According
to statements by former Clinton Defense Secretary William Cohen,
the Red Chinese were contacted by the U.S. government last January
about the harassing incidents, which by that time had become almost
routine.April 2, 2001
April 9, 2001
April 16, 2001
April 23, 2001
April 30, 2001
Here's to Your Health
In a significant step toward global government, a prestigious group is calling for an end to all tariffs in the world——to the cheers of the Bush administration.
The National Foreign Trade Council called for an end to tariffs throughout the world at a press conference attended by officials of the Bush administration on March 21.
"The tariff elimination proposal addresses the WTO's most obvious piece of unfinished business——the remaining high level of tariffs on industrial goods worldwide," said Frank Kittrede, council president.
Attending the Washington session were Brenda Fisher of the Commerce Department, Christopher Griffen of State and Normal Vantoai and Eugene Rosengarden, both of the International Trade Commission.
The meeting was hosted by Global Business Dialogue, an advocate for a global economic system. It is based in Washington.
"We firmly believe that global industrial tariff elimination would provide significant economic benefits to American manufacturers, workers and consumers, as well as to the rest of the world," Kittredge said. "If enacted, global tariff elimination could be a powerful economic stimulus."
With "the momentum toward regional zero-tariff agreements, such as NAFTA, FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas), the European Union . . . the next logical step would be political commitment to multilateral zero-tariff trade as well," Kittredge said.
Vince Ryan, chairman of Liberty Lobby, the Institution that led opposition to NAFTA and other so-called "free trade" agreements, ridiculed the proposal for an end to all tariffs.
"They are using the same propaganda that misled Congress into embracing NAFTA," Ryan said. "They promise us more jobs, economic expansion, lower costs of consumer goods and what happens?
"Millions of American jobs have been lost as international corporations shut down their U.S. plants and set up shop in poor countries where they pay slave wages and escape the costly burdens of vacations, health insurance and other fringe benefits imposed in this country by government," Ryan said.
Ryan cited the numerous cases of foreign countries "dumping"——selling below cost until the domestic producer is forced out of business——in calling tariffs a "necessary tool" to protect U.S. industry.
"The worst thing about this propaganda is that world free trade would be tantamount to world government, and this is an undeniable fact," said Ryan.*
Congress should abort the NAFTA treaty and courts should kill it because it does violence to the Constitution, as demonstrated by an international panel claiming power superior to the Supreme Court (SPOTLIGHT, March 26, 2001).
Any dropout from remedial law school knows that it requires a constitutional amendment to surrender national sovereignty to an international body.
But NAFTA was not passed by a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress nor ratified by three-quarters of the states as a constitutional amendment.
In fact, although much was made about the debate in Congress when this evil was committed in November, 1993, it was well disguised. If you depended on the mainstream media, you believed NAFTA was second only to the Second Coming: It would turn America into the land of milk and honey.
The treaty itself consumed thousands of pages in several volumes. It must be assumed that no legislators read it, much less understood it. They just did what they were told. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), then House minority leader, nattered about how he was for "world trade, not world government" while pushing this Bilderberg-dictated step toward global government.
In The SPOTLIGHT's page-by-page examination of the treaty, it appeared to say whatever anybody wants it to say. On one page, for example, it seemed to say that a Mexican woman whose training was significantly lower than states in this country require for a registered nurse could, nevertheless, pursue her profession here. On another page, in another volume, the treaty seemed to say that the Mexican "nurse" would have to meet standards imposed by states in this country.
The fact that a NAFTA tribunal claims superiority over the U.S. Supreme court, lower courts and federal and state agencies is just the first of many shocks SPOTLIGHT has been warning about for years.
Trisha Katson, then Liberty Lobby's legislative advocate, documented that NAFTA was unconstitutional (SPOTLIGHT, Aug. 30, 1993) and helped produce a special edition NAFTA: the Global Plantation that explained the issue to readers and legislators.
Next month, President Bush goes to Canada to begin the process of expanding NAFTA throughout the Western Hemisphere as the "Free Trade Area of the Americas."
As NAFTA expands, the 90-man commission expands accordingly, evolving into the parliament of the "American Union." Next comes "dollarization," or the common currency of the American Union.
Replacing the currencies of the countries with the Federal Reserve's dollars would mean additional hundreds of billions of profit for the bankers paid by taxpayers who have no idea that they must pay interest of the dollars.
Kenneth Clarke, a member of the British parliament, former chancellor of the exchecquer and long-time Bilderberg stalwart, acknowledged in an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with The SPOTLIGHT that this is the secret organization's plan for the world.
Tell your congressman and senators to repeal the NAFTA agreement before U.S. sovereignty is completely turned over to the Global Plantation.*
You can contact the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 or toll free 1-800-648-3516. Call and ask for your lawmaker's office. (If you don't know the name of your representative or senators, the operator will be able to provide those names for you.)
Write your representative in care of the House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 20515. Write both of your senators in care of the U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.
If you wish to check on the status of any legislation, you may call 202-225-1772. The SPOTLIGHT's Legislative Action Center located on our web site at www.spotlight.org highlights important current bills.
Coming Soon! Liberty Lobby's 107th Congress Handbook will be available in the coming months with all updated information on the new and incumbent members of the House and Senate plus lots more. Look for details in upcoming issues of The SPOTLIGHT.*
It's a great day for America when international manipulators are defeated in their efforts to establish another global bureaucracy under the United Nations.
A long, difficult fight led by Liberty Lobby is ending in victory as the Bush administration dumps the Kyoto "global warming" Treaty.
Significantly, President Bush had to resist pressure from Bilderberg in deciding to abandon the treaty signed by the administration of former President Bill Clinton and feverishly endorsed by Al Gore.
It was never sent to the Senate for ratification because the White House knew it would be soundly rejected. The Clinton strategy was to try to implement the treaty through regulation and pieces of legislation while hoping elections would produce a far-left Congress.
It would have imposed stiff limits on air pollution in the United States and other industrialized nations while exempting poor countries, including Mexico.
Platoons of economists warned that implementing the treaty would greatly increase energy prices and result in skyrocketing inflation in the United States.
It would also, they warned, accelerate the transfer of industry and jobs from the United States to Mexico where the huge costs of Kyoto implementation could be avoided.
Hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs have already been lost because of NAFTA, as huge corporations move south where wages are low and costly fringe benefits nonexistent.
Scientists have challenged the theory that there is "global warning" requiring public panic and huge expenditures. They pointed to records showing that the Earth has actually cooled a fraction of a degree in the second half of the 20th century when there were more automobiles and other sources of pollution than ever before.
NO HARD EVIDENCE
The SPOTLIGHT reported on March 26 that average temperatures taken in the first seven miles of the Earth's atmosphere around the globe show no evidence of significant warming and environmental catastrophe.
"This is a monumental victory for America," said Vince Ryan, chairman of Liberty Lobby's Board of Policy, which lobbied the White House to reject the Kyoto Treaty. "If we can win on this issue, we can win on other fronts. At last, America is waking up."
Years before the treaty was signed in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, Bilderberg and its brother group, the Trilateral Commission, had plotted in their secret meetings to establish such a global bureaucracy as another cornerstone of the emerging world government.
Thus, it is significant that Bush resisted their pressure. His father, a former president, was a long-time member of the Trilateral Commission. Henry Kissinger, a power in both groups, is a close adviser. Like all presidents, there are many Bilderberg and Trilateral water-carriers in his administration.
The White House was known to be seeking advice from the State Department on how to withdraw the U.S. signature from the Kyoto Treaty.
Christine Todd Whitman, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, said publicly on March 27 that the Kyoto Treaty is dead as far as the administration is concerned.
"We have no interest in implementing that treaty," she said.
The State Department advised the White House that it could withdraw by having Secretary of State Colin Powell send a letter notifying the United Nations that the United States has no intention of ratifying the treaty.
