From: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com (roc-digest) To: roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: roc-digest V2 #179 Reply-To: roc-digest Sender: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-roc-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk roc-digest Friday, August 28 1998 Volume 02 : Number 179 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 13:52:54 -0500 From: Chuck Scanland Subject: Re: Grenier Editorial - The long history of living in terror Just look what the Brits/Irish (not the greatest of examples, I know) are doing as a result of the Omagh bombing. According to an article in Today's Electronic Telegraph, Tony Blair wants to recall (reconvene) Parliament in order to institute "the toughest anti-terrorist measures for the whole of the island of Ireland . . . that we've ever seen" Does anyone doubt that there would be an intensive push here to curtail liberties and enhance police/military powers with an increase in domestic incidents? It's going to be awful hard making yourself heard shouting about individual liberties and 4th Am. rights above the wailing of the mourners in the aftermath. This does not look good. And I'll be dam**d if I see a way past it. Chuck At 02:24 PM 8/25/98 -0400, John Curtis wrote: [snips] > "We must make more intensive supervision of our own > citizens" > > Interesting choice of words. One supervises children and > workers not trusted to do the job without someone watching. > > How long before it becomes "more intensive surveillance of > our own citizens"? > > I seem to recall an ACLU report from several years ago that > found that the greatest threat to U.S. civil liberties was > NBC terrorism. Just imagine a credible threat of a nuke in > a U.S. city. There would be armed door-to-door searches, > National Guard and Army control of entry/egress from the city, > etc. etc. Posse Commitatus, search and seizure, 2nd amendment, > due process, etc. out the window in a heartbeat. > > ciao, > > jcurtis > > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 98 16:13:40 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: Grenier Editorial - The long history of living in terror The answer is obvious: Go the Israeli/Swiss route, with incentives like removing all taxes, limitations, and restrictions on Arms ownership/sales/ ammo/training etc. Of course this will also mean hanging a few Gun Grabbers, Multi-Culturalists, and other Socialist types so they get the message, but small loss. IT will also mean that people will have to start taking the Millitia Act seriously again, with the Military supplying a Training Cadre, but that's all to the good. Terrorists are basically Criminals who try to justify themselves with a Political axe to grind. When Criminals do not fear the Law, they must be made to fear the People. On Aug 25, Chuck Scanland wrote: >Just look what the Brits/Irish (not the greatest of examples, I know) are >doing as a result of the Omagh bombing. According to an article in Today's >Electronic Telegraph, Tony Blair wants to recall (reconvene) Parliament in >order to institute "the toughest anti-terrorist measures for the whole >of the island of Ireland . . . that we've ever seen" > >Does anyone doubt that there would be an intensive push here to curtail >liberties and enhance police/military powers with an increase in domestic >incidents? > >It's going to be awful hard making yourself heard shouting about >individual liberties and 4th Am. rights above the wailing of the >mourners in the aftermath. > >This does not look good. And I'll be dam**d if I see a way past it. > >Chuck > >At 02:24 PM 8/25/98 -0400, John Curtis wrote: >[snips] >> "We must make more intensive supervision of our own >> citizens" >> >> Interesting choice of words. One supervises children and >> workers not trusted to do the job without someone watching. >> >> How long before it becomes "more intensive surveillance of >> our own citizens"? >> >> I seem to recall an ACLU report from several years ago that >> found that the greatest threat to U.S. civil liberties was >> NBC terrorism. Just imagine a credible threat of a nuke in >> a U.S. city. There would be armed door-to-door searches, >> National Guard and Army control of entry/egress from the city, >> etc. etc. Posse Commitatus, search and seizure, 2nd amendment, >> due process, etc. out the window in a heartbeat. >> >> ciao, >> >> jcurtis - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 17:44:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Boyd Subject: Re: Grenier Editorial - The long history of living in terror I hope this isn't too small a nit to pick here, but I hope anyone asserting that we are already at war with "islamic fundamentalism" will either reconsider thier