The Lies of our Leaders
Starmail - 26. Aug, 23:24
26
Aug
2004
Feds Press Salt Assault
The Assalt on Salt
Since 1995, 10 studies have reported on whether lower sodium diets produce health benefits. All 10 studies indicate that, among the general population, lower sodium diets do not produce health benefits. In fact, not a single study has ever shown improved health outcomes for broad populations on reduced sodium diets.
Studies by hypertension specialist and American Hypertension Society past-president Michael Alderman even report an increased risk of heart attack and a higher death rate among some individuals on low-salt diets.
Do you find that hard to believe? Do you wonder why the Government and major health organizaitions have been telling us to avoid salt for last 30 years? The answer to this question and the latest reseach is "eye-opening" to say the least:
Feds Press Salt Assault
Thursday, February 12, 2004
By Steven Milloy
Americans should slash their consumption of salt by half says a new government report. But the recommendation has no basis in science and may even be harmful to your health.
“Healthy 19-to 50-year old adults should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day,” recommended a panel of the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine (IOM). That’s quite a reduction from the currently recommended 2,400 milligrams of sodium per day and average consumption of more than 4,000 milligrams per day.
Too much dietary salt increases blood pressure which, in turn, may lead to stroke, coronary heart disease -- or so the IOM panel claims. Existing scientific data, however, do not support this commonly-held belief.
Dietary salt may, in some sensitive people, slightly increase their blood pressure, but it’s not clear that the increase leads to health effects or that restricting their intake of salt makes them any healthier.
Since 1995, 10 studies have reported on whether lower sodium diets produce health benefits. All 10 studies indicate that, among the general population, lower sodium diets don’t produce health benefits. In fact, not a single study has ever shown improved health outcomes for broad populations on reduced sodium diets.
Just last week, in fact, a coalition of six Canadian medical groups rejected a recommendation for universal salt restriction, choosing instead to make lifestyle recommendations for reducing blood pressure such as exercising, eating a balanced diet, and stress management.
The IOM would be on firmer ground if it limited its recommendation to “salt sensitive” individuals, rather than the general public. Genetic background and lifestyle make some people hypersensitive to salt intake.
The IOM panel recommendation is “nonsense,” said Dr. Lawrence M. Resnik, executive editor of the American Journal of Hypertension and a professor at CornellMedicalCollege. Resnick was a member of the IOM panel until his resignation over the panel’s disregard for testimony and data that contradicted its apparently pre-determined recommendation.
Dr. Alexander Logan, co-author of the Canadian recommendations, observed that the difference between the Canadian and U.S. recommendations came down to process. The Canadian recommendations were based on a rigorous examination and consideration of the available scientific evidence according to an established protocol whereas the IOM panel operated under “no rules” ? that is, without regard to scientific standards and process ? according to Dr. Logan.
The conduct of the IOM panel is made more egregious by the fact that its recommendation may very well place some people at risk.
Studies by hypertension specialist and American Hypertension Society past-president Michael Alderman even report an increased risk of heart attack and a higher death rate among some individuals on low-salt diets.
Since no data supports limiting sodium intake to 1,500 milligrams per day, you might wonder why the IOM panel would urge such an uncontrolled experiment on the general public. An IOM panel member who didn’t want to be identified indicated that one of the panel’s goals was to get African-Americans, who tend to be more salt sensitive, to reduce their sodium intake.
But because the panel didn’t think that singling out African-Americans was an effective public health strategy, it decided to “overcompensate” and make the recommendation for the general population ? thereby shifting the burden to the food industry to reduce salt content in foods. African Americans, then, couldn’t help but eat less salt. Another motivation is more political.
The U.S. health establishment’s official position, as espoused for the last 30 years by the National Institutes of Health, is that everyone should restrict their salt intake. Regardless of the science, the NIH is not about to admit it’s been wrong ? even to the extent of refusing to make publicly available all the data on which the current dietary salt recommendation is based.
Fortunately for the NIH, the IOM panel was well stacked with sycophants that could be relied on not to bite the hand that feeds them. A majority of the IOM panel, including chairman Lawrence Appel, all receive research grants from the NIH.
In an effort to make the food industry rather than the NIH the problem, Dr. Appel told the Associated Press, “There are commercial interests that don’t want this to happen.”
But why should the food industry be forced to sell less tasty food for no good reason?
More importantly, does it really make sense to experiment with the public health so that government bureaucrats don’t have to admit they’ve been wrong for the last 30 years?
Steven Milloy is the publisher ofJunkScience.com, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and the author ofJunk Science Judo: Self-Defense Against Health Scares and Scams(Cato Institute, 2001).
Informant: Chief of Clan Hale
Since 1995, 10 studies have reported on whether lower sodium diets produce health benefits. All 10 studies indicate that, among the general population, lower sodium diets do not produce health benefits. In fact, not a single study has ever shown improved health outcomes for broad populations on reduced sodium diets.
Studies by hypertension specialist and American Hypertension Society past-president Michael Alderman even report an increased risk of heart attack and a higher death rate among some individuals on low-salt diets.
Do you find that hard to believe? Do you wonder why the Government and major health organizaitions have been telling us to avoid salt for last 30 years? The answer to this question and the latest reseach is "eye-opening" to say the least:
Feds Press Salt Assault
Thursday, February 12, 2004
By Steven Milloy
Americans should slash their consumption of salt by half says a new government report. But the recommendation has no basis in science and may even be harmful to your health.
“Healthy 19-to 50-year old adults should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day,” recommended a panel of the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine (IOM). That’s quite a reduction from the currently recommended 2,400 milligrams of sodium per day and average consumption of more than 4,000 milligrams per day.
Too much dietary salt increases blood pressure which, in turn, may lead to stroke, coronary heart disease -- or so the IOM panel claims. Existing scientific data, however, do not support this commonly-held belief.
Dietary salt may, in some sensitive people, slightly increase their blood pressure, but it’s not clear that the increase leads to health effects or that restricting their intake of salt makes them any healthier.
