February 5, 2001
February 12, 2001
February 19, 2001
February 26, 2001
Here's to Your Health
Brand new Secretary of State Colin Powell greeted his new staff with calls for more international meddling.
Secretary of State Colin Powell received a tumultuous welcome from career bureaucrats when he promised to seek more money to do more things to involve the United States in more places on Earth.
Powell is a servant of Bilderberg, the secret organization of international movers and shakers, and is doing its bidding in involving the United States in every petty problem everywhere.
Powell is well-paid by Bilderberg. Among the biggest contributors for speaking fees is Gold man Sachs, which has long been represented at secret Bilderberg meetings. Powell earned $6.7 mil lion last year in fees from colleges and big corporations.
Today, Powell is estimated to be worth more than $27 million, most of which he has earned from giving speeches.
Powell, a lifelong internationalist who favors compelling American soldiers to fight in United Nations uniforms commanded by foreign officers, made it clear that Earth has no small corner into which his State Department will not intrude.
He is making good on his oft-stated promise to seek more money and re sources for the State Department, Powell told his new staff.
Powell said he had "pigeon-holed" White House officials, including the head of the Office of Management and Budget and the White House chief of staff, to ask for more funds "at every inaugural ball and party I went to this weekend.
"But the Chief of Staff Andrew Card, "was ducking me at every turn" until, Powell said, he told him: "Come here, Son."
Powell, as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under the elder President Bush, directed the Persian Gulf war that sent the president's poll ratings into the 90 percent range in 1991. He will be discussing what new actions may be necessary against Saddam Hussein, Iraq's strong dictator who remains in charge.
INSUFFICIENTLY BLOODY
As to former President Clinton's invasion of Yugoslavia, the only criticism the new president had was that it was insufficiently bloody—even though the draft dodger then in the White House killed thousands of civilians of varying ethnicity in Yugoslavia.
Powell made it clear that a U.S. presence in Yugoslavia would be extended indefinitely. He complained about the condition of the embassy and other diplomatic facilities there.
Powell's formula for the future: more spending and more meddling in more places. The United States is now involved in 16 UN "peacekeeping missions" throughout the world and has several hundred thousand U.S. troops in more than 30 countries around the globe.*
President Bush supported a rally of mostly middle-class demonstrators protesting the anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision to approve abortion on demand.
They called for the right to life in Washington on Jan 22, the 28th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, and President Bush heard and responded.
President bush responded promptly by blocking U.S. funds from going to international organizations that provide "family planning" and abortions overseas. His action cancelled orders by former President Bill Clinton providing tax dollars to such organizations.
POLITICAL GAMES
Legislation granting federal funds to international groups that promote abortions has always been controversial.
In 1993, just after taking office, Clinton signed legislation ending restrictions on the funding. Six years later, however, Clinton reversed himself, agreeing to prevent money from going to these groups in return for Congress appropriating money to pay more than $900 million to the United Nations.
In 2000, Clinton reversed himself again, freeing up the restrictions on the money. But in order to avoid a heated campaign battle, Clinton agreed that his contentious change would not take effect until after the next administration took office Feb. of this year.
Rep. Chris smith (R-N.J.) read a statement by Bush to protesters outside the Supreme court:
"We share a great goal: to work toward a day when every child is welcomed in life and protected in law. We know this will not come easily of all at once."
TIDE TURNED?
Marchers expressed the view that Bush's election may have turned the tide in their favor.
"For me, it is a special time," said Sylvia Nuniz, 71, of New Orleans. She said she firmly believes Bush will stop abortions. "Oh yes, he's an honest man."
Can Bush roll back the Supreme Court's abortion ruling?
"Not necessarily abortion as a whole," said Cathryn Pracht of Greenbelt, Md. "I think he will have a tremendous effect on the partial-birth abortions.
When president, Clinton twice vetoed legislation banning partial-birth abortion, in which a live baby is delivered feet-first until all but the head is out of the birth canal. As the baby's arms flail and legs kick, the physician stabs the head, sucks out the brain with a vacuum and squeezes the head until it is small. This prevents stitches for the mother.
Bush has said that he will sign legislation banning partial-birth abortions if it reaches his desk.
"It's about time the United States took a positive approach," said Sister Joanne of the Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, an order in Ann arbor, Mich. "And that begins with life."
Polls show that Americans are split down the middle on abortion, with most showing that Americans support limiting abortion on demand.*
Because the new administration is still settling in, the United States is absent form this years economic summit at Davos, Switzerland.
Security is tight in Davos, Switzerland, for the annual gathering of internationalists, power brokers, bankers and military units brace for more protest against globalization.
But the United States is not represented this year, which is unusual. Former President Bill Clinton was a regular and spoke at last year's mega-confab.
Officials said the new administration is still "settling in."
At last years World Economic Forum 2000 opponents of "free trade" broke shop windows and smashed car windshields while denouncing the gathering as a "meeting of murderers."
Swiss television estimated that between 1,000 and 2,000 police from across Switzerland were on hand to head off the kind of anti-globalization protests that hit the European Union summit in Nice, international financial organization meetings in Prague, Washington and Davos previously.
Many heads of state and senior corporate executives are among the 3,200 participants at a luxury ski resort. They include Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori of Japan, Palestinian laeder Yasser Arafat, Mexican President Vicente Fox, Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
Shimon Peres of Israel and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan are scheduled to attend.*
The United Nations is seeking a global tax to finance the emerging world government. The UN is acting at the urging of Bilderberg, which proposed such a plan years ago.
The United Nations proposed a global tax on international currency transactions in a Jan. 30 report that reflected a plan presented by the secret Bilderberg group years ago (The SPOTLIGHT, June 24, 1991.
The report was compiled by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization, all of which are always represented at secret Bilderberg meetings.
A Global tax has been on the UN agenda since first being urged by Bilderberg nearly a decade ago, but it is the first time the world body was so bold as to go high-profile public with a formal recommendation.
Despite their best efforts and the collaboration of the mainstream media, UN bureaucrats were unable to completely suppress public discourse on a global tax.
Soon after The Spotlight first exposed the scheme, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, Alan Keyes, denounced the proposed tax. He has spoken strongly against the scheme while running in the Republican presidential primaries in 1996 and 2000.
Bilderberg's first plan was a tax on oil at the well head. This would mean that everybody who bought gas or used oil for any reason would be paying a direct tax to the UN. A second proposal ws to tax international travel, with a surcharge on airline tickets and passenger ships. This was quietly suggested by Un secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali.
Last year, a UN report suggested an Internet tax in one sentence and said nothing more following public denunciations. Reaction overshadowed the massive report by the UN Development Program.
A 1 percent tax on $1.5 trillion worth of "speculative' currency transactions may yield $150 billion a year to be used to stabilize volatile markets, the report said.*
Americans cannot suffer police state terrorism in the name of "law enforcement" and still call themselves "free." They must decide between the "security" of the SWAT mentality and the personal responsibility of freedom, not only from criminality but, more, from government tyrants who no longer even consider police "peace officers."