However, Bush will remain under Bilderberg pressure to sign on to some type of global climate deal.*
The mainstream media is ignoring massive amounts of evidence that could shed light on the worst act of terrorism on domestic soil in U.S. history.
As the nation awaits the May 16 execution of convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, the Establishment media is hyping McVeigh's claim to have acted alone. The media utterly disregards the overwhelming evidence of a wider conspiracy that critics of the government's handling of the case are insisting will be buried with the Persian Gulf War veteran.
Contradictory statements from witnesses indicating a well-orchestrated conspiracy, even with involvement of the government itself, are still being ignored by the national media. It also ignores physical evidence that has disappeared, such as the Ryder rental truck that McVeigh supposedly used to deliver a homemade fertilizer and fuel oil bomb to the front of the Murrah building on April 19, 1995.
Explosions killed 168 people in the worst domestic terrorist event in U.S. history.
Americans are to believe that all that remains of the truck used to deliver the 4,800-pound bomb is the rear axle, a bumper, a few pieces of twisted structural metal, a piece of plywood less than a foot square that was supposedly from the body of the vehicle and the ignition key, which McVeigh conveniently lost while making his escape through a nearby alley.
The huge axle became famous when it was found several times during the course of the investigation, once by Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, a retired FBI big shot, who supposedly stumbled upon it while surveying the damage around the building. When that story was questioned another was offered that it supposedly came close to striking a janitor from a nearby building when it slammed into the man's car.
The plywood fragment was presented as evidence at the trials of McVeigh and his supposed co-conspirator, Terry Nichols, in Denver. It was evidence that the bombing duo used the ammonium nitrate fertilizer and fuel oil mixture to blow up the building.
Ammonium nitrate and fuel oil bombs, as any bomb expert will confirm, are dirty weapons, leaving behind residue everywhere around the blast, but not, as Americans are supposed to believe, at the Murrah building. The only remains were found on that square and jagged piece of plywood.
But, ooops! According to the FBI, the ammonium nitrate mixture on the piece of wood was inadvertently destroyed. It just disappeared when it was being examined at the FBI forensics laboratory.
The fact is the government does not have a single piece of evidence from the crime scene covered with any trace of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, not even on that massive rear axle of the Ryder truck.
There is more evidence to suggest there was not a Ryder truck used in the bombing than to confirm that there was such a vehicle.
Where is the vehicle's huge V-8 engine, weighing several hundred pounds? You are supposed to believe that it, as well as the differential, frame, doors, rims and tires were vaporized—not even a piston, connecting rod or drive shaft was found— not even a huge blob of melted metal.
The mystery of missing evidence does not stop with the truck.
A roll of exposed film was among the items McVeigh had when he was stopped while fleeing the scene.
And where is that film today? The FBI claims it has no knowledge of it, although local Oklahoma police officials insist it was among the inventoried items that were taken when the FBI snatched McVeigh from local custody.
And what was on that missing roll of undeveloped film?
Could it have contained pictures of fellow conspirators in addition to his old army buddy Nichols?
Could it have contained snapshots of the Iraqi, who had supposedly fled to the United States after the war, and was recently revealed as being a part of a larger plot by a young reporter from an Oklahoma City television station?
The reporter had outlined her findings on a recent edition of Fox News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor. The show's host, Bill O'Reilly, seemed to find the reporter's story of interest, but the FBI turned down evidence offered to the agency by the TV broadcaster.
The reporter has statements from numerous witnesses of the involvement of foreign terrorists in the Oklahoma City bombing, including a leader of the earlier bombing of the World Trade Center in New York.
Of course all of these mysteries could be answered by Timothy McVeigh.
The trouble is he simply will not—or cannot—talk and may go to his grave claiming sole responsibility.
No one but McVeigh at this point can explain how or why he (McVeigh) has been convinced to cover up the entire truth about the bombing.*
The SPOTLIGHT has done it again, discovering where this year''s meeting of the Bilderberg Group will be held.
Bilderberg will hold its annual secret meeting at a resort near Gotesberg, or Gothenburg, Sweden May 24-28, The SPOTLIGHT has learned.Bilderberg will meet at the Quality Hotel Stenungsbaden, a luxury resort in Stenungsund, about 30 miles from Gotesberg. While accessible by land, the resort occupies an entire island off the coast.
According to travel agencies, Bilderberg has chosen an ideal location for security purposes——something it has always emphasized but has become even more sensitive about in recent years.
Not only is the resort surrounded by a moat, but travel agencies report finding no accommodations between Stenungsund and Gotesberg. However, people who have traveled there say modest accommodations can be found. In this remote but luxury setting, Bilderberg will deploy armed guards at the gates and around the hotel. Often, when meeting in Europe, Bilderberg deploys the military as well, sometimes with dogs.
The usual luminaries are scheduled to attend, including David Rockefeller and his valet, Henry Kissinger, who are also leaders of the Bilderberg brother group, the Trilateral Commission.
Rockefeller shares power in Bilderberg with the Rothschilds of Britain and Eur ope, and has attended since meetings began under that name in 1954. How ever, Rockefeller is now more than 80 years old and has become stooped and feeble.
PLUTOCRATIC AGENDA
The broad outlines of Bilderberg''s perennial agenda are long known: universal free trade to create a world government under the United Nations and elimination of nation-states so the international plutocrats can turn everyone into wage slaves on their Global Plantation.
But the specific actions planned for the coming year will only be known after SPOTLIGHT completes its penetrations of Bilderberg in Stenungsund. After then, you will be able to read in-depth reports in The SPOTLIGHT and on several web sites which will present the information as their own, without crediting this populist newspaper.
Ever since its founding in 1975, and before this by its publisher, Liberty Lobby, this newspaper has reported on the secret meetings and often the plans of this enigmatic group, Bilderberg. It will be interesting to see if this year the important news will be reported in the controlled media.*
Americans need to know that the gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots" is widening. Opposition to globalization may be the only way to curtail the disparity.
One way to understand the so-called "new global economy" touted by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan is to take a look at the rip-offs of the financial magnates who created and rule it, such as Gerald Levin, chairman and chief executive officer (CEO) of AOL-Time-Warner-CNN Cable News, the world's largest media conglomerate.
Levin, who began his education as a rabbinical student and became a central figure in the tight inner circle that controls much of U.S. communications, ended up on top of this corporate heap by virtue of sharp stock speculation, shrewd interoffice intrigues, massive mergers and other iron-fisted moves required for advancing oneself in today's business.
But although Levin's media empire is huge, it is, despite glowing advance promises from the CEO, not profitable. The pressure-driven mergers of AOL, Time-Warner and Ted Turner's cable-news spread were hammered out to gain control of what Americans see and read in their "news," not with any sober calculation of future earnings.
The result is that there aren't any profits. In the first three months of this year, the giant media colossus fired more than 6,000 employees to "cut costs." A similar number found their wages slashed.
But when it came to setting his own remuneration, Levin was far more generous. He took home $157 million in pay and bonuses for the year 2000—astonishingly high compensation, considering the poor performance of his enterprises.
That CEOs whose companies function smoothly, even profitably, pay themselves outsized, often outrageous salaries and bonuses, has been generally accepted. GE's CEO, Jack Welch, draws $165 million a year in such emoluments, not including the $1.3 million in insurance premiums the company shells out for him.
And that does not represent a record high. Steven P. Jobs, head of Apple Computer, paid himself $775 million and change for services rendered last year. San ford I. Weill, chairman of Citigroup, a much-merged international banking and insurance conglomerate, took home $315 million while his company came under criminal investigation for stock manipulation and money laundering in several notorious cases going back to the mystery death of Israeli spy and billionaire swindler Robert Maxwell in 1991.