Since 1995, 10 studies have reported on whether lower sodium diets produce health benefits. All 10 studies indicate that, among the general population, lower sodium diets don’t produce health benefits. In fact, not a single study has ever shown improved health outcomes for broad populations on reduced sodium diets.
Just last week, in fact, a coalition of six Canadian medical groups rejected a recommendation for universal salt restriction, choosing instead to make lifestyle recommendations for reducing blood pressure such as exercising, eating a balanced diet, and stress management.
The IOM would be on firmer ground if it limited its recommendation to “salt sensitive” individuals, rather than the general public. Genetic background and lifestyle make some people hypersensitive to salt intake.
The IOM panel recommendation is “nonsense,” said Dr. Lawrence M. Resnik, executive editor of the American Journal of Hypertension and a professor at CornellMedicalCollege. Resnick was a member of the IOM panel until his resignation over the panel’s disregard for testimony and data that contradicted its apparently pre-determined recommendation.
Dr. Alexander Logan, co-author of the Canadian recommendations, observed that the difference between the Canadian and U.S. recommendations came down to process. The Canadian recommendations were based on a rigorous examination and consideration of the available scientific evidence according to an established protocol whereas the IOM panel operated under “no rules” ? that is, without regard to scientific standards and process ? according to Dr. Logan.
The conduct of the IOM panel is made more egregious by the fact that its recommendation may very well place some people at risk.
Studies by hypertension specialist and American Hypertension Society past-president Michael Alderman even report an increased risk of heart attack and a higher death rate among some individuals on low-salt diets.
Since no data supports limiting sodium intake to 1,500 milligrams per day, you might wonder why the IOM panel would urge such an uncontrolled experiment on the general public. An IOM panel member who didn’t want to be identified indicated that one of the panel’s goals was to get African-Americans, who tend to be more salt sensitive, to reduce their sodium intake.
But because the panel didn’t think that singling out African-Americans was an effective public health strategy, it decided to “overcompensate” and make the recommendation for the general population ? thereby shifting the burden to the food industry to reduce salt content in foods. African Americans, then, couldn’t help but eat less salt. Another motivation is more political.
The U.S. health establishment’s official position, as espoused for the last 30 years by the National Institutes of Health, is that everyone should restrict their salt intake. Regardless of the science, the NIH is not about to admit it’s been wrong ? even to the extent of refusing to make publicly available all the data on which the current dietary salt recommendation is based.
Fortunately for the NIH, the IOM panel was well stacked with sycophants that could be relied on not to bite the hand that feeds them. A majority of the IOM panel, including chairman Lawrence Appel, all receive research grants from the NIH.
In an effort to make the food industry rather than the NIH the problem, Dr. Appel told the Associated Press, “There are commercial interests that don’t want this to happen.”
But why should the food industry be forced to sell less tasty food for no good reason?
More importantly, does it really make sense to experiment with the public health so that government bureaucrats don’t have to admit they’ve been wrong for the last 30 years?
Steven Milloy is the publisher ofJunkScience.com, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and the author ofJunk Science Judo: Self-Defense Against Health Scares and Scams(Cato Institute, 2001).
Informant: Chief of Clan Hale
Starmail - 26. Aug, 23:14
The American Bald Eagle Is Back
The bald eagle, whose numbers had dipped dangerously, is now back from the brink of extinction. Today, thousands of American bald eagles fly the skies of the lower 48 states - a powerful symbol that shows the Endangered Species Act works.
But the Feds Won't Act:
This remarkable recovery should not go unnoticed. In May, Environmental Defense called on President George W. Bush to follow through on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's (FWS) five-year-old promise to take the bald eagle off the endangered species list. The FWS is still dragging its feet and the bald eagle's dramatic comeback has yet to receive the government's stamp of approval. You can help. Sign the Eagle Pledge and urge President Bush to delist the bald eagle:
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/GpaYwHs1zj8u/
Bald Eagle's Decline and Recovery:
It's hard to imagine that we nearly lost our national symbol. The bald eagle's long decline began in the 19th century as forest clearing, other habitat loss and hunting sharply reduced eagle numbers. Following World War II, the pesticide DDT contaminated fish and other eagle prey. Female eagles laid eggs with shells too thin, which were often crushed by the parent bird, and the eagle's numbers plummeted. By 1963, only 417 pairs remained in the continental United States.
Today, nearly 8,000 pairs nest in the lower 48 states, and Americans can watch bald eagles at wildlife refuges, state parks, national parks, along coastlines, on private lands and in large winter flocks along waterways in almost every state -- thanks in large part to the Endangered Species Act.
Take Action! Sign the Eagle Pledge:
Sign the Eagle Pledge and urge President Bush to take the bald eagle off the endangered species list - a move that would mark the bald eagle's remarkable recovery and give Americans faith in our nation's conservation efforts.
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/GpaYwHs1zj8u/
On the Eagle's Tail...
Back from the Brink is a Environmental Defense campaign aimed at shining a spotlight on 15 endangered species that ordinary Americans can help bring back from the brink of extinction. Our commitment is to restore private land habitat in more than 20 states, working with ranchers, farmers and other private landowners, as well as scientists and wildlife experts.
Visit BackfromtheBrink.org to meet the 15 species and find out how you can help:
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/F1aYwHs1zj8j//
Take a look at Environmental Defense's report "The Eagle Is Back."
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/FdaYwHs1zj8m/
But the Feds Won't Act:
This remarkable recovery should not go unnoticed. In May, Environmental Defense called on President George W. Bush to follow through on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's (FWS) five-year-old promise to take the bald eagle off the endangered species list. The FWS is still dragging its feet and the bald eagle's dramatic comeback has yet to receive the government's stamp of approval. You can help. Sign the Eagle Pledge and urge President Bush to delist the bald eagle:
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/GpaYwHs1zj8u/
Bald Eagle's Decline and Recovery:
It's hard to imagine that we nearly lost our national symbol. The bald eagle's long decline began in the 19th century as forest clearing, other habitat loss and hunting sharply reduced eagle numbers. Following World War II, the pesticide DDT contaminated fish and other eagle prey. Female eagles laid eggs with shells too thin, which were often crushed by the parent bird, and the eagle's numbers plummeted. By 1963, only 417 pairs remained in the continental United States.