It is becoming all too commonplace in America today. The shooting death of Carl Ray Wilson of rural Arkansas by "law enforcement" agents is best described as cold-blooded murder, officially covered up.
Once again, no participating officer or official will be held to account for an arbitrary killing, using military-tactic stealth to invade the sanctity of his home and destroy the peace of his sleeping family while shooting him to death before their eyes. A simple knock on the door and a warrant shown during regular business hours would have sufficed.
Timing these raids when the targeted family will be asleep practically guarantees there will be confrontation. Who does not attempt to defend himself when he awakens to armed strangers in black invading his home? It appears that these myrmidons well understand this reaction and purposely use it to justify the murder of "targets" in their beds.
Typically utilizing criminal appearing agents - garbed in black and masked - who neither show a warrant mor announce any reason to justify their prexence on one's property, these no-knock "SWAT" operations too often amount to brutal home-invasion killings with the earmarks of KGB or Mossad-style "hits." These assaults cannot be lawful in this nation no matter what congress and the kept courts say.
The whole "shoot first and ask questions later" SWAT mentality is foreign to our Bill of Rights and the concepts embodied in it. Several of those rights are routinely ignored in the process. Just a generation or so ago, reflecting our national sense of right order, there was a common saying that "100 guilty men must fo free rather than one innocent man be convicted."
The SWAT mentality doesn't concern itself with the niceties of a conviction or any other due process, just "getting its man." whether alive, maimed or dead is immaterial to them. In that mind set, he's already tried, found guilty and convicted, a criminal to be dealt with in a harsh, terroristic manner. That seems to go for any family members in the way also, even children.
Whatever happened to our lawful necessity of presumed innocence? SWAT and "no knock" are police state concepts for nations which have zero tolerance for justice and freedom. Rationalized as a "drug war" necessity, SWAT is mushrooming as the police action of choice in all areas of "peace keeping."
Mymidons recruited to carry out these bully-boy deeds - supposedly the servants of those they enthusiastically attack - to often show sadistic tendencies. They seem not to be overly interested in the certainty, even of the street address, of their planned "targets." The thrill of the hunt, or maybe of the kill, appears to be at least part of the SWAT mentality. They have callously victimized innocent families whose home were "fingered" at random by some prison con looking for a way to reduce his sentence.
When an innocent is murdered by them, or when they terrorized and degrade in every way an innocent family, it doesn't seem to bother their collective conscience enough even to offer an apology. The best officials have to offer tends to be taxpayer dollars that go to pay off the innocent victims in order to keep them quiet.
Rationalizations in talks to impressionable school kids about their great service to the public do not offset the brutality and terror some of their number obviously enjoy bringing into the lives of wives, children and other members of families they invade. Acts such as sadistically forcing wives and children, who had been violently rousted out in their bedclothes, to shiver on cold ground for hours while handcuffed, seems to be standard practice. As is the verbal degradation of any woman unfortunate enough to be rousted from her bed not fully clothed.
Agents in the Wilson killing were under the authority of the U.S. Treasury Department's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), on of the more vicious of over 100 federal bureaucracies to which Congress has arbitrarily granted police state enforcement powers.
Carl Wilson had a criminal past but had paid his debt to society and was no longer considered anything but a family man to those who knew him well.
But lately the "guardians" of our society have decided that even if a man fully pays his debt, it won't be accepted. Most ex-felons are no longer returned to full citizenship, "law and order" perversion of justice that will, in their future, come to haunt many who consider themselves good citizens.
Besides losing their right to vote, felons, like so-called "dead beat dads," are having more and more natural rights withheld from them. For Wilson, one of those was the right to have a gun. It was this "violation" that a swarm enemy, BATF Agent Bill Buford - who promised Wilson he would "get him," used to arrange the early morning raid on Wilson's family.
When aroused, Wilson made a belated attempt to arm and defend himself and his family (this is always the rationalization for a "law enforcement" killing even though there is absolutely no chance whatever for an individual so taken by surprise) but was shot seven times, mostly in the back and through a wall, and then gruffly ordered to "get up" which he couldn't do.
There, in his bed and in his wife's gun-to-her-head presence, the agents watched him bleed to death with no move to prevent it. One later even asked his wife why she was not int the bed with him, an implication that he wanted her to have suffered the same fate.
According to The Sierra Times reporters Wayne Hicks and Henrietta Bowman, immediately after the killing, Agent Buford began a series of lies about the circumstances from the motives for the raid to how the raid progressed, even to who fired the first shot - now a commonplace method of operation for myrmidons. No government agent was concerned enough about an investigation to call the home a crime scene and rope it off or otherwise attempt to keep any evidence from being moved. At least they didn't burn or raze it as they did Waco and the Oklahoma City federal building.
These myrmidon "public servants" hold no grief for the public and consider themselves a class above, not beholden to, the rule of law they claim to enforce on others.
An interesting and sinister side bar surfaced by the Times reporters is a suspicion that Wilson had knowledge concerning the murders of the two boys found on the railroad tracks near Mena, Ark., during the CIA's dope-running Iran-contra days of Gov. Bill Clinton, Ollie North, Barry Seal and others.*
The United States faces yet another threat to its sovereignty in the form of a broad-reaching agreement on trade formulated by internationalists.
A powerful international trade agreement that would override U.S. laws and regulations placing control over U.S. commerce in the hands of multinational corporations, bankers and unelected globalist leaders is being foisted on unsuspecting Americans as it is debated in internationalist circles outside the realm of public scrutiny.
Spawned out of the Uruguay Rounds in the early 1990s, the trade agreement known as the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), was originally signed in 1994 with the express purpose of liberalizing global trade rules under the umbrella of the internationalist policy-directing agency, the World Trade Organization (WTO).
New high-level discussions, however, are taking place right now in Geneva, Switzerland, to ensure that the agreement is universally accepted before any opposition can mobilize.
Frustrated by the failure of the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI) in 1998 and the subsequent protests that brought unwanted publicity to globalist mega-confabs around the world, internationalists looked to expand an existing trade agreement that focused on opening economies around the world to multinational corporations.
The MAI was much like its successor. The sovereignty of member nations would be surrendered in huge chunks to the international organization. Foreign companies could enter a country despite objections of the host government. A country could no longer require that foreign entities be in part locally owned. A foreign company would have to be treated equally or better than local enterprises.
The SPOTLIGHT first exposed the MAI on March 9, 1998.
Today, according to a report by Jessica Woodroffe for the World Development Movement, "all kinds of agendas are being pursued in the continuing negotiations around this agreement, which now extends beyond any reasonable definition of either trade or services."
GATS is composed of a set of rules that are part and parcel of the WTO's dispute resolution process, an international court system where countries can air quarrels over trade disputes and have a panel of unelected oficials rule on them and hand out penalties.
"The GATS is a set of rules restricting governments from making their own decisions on how trade in services takes place," writes Woodroffe.
But the agreement, according to Woodroffe, is vague about what exactly constitutes the service industry. GATS refers to activities as diverse as pesticide spraying, building regulations and sewer and water facilities.