PRINCELY PAYOFFS
Executives who receive such princely pay offs from companies they are actually running into the ditch profiteer best by loudly touting the stock they receive as part of their bonus at its high point. Mar ket-watchers cite the example of David Rickey, former chairman of Applied Micro-Circuits, who received some 800,000 shares of his company as part of his 2000 bonus.
Mr. Rickey sold all these shares in mid-2000 when they stood at about $100 each, and then calmly watched as the share price plunged to $20—a fall he was in a position to anticipate, but no one else.
As for the workers, laborers and technicians who actually produce the goods and wares these companies are supposed to sell, their wages have risen a meager 2.5 percent since 1995—the pay of skilled and apprentice workers has actually declined, while the "executives" cleaned up.
This kind of monstrous wealth transfer—with just about all the nation's real income shifted from workers to speculators, raiders, currency manipulators and, in large proportion, to self-styled corporate "executives"—is hailed by Greenspan as "keeping inflation at bay."
Free trade is at the root of this excessive disparity in wealth. As U.S. workers are increasingly forced to compete with Third World labor pools, wages are being driven down.
Speaking before Congress on April 3, Greenspan scolded the growing anti-globalization movement, saying they're "wrong-headed" for opposing free trade.
"It is essential to note that probably the best single action that the industrial countries could actually take to alleviate the terrible problem of poverty in many developing countries would be to open, unilaterally, markets to imports from these countries," Greenspan said. "These countries need more globalization, not less."*
Mexican President Vicente Fox is demanding elimination of his border with the United States. A high-level meeting was held to "negotiate" the issue.
Top officials of the United States and Mexico met in Washington April 4 to negotiate demands that the common border be eliminated.
President bush signaled the importance of these talks by assigning Secretary of State Colin Powel and Attorney General John Ashcroft to represent the United States in what is projected as a series of meetings.
President Vincente Fox assigned foreign Minister Jorge Castaneda and Interior Minister Santiago Creel to represent Mexico.
Initially, the Mexicans are urging the Bush administration to allow far more immigrants to enter this country and to give legal status to the millions living here illegally.
But Fox publicly announced his ultimate goal as being the elimination of border, with Mexicans crossing at will. This also serves the Bilderberg goal of eliminating all borders in the Western Hemisphere as the "American Union" evolves.
Bush promised "better cross-border relations" in a "sweetheart summit" at Fox's home on Feb 15, his first trip outside the country as president.
Mexican officials said Fox wants to pursue his goals step-by-step, starting with legal status so criminal border-crossers can get a driver license, rent an apartment and -above all- get a Social Security card. Card would permit them to feed at the taxpayers' welfare trough.
"We are not saying that we want all the rights to become available to Mexicans overnight, Castaneda told the Bilderberg-controlled Washington Post on April 2. "It is not all or nothing."
"Their jobs must be recognized, must be legalized," Fox told the Post.
The "progress" toward open borders was celebrated by officials of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which is always represented at secret Bilderberg meetings.
"This is the firs time the Mexican and American presidents have agreed to actually put immigration on the table and see what might come out of it," said Carnegie's Demetrios Papademetriou.
The Post story included a lengthy hearts-and-flowers description of a criminal alien identified only as "Rosa," who was tenderly quoted as "dreamily" saying: "I's like to have a Social Security card to be able to rent, get credit, to go to the clinic."*
Today's established immigrant population is poorer than ever. And the overwhelming majority of them don't bother to become citizens, buy homes or finish high school.
Not only are they coming in greater numbers to live in the U.S. but immigrants of the past 30 years are much poorer, less educated and less likely to own homes or become citizens than their predecessors, a new study shows.
America's immigrant population has tripled to about 30 million, reported the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, which conducted the research.
Among the findings:
* Over the past 30 years the percentage of established immigrants who have chosen to become citizens has declined dramatically. In 1970, 63.6 percent were citizens, but in 2000 only 38.9 percent of established immigrants had become citizens.
* In 1970, established immigrants who had lived here more than 10 years were less likely to be poor, with only 25.7 percent living in or near poverty, compared to 35.1 percent of natives. By 2000, the situation had reversed, with 41.4 percent of established immigrants living in or near poverty, compared with 28.8 percent of natives.
* Thirty years ago, 56.8 percent of established immigrant households were homeowners, compared to 63.4 percent of natives - a 6.6 percentage-point difference. In 2000, only 45.5 percent of established immigrant households were homeowners. This is almost 24 percentage points lower than natives, whose share has not changed.
DETERIORATION
"The deterioration in the position of immigrants is primarily explained by a significant decline in the educational attainment of immigrants relative to natives," the report said.
In 1970, 7 percentage points separated the high school completion rates of established immigrants and natives.
By 2000, established immigrants were more than three times as likely as natives to lack a high school education. In 2000, 34.4 percent of established immigrants and 9.6 percent of natives lacked a high school deploma.*
Whites may now begin making demands for "minority rights" in California.
The official census figures are in, and it's been confirmed that whites are no longer an ethnic majority in California, amounting to a little less than half the population of the most populous state.
That compares with nearly three-quarters only a decade ago, according to census figures released March 30.
Hispanic residents now make up nearly one-third of the state's population. The use of the word "residents" comes from the federal government and is deliberate. Estimates of how many Hispanics reside in California but are not citizens range as high as a third of the total.
MORE TO COME
Combined with a re percent increase in the state's Asian population, the figures confirmed California's status as the nation's most diverse big state and was viewed as a harbinger of changes in other populous states like Florida, New York and Texas.
California easily remained the most populous state, home to nearly one in 8 Americans, and its highest rates of population growth came in the inland valleys.
According to government figures, the fastest-growing county was Placer in the Sierra Nevada foothills northeast of Sacramento. It has become one of the many white havens around the state.
Over all, California gained slightly less than three million people, for a total of 33.9 million, compared with adjusted figures from the 1990 census, a growth rate of a little less than 10 percent.
The state's increase in people was more than the individual population of about half the states in the union.
More than 43 percent of Californians younger than 18 are now Hispanic, compared with about 35 percent a decade ago, the figures show.
The state's black population, meanwhile, declined by 3 percent, to 2.3 million, while the black population of the most populous county, Los Angeles, declined by 12 percent, to 920,899.
The state's white population declined by about 8 percent over the decade.
The national increase in the Hispanic population was 58 percent, while the increase was 33 percent in California. But nearly a third of all Hispanics in the nation live in California.
According to Dr. Paul Ong, director of the Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies and a professor of urban planning at the University of California at Los Angeles, California represents what many states are moving toward.
I don't think most states will end up at the same level of diversity," Ong said. "The truth of the matter is the rest of the country is going in this direction."
As a jurisdiction where non-Hispanic whites are in the minority, California joins New Mexico, Hawaii and the District of Columbia.
ASIAN INVASION
Most of the growth in the Asian population was because of immigration, according to the Census Bureau.
Asians account for almost 12 percent of the state's population, or 3.9 million residents, compared with 9 percent a decade ago. Some of the largest percentage increases for this group came in the north-central counties known as the Gold Country, where Chinese immigrants once flocked during the gold rush.
According to demographic experts, it was hardly surprising that some of the highest rates of population growth came in counties like Riverside and San Bernardino, the so-called Inland Empire east of Los Angeles, and in counties of the Central Valley, where farmland is increasingly giving was to cheap tract housing. Even in those areas, the Hispanic population rose, though not as swiftly.
One reason, according to experts, is because coastal California is already heavily settled from San Diego to San Luis Obispo by Hispanics, and many localities have or are passing ordinances to limit growth or suburban sprawl.
But that isn't the end of it. White majorities were only a blip in the history of the New World, according to cultural pundits on the West Coast.
According to Kevin Starr, the California state librarian and author of cultural histories of the state: "The Anglo hegemony was only an intermittent phase in California's arc of identity, extending from the arrival of the Spanish.*
Reports of deadly drug-resistant diseases are on the rise in hospitals around the nation.