phrasing or speak for themselves. I have -no- problem with members of Islam be they fundamentalist or no. And there are billions of Islamic people around the planet who have no problem with us. We can't cut through the evil propaganda of class hatred if we adopt it's rhetoric with words like: "But those less advanced don't forgive us for being rich." wich asserts so many stereotypes about the US and Islam (one being that they're exclusive) as to be impossible to refute in a small email. We have -no- argument with people for being "Islamic" or for being "poor" nor should we accept that argument from them, let alone put it in their mouths like this. By doing it we lend credence to the sort of spinmasters who propagandize these small groups into self destruction (thinking particularly of Iraq IMHO). I do have a problem with anyone who initiates violence and judging by our recent act of war (not a war until declared such by the peoples congress) so does our (monarchic seeming) president, leaving aside my alarm at his unwillingness to publicize our proof that the site -was- actually an NBC factory, connected to Ladin and his failure to advise congress. Anyway, if we're going to be killing people, or have our president pushing that button I think we owe it to ourselves to be extremely accurate in the words that describe the why's and wherefores. Just my opinion. Boyd Kneeland, fundamentally Christian, but not overly so ; ) At 1:00 PM -0500 8/25/98, Chuck Scanland wrote: >This ran in today's Washington Times: >http://www.washtimes.com/opinion/grenier.html > >Mr. Grenier makes several interesting points here - 1) Americans are >currently >unprepared to wage a war in which "collateral damage" is likely. 2) America is >already at war with Islamic fundamentalism. and 3) It's going to get a lot >worse. > >Chuck >============================================================================ >====== > >"The fact is that the American people have almost completely lost their >warlike spirit." > >The long history of living in terror > >By Richard Grenier >THE WASHINGTON TIMES > > Now to all who think we've very recently entered a new age, the age of >terrorism -- where innocent civilians have suddenly become victims of >terrorist attacks -- I have a simple question: what are the civilians so >afraid of in Lord Byron's following evocation of battle? > > "And near, the beat of the alarming drum / Roused up the soldier ere >the Morning Star; / While thronged the citizens with terror dumb, / Or >whispering with white lips -- 'The foe! They come! They come!' " > > My question is just what are the poor citizens (civilians) afraid of? >The battle evoked took place during the Napoleonic Wars almost 200 years ago. >Both parties, dominantly French and British, were civilized, weren't they? >Assuredly they wouldn't harm innocent civilians. But of this, judging by >their "white lips," the citizens don't seem confident. > > And what of the Cossacks, who during the Napoleonic wars laughingly >burned thousands to death in the Russian retreat from Moscow? Or left >thousands of other Russians without shelter to freeze to death in the coming >winter? Or, if you'd like a change of scenery, how about the nearly >three-quarters of the total German population that perished during the >30 Years War (while the Pilgrims were settling Massachusetts)? > > For the fact of the matter is that until quite recently, >despite Auschwitz, we've been living in a relatively brief hiatus in >the history of war which, until perhaps a century or so back -- and this >since >forever -- was an uninterrupted tale of carnage, killing, destruction, rape, >pillage, looting, murder, kidnapping, extortion, vandalism, incendiarism and >gratuitous mayhem. This is the way the high-culture ancient Greeks fought >wars, and (obviously) the Romans, Saracens, Crusaders and Nordic invaders. >What happened to Carthage? When the Romans got through with it there was not >a blade of grass left. > > In America we suffer from the widespread delusion that the relative >peacefulness we've enjoyed for decades (and without even a missile defense >system) should by rights last forever. But it won't. Some years ago Samuel >Huntington of Harvard predicted that the coming great world conflict would >be between the West and Islam. For no matter how kindly we behave --or no >matter how well most of the Islamic population behaves --we're separated by a >gulf in material affluence that is bound to incite extreme resentment. We, a >technologically advanced society, make at least some efforts to help those >less advanced. But those less advanced don't forgive us for being rich. > > Personally, I'd advise President Clinton, if he has the moral stamina, >to make not one anti-terrorist speech, but