A guide to the agreement names 11 broad categories of "services" that would fall under the sphere of GATS: business; communication (telecommunications, postal, audio-visual); construction and related engineering services; distribution; educational environmental (water delivery, energy, refuse disposal); financial; health related and social; tourism and travel related; recreational, cultural and sporting; and transport (sea, air, rail, road).
"It goes far beyond what is commonly understood as ‘trade' and prescribes extensive areas of domestic economic activity," the report says.
A compounding caveat associated with the trade agreement is that once a country signs on, its elected officials and citizens are trapped, in spite of what may happen to a country's economy.
One aspect of the GATS is that it helps to "overcome domestic resistance to change," said WTO Secretariat Mike Moore. "Bindings undertaken in the GATS have the effect of protecting liberalization policies, regardless of their underlying rationale, from slippages and reversals."
The agreement removes accountability of elected officials in that government can inform the populace that there is little that can be done when instituting unpopular economic policies, said Moore. Governments can "tell their constituents that their hands are tied at the international level," paving the way for disastrous internationalist schemes that benefit multinational corporations and the super rich.
Critics charge that if the agreement is not blocked, an international organization will have the power to overrule Congress and the U.S. Constitution, dictating what U.S. companies can and cannot do on U.S. soil or risk trade sanctions. And there would be very little that any U.S. elected official could do about it.*
Both Pro- and anti-globalists claimed victory after riots in Switzerland.
Anti-internationalist rioters trashed downtown Zurich, Switzerland Saturday night and Sunday morning (Jan 27-28).
But few got near the meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) at the posh ski resort at Davos and there was no violence there.
Demonstrators had announced that they wouldn't be stopped and Swiss police said they wouldn't disrupt the WEF proceedings.
On Monday morning, both sides announced victory.
Police arrested 121 masked rioters on Sunday after about 1,000 protesters rampaged through Zurich, burning cars, smashing windows of local businesses and pelting police with stones.
According to Swiss sources, most of the rioters were released as the clean-up began, but 35 will face criminal charges including "grievous bodily harm," "vandalism" and "breach of the peace."
The police were criticized by Swiss commentators after they fired rubber bullets, tear gas and water cannon at demonstrators after the riot broke out on Saturday night.
For their part, officials described the mob as "extremely violent" with "a destructive fury."
Sonntagsblick, a German-language weekly newspaper, accused police of a "mobilization like in a dictatorship."
"I wouldn't have believed that possible in Switzerland," Franco Cavalli, head of the Socialist Party in the Swiss Parliament, told the German newspaper. ‘The police have trampled on state law."
Another newspaper, Sonntagszetung, wrote: "The spirit of Davos was suffocated in tear gas."
It added that police had "trampled on basic rights." however, the force defended its actions, saying it used "moderate, exemplary intervention."
BANNED DEMONSTRATION
Swiss newspapers reported that the riot began after police stopped hundreds of anti-globalization protesters from reaching the ski resort of Davos on Saturday night, where they wanted to join a banned demonstration against the annual WEF.
They returned to Zurich in trains and buses, and marched through the city, over-turning cars and setting them on fire.
Swiss newspapers said the majority of those arrested were Swiss, along with groups from Germany, France, Spain, and Italy and individual protesters from as far away as Canada and the Dominican Republic.
Several hundred protesters turned out for the banned demonstration in Davos which proceeded peacefully before it was dispersed by police.*
The only thing standing in the way of those who wish to rule the world is the Constitution.
Rich and powerful men who brilliantly manipulate the political arena from behind the scenes are fully confident they will soon be able to govern the entire Earth through a single political body - the United Nations.
One of their own, Dr. Carroll Quigley, was so confident a one-world government was basically a done deal and the manipulations and control of heads of government no longer needed to remain hidden that in 1966 he published somewhat of an expose in his 1,348-page book, Tragedy and Hope. In his inaugural speech on Jan. 20, 1993, President Bill Clinton boasted that Dr. Quigley was one of his professors hen he attended Georgetown University.
There is a single remaining barrier preventing implementation of world government: The United States of America and its Constitution. Once the manipulators get full control of U.S. government and, therefore, control of the greatest military force on earth, it will be a simple matter and a short time until all other nations will be forced to concede power to the White-shirt criminals who will become the tyrannical and bloodiest group of men to have ever ruled.
When they are through there will not be an island of the sea, nor a mountain cave, where all resistance, or perceived resistance, will not have been rooted out. Compared to the Dark Ages, when heretics, or resisters, were hunted down, tortured and burned at the stake, the coming tyranny, having little if any organized resistance, will be for worse.
As a barrier to world government, the Constitution contains one particularly high hurdle which as yet the manipulators have not been able to over come. That is the Second Amendment, Which guarantees the right of the individual Americans to own firearms.
Dozens, or hundreds, some say thousands, of laws have been put in place at the federal and state levels in a futile attempt to first register and then confiscate all firearms - handguns, then rifles, then shotguns. An important first step toward eventual confiscation came in 1968 when Congress required purchasers to give the gun dealer his name and address and state he was not a felon.
Though some progress has been made since 1968, with current gun buyers being forced to submit to instant background checks, it is highly likely that the rich and powerful who dream of world government are growing impatient with the advocates of the Second Amendment.
Once the manipulators determine the impossibility of getting America's guns through legislation and that psychological conditioning of the masses against guns is not going to work, they will attempt to confiscate the guns with brute force.
In the future, a president will declare a "national emergency" and proclaim martial law. Then the federal government will come after your guns.*
A brief look at Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's checkered background sheds some light on the career of this shady financial mind.
Is Alan Greenspan the capo di tutti capi - the boss
of all bosses?
More than a trillion dollars in criminal cash are washed through the world's financial institutions each year. At least half of it goes through major American banks such as Chase Manhattan, the Rockefeller dynasty's financial flagship. These megabanks become a "prime facilitator" of Large-scale money-laundering, a congressional investigation found this month.
Although the study, compiled by Democratic staffers of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, does not specifically make the point, it leaves the "inescapable conclusion" that under the lawless stewardship of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan the entire U.S. payments system has become "criminalized," said Dr. Aldo Milinkovich, a former senior Treasury examiner.
Paradoxically, the Senate report came to light as Greenspan was basking in the adulation of the Establishment media, where he was euligized as a miracle-working financial genius, the "Maestro" whose manipulative genius kept the U.S. economy soaring, as Robert Woodward, a celebrated Washington Post editor, put it in a recent book.
But even Woodward, a gushing admirer, admits in his book that the key difference between the Fed chairman and other central bankers may be that Greenspan was willing to do things that were "not legal."
But having let slip this crucial fact, Woodward offers no explanation for it.
His book takes little not of the Fed chairman's early years of economic apprenticeship or his ideological background.
CRIMINAL CONNECTIONS
Other researchers, however, have been not so reticent.
"Greenspan received his intellectual formation as a acolyte of the so-called ‘Objectivist' movement headed by the late Ayn Rand in the ‘60s," noted author Christopher Hitchens.
It was a extremist Libertarian cult group the "exalted greed, ruthless profiteering, and taught harsh contempt for Christianity and any notion of treating others charitable," Hitchens recalled.