There is growing concern over an epidemic of drug-resistant diseases. Those quietly expressing fear are the most likely to come in contact with them on the frontline - doctors, nurses and other health care workers.
With the number of reported cases of diseases such as tuberculosis and hepatitis C on the rise, caring for the sick has become a frightening undertaking. In major cities around the United States, nurses and doctors are facing highly-contagious and deadly diseases with only an ultra-thin layer of latex standing between them and infection.
Health care workers regularly receive testing, but, according to an emergency room nurse in Virginia, in today's hospitals, they eventually must face the inevitability of testing positive to some sort of viral or bacterial infection that they may carry for life.
Tuberculosis (TB) is one such disease.
Once thought to be eradicated, TB is now making a strong comeback and is once again considered a public health threat.
TB is a bacterial infection that proliferates in the lungs. Symptoms include coughing, sneezing, chest pains, chills, fever and even death. Many people who catch the disease don't show any symptoms, though symptoms may develop later if not treated.
Testing for TB is usually done by x-ray or injecting live bacteria under the skin. A "positive" reaction indicates infection. Health care workers have quietly said that every time a person is tested, he stands about a one-in-ten chance of contracting the disease.
The Washington, D.C. area, much like the rest of the United States, has seen an incredible influx of immigration from Third World countries. Politicians will not admit it, but this increase has also brought a rise in the number of cases of tuberculosis to the region.
According to health care workers, many of the people, who test positive for tuberculosis and commence treatment, stop taking the full course of drugs when they begin to feel better. Often, the tuberculosis returns, but this time resistant to drugs.
This drug-resistant strain can then be passed on to others, including the doctors and nurses who are trying to treat patients. TB becomes exceedingly difficult to treat as allopathic medicine runs out of effective drugs and options.
Hepatitis C is also 0on the rise. But what used to be a disease that affected mostly intravenous drug users, has now spread, too.
Hepatitis C is an extremely hardy virus that attacks the liver and can result in cirrhosis, liver failure and even death. It is transmitted by blood and there is no known cure.
The only allopathic treatment for hepatitis C is an extremely torturous and painful course of an immuno-boosting drub called Interferon.
Nearly 4 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with hepatitis C, more than any other blood-borne disease, including HIV, according to the Centers for Disease Control.*
The downing of an American plane and capture of its Navy crew may result in the special trade deal with China coming unraveled.
The Bush administration promised "free trade" and admission into the World Trade Organization if China returned the captive Navy crew—but the incident may have reverse results.
Public outrage at China for so badly damaging the Navy plane in international air space that it had to land on Chinese soil is high (see Spotlight on Congress, page 8 and related story on page 6).
This could result in Congress abandoning permanent "normal" trade relations (PNTR) with China and blocking the communist state's entrance into the WTO.
Already, bipartisan legislation to re peal the trade deal has been announced. It has a "good chance" of passage, the authors said.
President Bush has until June 3 to notify Congress if he intends to grant China "normal trade relations" for another year. Congress passed legislation last year giving China this status permanently, but it only takes effect after China enters the WTO. If Congress rescinds PNTR, China becomes ineligible for WTO membership.
Lobbyists for international corporations tactically held their fire while China was holding the American Navy crew. But before their feet walked on American soil, the megacorporations were pressing their case for "free trade" with China.
The Business Roundtable, a pressure group composed of some of the largest U.S. businesses including Boeing, had spent millions lobbying Congress for passage of PNTR. Big business was not about to give up its prize.
Big business wants to increase its profits by accessing China's cheap labor market and escaping U.S. labor benefits. The result has been a significant loss in U.S. manufacturing jobs and a decline in the quality of many products sold in America.
But having heard from outraged voters, many congressmen resisted the pressure of power and money. Typical was the reaction of Rep. Bernie Sanders of Vermont (I), a left-wing populist in Congress.
In announcing bipartisan legislation to revoke PNTR, Sanders said "it is inconceivable that the United States would retain most favored nation trading status" with China after the airplane incident.
"The United States has an $83 billion trade deficit with China, which is costing us hundreds of thousands of decent-paying jobs," Sanders said.
"Corporate America, which has invested tens of billions of dollars in China, put great pressure on Congress last year to pass permanent normal trade relations with them," Sanders said.
"My impression is that, as a result of this incident, many members of Congress are rethinking their votes and that we have a good chance of repealing that legislation," Sanders said.*
Internet successes are examples of the "small is beautiful" concept while, conversely, its failures show the futility of heavy-handed corporate practices.
By the beginning of this year, 28 million Americans who had tried the Internet decided to no longer use it and returned to "reality." Other nations have had similar drop-offs.
Various reasons have been given for the losses. Boredom, literally in-your-face advertising, and fees are common complaints. Apparently a substantial number of Internet users are college students who have free access to the web in school but won't pay for it once they are on their own.
Having almost all the accumulated knowledge in the world at your fingertips sounds wonderful but does not appeal in actual practice. As Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com points out in his "gloat" over the financial troubles facing Salon.com, a left-wing Internet news source, successful web sites cater to niche groups.
Funded by Hambrecht and Quist, a high-tech, investment-banking group, Salon.com was forced to fire many of its employees and scale back its corporate offices considerably after it announced that it had lost millions of dollars this year.
PEOPLE APPEAL
Thanks to email and web forums, individual interaction with web sites that amount to one man's personality or a small group with an issue, has people appeal that corporate bodies do not.
This is why many corporate media extensions to the web such as, The New York Times's web site, Excite.com, and TheStreet.com are faltering, laying off hundreds of people and closing offices. Others, like Vivid.com and Yahoo.com, are selling out to pornographers to try to turn a profit. Some, NBC's interactive web site as an example, are closing up their Internet shops completely.
But "Drudge type" independent media sites are thriving—all of them with a libertarian or further rightward tilt, exactly what the politically-correct corporate entities disallow. Such uncontrolled media niche sites are a natural result and reaction to the very control that has been imposed on "verbo ten" information.
The SPOTLIGHT is in a unique position to lead the Internet pack of the populist niche with its long time experience and the backing of Liberty Lobby and its Board of Policy (BOP).*
You can blame former President Bill Clinton for the loss of a Navy plane and the ordeal of the crew that was held hostage for 10 days.
Former President Bill Clinton is largely responsible for 24 U.S. naval airmen who were held in Red China until the United States "apologized."
The SPOTLIGHT has learned that Clinton and his closest national security advisers ignored repeated warnings from the Pentagon that such an incident was going to occur when two Red Chinese jets harassed a U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane in the South China Sea on April 1.
Both the Air Force and the Navy sent formal complaints to the White House six months ago, warning Clinton that increasing harassment by Chinese aircraft of U.S. reconnaissance planes had become critical, seriously endangering the lives of servicemen.
According
to statements by former Clinton Defense Secretary William Cohen,
the Red Chinese were contacted by the U.S. government last January
about the harassing incidents, which by that time had become almost
routine.
The Clinton administration had decided months earlier to ignore China's aggressive behavior so it would not interfere with congressional approval of "permanent normal trade relations," which last year created an $83 billion trade deficit between the United States and China and has cost hundreds of thousands of Americans their jobs.
A retired National Security Agency official, who stays in contact with his former associates in America's top spy agency, told The SPOTLIGHT that concern among commanders sending both Air Force and Navy reconnaissance aircraft to eavesdrop off the coasts and along the borders of Red China had reached the near panic level by the time President Bush took office.
The SPOTLIGHT has also learned that the harassment of U.S. aircraft is not the only belligerent behavior of Peking that Clinton ignored.
Since 1998 the Clinton administration had been aware that due to the loss of technology to Red China the Chinese had been able to better target their relatively small arsenal of long-range nuclear missiles and are now able to strike 13 major cities throughout the United States.
