collective suicide, determined to revert to a
state of survivalist emergency, recreating and reliving the forgotten
series of ancient survivalist emergencies in which human behaviour is
rooted.

The Vivisection Swindle, with its avalanche of "animal
tested" (=untested) poisons, is our major tool for arranging that
reversion to a state of survivalist emergency. And the *fake debate*
on vivisection to eclipse the truth is part of the package.

We are not going to do anything about it.

That was confirmed by the pivotal non-event of 1990.

Gill Langley will not be needing her false beard.

But there is a need at least for the truth to be displayed in a
public
place, for those who want to read it, a generation after that initial
but short-lived surge of awareness and realism of the 1980s.

Pages 9 to 11 of 'IMPERATRICE NUDA' (Slaughter of the Innocent) by
Hans Ruesch give the shortest route to proving Gill Langley is not
only a fraudster but a mass murderer.

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

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:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------