Moreover, behind that enigmatic demeanor, Greenspan still believes in the Objectivist doctrine, Hitchens said recently.
If people really knew what is in Greenspan's mind, he could never be elected to anything: "he is too extreme," warned the author.
In fact, Hitchens claims that it was his Objectivist mindset that led the Fed chairman to his first known involvement in criminal finance.
KEATING SIX?
In 1985, Greenspan, then a consulting economist in New Yourk, took a $100,000 payoff from Charles Keating, owner of the Lincoln Savings and Loan thrift in Irvine, Calif.
To earn his windfall, Greenspan certified that Keating was an upstanding, trustworthy, "seasoned and expert" banker, under whose praiseworthy management Lincoln had made "sound and profitable" direct investments.
In fact, Keating was a hard-boiled swindler, who looted Lincoln Savings and went to prison for it, leaving the taxpayers to pick up a $3.8 billion loss.
But Greenspan gave him a glowing bill of health, apart from his hefty honorarium, in part because Keating, a domineering, oracular crook, resembled John Galt, hero od Ayn Rand's most successful novel, Atlas Shrugged, Hitchens concluded.
Some of the executive memoranda Keating wrote to the employees of Lincoln Savings have a truly Objectivist mindset.
"They read as if they had been written by John Galt himself," said Hitchens, a student of Greenspan's career.
In one of these directives, urging the sales staff to unload worthless junk bonds on credulous, elderly Lincoln thrift customers, Keating reminded them to spare no one. "Remember," Keating wrote, "that the weak, the meek and the ignorant are always good targets."
"And so are, in Greenspan's world view, complacent American taxpayers," added Milinkovich. "We will never rid ourselves of the criminal financial elite headed by this Fed chairman until we take a hard-eyed look at who Greenspan really is, what he really believes in - and what he is really doing to us."*
"Experts" acknowledge that NAFTA will grow into a hemispheric union, Americans are already suffering, but there's lots more ahead.
NAFTA experts acknowledged that the ultimate goal is the "political integration" of the Western Hemisphere similar to that of the European Union.
The acknowledgment came in a question-and-answer period during a panel discussion following release of a pro-NAFTA study Feb.6 in Washington.
Creating an "American Union" similar to the European Union is a major objective of the secret international Bilderberg group, which sees it as a major step toward a formal world government.
This question was addressed to all four panelist:
"As NAFTA expands throughout the Western Hemisphere as the ‘Free Trade Area of the Americas,' will there be political integration similar to that of the European Union?"
"Yes, there will be more political integration," responded Robert Scott, an international economist at the Economic Policy Institute.
"It is important to compare NAFTA to the European experience," Scott said. "Europe had a number of trade agreements that led to the European Union."
He was referring to the earlier European Common Market and other deals.
European nations "agreed to transfer huge amounts of resources" in the process of achieving "political union," Scott said.
John Mutti, professor of economics at Grinnell College and author of the pro-NAFTA report, agreed that political integration of the Western Hemisphere is the ultimate goal but said it will be "more of a two-way development rather than the United States saying ‘we are going to do it this way.'"
Mutti said, and his report argues, that NAFTA is not the miracle some supporters claim nor is it the evil critics charge but it should be continued and expanded.
President Bush is long on record as favoring a hemispheric "free trade" zone and is expected to ask Congress for "fast track" negotiation authority. This would allow Bush to negotiate a trade deal that Congress can vote up or down but not change.
Fast-track authority resulted in the birth of NAFTA on Jan. 1, 1994 by a lame-duck Congress.
The move toward an American Union is moving on many fronts.
Mexican President Vicente Fox said on Feb. 3 that he will press Bush on his "open borders" demand when the two meet Feb. 16. It will be Bush's first trip outside the country as President.
During his weekly radio address, Fox said he would ask Bush to grant amnesty to illegal Mexican aliens so they can receive the education and health benefits "they deserve."
For those who want to leave Mexico, Fox said, he would ask Bush to find a "documented way, so they can work, return home and see their families, then go back again.
Fox called for "open borders" with the United States immediately after his election in July.
Meanwhile, Bush was pushing for hemispheric integration on Feb. 5 while meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien in the White House.
"The biggest challenge in U.S.-Canada relations will be convincing Congress to pass a hemispheric free-trade agreement," Bush said after the meeting.
"We're going to have a summit in Quebec in April and I'm looking forward to being hosted by the prime minister," Bush said. "And the whole notion is to promote free trade and open markets around the hemisphere."
Chetien reaffirmed his long-standing support of world government in a speech to the Organization of American States the same day.
"Many look upon the powerful forces of economic globalization and technological change as the source of profound problems" such as poverty and political instability, Chretien said. "But Canada looks upon them as the key to solving them, to creating untold opportunities and shared prosperity from Tierra Del Fuego to Baffin Island."
At the same time, NAFTA was demonstrating its raw power over member states by compelling the United States to let its citizens be killed and maimed by unsafe and unlicensed Mexican trucks prowling freely across the nation.
A five-member NAFTA panel ruled that the United States cannot continue its policy of broadly prohibiting Mexican trucks from its highways for safety reasons. Decisions must be made on case-by-case basis, it said on Feb. 8.
The NAFTA agreement required the United States to open truck access to all states bordering Mexico in 1995 and to permit travel throughout the entire country as of Jan. 1, 2000.
Even before the anticipated decision was handed down, it was denounced by Public Citizen, An advocacy group established by Ralph Nader, in a scorching report.
"It is imperative that we continue to limit address for these dangerous trucks even if it means paying trade sanctions," said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, in releasing the report. "It is impossible to inspect every truck and we cannot knowingly put drivers at risk by inviting dangerous rigs into U.S. high-ways."
"This ruling once again provides a dramatic example of how trade agreements such as NAFTA reach far beyond appropriate commercial issues and threaten vital domestic health and safety standards, even when those standards are applied equally t domestic and foreign commerce," said the group's trade specialist, Lori Wallach.
The report found that:
* Fewer than one percent of Mexican trucks entering the United States are inspected, but 35 percent of those are taken out of service for serious safety failures (46 percent higher than the rate for U.S. trucks). The nation lacks both the facilities and personnel to inspect every truck.
* Although Mexico pledged to institute a comprehensive truck safety program when NAFTA went into effect, seven years later that country still has not instituted an effective system. The new rules now in effect are voluntary and are to be phased in over the next two years.
* Mexico does not limit the time drivers spend behind the wheel. Some are required to drive 36 hours straight with just a six-hour break before returning to the road.
The report quotes Lawrence Weintrob, former assistant inspector general of the Department of Transportation:
"We are going to see some frightening violations: air brakes that aren't responding; brake and tail lights that are not working or missing entirely. It's scary stuff."*
Have you seen these strange condensation trails left by aircraft that are appearing across America?
The day had been absolutely clear - not a cloud in the sky - with a slight wind of one to three miles per hour blowing from the northwest.
I came out to photograph a gorgeous sunset over the Blue Ridge Mountains; however, I was attracted by the sun's rays being reflected off a series of contrails running from east to west. These contrails did not dissipate as is usual, but seemed to hang in the sky and spread out. As I watched, these east-west contrails were crossed by a series of north-south contrails.