Today, nearly 8,000 pairs nest in the lower 48 states, and Americans can watch bald eagles at wildlife refuges, state parks, national parks, along coastlines, on private lands and in large winter flocks along waterways in almost every state -- thanks in large part to the Endangered Species Act.
Take Action! Sign the Eagle Pledge:
Sign the Eagle Pledge and urge President Bush to take the bald eagle off the endangered species list - a move that would mark the bald eagle's remarkable recovery and give Americans faith in our nation's conservation efforts.
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/GpaYwHs1zj8u/
On the Eagle's Tail...
Back from the Brink is a Environmental Defense campaign aimed at shining a spotlight on 15 endangered species that ordinary Americans can help bring back from the brink of extinction. Our commitment is to restore private land habitat in more than 20 states, working with ranchers, farmers and other private landowners, as well as scientists and wildlife experts.
Visit BackfromtheBrink.org to meet the 15 species and find out how you can help:
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/F1aYwHs1zj8j//
Take a look at Environmental Defense's report "The Eagle Is Back."
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/FdaYwHs1zj8m/
Starmail - 26. Aug, 23:10
Bush Tries to Hide Poverty Numbers
Starmail - 26. Aug, 23:04
African-American Leaders Call on Republicans to End Vote Suppression Tactics
(excerpt)
MOVEON PAC
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jessica Smith or Kawana Lloyd,
Thursday, August 26, 2004
Fenton Communications, 202-822-5200
MOVEON PAC TO BUSH, REPUBLICAN PARTY:
DISAVOW MINORITY VOTER SUPPRESSION
In New Petition, MoveOn, African-American Leaders Call on Republicans to End Vote Suppression Tactics
MoveOn PAC Releases Benny Boom Ad To Encourage Voting;
MoveOn PAC announced today that, together with Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP*, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and other African-American elected officials, it is launching an on-line petition demanding an end to Republican efforts to suppress the votes of minority and specifically African-American voters.
MoveOn PAC also announced the release of a new 30-second TV spot produced by noted hip-hop director Benny Boom aimed at spurring registration, voting and turnout among younger and minority voters.
The petition, addressed to President Bush, Ken Mehlman and Ed Gillespie specifically asks the Republican Party and the Bush/Cheney campaign to disavow all forms of voter suppression, including voter intimidation, misinformation, purges of voter roles that disenfranchise qualified voters, the threat to discount provisional ballots, and other actions that undermine the rights of qualified Americans to vote.
“Rather than trying to win over African-American and minority voters on the issues, Republicans are simply trying to prevent them from voting,” said James Rucker, Director of Grassroots Mobilization for MoveOn PAC. “The approach is racist, undemocratic and has no place in American politics.”
The Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr. indicated this petition is only one part of a massive effort to address this issue, saying, “We will mobilize our communities to halt all voter suppression efforts of the rightwing aimed at thwarting the democratic vote of the people.”
A new report released yesterday by People For the American Way Foundation and the NAACP highlighted the systematic efforts across the country to deny qualified voters the ability to exercise their most basic democratic right. The entire report can be found on PFAW’s website at http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368.
The ad will start next week during the Republican Convention. It has been submitted to MTV and BET and will run on other youth and urban-focused stations if it does not run on those networks.
* For identification purposes only.
Beta and VHS tapes are available by contacting Steve Smith at: SSmith@fenton.com or 202-822-5200 x243. Screengrabs are also available by contacting Jessica Smith at: jessica@fenton.com or 202-822-5200 x234.
Jessica A. Smith
FENTON | Communications
1320 18th St., NW
Washington, DC 20036
202.822.5200 x234
http://www.fenton.com
MOVEON PAC
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jessica Smith or Kawana Lloyd,
Thursday, August 26, 2004
Fenton Communications, 202-822-5200
MOVEON PAC TO BUSH, REPUBLICAN PARTY:
DISAVOW MINORITY VOTER SUPPRESSION
In New Petition, MoveOn, African-American Leaders Call on Republicans to End Vote Suppression Tactics
MoveOn PAC Releases Benny Boom Ad To Encourage Voting;
MoveOn PAC announced today that, together with Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP*, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and other African-American elected officials, it is launching an on-line petition demanding an end to Republican efforts to suppress the votes of minority and specifically African-American voters.
MoveOn PAC also announced the release of a new 30-second TV spot produced by noted hip-hop director Benny Boom aimed at spurring registration, voting and turnout among younger and minority voters.
The petition, addressed to President Bush, Ken Mehlman and Ed Gillespie specifically asks the Republican Party and the Bush/Cheney campaign to disavow all forms of voter suppression, including voter intimidation, misinformation, purges of voter roles that disenfranchise qualified voters, the threat to discount provisional ballots, and other actions that undermine the rights of qualified Americans to vote.
“Rather than trying to win over African-American and minority voters on the issues, Republicans are simply trying to prevent them from voting,” said James Rucker, Director of Grassroots Mobilization for MoveOn PAC. “The approach is racist, undemocratic and has no place in American politics.”
The Reverend Jesse Jackson, Sr. indicated this petition is only one part of a massive effort to address this issue, saying, “We will mobilize our communities to halt all voter suppression efforts of the rightwing aimed at thwarting the democratic vote of the people.”
A new report released yesterday by People For the American Way Foundation and the NAACP highlighted the systematic efforts across the country to deny qualified voters the ability to exercise their most basic democratic right. The entire report can be found on PFAW’s website at http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368.
The ad will start next week during the Republican Convention. It has been submitted to MTV and BET and will run on other youth and urban-focused stations if it does not run on those networks.
* For identification purposes only.
Beta and VHS tapes are available by contacting Steve Smith at: SSmith@fenton.com or 202-822-5200 x243. Screengrabs are also available by contacting Jessica Smith at: jessica@fenton.com or 202-822-5200 x234.