dozens. The fact is that the >American people have almost completely lost their warlike spirit. And the >danger is they think the terrorist attacks at Khartoum and Dar es Salam are >flukes. Osama bin Laden himself has promised they are only the beginning. >And I'm prepared to take his word that, in plain fact, a war is now afoot >between America and Islamic fundamentalism. And also, still according to bin >Laden (along with Hezbollah, Hamas,etc.) that the Islamic Jihad will fight >this war for decades, and with no holds barred. > > After all, as an Islamic fundamentalist once told me in Algeria, "When >you bombed the Germans during World War II, you never counted the innocent >civilians you killed. What Americans were worried about collateral damage >then?" One result of the protracted period of peace we've enjoyed in America >(augmented by remains of certain attitudes from the Vietnam anti-war >movement) is that we simply cannot bear to kill civilians. Our adversaries of >course don't mind in the least killing civilians. In fact, as one told me on >a recent occasion, killing innocent women and children shows the strength of >their feelings. But God forbid American weapons should produce "collateral >damage." This is not the attitude of a nation ready forwar, and a war, >furthermore, with no visible end. > > America is heading into the most morally difficult conflict in our >history, and to all appearances we need some toughening up. A single >resentful presidential speech the night after Islamic fundamentalists bomb >another American embassy isn't enough. Nor is a single day of mourning for >the American dead. Before this thing is over, we're likely to lose quite a >few more dead, and the country must be prepared for it. And we must prepare >in >ways we've usually reserved for all-out war. > > Richard Haas, director for foreign affairs at the Brookings Institution, >recently made some recommendations, some of which will surely curdle the >blood of conventional liberals. We must make a much greater effort to obtain >intelligence abroad. We must make more intensive our supervision of our >own citizens (one can imagine how the ACLU will like this). And -- here we >tread on the most dangerous ground -- we must on good intelligence engage in >what the intelligence community calls "anticipatory defense" -- or, in plain >language, hit them before they hit us. > > Before rushing to condemn such seemingly aggressive behavior we should >recall that many members of our intelligence community consider that we've >been lucking out for years. They're astonished that our enemies have so far >used only conventional explosives in strikes on embassies, when their money >gives them access to biological, chemical and nuclear weapons as well. >Nuclear weapons or their ingredients produced by the late Soviet Union (or >North Korea) are apparently going for bargain-basement prices. > > A major preemptive strike against some rogue Taliban-controlled state -- >with dead women and children all about --would of course set off a terrific >moral ruckus in America. But imagine the ruckus that would be set off if such >a state set off a nuclear device in California. This is now the world we >live in. > >========================================================= > Trebuchet Systems Inc. > Systems and Network Management Platforms > http://www.trebsys.com > Chuck Scanland - ScanlanC@TrebSys.com >========================================================= > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 14:17:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Paul M Watson Subject: CLINTON MENTAL BREAKDOWN FORESEEN BY CIA? (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 13:39:51 -0400 From: "John K. Whitley" To: pwatson@utdallas.edu Subject: CLINTON MENTAL BREAKDOWN FORESEEN BY CIA? With all of the speculation now occurring concerning Clinton's mental state [no balanced individual sends a volley of cruise missiles on a murderous mission to a known innocent, civilian target!], we thought we'd contribute this intriguing extract from the May, 1996, issue of the NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE, which appeared as part of a lengthy and fascinating article entitled "The Suspiciously-Convenient Death Of U.S. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown" - the first report anywhere to allege, with factual backing, that his death was deliberate foul play. A portion of that article can be read on our Web site at: http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/brown.htm, and back issue copies are still available. The same issue also contained a lengthy article entitled "Back To The U.S.S.R. - With A Vengeance!", which predicted exactly what is currently beginning to occur in Russia and which contains a horrifying and graphic expert intelligence analysis of what will yet occur there. A portion of that article can be read on our Web site at: http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/russ.htm. You can order a copy of the complete May, 1996, issue directly from that Web page, too, if you wish. ___________________________________________________ THE FOLLOWING ITEM IS ABSTRACTED FROM THE MAY, 1996, ISSUE OF THE "NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE" [http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley] "Clinton Cocaine Video Surfaces In Little Rock" "Free Speech Newspaper, based in Phoenix, Arizona, has announced that it has obtained exclusive information from a source associated with the Arkansas State Police in Little Rock that a sensational video of then Governor Bill Clinton involving the illicit use of the drug cocaine will be released to the media nationally during the week of the 14th April. They also intend to reproduce stills taken from the video in their newspaper. The video tape clearly depicts then Governor Bill Clinton sitting at a table in front of an ashtray with a substantial amount of cocaine in the presence of Dan Lassiter and other well known and prominent Arkansas personalities. The black and white video tape has been verified as authentic and is further corroborated by witness statements. For additional support of the video tape, sources linked to the Arkansas State Police maintain that a series of surreptitious video and audio recordings allegedly obtained by former Arkansas security employees of Bill Clinton will be released. The release of the tapes may be made with the tacit consent of key Washington D.C. Democrats who are said to be seeking a quick resignation of President Bill Clinton in favour of Vice President Al Gore." That prompted us to go back to our files, where we remembered having stored this intriguing item from another source two years ago: Five months into Clinton's Presidency, on May 25th 1993, a special briefing was reportedly presented to Congress in answer to the question: "Will Clinton resign?" The scientist who presented the report, a specialist in brain chemistry and a CIA expert, said: "[We] cannot be conclusively sure without urine and blood tests, but [we believe that] Clinton shows every symptom of severe neuro-transmitter depletion, primarily noradrenaline and dopamine [these are natural chemicals that nerve cells in the brain use to communicate with each other]. Noradrenaline is used in the brain every time you have to make a quick decision; dopamine is required for non-automatic or effortful memory" [note: these chemicals are depleted in the brains of, among other people, those who use cocaine. Readers might wish to consult our Mena page, at http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/mena.htm, to see if President Clinton falls into this category]. "Clinton's insomnia [note: no Clinton medical records have ever been made public] and flights of ideas that keep him up all night, his bounce of manic energy, his micro-managing all decisions in his Administration, his increasingly fractured syntax when speaking, and the obvious and growing impairment of his judgement, causing non-stop blunders and scandals, all indicate this neuro-chemical condition. Further, Clinton also strongly displays symptoms of a psychological syndrome known as "hysteroid dysphoria". Description of this personality type is given in a paper by Leibowitz and Kline in A JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, Vol 2, December 1979: "Hysteroid disphorics are pathologically dependent upon external approval, spending much of their time seeking applause, attention and praise, while having an extreme intolerance of personal rejection. They are often obsessively promiscuous, they enter work situations with great enthusiasm and energy, but if they feel rejection or insufficient praise they quickly lose their enthusiasm and depression, often very severe, sets in." Putting both of these neuro-psychological conditions together, our scientists predict that Clinton is clearly headed for a nervous breakdown, rendering him mentally incapacitated for the Presidency. In the meantime, certain of our friends in the intelligence community are now speculating that Clinton's Presidency is ultimately doomed, that the combination of impending economic disaster, up-coming major scandals [note: remember, this is May, 1993!] and overall bumbling incompetence will result in Democratic party leaders in Congress calling for Clinton's resignation so that they won't be swept away in '94 and '96. As the Clinton Presidency disintegrates, a stupendous battle looms between Hillary and the intellectual Left on one side, and Al Gore and the Democratic party leadership on the other. Mrs Clinton will wish to govern in her incapacitated husband's stead, much as Eleanor Roosevelt or Edith Wilson did in the last days of their sick husband's Presidencies, not willing to lose the Senate outright and, effectively, the House, with enough new Republicans to have a majority when combined with conservative Democrats. George Mitchell, Tom Foley and other party leaders will want to dump the Clinton albatross and have Al Gore assume the Presidency, offering new leadership to the nation." This Congressional briefing reportedly came from THE FREEDOM RESEARCH FOUNDATION, in MACLEAN, VIRGINIA [right next to CIA headquarters!]