I took several photos from a northwest direction toward the Blue Ridge.
I saw two new contrails being formed, running south to north, but too high up to spot the exact configuration of an aircraft. I assumed they were KC-135 tankers. I estimated the height at 40,000 feet.
There were at least two aircraft and possibly four flying this checkerboard pattern. The parallel flights were about two miles apart and I estimated their speed at 400 miles per hour.
The entire grid pattern of contrails - or chemtrails, as they are often called - covered an area of approximately 10 square miles, which drifted in a southeasterly direction, with no noticeable dissipation of the earlier trails, but rather forming a feathered cloud-like spreading.
The entire mas drifted off toward the southeast and by 5 p.m., the sky was completely clear once more. At no time, either before or after the patterning, were there any normal clouds in the sky.
Having flown as a pilot or a passenger over much of the Earth in all kinds of weather, I am acutely aware of aircraft performance. I have watched the formation of normal condensation trails of commercial aircraft fly8ing over my farm at heights of 34,000 to 38,000 feet, which rapidly dissipate.
The flight pattern of Dec. 8 was noticeably different. It was reminiscent of the early days of the smoke writers in the sky who laid out their patterns in intricate detail on paper and then flew that pattern in relationship to key features on the ground.
I assumed that the group who flew that particular pattern on that sunny and clear afternoon had done the same, only using sophisticated radar and Ground Positioning Systems. Their focal point was probably the geographic location of the highest terrain elevation in the Blue Ridge Mountains located at 38 degrees 33 minutes north by 78 degrees 24 minutes west, known as Old Rag Mountain.
What happened after that checker board pattern of chemtrails was flown?
Within the local communities of Culpeper, Madison, Orange and Fredericksburg, downwind from the pattern formed over the Blue Ridge, an outbreak of upper respiratory ailments spread rapidly.
The doctors' offices and the emergency rooms of the hospitals became crowded with patients complaining of sinus problems, bronchial coughs and wheezing, watery and itching eyes. Most of the people were inclined to accept it as "the flu." Coincidence?
But it wasn't the flu. Something in the air was causing a major irritation of the upper respiratory system to countless people of all ages. The symptoms and the acute irritation lasted a period of three weeks and then seemed to dissipate.
That "something in the air" was exacerbated by an unusual record-breaking cold snap that penetrated into the deep South, transported the jet stream that instead of following a normal pattern of west to east along our shared border with Canada, dipped sharply down, bringing frigid Arctic air into Florida, Texas and even California.
Health reports from these areas were remarkably similar in that people from widely separated geographic areas were complaining of dripping sinuses, uncontrolled coughing from irritated bronchial passages and various flu-like symptoms, including headaches, blurred vision and stinging eyes, stomach upsets, nausea and spastic vomiting.
As the symptoms wore away, generally over three weeks, the patients were left with a feeling of weariness and depression.
Could it be that we are being subjected to a combination of bacteriological and psychological warfare by an enemy within the gates?*
Donn de Grand Pre is a retired Army colonel and the author of Barbarians Inside the Gates (hardcover, 425 pps. $33, item no.399). His book can be ordered from Liberty Library at 300 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20003.
A U.S. congressman has introduced legislation to prevent U.S. officials from ceding sovereignty to an international court.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) has called on Congress to reject the proposed United Nations International Criminal Court (ICC) as an assault on U.S. sovereignty.
Paul's resolution (HCR 23) calls for President Bush to declare that the United States does not intend to ratify or assent to the ICC treaty signed in the last days of the Clinton administration.
Although the Senate has declined to ratify the treaty, Paul warned his resolution on Feb. 8 that officials and international law experts claim the UN considers the U.S. signature as tantamount to American support for the court.
"UN bureaucrats don't care whether our Senate ratifies
the ICC treaty or not,"Paul said. "The Clinton administration
signed the treaty and the UN views the signature as final. It
arrogantly announced that signatures from 60 nations will suffice
to authorize creation of the international court." Once the
court is established, "the UN will have the mechanism it
needs to enforce its global edicts against American citizens,"
Paul said. "What about
rights guaranteed to all U.S. citizens by the Constitution, such
as due process, jury trials, the right against self-incrimination,
and the prohibition against unreasonable searches?"
The ICC "represents the next step toward global government: first the UN created its unconstitutional laws and now it seeks an international court to give teeth to the laws," Paul said. "President Bush should act now to revoke any symbol of U.S. support for this terrible treaty."
Paul said he will seek support from his colleagues on the International Relations Committee.
AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY
"This is not a partisan issue," Paul said. "This is an issue of American sovereignty. American citizens have a right to constitutional protections. Congress must en sure that no American ever faces trial before an unconstitutional international court."
The ICC is an important part of the secret Bilderberg group's plan for world government. Bilderberg's dictates flow to Bush from Henry Kissinger, who is on the steering committee of Bilderberg and its more-public brother group, the Trilateral Commission, of which George Bush the Elder is a member.
The UN has announced that, once in place, the ICC will assert jurisdiction over the entire globe, including nations that refuse to either sign or ratify the treaty. The prospect of American servicemen being jerked before the court for "war crimes" during the endless "peacekeeping" missions troubles lawmakers.*
The so-called "maestro" behind the booming U.S. economy has never been called to task for burying one of the uglier reasons behind the international plutocrats' stunning profits and the ruin of American labor.
Alan Greenspan got away with manipulating and corrupting the
U.S. economy for more that a decade by his actions behind a 
facade of lies and misstatements.
but now influential critics are beginning to chip away at the
deceptive claims and reassurances this financial guru has boldly
fed over the years to Congress and the Establishment media.
"The optimistic ‘new economy' theories, long propounded by Greenspan, have lost their last shreds of credibility," said the sobersided Economist, the worlds' leading business weekly.
According to this Greenspanite theory, "wondrous new technological progress has abolished the traditional business cycle of boom and bust." added this prestigious publication. "In this rosy view, productivity would grow forever at a Miraculous rate, producing more and more profits over the years."
Hogwash, concluded the Economist. by last year, "U.S. labor productivity growth fostered by technology has slipped to an annual rate of 2.1 percent, sharply down from the 4.3 percent productivity rise claimed by Greenspan for 1999," it reported.
But there is no doubt that in recent years, some U.S. corporate profits - unlike wages - have gone up substantially. Where did the extra gravy come from? Not from contributions made by information technology - though that, too, had an effect - but from the sweat of child labor around the world.
At least 120 million children between the ages of 5 and 12 are made to work a full day in the poor countries of the world to produce goods for rich nations, often at wages amounting to a dollar a day or even less, Professor Benno Morici of the University of Maryland revealed in a recent study.
The report, sponsored by the prestigious Economic Strategy Institute, found that some 12,5 million children labor in export industries whose goods are destined for pricey American fashion, toy and home electronic retailers.
Apart from this shattering discovery, the report suggests that unpaid prison labor, bonded labor and semi-slave labor exploited in huge prison-like camps under club-wielding armed guards have become "prevalent" from china to Brazil.