Jessica A. Smith
FENTON | Communications
1320 18th St., NW
Washington, DC 20036
202.822.5200 x234
http://www.fenton.com
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:58
Coalition of the Coerced
Many of America’s 32 allies, tributaries, supplicants, and camp followers that sent a total of 22,000 troops to Iraq are wishing they had never become involved and are seeking escape or giving thanks they are well out of the growing carnage in Mesopotamia...
http://amconmag.com/2004_08_30/article.html
From Information Clearing House
http://amconmag.com/2004_08_30/article.html
From Information Clearing House
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:50
MPs plan to impeach Blair over Iraq war record
British MPs aiming to impeach Blair over Iraq war
Eleven members of the British parliament are planning to table a motion in the House of Commons calling for the impeachment of Prime Minister Tony Blair over the way he took the nation into the Iraq war...
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_971921,00050003.htm
From Information Clearing House
--------
MPs plan to impeach Blair over Iraq war record
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1290832,00.html
Read the report
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2004/08/26/impeach.pdf
Informant: Anna Webb
Eleven members of the British parliament are planning to table a motion in the House of Commons calling for the impeachment of Prime Minister Tony Blair over the way he took the nation into the Iraq war...
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_971921,00050003.htm
From Information Clearing House
--------
MPs plan to impeach Blair over Iraq war record
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1290832,00.html
Read the report
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2004/08/26/impeach.pdf
Informant: Anna Webb
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:47
The Independent Panel To Review DoD Detention
Full Report: The Independent Panel To Review DoD Detention Operations...
pdf Format
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6784.htm
pdf Format
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6784.htm
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:45
Investigation of Intelligence Activities At Abu Ghraib
Full Report: Investigation of Intelligence Activities At Abu Ghraib
pdf format
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6784.htm
pdf format
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6784.htm
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:43
Holding the Pentagon Accountable
For Abu Ghraib: The two reports issued this week on the Abu Ghraib prison are an indictment of the way the Bush administration set the stage for Iraqi prisoners to be brutalized by American prison guards, military intelligence officers and private contractors...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6782.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6782.htm
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:41
I was abused by soldiers
I was abused by soldiers, says Hicks:
ALLEGED Australian terrorist David Hicks has pleaded not guilty to war crimes charges and has told his father Terry that he was beaten and abused by US forces...
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10581024%255E401,00.html
From Information Clearing House
ALLEGED Australian terrorist David Hicks has pleaded not guilty to war crimes charges and has told his father Terry that he was beaten and abused by US forces...
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10581024%255E401,00.html
From Information Clearing House
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:40
General says U.S. forces tortured Iraqis
Pentagon leaders and Bush administration officials had previously steered clear of describing the physical abuse and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners as torture...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6781.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6781.htm
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:37
Iraqi Prisoner 'Kicked by U.S. Army Sergeant'
An Iraqi inmate who died at a US detention camp was hit by several marines, including a sergeant accused of kicking him in the chest, a court heard...
http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3409760
From Information Clearing House
http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3409760
From Information Clearing House
Starmail - 26. Aug, 22:35
Stop Congress from Repeating the Mistakes of the PATRIOT Act
Members of Congress are currently holding hearings and considering rapid action on the recommendations issued by the 9/11 Commission in early August. While the Commission's report contains beneficial analysis and recommendations, there are also proposals which, if enacted, would have a long-lasting and negative impact on the privacy and freedoms of future generations of Americans.
Click here to get more information and to take action!
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=16308&c=262
Click here to get more information and to take action!
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=16308&c=262
Starmail - 26. Aug, 18:12
Proteste wirken! Metro verzichtet auf Papier aus Regenwaldzerstörung
Der Handelskonzern Metro (Kaufhof und Real) verzichtet ab sofort auf Papier aus Regenwaldzerstörung. Die Metrogroup reagiert damit auf die Proteste von Umweltorganisationen - darunter auch der Mailaktion von Rettet den Regenwald. An dieser Stelle möchten wir uns bei Ihnen für Ihre Unterstützung bedanken.
Während die Metro die Geschäftsbeziehungen zu seinem indonesischen Papierlieferanten APP aus Umweltschutzgründen abgebrochen hat, kauft die Hamburger Papier Union weiter beim indonesischen Regenwald-Abholzer APRIL. Auch Karstadt und die Deutsche Post verzichten längst auf Papier aus Raubbau. Damit es um die Papier Union nicht einsam wird, starten wir eine zweite Protestrunde.
Bitte protestieren Sie sofort unter
http://www.regenwald.org
Bitte melden Sie uns, wenn Sie Papier der Marke "Paper One" von APRIL entdecken.
Und leiten Sie diese Mail bitte an möglichst viele Freunde und Bekannte weiter.
Ausserdem:
Bitte helfen Sie auch dem Wald in Ghana (Westafrika). Bitte protestieren gegen den geplanten Goldabbau in Waldreservaten.
Herzlichen Dank
Reinhard Behrend
Vorsitzender
Rettet den Regenwald e. V.
Friedhofsweg 28
22337 Hamburg
Tel. 040 - 4103804
Fax: 040 - 4500144
info@regenwald.ORG
http://www.regenwald.ORG
Während die Metro die Geschäftsbeziehungen zu seinem indonesischen Papierlieferanten APP aus Umweltschutzgründen abgebrochen hat, kauft die Hamburger Papier Union weiter beim indonesischen Regenwald-Abholzer APRIL. Auch Karstadt und die Deutsche Post verzichten längst auf Papier aus Raubbau. Damit es um die Papier Union nicht einsam wird, starten wir eine zweite Protestrunde.
Bitte protestieren Sie sofort unter
http://www.regenwald.org
Bitte melden Sie uns, wenn Sie Papier der Marke "Paper One" von APRIL entdecken.
Und leiten Sie diese Mail bitte an möglichst viele Freunde und Bekannte weiter.
Ausserdem:
Bitte helfen Sie auch dem Wald in Ghana (Westafrika). Bitte protestieren gegen den geplanten Goldabbau in Waldreservaten.
Herzlichen Dank
Reinhard Behrend
Vorsitzender
Rettet den Regenwald e. V.