. The briefer, and the group briefed, remain anonymous. Reports indicate that these conditions result from certain medications given over an extended period of time. His "condition", apparently, results in his medical records being "a secret". Were the Bilderbergers not aware of this when they invited Clinton to join, and promoted his Presidential campaign? Was he "set up" to fall? And, if rumours are true about brewing scandals in his "successor's" [Al Gore's] past, would such a crisis not provide innumerable opportunities for changes or "improvements" in the political system - for example, through a Constitutional Convention or a National Emergency?" Copyright 1996, New World Order Intelligence Update ________________________________________ Interested in learning what the New World Order elite have planned for your future? Check the NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE Web site at: http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/index.htm http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/nwa.htm http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/quinn.htm http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/bild98.htm http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/BILDNEWS.HTM http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/SURVBOOK.HTM http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/bookvid.htm Take advantage of our August Special Offer at: http://www.inforamp.net/~jwhitley/special.htm ________________________________________ [This item may be freely reposted if unedited and unaltered, with header and footer left intact, a link provided to our Web site, and our copyright clearly expressed and asserted. For print reproduction permission call John Whitley, Editor of the NEW WORLD ORDER INTELLIGENCE UPDATE, at 416-481 4868 or e-mail jwhitley@inforamp.net] - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 17:15:08 -0500 (CDT) From: Paul M Watson Subject: Bill Clinton and the Cherry Tree (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- http://www.wildershow.com This is from a Christian Radio show in Dallas. Bill Clinton and the Cherry Tree "George Washington, did YOU chop down the cherry tree?" "No, Dad." "I think you are lying." "No, no, no! I swear I did NOT chop down the cherry tree." "Son, I saw you out here with your axe. Your punishment will be much worse for you if you lie. Now, tell me the truth!" "I did tell you the truth. Honest." (seven months later...) "Dad, I answered your question truthfully. Still, I must take complete responsibility for all my actions. While my answer was legally accurate, I did not volunteer information. "Indeed, Dad, I did cause the cherry tree to be lying on the ground. To do this was wrong. It constituted a critical lapse in judgment and a personal failure on my part for which I am solely and completely responsible. "I know my answer to you gave a false impression. I misled you, my own father. I deeply regret that. "I can only tell you I was motivated by many factors. First, by a desire to protect myself from the embarrassment of my own conduct. "I was also very concerned about protecting Mom from this shock. "What I did, Dad, was use a saw to cause the cherry tree to fall. Only after the tree was already down did I go get my axe to chop off individual branches. So, I chopped off branches, but sawed down the tree. Look at the saw cut on the stump and the axe cuts on the branches. Therefore, legally, I told the truth. "I ask you to turn away from the spectacle of this fallen tree and to return our attention to a solid family relationship." - - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 98 18:42:18 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: CNN Has More Than Hurricane Bonnie To Contend With Wednesday (fwd) On Aug 26, Robin Arthur Gustavson wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] >Return-Path: >From: admin@hackworth.com >X-Sender: hwadmin@mail.cyberport.net >Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 15:48:52 -0600 >To: (Recipient list suppressed) >Subject: CNN Has More Than Hurricane Bonnie To Contend With Wednesday=20 >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail1.rcsntx.swbell.net id SAA06613 > >CNN Has More Than Hurricane Bonnie To Contend With Wednesday=20 > > Atlanta, GA, Aug, 26th=85 CNN executives and staffers minds may be on the >pending hurricane, but on Wednesday, August 26th, they are going to come >face-to-face with some of the Vietnam War veterans which they had earlier >this year branded as "War Criminals".