Wherever large international corporations operating under the new covenants of "free trade" such as the WTO and NAFTA have managed to destroy labor standard and workers' rights, they have made an average yearly extra profit of at least $6,000 per exploited laborer, the study found.
You can comb through all of Greenspan's speeches and congressional testimony,' noted business reporter Jane Gorman, "You will never find a word about this immense slave labor empire, created largely by the corrupting influence of greedy international mega-conglomerates."
The very existence of this enormous new economic anomaly, which casually violates the hard-won labor laws everywhere, has been covered up by the Federal Reserve chairman and even America's labor bosses.
"They may have gotten away with this mass crime against humanity for the time being, but history will judge them harshly," concluded Gorman.*
The destruction of America is in progress because the federal government's inaction on illegal immigration.
A state senator in Utah has proposed legislation to bring Mandarin Chinese into public high schools in the Beehive state and a mainstream California newspaper has called for Chinese and Korean to be taught to students, along with Spanish in the Golden state.
Claiming that the future lies in Asia and Latin America, the Contra Costa Times wrote on Feb. 9, "We hope to see, in the years ahead, an outpouring of Japanese, Chinese, and other Asian languages in local school curricula, to supplement the Spanish that now has earned a foothold in the schools."
As if to prepare Californians for an increasingly balkanized future caused by the failure of the federal government to protect the nation's borders, the paper said, "Teaching Spanish to California kids makes sense, given the increasing Hispanic population and the gradual blurring of the border, fueled by NAFTA and helped along by new presidents in Mexico and the United States."
Currently the three foreign languages most widely taught in California are Spanish, which is first, followed by French and German. The Times editorial suggested Vietnamese or Korean would be more appropriate than French or German for young Californians saying, "We should be teaching our youngsters the languages of the future rather than the languages of the past."
One out of every four Californians—about 8.5 million people—is foreign-born. In the city of Los Angeles, 40 percent of the residents are foreign-born—a higher percentage of immigrants than New York City experienced during the Great Wave of immigration at the turn of the last century.
"No other region of the country has experienced the demographic change that California has in the past two decades," according to Mark Baldassare, author of From California in the New Millennium: The Changing Social and Political Land scape, which documents the profound demographic changes that are affecting the state.
"This growth will significantly change the demographic diversity of the state. The white population will grow from 17.4 million in 2000 to 18 million in 2040, and the black population will grow from 2.4 million to 3.2 million over this period. These are modest gains compared with the growth of the Asian population, from 4 million to 9.1 million, and the Latino population, from 10.7 million to 28.1 million.
"The growth in the Latino and Asian populations reflects a rate of immigration to California since 1980 that has been nothing short of phenomenal," Baldassare writes. "This immigration has transformed California from a state where the vast majority were white to a multiracial society consisting of sizable proportions of whites, blacks, Asians and Latinos."
Latinos in California will outnumber whites sometime in the early 2020s and could well become the outright majority in the 2040s, according to the California Department of Finance.
Between 1990 and 2010, California's His panic population will grow by 83 percent, while the state's Asian population will grow even faster by 94 percent, according to a 1998 report on California demographics by the Legislative Analyst's Office.
Most of California's immigrants arrived from Mexico and Asian countries. By 1994, nearly 24 percent of Californians were foreign born and about 42 percent of the school-age population of California consisted of immigrants or the children of immigrants, many of whom have great difficulty with English since it is not spoken in their home or neighborhood.
A Time/CNN poll found that 80 percent of Americans still consider it important that the federal government track down illegal aliens living there.
Surveys conducted among Hispanic Americans, after the 1990 Immigration Act increased annual U.S. immigration quotas by 40 percent, indicate that 89 percent of Hispanics in America strongly support an immediate time-out on immigration. Seven ty four percent agree that fewer immigrants should be allowed—and support stronger restrictions.
A Latino National Political Survey found that 75 percent of Mexican-Americans agree there are too many immigrants in this country while 79 percent of Puerto Ricans agree. Hispanics are more opposed to mass immigration than the 74 percent of "Anglos" who agreed there are "too many immigrants."
This opposition by Hispanics needs to be viewed from their economic perspective. A 1992 study on immigration and wages re ported, "any 10 percent increase in the U.S. work force lowers wages by about 3 percent." The study, included in the recent book on the subject, The Race to the Bottom,* by Alan Tonelson said, "Trade and immigration flows together might account for fully half the wage decline suffered by poorly skilled Americans."
These numbers would suggest that the massive amnesty bill for illegal immigrants (H.R. 500) proposed by Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) does not have the popular support of his Hispanic constituents. (See this week's SPOTLIGHT on Congress on Page 8 for more on amnesty legislation on illegal immigrants.)*
Common and widespread use of antibiotics and other drugs in our nation's food supply is wreaking havoc with our immune systems.
Antibiotics were the "wonder drugs" that launched the power of modern medicine following World War I and continuing through World War II. Today those "wonders" may be turning into a terrible health catastrophe as greed and abuse provoke a serious "counter-revolution" by pathogenic bacteria.
Today virtually every public health institution is wary that antimicrobial resistance is a problem of "growing urgency." Recently the Union of Concerned Scientists released a study showing that while the overuse and abuse of antibiotics by medical doctors is a key factor in this resistance, the use of antimicrobials in agriculture may play an even more significant role.
NEW REPORT
The Concerned Scientists report said: "Tetracycline, penicillin,
erythromycin and other antimicrobials that are important in 
human use are used extensively in the absence
of disease for nontherapeutic purposes in today's livestock production.
Cattle, swine and poultry are routinely given antimicrobials throughout
much of their lives..."
"We estimate that every year livestock producers in the United States use 24.6 million pounds of antimicrobials for non therapeutic purposes. these estimates are the first available to the public based on a clear methodology. We have been careful in making these estimates, always choosing conservative assumptions. We hope that any critics of this study who claim the estimates are incorrect will provide the documented data needed to refine them."
Why use antibiotics for a "non therapeutic" purpose in the first place? Answer, because it is a cheap way to get the animals "fatted for market" earlier than normal. It is also pertinent to note that getting solid facts and figures in this matter from the pharmaceutical and animal livestock industries is difficult, to put it mildly. Additionally, you should know that "organically" produced meats and poultry cannot, by original definition, use antibiotics or hormones in animals.
The term "nontherapeutic use" is especially interesting. The huge 24.6 million pound figure estimated by the study does not include al the antibiotics given to animals for therapeutic purposes.
The study said: "The quantities
of antimicrobials used in the absence of disease for nontherapeutic
purposes in livestock dwarf the amount of antimicrobials used
in human medicine. Our estimates of 24.6 million pounds in animal
agriculture and 3 million pounds in human medicine suggests that
8 times more antimicrobials are used for nontherapeutic purposes
in the three major livestock sectors that in human medicine."
The report added: "...By contrast, industry's estimates suggest that two pounds of antimicrobials are used in treating human disease for every pound used in livestock."