Friedhofsweg 28
22337 Hamburg
Tel. 040 - 4103804
Fax: 040 - 4500144
info@regenwald.ORG
http://www.regenwald.ORG
Starmail - 26. Aug, 18:01
Focusing On Undecided Voters: Not A Very Swift Idea
Starmail - 26. Aug, 16:21
Radiation News Stories
** It is unclear whether the new school year will open in Einstein school in Haifa, because the school is irradiated by an army A.M antenna and parents oppose their children will study there. One of the pupils is the grandchild of our Environment Minister. This antenna has been there for many years and in the 90's it was blamed for the high cancer rate in Einstein street, the citizens fought and as a result, the antenna was closed. Now, in summer 2004, the A.M station multiplied to a cellular antennas farm, with 4 huge towers very close to houses and to the school. Still, the A.M station is again at the center of events. After the residents in the area have heard the army radio station "Galey Zahal" through the electronic equipment in their houses - through turned off computer's loudspeakers, through the T.V., telephones, entercom, the cars remote controls don't work - the Cities Union hired Ehud Neaman to measure the radiation there, and it was found that in one of the houses it was 400% more than the 20 uw/cm2 which is the israeli Environment Ministry non-obligatoy standard, and near the school 2.8 fold more than this standard. The mayor demands to close immediately the station but the army says that it rejects the radiation claims, the army spokeperson says that a year ago, the Env. Ministry measured the radiation there and it was ok.
Actually, the Env. Ministry measured the radiation but didn't find anything [well that's what they say], and that's the reason the Cities Union hired Ehud Neaman who found the high radiation. Now, after the results were published on local & national T.V and in the newspaper, the Ministry claims that it found similar results as Ehud Neaman found. Within a week the school year is supposed to open and what will happen with the pupils is unclear, the parents say they are not sleeping well now and don't agree to send their children to Einstein school.
** Also in Israel- a new governmental team will investigate the radiation from the antennas. As a results from the citizens complains, a committe of the ministers of science and technology will investigate the radiation.
This news item says that although there is accumulation of knowledge that is funded by the cellular companies, we don't have a national body that gathers all the information and produces reliable guidelines.
The science minister Ilan Shalgy says that this subject is a hot potato that everyone throws from hand to hand. He says that the knowledge is gathered in different hands but nobody coordionates them and no upper body took the responsibility to give answers. He says the subject is not advanced although it has been treated by different governmental committees for about 10 years. The team is expected to recommend within 3 months on the way to establish a national knowldge center for research on electromagnetic radiation and its effects on public health.
** The investement bank Meryl Linch made an international comparison and found again that Israel is the second in the world in the quantity of the cellular phone calls. In the first quarter of this year Israel was first in the world, with penetration of 102% procents. In Israel there are more phones than citizens.
This "achievement" is attributed to the low prices that were at the beginning of the technology in Israel, because the communication ministry and Cellcom company wanted the technology to penetrate "the deepest it could".
Also another reason is that Israelies accept very easily new technologies, they tend to adopt new technologies quicker than anywhere else in the world. [that is why it will be so hard to try to make a change in Israel]
** Yesterday it was reported that a teenager felt suddenly headaches in a party, a sensitivity to light was diagnosed but the doctors didn't unserstand what's wrong with him because all his checks were normal. He had migranes, and he is unconscious now. The doctors "solved" the problem by claiming it is a virus.
From Iris Atzmon
(excerpt)
Actually, the Env. Ministry measured the radiation but didn't find anything [well that's what they say], and that's the reason the Cities Union hired Ehud Neaman who found the high radiation. Now, after the results were published on local & national T.V and in the newspaper, the Ministry claims that it found similar results as Ehud Neaman found. Within a week the school year is supposed to open and what will happen with the pupils is unclear, the parents say they are not sleeping well now and don't agree to send their children to Einstein school.
** Also in Israel- a new governmental team will investigate the radiation from the antennas. As a results from the citizens complains, a committe of the ministers of science and technology will investigate the radiation.
This news item says that although there is accumulation of knowledge that is funded by the cellular companies, we don't have a national body that gathers all the information and produces reliable guidelines.
The science minister Ilan Shalgy says that this subject is a hot potato that everyone throws from hand to hand. He says that the knowledge is gathered in different hands but nobody coordionates them and no upper body took the responsibility to give answers. He says the subject is not advanced although it has been treated by different governmental committees for about 10 years. The team is expected to recommend within 3 months on the way to establish a national knowldge center for research on electromagnetic radiation and its effects on public health.
** The investement bank Meryl Linch made an international comparison and found again that Israel is the second in the world in the quantity of the cellular phone calls. In the first quarter of this year Israel was first in the world, with penetration of 102% procents. In Israel there are more phones than citizens.
This "achievement" is attributed to the low prices that were at the beginning of the technology in Israel, because the communication ministry and Cellcom company wanted the technology to penetrate "the deepest it could".
Also another reason is that Israelies accept very easily new technologies, they tend to adopt new technologies quicker than anywhere else in the world. [that is why it will be so hard to try to make a change in Israel]
** Yesterday it was reported that a teenager felt suddenly headaches in a party, a sensitivity to light was diagnosed but the doctors didn't unserstand what's wrong with him because all his checks were normal. He had migranes, and he is unconscious now. The doctors "solved" the problem by claiming it is a virus.
From Iris Atzmon
(excerpt)
Starmail - 26. Aug, 16:15
Alliances and the American election
Starmail - 26. Aug, 16:05
Media Reform Needed for a Continuing Democracy
by Peter Phillips
The First Amendment of the US constitution, guaranteeing freedom of the press, was established to maximize citizen cognition of critical issues in society. It was understood clearly by the founders that Democracy could only be maintained through an informed electorate.
A daily newspaper, along with the three major TV networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, as well as CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, are the major sources of news and information for most Americans. News stories and the invidious entertainment segments from these corporate sources generally have similar themes and common frames of understanding. This concentration of access to media sources leaves most Americans with very narrow parameters of news awareness and an almost complete lack of competing opinions.