Although the Pentagon is aware of the cities that are under the threat of Red Chinese missile attacks they have not been publicly identified. However, they are believed to include Washington, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia and Settle.
The Pentagon is trying to downplay the significance of the capture by the Chinese of the super-sophisticated Lockheed EP-3E Aries - a four-engine propeller-driven aircraft of which only 12 are in use.
The Aries was specially designed to eavesdrop on enemy radar and communications far inland.
One source told The SPOTLIGHT that the Aries, forced to land on Red China's Hainan Island after being "bumped" by a Chinese F-8 jet interceptor, was gathering intelligence data on two Russian-built Sovremanny-class destroyers recently purchased from Moscow by Peking.
The Pentagon is particularly interested in the destroyer because it carries two quad-launchers of Russian SS-N 22 sea-skimming anti-ship missiles, which can be armed with nuclear warheads.
The Russians designed the missiles, designated by NATO as the "Sunburn," to be able to penetrate the protective screens around U.S. aircraft carriers.
Military analysts have warned that the missile makes carrier battle groups, the offensive backbone of the U.S. Navy, highly vulnerable.
The Red Chinese are particularly interested in the electronics aboard the Aries which they hauled away by the truckload, according to photographic imagery picked up by U.S. spy satellites.*
NAFTA's supra-national "rights" have placed corporations and global groups above member nations. Efforts are now under way to expand the sovereignty-stealing trade pact across North, Central and South America.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) includes an array of corporate investment rights and protections that are unprecedented in scope and power. NAFTA allows corporations to sue the national government of a NAFTA country in secret arbitration tribunals if they feel that a regulation or government decision affects their investment in conflict with these new NAFTA rights. If a corporation wins, the taxpayers of the "losing" NAFTA nation must foot the bill.
This extraordinary attack on governments' ability to regulate in the public interest is a key element of the proposed NAFTA expansion called the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).
NAFTA's investment chapter, called chapter 11, contains a variety of rights and protections for investors and investments in NAFTA countries.
Specifically, Article 1110 of NAFTA guarantees foreign investors compensation from the NAFTA governments for any direct government expropriation, i.e., nationalization, or any other action that is "tantamount to" an "indirect expropriation."
In addition, Article 1102 provides for "national treatment," which means that governments must accord to companies of other NAFTA countries no less favorable treatment than they give to their own companies.
Article 1105 contains a "minimum standard of treatment" provision, which includes vague prose about fair and equitable treatment in accordance with international law.
If a company believes that a NAFTA government has violated these new investor rights and protections, it can initiate a binding dispute resolution process for monetary damages before a trade tribunal offering none of the basic due process or openness guarantees afforded in national courts.
These co-called "investor-to-state" cases are litigated in the special international arbitration bodies of the World Bank and the United Nations, which are closed to public participation, observation and input. A three-person panel composed of professional arbitrators listens to arguments in the case, with powers to award an unlimited amount of taxpayer dollars to corporations whose NAFTA investor privileges and rights they judge to have been impacted.
Corporate investors have used these unprecedented NAFTA investment protections to challenge national and local laws, governmental decisions and even governmental provision of services in all three NAFTA countries.
To date, companies have filed more than a dozen dases, claiming damages of more than $13 billion.
In the largest NAFTA chapter 11 suit yet brought against the United States, the Canadian corporation Methanex in 1999 sued the U.S. government for $970 million because of a California executive order phasing out the sale of a Methanex product.
Methanex claims that California's phase-out of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline additive, violates the company's special investor rights granted under NAFTA because the California environmental policy limits the corporation's ability to sell MTBE.
[See The SPOTLIGHT's April 12, 1999, issue for more on the toxic effects of MTBE.-Ed.]
If a NAFTA tribunal decides that California's environmental policy violates NAFTA's investor protection, the U.S. government can be held liable for the corporation's lost profits from not selling MTBE.
The case is "a clear threat to California state sovereignty and democratic governance," says Martin Wagner of the California-based Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund. If Methanex succeeds, California will be under pressure to rescind its executive order to lessen the damage award.
Associated with human neurotoxicological effects, such as dizziness, nausea and headaches and found to be an animal carcinogen eith the potential to cause human cancer, MTBE has been found in ground water and drinking wells around California. On March 25,1999, California required the removal of MTBE from gasoline sold in the state by Dec. 31, 2002.
In its amended claim, Methanex alleges that the California ban discriminates against MTBE in favor of ethanol, an organic fuel-alternative made from corn, and is therefore a violation of NAFTA's national treatment rules.
As evidence, Methanex cites the executive order which requires the California Energy Commission to look into development of a California ethanol facility.
Methanex alleges that Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), a principal producer of ethanol in the United States, influenced the governor's decision with $210,000 in campaign contributions, arguing that the ban stands in violation of NAFTA's fair and equitable treatment rules.
Finally, Methanex claims that the ban was not the "least trade restrictive" method to fix the water contamination problem, and thus violates NAFTA requirements that companies be treated fairly and "in accordance with international law."
The relevant laws cited by Methanex are the rules of the World Trade Organization, which require countries to use the least trade restrictive means to achieve environmental and public health goals.
Methanex brought its NAFTA case to the United Nations Commission for International Trade and Law (UNCITRAL), the arbitration regime of the United Nations. The case is now pending. Under UNCITRAL rules, not only are the citizens of California shut out of this proceeding, but so are the governor and the attorney general of California, the state whose policy is in question. California officials must rely on the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to defend the interests of California residents in this closed tribunal.
While these expansive investor rights currently are included only in NAFTA, plans are under way to incorporate similar provisions in the FTAA.
FTAA is a proposed NAFTA expansion to all 34 countries of the Western Hemisphere (but for Cuba). The Bush administration has signaled that it wants the controversial fast track trade negotiation authority in order to negotiate the FTAA. Once congress delegates its trade negotiating authority to the president via fast track, it limits its own role to a single up-or-down vote on trade agreements' implementing legislation, which cannot be amended.
Canada, which has been badly burned in a series of chapter 11 cases, is no longer a believer. Canadian Trade Minister Pierre Pettigrew has declared that Canada will not sign FTAA if investor-to-state enforcement of broad regulatory takings rights are included, and Canada has called for a review of chapter 11 within NAFTA.
Whether Canada will hold to these positions, and whether it can organize other countries to join it amidst the complex FTAA negotiations in which the United States is the dominant player, remains to be seen.
In the meantime, environmentalists, public health groups, California residents and many others concerned about the broad regulatory takings provisions will continue to press for their removal from NAFTA and their exclusion from the FTAA.*
Mary Bottare is director of Global Trade Watch's Harmonization Project. This report appeared in the April 2001 issue of The Multinational Monitor.
The Bilderberg agenda for Sweden was partially revealed when its brother group, the Trilateral Commission, met in London. After all, they share the same twisted goals.
LONDON—The Trilateral Commission, meeting here March 9-12, devoted al most its entire closed-door sessions to world government.
Since the Trilaterals have a common agenda and interlocking leadership with its brother group, it is certain that Bilderberg, too, will concentrate on the world government when it meets May 24-28 near Gothenberg, Sweden.
Interlocking leadership includes David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger and Peter Sutherland, head of Goldman Sachs Inter national in London. All are leaders of both Bilderberg and the Trilaterals. Sutherland is European chairman of the Trilaterals.
"Globalization and governance" was the subject of a March 10 luncheon address by Gordon Smith, former Canadian deputy minister of foreign affairs and now director of the Center for Global Studies at the University of Victoria in British Columbia.
This was followed by an afternoon panel discussion of "globalization and governance II" led by Jusuf Wanandi, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Jakarta, Indonesia.
The world government theme continued the following day. "Globalization III" stressed "improving the trading regime," led by Mike Moore, director-general of the World Trade Organization.