Curiously, estimates from industry claim that twice as much is used for human therapy than is used by the livestock industry. Apparently someone, somewhere is lying to cover up this abuse, which has contributed greatly to the dangerous resistance problem. For example, the Animal Health Institute recently released figures that a total of 17.8 million pounds of antibiotics is used each year for therapeutic and nontherapeutic uses in "all animals" and not just swine, cattle or poultry.
The Concerned Scientists estimate of 24.6 million pounds is only that which is used "nontherapeutically' in poultry (10.5 million pounds); swine(10.3 million pounds) and cattle (3.7 million pounds). "The tonnage would be even higher if antimicrobials used therapeutically for animals were included."
"Livestock use accounts for the lion's share of the total quantity of antimicrobials used in the United States. Our ballpark estimates suggest that nontherapeutic livestock use accounts for 70 percent of total antimicrobial use. then all agricultural uses are considered, the share could be as high as 84 percent. This estimate is far higher than the 40 percent figure commonly given in the literature for agricultural share of antimicrobial use."
What we obviously have here is a very lucrative antimicrobial business that is threatened by developing knowledge of microbial resistance factors and apparent danger to human health. The health problem has been known by the "health community" since the 1970s when "intransigent, antibiotic-resistant infections" were discovered "circulating in hospitals." such resistant microbial infections now plague hospitals and the food supply.
What has taken so ling for this problem to be recognized?
The January-February 2001 issue of FDA Consumer magazine featured a story headlined: "Antibiotic Resistance - From Down on the Chicken Farm." This story does not deal with the "nontherapeutic" uses of antibiotics, but rather the problems with the therapeutic use.
The Center for Veterinary Medicine was forced to take action last fall. It "proposed" that permission for use of Baytril (enrogloxicin) made by Bayer be withdrawn for use in chickens and turkeys. Abbott Laboratories voluntarily withdrew its product SaraFlox, which is also in the fluoroquinonlone family of antibiotics - an antibiotic commonly used to treat humans.
Hearings are now underway as Bayer wishes to present evidence that will allow keeping Baytril on the market.
The Poultry industry uses this family of antibiotics to control Escheria coli a common organism in the human gut that is not normally pathogenic to humans, but now, incidently, has a "mutated, resistant strain" that can be deadly.
The FDA Consumer said: "...the size of flocks precludes testing and treating individual chickens, so when a veterinarian diagnoses an infected bird, the farmers treat the whole flock by adding the drug to its drinking water. While the drug may cure the E. coli bacteria in the poultry, another kind of bacteria - campylobacter - may build up resistance to these drugs, and that is the root of the problem."
This means that people consuming commercial chicken - an exceptionally popular food - are at risk for contacting fluoroquinolone-resistant campylobacter.
Guess what, campylobacter is the most common bacterial cause of diarrheal illness in the United States today. The Centers for Disease Control say this bug affects more than 2 million people every year. The campylobacter infections can be deadly to people with weakened immune systems - making it the biggest food poisoning killer among such germs in the United States.
The damage does not stop here, the FDA report claimed: "Cross-resistance occurs throughout this class of drugs, so resistance to one fluoroquinolone can compromise the effectiveness of all fluoroquinolone drugs," according to Dr. Stephen Sundlof, director of the Center for Veterinary Medicine.
What is not being said in the FDA Consumer, but is heavily implied by the Concerned Scientists' study, is that dripping antibiotics in the water systems on poultry farms is done routinely, and not necessarily therapeutically - obviously compounding the problem.
Meanwhile, government regulators are moving the the typical snail's pace with lobbyists from industry hawking every move. The Concerned Scientists said their report was not "meant to end the debate about usage, but to start it. "They called for a series of steps by the federal government.*
There is an easy way you can minimize your exposure to the hormones and antibiotics used in treating animals and make a change for the better.
To minimize exposure to drugs that are used in livestock, consumers should demand organically produced poultry, eggs, meats and dairy and ignore the standard supermarket fare. Nothing will more the industry away from this abuse faster than to boycott their tainted products.
So many consumers have begun to question hormones used in raising livestock, the giant poultry producer Tyson is now widely advertising a "hormone-free" chicken. It may not be "organic" but it's a step in the right direction.
If consumers can affect mega-corporations such as Tyson, they can affect all industry without any government intrusions or regulations.*
Rather than address rising bacterial contaminations due to filthy conditions in today's agribusiness, the FDA is pushing a high-tech fix. But could the fix be as bad as the problem?
Late last year the FDA approved the irradiation of eggs as a method of reducing levels of Salmonella. Despite protests from opponents of irradiation of foods, the FDA concluded it would be a safe process. It has already approved irradiation of raw meat and meat products, poultry, fruits, vegetables, flour and spices.
The institutional assumption is that irradiation can kill disease-causing germs by zapping them with ionizing radiation from gamma rays or X-rays without doing damage to the food.
Groups opposing irradiation of foods argued to delay the FDA's decision so public hearings could be held.
The idea of hearings is not looked upon with favor by the agency. For example, when hearings were held on the matter of the government's arbitrary changes in the definition of "organic," public outrage totally swept several arbitrary bureaucratic changes aside.
One of the changes in the definition of "organic" to be washed away by the angry tide of public opinion was that "irradiated foods" could still claim the label "organic."
The objection to irradiation is that the process reduces vitamin A levels, creates high levels of free radicals that weaken cell membranes and can disrupt the interaction between enzymes and proteins that are essential to digestion and proper metabolism. Additionally, irradiation never kills all the dangerous microbes. It does eliminate most of the beneficial ones, and it increases the chances for genetic mutations that could create more "super-germs." Furthermore, irradiation merely masks filthy conditions caused by the factory farming methods.
The FDA argued that by using"only 3 kilorays of ionizing radiation" the level of nutritional damage to vitamins, including vitamin A, protein, lipid and carbohydrate levels and quality would be "minimal."
The FDA scientists determined that changes in egg due to irradiation would be "insignificant." Then the agency noted that "irradiation can cause color loss in egg yolk and a change in egg's viscosity as the intensity of the kilorays increases.*
Does saturated fat and cholesterol cause heart disease? No, say some researchers, it's a myth promoted largely by the vegetable oil industry.
That was the topic of discussion
on the Jan. 21 broadcast of The SPOTLIGHT's weekly call-in talk
forum, Radio Free America, with host Tom Valentine. The guest
was natural health and nutrition specialist Sally Fallon, author
of Nourishing Traditions and publisher of The Cholesterol Myth.
What follows is an edited transcription of the interview on RFA. Valentine's questions start with a "Q" and Miss Fallon's comments start with a "R".
Q. You have sponsored publication of a book by Dr. Uffe Ravnskov entitled The Cholesterol Myth which states flatly that it is a fallacy that saturated fat and Cholesterol can cause heart disease.
R. That's right. It's not true that saturated fat and cholesterol can cause heart disease. Yet, even people who are savvy about things bought into the myth.
I got into this issue of cholesterol through the work of Weston Price, who found that very healthy people have a very high animal food diet, with lots of animal fat. Their sacred foods were the ones that had a lot of fat in them. So it just can't be true that you have these healthy diets on the one hand, and yet, these things are supposed to be "bad" for us.