Important questions that impact most Americans are generally ignored. Why are 45 million American without health care? Why is poverty increasing in the US? What happened to the safety net of social programs for the disadvantaged? What are the underlying reasons - other than oil - for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan? Will the military draft be re-instituted in the US after the 04 election? What is the truth behind global warming and extreme weather conditions? Where have all the living wage jobs gone? Why is minimum wage now at 60% of its value in 1968? Who got rich in the 90s and kept the money? Who owns the electronic voting machine companies?
Each of these questions and many more directly affect nearly every American and their personal motivations to participate in the democratic process. Yet the corporate media choose not to address these important issues in any significant way. Instead, they are keeping us on top of the Peterson murder case, the Michael Jackson trial and the threat of new terror attacks.
By not addressing relevant issues facing everyday Americans, the corporate media are weakening democracy in the US. More than half the eligible voters in the country do not vote in elections. Most non-voters believe their vote matters very little. Therefore, they do not make the effort to distinguish important issues between candidates nor do the corporate media do it for them. Non-voters often see little difference between the two primary political parties and tend to believe that voting is a waste of time.
The corporate media agenda of maximum profits undermines the public purpose of a free press by creating the fiscal necessity for cutting costs and increasing the entertainment content. Ratings and audience share translate to higher advertising value and higher profits. This structural arrangement of corporate media results in an electorate who perceive few personal reasons to get involved, not just as voters but as activists on political issues as well.
How can we address media reform to broaden citizen democratic participation? The regulator of the media -- the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) -- is the body established to insure that the purposes of the First Amendment are maintained. Bush administration pro-corporate media appointees, however, have captured the FCC. Chaired by Michael Powell, the FCC has been trying to relax the media ownership rules by allowing expanded market share by any single media conglomerate and they propose to deregulate the rules of cross ownership between radio, television and newspapers in the same locale.
Members of Congress have been attempting to scale back the proposed FCC changes, but they need a public outcry to encourage them to continue their efforts.
Media reform is not a topic covered by the corporate media themselves and without a strong public expression of concern congressional resolve may weaken in an election year. We must continue the pressure and demand that a diversity of independent news sources be maintained in every city. And we must ask for public funding of locally-controlled grassroots independent news agencies throughout the country as well. Democracy is too precious to lose.
Peter Phillips is Department Chair and Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and director of Project Censored, a media research organization.
Peter Phillips Ph.D.
Sociology Department/Project Censored
Sonoma State University
1801 East Cotati Ave.
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
707-664-2588
http://www.projectcensored.org/
The First Amendment of the US constitution, guaranteeing freedom of the press, was established to maximize citizen cognition of critical issues in society. It was understood clearly by the founders that Democracy could only be maintained through an informed electorate.
A daily newspaper, along with the three major TV networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, as well as CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, are the major sources of news and information for most Americans. News stories and the invidious entertainment segments from these corporate sources generally have similar themes and common frames of understanding. This concentration of access to media sources leaves most Americans with very narrow parameters of news awareness and an almost complete lack of competing opinions.
Important questions that impact most Americans are generally ignored. Why are 45 million American without health care? Why is poverty increasing in the US? What happened to the safety net of social programs for the disadvantaged? What are the underlying reasons - other than oil - for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan? Will the military draft be re-instituted in the US after the 04 election? What is the truth behind global warming and extreme weather conditions? Where have all the living wage jobs gone? Why is minimum wage now at 60% of its value in 1968? Who got rich in the 90s and kept the money? Who owns the electronic voting machine companies?
Each of these questions and many more directly affect nearly every American and their personal motivations to participate in the democratic process. Yet the corporate media choose not to address these important issues in any significant way. Instead, they are keeping us on top of the Peterson murder case, the Michael Jackson trial and the threat of new terror attacks.
By not addressing relevant issues facing everyday Americans, the corporate media are weakening democracy in the US. More than half the eligible voters in the country do not vote in elections. Most non-voters believe their vote matters very little. Therefore, they do not make the effort to distinguish important issues between candidates nor do the corporate media do it for them. Non-voters often see little difference between the two primary political parties and tend to believe that voting is a waste of time.
The corporate media agenda of maximum profits undermines the public purpose of a free press by creating the fiscal necessity for cutting costs and increasing the entertainment content. Ratings and audience share translate to higher advertising value and higher profits. This structural arrangement of corporate media results in an electorate who perceive few personal reasons to get involved, not just as voters but as activists on political issues as well.
How can we address media reform to broaden citizen democratic participation? The regulator of the media -- the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) -- is the body established to insure that the purposes of the First Amendment are maintained. Bush administration pro-corporate media appointees, however, have captured the FCC. Chaired by Michael Powell, the FCC has been trying to relax the media ownership rules by allowing expanded market share by any single media conglomerate and they propose to deregulate the rules of cross ownership between radio, television and newspapers in the same locale.
Members of Congress have been attempting to scale back the proposed FCC changes, but they need a public outcry to encourage them to continue their efforts.
Media reform is not a topic covered by the corporate media themselves and without a strong public expression of concern congressional resolve may weaken in an election year. We must continue the pressure and demand that a diversity of independent news sources be maintained in every city. And we must ask for public funding of locally-controlled grassroots independent news agencies throughout the country as well. Democracy is too precious to lose.
Peter Phillips is Department Chair and Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University and director of Project Censored, a media research organization.
Peter Phillips Ph.D.
Sociology Department/Project Censored
Sonoma State University
1801 East Cotati Ave.
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
707-664-2588
http://www.projectcensored.org/
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:56
Bush's Dad Foresaw 'Incalculable' Costs of Iraq War
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:49
A Trail of 'Major Failures' Leads to Rumsfeld
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:48
Neo-Cons Rethink Iraqi Fiasco
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:47
Investigation faults intel unit members for Abu Ghraib
USA Today
08/25/04
Twenty-seven members of an intelligence unit at Abu Ghraib prison either requested or condoned certain abuses of Iraqi prisoners there, an Army investigation found. 'We discovered serious misconduct and a loss of moral values,' said Gen. Paul Kern, the head of the investigation, while briefing reporters at the Pentagon. Kern and other officials on Wednesday detailed the results of the investigation, commonly called the Fay report, after one of the chief investigators...
http://tinyurl.com/63mst
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
08/25/04
Twenty-seven members of an intelligence unit at Abu Ghraib prison either requested or condoned certain abuses of Iraqi prisoners there, an Army investigation found. 'We discovered serious misconduct and a loss of moral values,' said Gen. Paul Kern, the head of the investigation, while briefing reporters at the Pentagon. Kern and other officials on Wednesday detailed the results of the investigation, commonly called the Fay report, after one of the chief investigators...
http://tinyurl.com/63mst
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:38
Antennen außerhalb von Wohngebieten ?