=20 > > The veterans, most of whom represent the now-famous MACVSOG and other >Special Forces units in Vietnam, their friends and families promise an >entirely peaceful demonstration of their dissatisfaction of CNN and >Time-Warner=92s handling of their erroneous, patently false, and= subsequently >totally discredited, production of "Tailwind - Valley of Death" story. > > The veterans' charge that CNN & Time-Warner have not acted responsibly, >fairly nor in any good faith whatsoever in correcting their Tailwind story >errors and omissions. > > The issues are essentially those which CNN had promised the Special Forces >and Special Operations Associations they would do. Standard things that a >media organization must do when they have wronged and defamed an honorable >and honest group of people. > > The veterans' demands are very straightforward -- > > * An apology for the wanton defamation of their character, integrity and >conduct during their service in the Vietnam War. A genuine and sincere >public apology for CNN=92s egregious errors in this story. Ted Turner has >stated that he owes them a public apology, but he has not gotten around to >making it. The group will visit his headquarters Wednesday, fully expecting >to collect on this debt. And to see it broadcast in the same manner as the >original story.=20 > > * A REAL retraction to the reckless disregard for the truth they >demonstrated in the original Operation Tailwind story. Not a wimpy, lame >"We can=92t prove it at this time=85" statement. That is not a retraction, >that's further insult. A front page retraction that starts with "We were >wrong and we=92re sorry" retraction is what the vets are demanding.=20 > > * The removal of ALL offending and conspiratorial staff involved in the >production of this libelous program. Minimally this must include Rick >Kaplan and Peter Arnett. Continuation of their retention at CNN is >absolutely intolerable to the veteran community. This is certainly not the >first offense for either of them.=20 > > * Equal Air Time to correct the damages which CNN has done to all Vietnam >War veterans. To show the real Operation Tailwind story and correct the >misnomers about all veterans which this kind of story perpetuates. =91Equal >air time=92 means prime time Sunday night=85 just as the original lies were >broadcast and not once, but twice.=20 > > * Compensation to those directly damaged by this malicious campaign. >Including both the American GI=92s and the Montagnard communities here in >this country.=20 > >Vets' Message To CNN Is Simple --=20 > > The Issue Is Not Going To Go Away & Neither Are American Veterans!=20 >Until such point as CNN addresses these grievances sincerely, honestly and >in straightforward fashion, it will not be forgotten and will not go away. >Plain and simple.=20 >=20 >You Are Invited --=20 > > To the peaceful gathering at CNN headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, on >Wednesday, August 26 from 11 AM until 3 PM to witness firsthand how CNN >executives and staff answer to these grievances face-to-face with the >community they wrongly accuse of being war criminals.=20 > >Media Contact =97=20 >J.R. Tobin=20 >(704) 545-0585 Office=20 >(704) 564-2224 Mobile=20 > > > > By all means send to your members. Ask them to further distribute, too. > > Regarding attendees, inform them that this is to be a first rate >professional protest and that they should go to the Tailwind Info Center >referenced on the Press Release and read the Op Ord listed under "Join Us >In Atlanta" and be prepared to conform to the instructions. Tell them that >anyone attending must adhere to the op order. > > The links, if you want to mail directly from the html pages as I did are >http://www.GreenBeret.Net/Tailwind/PressInfo/Announcements/8-26%20Press%20 >Release.htm >for the press release and >http://www.GreenBeret.Net/Tailwind/Misc/OpOrd-10-26-98-Atlanta.html > > I would just caution them about showing up to participate without being >thoroughly familiar with the op ord and being in proper and professional >accordance with the dress code outlined therein. This will be STRICTLY >enforced. Absolutely no camo. > > Other than that, fling as far and wide as you can.