Also participating were Frits Bolkestein of the European Commission and Toru Kusukawa, former Japanese delegate to the Asian-Pacific Economic Commission. APEC is to evolve into an "Asian-Pacific Union" after the Western Hemisphere becomes the "American Union" similar to the existing European Union.
This was followed by a luncheon session on "the international role of the United States," led by retired Gen. Brent Scowcroft, former assistant to President Ronald Reagan for national security affairs and now president of the Forum for International Policy in Washington.
An afternoon session on "globalization IV" addressed the "democracy deficit in the global economy." It was led by Joseph Nye Jr., dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
The closing session on March 12 was de voted to "international security challenges," with Richard Holbrooke, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and assistant secretary of state under former President Bill Clinton, himself a Bilderberg member.
A common theme for all of the three days of closed meetings was "a world without borders" and the "demise of the nation-state." Dealing with "provincial nationalism" was viewed as a major challenge.*
A new report by reputable historians says populist president Thomas Jefferson did not father a child with one of his slaves as has been alleged by culture distorters.
Political correctness notwithstanding, a group of scholars in Richmond, Va., agrees with The SPOTLIGHT. A report issued April 12 disputed widely-heralded media claims that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with his slave Sally Hemings, and said the evidence points instead to Jefferson's younger brother.
The scholars could have saved themselves the trouble by reading this populist newspaper, which printed stories destroying the Jefferson-as-father-by-slave-girl myth.
The April scholarly findings resulted from a year-long study commissioned by a group of Jefferson family historians interested in facts, not myth and gossip.
The report comes more than two years after DNA tests showed that Hemings' youngest son, Eston Hemings, had the tell-tale Jefferson Y-chromosome and was possibly fathered by a Jefferson male.
In a summary of its 450-page report, the commission said: "The circumstantial case that Eston Hemings was fathered by the president's younger brother is many times stronger than the case against the president himself."
EVIDENCE
With one dissenter on the 13-member commission, the scholars bolster their case for the brother, Randolph Jefferson, by noting that:
• A slave's memoirs assert that Randolph Jefferson often spent time playing the fiddle and dancing with the slaves when he visited Monticello, Thomas Jefferson's home.
• Thomas Jefferson had invited Randolph — who lived about 20 miles away — to visit Monticello shortly before Hemings became pregnant with Eston.
• Descendants of Eston Hemings passed down the story that Eston was fathered by "Thomas Jefferson's uncle." Both of Jefferson's paternal uncles had died before Eston was conceived, but the report points out that Jefferson's daughter Martha referred to Randolph as "Uncle Randolph"; and
• Sally's childbearing years probably corresponded to the years in which Randolph was a widower.
The findings contradict a January 2000 report by black historians that scientific and historical evidence shows the president probably fathered one and possibly all of Hemings' children.
The new commission included Jefferson scholars at such universities as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Brown, and Virginia.
"The biggest surprise to me was how weak the case [against the third president] really was," said Commission chairman Robert F. Turner, a University of Virginia professor.
The latest report trashes the conclusions of Annette Gordon-Reed, a professor at the New York Law School, who was not a commission member. Her book, Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: an American Controversy, makes a case for the relationship.
"It's an interpretation," she said. "People will just have to read the Monticello report and my book and this and reach their own conclusions."
NO RECORD
The scholars said there is no record of Hemings or her children, other than Madison Hemings, ever alleging that Jefferson was the father. Madison made the claim in an 1873 newspaper interview in Ohio.
Jefferson vociferously refuted a story alleging he had sexual relations with a slave that was circulated by an unscrupulous pamphleteer named James T. Callender. Jefferson, a prolific writer, wrote in several letters to acquaintances that the stories were calumnies fabricated to ruin his good name.*
The report acknowledged Monticello's claim that Jefferson was home when Hemings' children were conceived, but noted that that is also when he had visitors, including Randolph.
According to the report: "Whatever one thinks of Jefferson's character, there can be little doubt that he was deeply concerned about his reputation.
"Yet we are asked to believe that Jefferson would have entrusted his reputation to the discretion of a 15- or 16-year-old child" — Hemings' age when the relationship is said to have started.
"If he did that, he was a child-molesting rapist, and that is far from what we know of him," Turner said.*
* For a thorough refutation of allegations that Jefferson kept a black mistress and fathered illegitimate children gleaned from primary sources, order The Jefferson Scandals: A Rebuttal by Virginius Dabney ($15, soft cover, 154 pages, item # 192).
Studies linking gun ownership to violence are politically motivated and "bad science," says a respected physicians' group.
The United Nations wants control of your firearms but physicians back your rights as gun deaths decline.
While the United Nations seeks global gun control as a condition for world government, a physicians' organization de fends the Second Amendment as firearms deaths decline.
United States negotiators are seeking changes in a proposed UN agreement that could severely damage the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms. The proposal, to be finalized in July, would ban the export of many small arms and light weapons to "resistance" groups. Such groups could include Taiwan, U.S. officials said.
A working definition of proscribed weapons adopted in 1997 includes rifles, carbines and revolvers. Hunters, sports shooters and gun manufacturers say the agreement, as it now stands, could prevent civilian ownership of popular hunting rifles such as Remington, Winchester and Ruger.
"Almost all hunting rifles are of military design," said Tom Mason, who is lobbying the UN on behalf of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities, which includes the National Rifle Association among 30 member groups.
"Under this proposal, civilian possession would be banned," Mason said.
Meanwhile, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons reports in its journal that most gun violence studies of the past two decades are based on flawed methodology and unduly influenced by political agendas, leading to biased and incorrect conclusions. This is a dramatic break from the American Medical Association and other politically-correct groups.
The findings are published in The Medical Sentinel, official journal of the 43-year-old organization which is based in Tucson, Ariz.
Dr. Miguel Faria, author of the report, debunks many incorrect, widely accepted claims by anti-gun groups based on tainted studies.
Faria found: Women, in particular, are not in more danger if they carry or own a gun, ease of access to or availability of guns does not cause crime, mass killings would not be avoided if guns were unavailable and gun violence is not the leading cause of death in children.
Faria blames "those in public health with the proclivity toward the promulgation of preordained research such as the gun and violence research conducted by many investigators with a gun-control agenda and disseminated in the medical journals . . . Much of this information is tainted, result-oriented and based on what can only be characterized as poor science."
For example, Faria cites studies on women and handguns that claim a woman is up to 100 times more likely to be killed by a handgun than to fire one for protection.
"But they ignore the most important use of a handgun: protection," Faria said. "In 98 percent of cases, all you have to do is brandish a firearm. But these studies don't take those incidents into account. All they do is count women who have been killed in criminal acts and compare it to the number of women who have used a gun in self-defense."
Faria chastised a number of physician organizations, including the AMA and American Academy of Pediatrics that urge doctors to ask patients about gun ownership.
"This is playing politics," Faria said. "Public health should not be subverted and medical science should not be perverted."
Shoring up Faria's arguments, the federal government itself—through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—has announced that gun deaths in the United States has dropped more than 25 percent during the mid-1990s to the lowest level since 1966.
The CDC reported 30,708 gun-related deaths—11.4 per 100,000 people—in 1998, the latest year for which figures are available. The rate was down 26 percent from 1993, when there were 15.4 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people. The number of gun-related injuries dropped by half during the same period, to 64,484, or 23.9 per 100,000 people.*
Americans are taking more interest in alternative treatments and, consequently, their own well-being.
The number of visits in the United States to alternative therapists was greater in 1997 than the total visits to all primary care physicians, according to Friends of Health, an advocacy group.
As more and more Americans turn away from invasive allopathic medicine - based primarily on drugs and surgery - and embrace alternative therapies, herbal, homeopathic and wholistic therapies are becoming commonplace.
Americans' growing interest in non-traditional forms of medicine has also forced doctors to take an honest look at new and old techniques for healing people through good nutrition and mild, natural therapies.