“Mobilfunksender raus aus den reinen Wohngebieten“?
Kann uns das wirklich vor den Gefahren der Mobilfunkstrahlung schützen?
Immer öfter hört man die Forderung von besorgten Bürgern und Organisationen, Sendeanlagen nicht mehr in reinen Wohngebieten aufzustellen, sondern am Stadt- oder Ortsrand, in Gewerbegebieten oder im Grünland – also in sogenannten Außenbereichen.
Eine solche Forderung ist nicht sinnvoll ! Denn entscheidend für die Belastung eines Menschen ist nicht allein die Entfernung vom Sender, sondern wie viel Strahlung von diesem Sender noch bei ihm ankommt.
Steht z.B. ein Sendemast in 1000 m Entfernung bei freier Sicht, dann treffen uns in Hauptstrahlrichtung noch bis zu 10 nW/cm² (= 100 Mikrowatt/m² bzw.0,2 V/m). Sind Sender mehrerer Betreiber auf dem Mast, dann werden sogar 30-40 nW/cm² (300 bis 400 Mikrowatt/m² bzw. 0,35-0,4 V/m) gemessen.
Wenn man bedenkt, dass Menschen bei einer langzeitigen Bestrahlung schon bei 1 nW/cm² (=10 Mikrowatt/m² = bzw. 0,06 V/m) erkranken (Dr. Lebrecht v. Klitzing), so kann also keine ausreichende Sicherheit für unsere Gesundheit gegeben sein, auch wenn ein Sender 1000 m und mehr von uns entfernt steht, also z.B. außerhalb eines Wohngebietes.
Handys benötigen Sender !
Aus Kapazitätsgründen können von jeder voll ausgebauten Sendeanlage in ihrem Umkreis (z.B. Großzelle r= 10-30 km) nur ca. 90 Gesprächsverbindungen gleichzeitig hergestellt werden (in Österreich und in der Schweiz sind es weniger). Wenn die Zahl der Handynutzer weiter zunimmt, werden die Zellen weiter unterteilt und damit immer mehr Sender gebaut.
In größeren Städten ist also schon aus Kapazitätsgründen eine Versorgung aller Nutzer nur von “außerhalb“ gar nicht möglich.
Außerdem leben und arbeiten ja auch Menschen in Außenbereichen und diese Menschen in Misch-, Industrie- und Dorfgebieten haben doch dasselbe Recht auf den Schutz ihrer Gesundheit wie die Menschen in den reinen Wohngebieten.
Und weiter draußen auf dem Land arbeiten die Bauern auf dem Feld und leben die Tiere in Feld und Wald, die ebenso zu schützen sind.
Weiterhin: Wenn man fordert, die Sendemasten dort draußen aufzustellen, dann werden meist sofort hohe Masten aufgestellt. Mit diesen hohen Masten wird aber die Infrastruktur bereitgestellt für die Erweiterung der Richtfunknetze und der Mobilfunknetze!
Es geht um Folgendes:
Die Einbindung der einzelnen Sendestationen in das Netz eines Betreibers über Richtfunk ist kostenmäßig viel günstiger als mittels erdverlegter Kabel. Die Richtfunkantennen müssen dazu untereinander Sichtkontakt haben – daher die hohen oder erhöht stehenden Masten im Außenbereich. Von hier aus können die in den Innenbereichen noch zu erwartenden Sender leicht per Richtfunk angebunden werden.
Mit der Forderung, die Masten in den Außenbereichen zu bauen, unterstützt man also die Pläne der Betreiber, weil dadurch der Weg für weitere Sender in den Innenbereichen geebnet wird.
Die mit Umweltschutz begründete Zielsetzung der Konzentration möglichst vieler Sender auf einem Masten, führt zu einer weiteren gefährlichen Erhöhung der Strahlungsbelastung.
Ja zum Handy – Nein zum Masten ??
Viele Menschen wollen mit dem Handy telefonieren, möchten aber selber keine Sender in ihrer Nähe haben. Ohne Sender funktionieren jedoch die Handys nicht. Wer also den Sender vom eigenen Haus weg haben will, handelt nach dem St. Florians-Prinzip, denn dann bekommen den für das Handy zwingend notwendigen Sender eben andere. Und ist der Handy-nutzer unterwegs, so braucht er zusätzlich noch viele weitere Sender entlang seines Weges, mit denen auch wieder andere belastet werden.
Oft hört man von Mastengegnern das Argument, sie würden ihr Handy unbedingt brauchen. Irgendeinen “wichtigen Grund“ werden aber auch alle anderen Millionen Menschen haben und damit auch den Anspruch auf ein Handy. Also was tun?
Es ist wohl klar, dass ein Mastengegner konsequenterweise auch sein eigenes Verhalten überdenken sollte. Denn die Handynutzer sorgen selbst dafür, dass immer mehr Masten gebaut werden müssen.
Wir sehen aus diesen Ausführungen, dass es nicht möglich ist, ein Mobilfunknetz mit der zur Zeit noch erlaubten Technologie aufzubauen und gleichzeitig den Gesundheitsschutz für die Menschen zu sichern.
Bei der heute verwendeten Technologie wird bewußt eine unübersehbare Schädigung der Volksgesundheit in Kauf genommen.
Wir müssen sicherstellen, dass unsere Gesundheit wieder zum höchsten Gut wird.