Q. Your very interesting cookbook, Nourishing Traditions (which has a lot of important nutrition information) points out that traditionally human beings ate a lot of animal fat and they were very healthy, generally speaking.
R. The bear was a sacred animal to the Indians in Texas and they didn't eat the meat of the bear. They threw the meat away, but they ate the fat and the skin. The sacred part of the bear to these Indians was the fat, not the meat. All of these traditional cultures had many sources, often times, of good quality animal fat and this was so important, usually valued as important for reproduction and for having healthy children.
Weston Price was a dentist who practiced in Cleveland, Ohio, from the 1920s through the 1940s and he was very concerned about what he was seeing in his patients. He was a lot of tooth decay, but even more serious, especially in the young people, he saw what he called "dental deformities." We would call that crooked teeth. Price didn't think this was normal.
He traveled throughout the world going to isolated places and he took photographs. You haven't seen what healthy people look like until you've seen these photographs.
When he analyzed their foods, he found that the foods were extremely rich in minerals, vitamins and particularly the vitamins that are rich in animal fat. That was his message: that animal fats are the most important foods that we can eat.
After Price passed on, the Establishment has tried to tell us just the opposite and that animal fats are bad for us.
Q. I've read Price's book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. It's fascinating work. Dentists like Price get to see a person's health through their teeth.
R. The health of the teeth are a sign of the current nutrition. The shape of the face and the jaw and the width of the face tells us how the parents ate. If we can continue a diet where we find a narrow face for several generations, you have no more reproduction. This is what we are seeing. A tremendous amount of infertility and it's getting worse.
I often say that if you are afraid of saturated fat and cholesterol, you will be making the wrong choices about your diet. It will force you into a lot of fabricated foods and a lot of factory fat, such as partially hydrogenated vegetable oils, because that's the only alternative we have.
Q. Cotton seed oil is a byproduct There's a lot of it, and the industry wanted to find a market for it.
R. That's right. The brand name Crisco stands for Crystalized Cotton Seed Oil, I believe. They learned to harden the oil by the process of hydrogenation and then they could sell it as a "butter substitute." In order to sell these factory-made oils, they had to demonize the competition, butter, and sell their own product as the substitute. Americans don't want "fake food," but they don't realize that this is fake food.
Q. You have now sponsored publication of a book, The Cholesterol Myths, by Dr. Uffe Ravnskov, which is available from Liberty Library.
R. When I was working on my own book, I stumbled upon a web site that had some marvelous material on by Dr. Ravnskov. I e-mailed Dr. Ravnskov, and asked if I could quote him in my book. Then I told him that he needed to publish his information in a book. He told me that he had been trying to find an English-language publisher for many years. He had published his book in Swedish and it didn't sell very well. He published it in Finnish and in Finland, they actually burned the book "live" on television. It was considered that offensive.
Q. Another little know reason for this is that the Finns get a great deal of American research money.
R. The margarine industry is very strong there. And, yes, they have very high rates of heart disease in Finland.
Q. Margarine has brought us more heart attacks, not because of cholesterol and unsaturated fats.
R. It does seem that transfatty acids are the culprit. In his book, Dr. Ravnskov does not say explicitly what the causes are, but we can make some guesses. What he does is totally debunk the notion that saturated fat and cholesterol are the cause of heart diseas.
He cites a very interesting study done back in the 1920s. They took people who had died violent deaths and they analyzed their cholesterol and the amount of plaque in their blood. There was no correlation between having high cholesterol and having clogged arteries any more than if you have low cholesterol.
There are many scientists who have concluded this and spoken out, but we don't see their names in The New York Times. They are just totally ignored by the juggernaut of the media and the research community.
Q. When people learn that their cholesterol is high, they run out and are told to take a drug to control it.
R. Anyone who has been told to take one of these drugs needs to read Dr. Ravnskov's book. There is actually quite a but of risk in lowering your cholesterol. One of the risks is cancer, and one of his analyses of these drugs to lower cholesterol shows how much more cancer there waa among those people who use theses drugs. One of the things he found in looking at the studies was that for older women, the higher the cholesterol is, the longer they are likely to live.
Q. A doctor who performed some 200 autopsies of people who died of massive heart attacks found that 185 of them had normal cholesterol levels, not high at all. The money to be made in the cholesterol scam is this thing called "measuring" your cholesterol.
R. It is a huge business. The combination os measuring cholesterol and the business of drugs to limit cholesterol is around $60 billion a year.
Q. Dr. Ravnskov says that it is a myth that high-fat foods cause heart disease.
R. There is no correlation. In fact, the people with the highest amount of saturated fates in their diet had the lowest cholesterol in their blood. Dr Ravnskov also looks at a number of populations where the people have high-fat diets and there is no heart disease.
Q. Yet, the myth that cholesterol and fat cause heart disease is the foundation of the American Heart Association's medical stand.
R. That's right. Yet, even if you look at our diet in 1900, you find that we had a very high fat diet. Visitors to the United States such as the famous DeToqueville, noted that Americans were big butter consumers. We were a healthy, attractive, strong people. Today, as we have abandoned these animal fats we have more heart disease and more cancer and more health problems. What's tragic, in particular, are the learning and developmental disorders in young people. This is because of the change in the type of fats that we are using.
Many people are unhealthy in our society today because of stress and cholesterol helps you handle stress. When you lower cholesterol with diet or drugs, you get more stress-related problems. Cholesterol is essential for the development of the brain and nervous system.
If babies don't get enough cholesterol from their food, they simply cannot make enough cholesterol to have that optimal development. Yet, is is now official medical policy to put children on low-fat and reduced-fat foods starting at the age of two and this flies in the face of what we are learning about the nervous system which develops through the age of 18.
During puberty, the brain sprouts all sorts of new nerve cells and these cells have to be joined and your body needs the right kind of fats and cholesterol to do this. However, this is the age when teen-agers are eating all sorts of vegetable oils and snack foods. when they think about it, they try to eat low-fat foods.
Coconut oil and cod liver oil were very important in the American diet and we need to be using more of it in our diets. Fats like coconut oil or butter help you use that cod liver oil better, so it's a good combination. Mother's milk is rich in saturated fat and cholesterol and it has a special enzyme that helps the baby use that cholesterol.
Normal cholesterol is any where from 180 to 350. It's a big range and it varies relating to whether you are under stress, when your last meal was, your age, sex etc. Those "cholesterol test" that you see in the mall tend to test high and make you think it is too high.
What the Establishment has done has picked a number, 200, and defined a new disease: "hypercholesterolemia." If your cholesterol is over 200, then you are sick and you will have to take these drugs. Where is nothing to support this number.
Vegetable oils are bad for the body chemistry. They upset the
endocrine system and actually cause weight gain. Saturated fats
are good for you. It helps your immune system. It's good for your
bones, your liver, protects you from disease. It's your best friend
and you should have it in your diet.*
Miss Fallon is the founder of the nutrition-oriented Weston
Price Foundation which has a web site at www.westonaprice.org. You may also call 202-333-4325
and leave your name and address and you will receive a free 12-page
informational brochure on nutrition and other information.