The newly formed, Washington-based group said out-of-pocket expenses relating to alternative therapies are "conservatively estimated" at $27 billion, citing a Harvard University study.
Friends will "work with HMOs, health care insurers and large corporations to include in their coverage a broader spectrum of wellness programs and other healing systems," said a mission statement released late last year in Washington.
It called for "combining the best of modern medicine with a wide variety of other healing approaches, including, among others: acupuncture, yoga, qigong, ayurveda, healing touch and massage, chiropractic, osteopathy, new botanicals and aromatherapy."
More patients "are benefitting from music, art and color therapy, Tibetan medicine and a variety of deeply personal spiritual practices, including prayer and meditation," the statement said. "Integrative and inclusive medicine is the means for embracing all of these practices in a coherent whole."
Doctors seem receptive to the idea of sharing their traditional schooling with older treatments, as so many of their patients attest to the benefits of natural remedies.
Advocates for alternative medicines also said that the outlook, can only be better for humanity as people take an active role in learning about what is making them sick and conversely what leads to a healthy, long and fulfilling life.*
Are we contaminating our food supply with synthetic components, genetic alterations and various cooking methods? Though the simple act of cooking can alter foods significantly, the following relates an older study that clearly frowns upon the usage of microwave ovens.
Microwave cooking ovens were originally researched and developed by German scientists to support mobile operations during the invasion of the Soviet Union. Had they perfected electronic equipment to prepare meals on a massive scale, Germans could have eliminated the logistical problems connected with cooking fuels while producing edible products in far less time than they could using traditional campfires.
After World War II, the Allies discovered the medical research and documentation concerning these apparatuses. The papers and experimental microwave equipment were transferred to the U.S. War department and classified for reference and scientific investigation. The Soviet Union also retrieved some of the devices and began to experiment on them separately.
The Russians, who have done the most diligent research into the biological effects of microwave ovens, have issued warnings about the biological and environmental damage that can result from the use of this and similar-frequency electronic apparatus.
MEDICAL RESEARCH
The most significant German research concerned with the biological effects of microwaves was done at the Hombolt-Universitat zu Berlin in 1942-43, during the Barbarossa military campaign.
Beginning in 1957 and continuing up to the present, Russian studies in the field have been conducted at the Institute of Radio Technology.
In most research, the foods were exposed to microwave propagation at an energy potential of 100 kilowatts per cubic centimeter per second, to the point considered acceptable for sanitary, normal ingestion.
The observations made by the German and Russian researchers are presented here in three categories: cancer-causing effects, destruction of nutritive value and biological effects of direct exposure of humans to microwave emissions.
CANCER LINK
The following effects have been observed when foods are subject to microwave emissions:
* Meats: Heating prepared meats sufficiently to ensure sanitary ingestion creates d-nitrosodiethanolamine, a well known cancer-causing agent.
* Proteins: Active-protein, biomolecular compounds are destabilized.
* Increase in radioactivity: A "binding effect" between the microwaved food and any atmospheric radioactivity is created, causing a marked increase in the amount of alpha and beta particle saturation in the food.
* Milk and cereals: Cancer-causing agents are created in the protein hydrolysate compounds in milk and cereal grains.
* Frozen foods: Microwaves used to thaw frozen foods alter the breakdown of important sugars, called the glucoside and galactoside elements.
EFFECTS ON THE BODY
* Digestive system: The unstable breakdown of microwaved food alters their elemental food substances, which may cause disorders in the digestive system.
* Lymphatic system: Due to chemical alterations within food, malfunctions can occur in the lymphatic system, causing a degeneration of the body's ability to protect itself against certain forms of neoplastics (cancerous growths).
* Free radicals: Certain trace-mineral molecular formations in plant substances - particular, raw root vegetables - form cancer-causing free radicals.
STOMACH, INTESTINAL CANCERS
* A statistically-higher percentage of cancerous growths result in these organs, plus a generalized breakdown of peripheral cellular tissues and a gradual degeneration of digestive and excretory functions.
REDUCE FOOD VALUE
Microwave exposure caused significant decreases in the nutritive value of all foods studied. The following are the most important findings to date.
In every food tested, the bioavailability of vital nutrients decreased, including vitamin B complex, vitamins C and E, essential minerals and lipotropics.
Exposure to microwave emissions also has a negative effect upon the general biological welfare of humans. This was not discovered until the Russians experimented with highly-sophisticated equipment and discovered that humans can be adversely affected without even ingesting the food that has been subjected to microwave emissions.
Internal cellular-membrane potentials during the process of breaking down food, called catabolism, into the blood serum from the digestive process degenerate and destabilize.
* Brain circuitry destruction: Electrical impulses in the junction potentials of the cerebrum can degenerate and breakdown.
* Loss of bioelectric strength: The bioelectric strengths within the ascending reticular activating system (the system which controls the function of waking consciousness) go out of balance and lose their proper circuiting.
* Loss of energy: Humans, animals and plants located within a 500-meter radius of the equipment in operation suffer a long-term, cumulative loss of energy.
* Nervous and lymphatic systems damage: Long-lasting residual magnetic "deposits" can become located throughout the nervous system and lymphatic system.
* Hormone imbalances: The production of hormones and the maintenance of hormonal balance in both males and females becomes destabilized and interrupted.
* Brainwave disruptions: Levels of disturbance in alpha-, delta- and theta-wave signal patterns are markedly higher than normal. These may include loss of memory and ability to concentrate, suppressed emotional threshold, deceleration of intellective processes and interruptive sleep episodes in a statistically higher percentage of individuals subjected to continual range-emission field of effects of microwave apparatus, from either cooking apparatus or transmission stations.
MIND CONTROL POTENTIAL
Due to the creation of random, residual magnetic deposits and binding within the biological systems of the body and nervous and lymphatic systems damage which can ultimately affect the neurological systems, long-term depolarization of tissue neuro-electronic circuits can result.
The residual magnetism effect can render the components of the brain more subject to influence by artificially induced, microwave-radio-frequency field from transmission stations and TV relay networks.
Soviet psychologists at Uralyera and Novosibirsk have theorized the possibility of psycho telemetric influence (i.e., affecting human behavior by transmitting radio signals at controlled frequencies), causing subjects to comply - involuntarily and subliminally - with commands received through microwave transmissions acting upon their psychological energy fields.
For this reason, and due to the other contraindications listed above, the use of microwave apparatus in any form is definitely ill-advised.*
Too many Americans have become dependent on dangerous "mood elevating" drugs that never address the causes of depression or psychosis - toxicity - but actually exacerbate the problem.
The most commonly prescribed antidepressant drugs in use today are Prozac or drugs which work on the same principle as Prozac - Zoloft, Luvox, Paxil, Celexa, and Sarafen (the most recent addition to the Prozac family that is being prescribed to women with PMS).
These drugs are classified as "selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)" and are designed to block the metabolism of serotonin, thereby increasing brain levels of this neurotransmitter. Medical research and experience have shown that the theory behind the use of these drugs is invalid.
People who are diagnosed psychotic or schizophrenic or suffer mood disorders, organic brain disease, mental retardation, autism and Alzheimer's disease commonly have elevated level of serotonin. Conversely, people who are anxious, suicidal, violent, reckless, impulsive, hostile, substance abusive, exhibitionistic and experience nightmares and insomnia have low levels of the metabolism of serotonin (which also produces high serotonin).
SSRIs increase brain levels of serotonin and decrease the metabolism of serotonin leading to any or all of the above results.
Dr. Candace Pert of the Georgetown University Medical Center and former head of the brain chemistry department of the National Institute of Health and Dr. Soloman Snyder, a neuroscientist from John Hopkins University, co-developed the serotonin binding process in the mid 1970s. Their work led to the development of SSRIs.
Dr. Pert accuses the medical profession of oversimplifying the action of these drugs by claiming they only produce their effects on the brain.