=20 > > Thanks a lot, > >-- Bob Golden [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 98 00:10:59 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Fratrum: STOP the FDA and SAVE our Supplements!! (fwd) Man, they just keep on trying, one Right after another. On Aug 27, Eugene Gross wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Hi Folks, I've been following the attempts by the FDA to stop the food supplement and nutritional supplements industry for the past five years. And now the FDA is at it again!! Read the following and PLEASE act now, or we may not be able to store enough supplements and herbs for our use later on!! En Agape, Gene P.S. Thanks to Ken for this heads up!!! Good catch, Ken!! =================================== > FDA IS AT IT AGAIN. > > URGENT, OUR HEALTH FREEDOMS ARE UNDER ATTACK AGAIN. > > Please read the following information. In a nutshell, what it says > is that if we do not stop the latest proposed ruling by the FDA, within > the next 8 or 9 days, practically all the nutritional products we use > could be re-classified as drugs. This would mean that access would > be restricted and costs would be prohibitive. The following text comes > from a company called Integris. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > "The FDA has proposed a new regulation on structure/function claims, > in an effort to narrow what can be said about supplements. They > proposed that any deviation of the body from a 'natural' state would > be considered a 'disease'. Such natural states as aging, pregnancy, > and menopause will be defined as diseases. > > The FDA will be able to restrict your ability to obtain information > on how to use vitamins, minerals, and herbs. The FDA will be able > to restrict access to vitamins, minerals, and herbs based on the > 'intended" use.' For instance, if you use a product to lower > cholesterol, even if the label makes no such claim, the FDA could > reclassify that product as a drug. > > UNLESS THE FDA RECEIVES 100,000 objections to this proposal by > August 27th, these regulations will become law." > > Please write or fax or copy, past e and e-mail the letter below. > Ask your spouse, your friends, co-workers, neighbors, and health > food stores to write letters also. > > Thank you. > > ------------------------------ > > SAMPLE LETTER: > > Mail To: > > Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) > Food and Drug Administration > Attn: Michael Friedman, MD > Lead Deputy Commissioner > 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061 > Rockville, MD 20857 > > Fax: 301-827-6870 > > E-mail: > mf28c@nih.gov > friedmam@od.nih.gov ? (this is how they showed it in the directory) > friedman@od.nih.gov (send to all three addresses to make sure) > > Dear Dr. Friedman: > > I am writing to notify you that FDA's proposed rulemaking on > structure function claims, 21 CFR part 101/Docket #98N-0044, is > totally unacceptable to me as an American consumer of dietary > supplements. > > Any final rule must reflect the true meaning and intent, mandated > by Congress, of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act > (DSHEA). > > I support the FDA's effort to fully implement DSHEA as intended > by Congress; however, I strongly object to the proposed regulations > which: > > 1. Limit my access to (scientific) information about dietary > supplements and health > > 2. Redefine disease restricting my ability to focus on preventive care > and wellness. > > It is extremely important to preserve Section 6 of DSHEA to allow > for a robust flow of valuable health information in the marketplace. > > I want free access to available information about dietary > supplements and health, and I want FDA to withdraw its proposal to > redefine disease in a way that limits such health information. > > DSHEA allows products to make structure/function claims on the > product labels. Redefining disease to nullify that part of DSHEA must > be withdrawn. > > Sincerely, > > _________________________ > (Sign here) > > > > __________________________ > (City and State) > > > Annette > > ______________________________________________ > The Estes Group > Certified Professional Behavioral and Values Analyst > 5018 Old Spartanburg Road =80 Suite 176 > Taylors, SC 29687 > (864) 244-1156 > Fax (864) 244-1219 > > --------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: BeatIRS@aol.com [mailto:BeatIRS@aol.