Quelle:
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/mobilfunksender_raus_aus_reinen_wohngebieten.rtf
Weiter weg heißt nicht immer strahlungsärmer
http://www.forum-elektrosmog.de/forumelektrosmog.php/aid/93/cat/36/
Mehr Antennen, weniger Strahlung?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/328525/
Kann uns das wirklich vor den Gefahren der Mobilfunkstrahlung schützen?
Immer öfter hört man die Forderung von besorgten Bürgern und Organisationen, Sendeanlagen nicht mehr in reinen Wohngebieten aufzustellen, sondern am Stadt- oder Ortsrand, in Gewerbegebieten oder im Grünland – also in sogenannten Außenbereichen.
Eine solche Forderung ist nicht sinnvoll ! Denn entscheidend für die Belastung eines Menschen ist nicht allein die Entfernung vom Sender, sondern wie viel Strahlung von diesem Sender noch bei ihm ankommt.
Steht z.B. ein Sendemast in 1000 m Entfernung bei freier Sicht, dann treffen uns in Hauptstrahlrichtung noch bis zu 10 nW/cm² (= 100 Mikrowatt/m² bzw.0,2 V/m). Sind Sender mehrerer Betreiber auf dem Mast, dann werden sogar 30-40 nW/cm² (300 bis 400 Mikrowatt/m² bzw. 0,35-0,4 V/m) gemessen.
Wenn man bedenkt, dass Menschen bei einer langzeitigen Bestrahlung schon bei 1 nW/cm² (=10 Mikrowatt/m² = bzw. 0,06 V/m) erkranken (Dr. Lebrecht v. Klitzing), so kann also keine ausreichende Sicherheit für unsere Gesundheit gegeben sein, auch wenn ein Sender 1000 m und mehr von uns entfernt steht, also z.B. außerhalb eines Wohngebietes.
Handys benötigen Sender !
Aus Kapazitätsgründen können von jeder voll ausgebauten Sendeanlage in ihrem Umkreis (z.B. Großzelle r= 10-30 km) nur ca. 90 Gesprächsverbindungen gleichzeitig hergestellt werden (in Österreich und in der Schweiz sind es weniger). Wenn die Zahl der Handynutzer weiter zunimmt, werden die Zellen weiter unterteilt und damit immer mehr Sender gebaut.
In größeren Städten ist also schon aus Kapazitätsgründen eine Versorgung aller Nutzer nur von “außerhalb“ gar nicht möglich.
Außerdem leben und arbeiten ja auch Menschen in Außenbereichen und diese Menschen in Misch-, Industrie- und Dorfgebieten haben doch dasselbe Recht auf den Schutz ihrer Gesundheit wie die Menschen in den reinen Wohngebieten.
Und weiter draußen auf dem Land arbeiten die Bauern auf dem Feld und leben die Tiere in Feld und Wald, die ebenso zu schützen sind.
Weiterhin: Wenn man fordert, die Sendemasten dort draußen aufzustellen, dann werden meist sofort hohe Masten aufgestellt. Mit diesen hohen Masten wird aber die Infrastruktur bereitgestellt für die Erweiterung der Richtfunknetze und der Mobilfunknetze!
Es geht um Folgendes:
Die Einbindung der einzelnen Sendestationen in das Netz eines Betreibers über Richtfunk ist kostenmäßig viel günstiger als mittels erdverlegter Kabel. Die Richtfunkantennen müssen dazu untereinander Sichtkontakt haben – daher die hohen oder erhöht stehenden Masten im Außenbereich. Von hier aus können die in den Innenbereichen noch zu erwartenden Sender leicht per Richtfunk angebunden werden.
Mit der Forderung, die Masten in den Außenbereichen zu bauen, unterstützt man also die Pläne der Betreiber, weil dadurch der Weg für weitere Sender in den Innenbereichen geebnet wird.
Die mit Umweltschutz begründete Zielsetzung der Konzentration möglichst vieler Sender auf einem Masten, führt zu einer weiteren gefährlichen Erhöhung der Strahlungsbelastung.
Ja zum Handy – Nein zum Masten ??
Viele Menschen wollen mit dem Handy telefonieren, möchten aber selber keine Sender in ihrer Nähe haben. Ohne Sender funktionieren jedoch die Handys nicht. Wer also den Sender vom eigenen Haus weg haben will, handelt nach dem St. Florians-Prinzip, denn dann bekommen den für das Handy zwingend notwendigen Sender eben andere. Und ist der Handy-nutzer unterwegs, so braucht er zusätzlich noch viele weitere Sender entlang seines Weges, mit denen auch wieder andere belastet werden.
Oft hört man von Mastengegnern das Argument, sie würden ihr Handy unbedingt brauchen. Irgendeinen “wichtigen Grund“ werden aber auch alle anderen Millionen Menschen haben und damit auch den Anspruch auf ein Handy. Also was tun?
Es ist wohl klar, dass ein Mastengegner konsequenterweise auch sein eigenes Verhalten überdenken sollte. Denn die Handynutzer sorgen selbst dafür, dass immer mehr Masten gebaut werden müssen.
Wir sehen aus diesen Ausführungen, dass es nicht möglich ist, ein Mobilfunknetz mit der zur Zeit noch erlaubten Technologie aufzubauen und gleichzeitig den Gesundheitsschutz für die Menschen zu sichern.
Bei der heute verwendeten Technologie wird bewußt eine unübersehbare Schädigung der Volksgesundheit in Kauf genommen.
Wir müssen sicherstellen, dass unsere Gesundheit wieder zum höchsten Gut wird.
Quelle:
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/mobilfunksender_raus_aus_reinen_wohngebieten.rtf
Weiter weg heißt nicht immer strahlungsärmer
http://www.forum-elektrosmog.de/forumelektrosmog.php/aid/93/cat/36/
Mehr Antennen, weniger Strahlung?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/328525/
Starmail - 26. Aug, 15:19
Save Our Ocean Legacy
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:26
Analysen zur Politik des globalen Kapitals
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:23
Games of Shame
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:17
THE SECRET SHADOW GOVERNMENT
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:15
More Bush Connections to Smear Ads
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:09
God is Not a Republican Or a Democrat
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:07
Identity Crisis
Starmail - 26. Aug, 00:00