"I am alarmed at the monster that John Hopkins neuroscientist Solomon Snyder and I created when we discovered the simple binding assay for drug receptors 25 years ago," said dr. Pert on the October 20, 1997 edition of Time magazine. "Prozac and other antidepressant serontonin-receptor-active compounds may also cause cardiovascular problems in some susceptible people after long-term use, which has become common practice despite the lack of safety studies."
HEALTH CONCERNS
An excerpt from a letter to Dr. Ann Blake Tracy, author of Prozac: Panacea or Pandora? Supports Dr. Pert's concerns that long-term use of SSRIs can cause long-term health complications.
"I caught the last part of your presentation on Radio Station KEX in Portland while flipping trough the dial last night. I was flabbergasted to hear you speak of the horrible potential side effects from Prozac, which I have been taking for approximately four years, particularly since I have been diagnosed recently with cardiomyalgia, severe artery disease, congestive heart failure and also fibromyalgia. I was a very ‘well' person prior to taking Prozac and am now exhausted all the time, with horrible aching joints and considerable pain and a massive heart problem. The adverse cardiovascular effects from Prozac, the one drug in this class of drugs out long enough to have some what of a track record, are listed in the drug information sheets put out by the manufacturer. The ‘frequent' effects listed are hemorrhage and hypertension. The ‘infrequent' effects include very serious adverse effects: congestive heart fallure, myocardial infaret, tachycardia, angina pectoris, arrhythmia, hypotension, migraine syncope and vascular headache."
Serotonin receptors exist throughout the body as well as in the brain which is why every aspect of out body's physiology is affected by these drugs.
MASS MURDER/SUICIDE
But even more revealing is the studies on Prozac leading to its licensing nearly 20 years ago. The following came from Eli Lilly's own studies on Fluoxetine (Prozac):
* In 1977 Prozac was found to affect sleep habits, specifically to suppress "deep" sleep or REM (rapid eye movement) sleep in cats. By the forth day, the cats receiving the larger doses of Prozac began to growl and hiss. After cessation of drug treatment, the cats returned to their usual friendly behavior in a week or two but those receiving higher doses recovered more slowly.
* in 1978 Eli Lilly began using human subjects in controlled clinical trials. The first group of patients showed no improvement in their depression. However, a large number of adverse reactions were reported. The first human to receive Prozac experienced "dystonia resembling an extrapyramidial reaction" - and uncontrollable, Parkinson-like shaking or trembling.
* In 1979 Prozac's use in clinical studies on depression showed that some patients went from severe depression to agitation within a few days. In one case the agitation was severe enough for the patient to be taken off the drug. Benzodiazepines and other sedatives would be used in future studies to help offset the "stimulant effect" of Prozac.
Prozac induced violence and suicide? The following factors were brought to the attention of the FDA but were ignored, discounted or trashed by them: 1) Lilly's analysis improperly excluded 76 out of 97 suicides. Dr Bruce Stadel, Chief of the FDA Epidemiology Branch in 1990 stated that, "it is inappropriate in a safety analysis to exclude such a large proportion of cases." 2) Lilly admitted that its clinical trials were not designed for the prospective evaluation of suicidality" and that their trials specifically excluded patients with current suicidal ideation. 3)Lilly admitted that the rating scale used to assess suicidality in clinical trials was inadequate.
Since Prozac has been approved, however, the homicidal ad suicidal horrors of SSRIs have been forever imprinted on American culture. Every school shooting from Littleton, Colorado, to the most recent in Santee, California, can be traced to the use of these drugs.*
Ingri Harkins writes for The Idaho Observer.
Since the 1950s, through misdiagnosis, an epidemic has been raging in America. But most people remain wholly unaware.
A "death certificate shuffle" exists that has the effect of concealing the true scope of a hidden disease epidemic that rages among us: diabetes. The shuffle works like this: The "cause of death" that appears on the death certificate depends upon the speciality of the doctor who is treating the patient when death occurs.
This stealth disease, diabetes, can be cured when patients consult alternative health providers.
Since our stealth disease has hundreds of symptoms, it masquerades under many different medical aliases and its symptoms are treated by many different specialists. In 1995 this one disease, then being treated by numerous competing specialists, accounted for over 40 percent of the deaths from all causes, according to a report in American Demographics.
In studying this disease, scientists noted that each of the medical specialties had their own proprietary name for their own proprietary symptom set which they recognized s their own proprietary disease and treated with their own ineffective proprietary protocol. This confusion forced researchers who needed to know what they were talking about, to rename the disease "Syndrome X."
Syndrome X is the same disease that was known in the 1930s simply as diabetes. Our modern, compartmentalized "medical Babylon" lists such symptoms of this disease as atherosclerosis, elevated cholesterol, hypertension, elevated glucose, elevated insulin, stroke, cardiomyopathhy, kidney and liver failure, neuropathy, retinopathy, male impotence, blindness and glaucoma, gangrene and many others.
Recently a connection between Syndrome X and ADHD has been made.
A compelling case exists to show that several forms of cancer are a result of a failure to effectively treat Syndrome X in its early stages.
This story can be traced to the extensive reorganization that shook the medical community in 1949. In that year many of the medical specialties that we know today emerged from what had been up to then the general practice of medicine. Thus the "heart specialist," the "endocrinologist," the "hepatic and billiary specialist" and many other specialties began to compete for market share. It became fashionable, for example, to declare that diabetes increased cardio-vascular risk where formerly it was well understood that heart failure was a direct consequence of untreated or poorly treated diabetes.
This reorganization of the medical community was greatly influenced by the emergence of a disease, then known as diabetes, that had exploded in the 1930s and 1940s to epidemic proportions. From an incidence of .0028 percent per capita in the late 1800s diabetes soared over a thousand times to become a serious epidemic by 1950.
The declared intent of the reorganization was to concentrate more resources on the disease to more efficiently find a cure. The result that the reorganization produced, however, was to compartmentalize the medical community, to obscure the epidemic with numerous aliases and to turn it into a cash cow.
Each of the emerging medical specialities concentrated only its proprietary symptom set. The entire field of medicine became symptom oriented.
Among the competing treatments can be found a huge variety of drugs, angioplasty, heart by-pass surgery, and even such far out symptom medications as Viagra. Patients became shuffled from one specialist to another as the disease progressed. Cash flowed freely and everybody prospered except the patient.
A few years later the diabetes industry was born as the drug industry managed to find symptom-suppressing drugs that would not cure the disease.
The good news about this disease, now widely known as Type II diabetes, insulin resistant hyperinsulinemia and Syndrome X, is that it is completely curable. It is, of course, an alternative cure.
The ability to completely reverse this disease has been understood by the research community since the late 1950s.
After rejecting orthodox medical treatment, this writer completely reversed a particularly bad case of Syndrome X in 103 days from start to finish be the use of alternative means alone. This included the time it took to research the literature to discover the cause of the disease.
The bad news is that our orthodox medical institutions did not and cannot cure this disease for reasons that have nothing to do with medical science. Partly because of medical school bureaucracy, partly due to the economics of a huge medical and quasi-medical industry that has grown up around htis disease and partly because this disease provides an effective limitation on population growth, the cure is poorly known outside of research circles.
The profits from a disease that provides such a vast, unending supply of patients in every generation are immense, The entire medical community is structured so that it would experience a major recession if the cure for just this one disease were widely known. Thus, because of powerful economic forces functions and highly deceptive medical practices, this disease has become a permanent part of America's medical commercial wallpaper.*
Thomas Smith is a reluctant medical investigator having been forced into seeking a cure for his own Syndrome X because it was obvious that his doctor didn't have one. He has published the results of his investigations in a report entitled "Insulin: Our Silent Killer". He has posted these results on the web page www.Healingmatters.com . He can be reached at his toll free number 866-320-7700.