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 10:19 PM > To: FozzyBearr@aol.com > Subject: Fwd: Here they go again > > ********************************************** > To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: > majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com > with the message: > (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address > ********************************************** > www.telepath.com/believer > ********************************************** > > --------- End forwarded message ---------- > > _____________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com > Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 98 11:07:46 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: PA Alert: VOTE NO Coaltion forms (fwd) On Aug 28, Bucks County Sportsmen's Coalition wrote: [-------------------- text of forwarded message follows --------------------] Friends: Many of the recipients on this list played a key role in stalling passage of SB555, the legislation leading to the so-called "Commonwealth Right to Jury Trial" constitutional amendment that will be placed before the voters for approval in November. If your memory needs refreshed, this is the amendment that will permit prosecutors to DEMAND an expensive jury trial, thus enabling them to coerce INNOCENT middle class defendants into making false guilty pleas, or plea bargains, rather than face financial ruin. We are pleased to announce that a broad-based VOTE NO coalition has been formed. The name of the group is PENNSYLVANIANS FOR FAIR TRIALS. The address is P.O. Box 206, Philadelphia, PA 19105-0206, and the number is (215) 552-8907. If you or your group would like to join with us in ACTIVELY campaigning against this change to Pennsylvania's Declaration of Rights, please contact the VOTE NO coalition to have your group listed as a member. Bucks County Sportsmen's Coalition PLEASE CROSS-POST TO APPROPRIATE LISTS! [------------------------- end of forwarded message ------------------------] - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 15:16:15 -0400 (EDT) From: John Curtis Subject: Re: PA Alert: VOTE NO Coaltion forms (fwd) > >If your memory needs refreshed, this is the amendment that will >permit prosecutors to DEMAND an expensive jury trial, thus >enabling them to coerce INNOCENT middle class defendants into >making false guilty pleas, or plea bargains, rather than face >financial ruin. > Ahhh, can someone please explain this. Isn't the more usual scenario one where a prosecutor wants to plea bargin a charge to a guilty plea for a lesser charge? If the prosecutor doesn't want to plea bargain, he/she doesn't have to. If you don't plea bargain, you definitely will go to trial. Is a jury trial noticeably more expensive for the defendant than a trial before a judge? The reasoning here seems to be garbled. The essential worry is that prosecutors can force amazing legal expenses on anyone they prosecute (guilty or innocent). awaiting clarification, Jack Curtis - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 98 14:16:04 PST From: roc@xpresso.seaslug.org (Bill Vance) Subject: Re: PA Alert: VOTE NO Coaltion forms (fwd) On Aug 28, John Curtis wrote: >>If your memory needs refreshed, this is the amendment that will >>permit prosecutors to DEMAND an expensive jury trial, thus >>enabling them to coerce INNOCENT middle class defendants into >>making false guilty pleas, or plea bargains, rather than face >>financial ruin. > > Ahhh, can someone please explain this. Isn't the more usual > scenario one where a prosecutor wants to plea bargin a charge > to a guilty plea for a lesser charge? If the prosecutor > doesn't want to plea bargain, he/she doesn't have to. > > If you don't plea bargain, you definitely will go to trial. > > Is a jury trial noticeably more expensive for the defendant > than a trial before a judge? > > The reasoning here seems to be garbled. The essential worry > is that prosecutors can force amazing legal expenses on > anyone they prosecute (guilty or innocent). > > awaiting clarification, > > Jack Curtis I'm not totally sure at this point, though my basic attitude is that prosecutors have it far too good these days, with respect to influencing Juries, especially when folks are poor enough to have to deal with the Legal System on their own. Prosecutors are motivated to rack up Convictions, not see Justice done, and any exceptions are just that; Exceptional period. It simply strikes me as just another Criminal/Trial Lawyer's Wellfare BIll. Anyone know if a loss in Pensylvania Courts includes Jury payments etc., as part of Court Costs? - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***** Blessings On Thee, Oh Israel! ***** - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- An _EFFECTIVE_ | Insured | All matter is vibration. | Let he who hath no weapon in every | by COLT; | -- Max Plank | weapon sell his hand = Freedom | DIAL | In the beginning was the | garment and buy a on every side! | 1911-A1. | word. -- The Bible | sword.--Jesus Christ - ----------------+----------+--------------------------+--------------------- - - ------------------------------ End of roc-digest V2 #179 *************************