Is the antenna business just the beginning or part of what the Judge predicts?


Tribute to Neil Cherry


Mothers of the San Vicente of Paúl refuse that its children go to class by a cellular antenna


The end of the illegal antennae


People die here, and nobody does anything


Zoran: leaving the village


The cancer street


Telecoms equipment on mast at Bulls Lane, Wishaw


Cellular Phones: Are They Safe to Use?


Public-safety interference resolution likely drawn out


Appeals court pushes brain cancer suit to September


FCC may fine carrier for site violation


National League Endorses Legislation


Adey papers on web site


Need to wake up Harvard School of Public Health


Sprint placed antennas illegally atop a St. Mary's in Boston


Compensation for phone mast blunder


The radiation directly below the base station antenna is not always extremely low


Sprint plans to invade a school in Berkeley, California


A Spy Machine of DARPA's Dreams

By Noah Shachtman

02:00 AM May. 20, 2003 PT

It's a memory aid! A robotic assistant! An epidemic detector! An all-seeing, ultra-intrusive spying program! The Pentagon is about to embark on a stunningly ambitious research project designed to gather every conceivable bit of information about a person's life, index all the information and make it searchable.

What national security experts and civil libertarians want to know is, why would the Defense Department want to do such a thing? The embryonic LifeLog program would dump everything an individual does into a giant database: every e-mail sent or received, every picture taken, every Web page surfed, every phone call made, every TV show watched, every magazine read. All of this -- and more -- would combine with information gleaned from a variety of sources: a GPS transmitter to keep tabs on where that person went, audio-visual sensors to capture what he or she sees or says, and biomedical monitors to keep track of the individual's health.

This gigantic amalgamation of personal information could then be used to "trace the 'threads' of an individual's life," to see exactly how a relationship or events developed, according to a briefing from the Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency, LifeLog's sponsor. Someone with access to the database could "retrieve a specific thread of past transactions, or recall an experience from a few seconds ago or from many years earlier ... by using a search-engine interface."

On the surface, the project seems like the latest in a long line of DARPA's "blue sky" research efforts, most of which never make it out of the lab. But DARPA is currently asking businesses and universities for research proposals to begin moving LifeLog forward. And some people, such as Steven Aftergood, a defense analyst with the Federation of American Scientists, are worried.

With its controversial Total Information Awareness database project, DARPA already is planning to track all of an individual's "transactional data" -- like what we buy and who gets our e-mail. While the parameters of the project have not yet been determined, Aftergood said he believes LifeLog could go far beyond TIA's scope, adding physical information (like how we feel) and media data (like what we read) to this transactional data. "LifeLog has the potential to become something like 'TIA cubed,'" he said. In the private sector, a number of LifeLog-like efforts already are underway to digitally archive one's life -- to create a "surrogate memory," as minicomputer pioneer Gordon Bell calls it.

Bell, now with Microsoft, scans all his letters and memos, records his conversations, saves all the Web pages he's visited and e-mails he's received and puts them into an electronic storehouse dubbed MyLifeBits. DARPA's LifeLog would take this concept several steps further by tracking where people go and what they see. That makes the project similar to the work of University of Toronto professor Steve Mann. Since his teen years in the 1970s, Mann, a self-styled "cyborg," has worn a camera and an array of sensors to record his existence. He claims he's convinced 20 to 30 of his current and former students to do the same. It's all part of an experiment into "existential technology" and "the metaphysics of free will."

Darpa isn't quite so philosophical about LifeLog. But the agency does see some potential battlefield uses for the program. "The technology could allow the military to develop computerized assistants for warfighters and commanders that can be more effective because they can easily access the user's past experiences," Darpa spokeswoman Jan Walker speculated in an e-mail. It also could allow the military to develop more efficient computerized training systems, she said: Computers could remember how each student learns and interacts with the training system, then tailor the lessons accordingly.

John Pike, director of defense think tank GlobalSecurity.org, said he finds the explanations "hard to believe." "It looks like an outgrowth of Total Information Awareness and other Darpa homeland security surveillance programs," he added in an e-mail.

Sure, LifeLog could be used to train robotic assistants. But it also could become a way to profile suspected terrorists, said Cory Doctorow, with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. In other words, Osama bin Laden's agent takes a walk around the block at 10 each morning, buys a bagel and a newspaper at the corner store and then calls his mother. You do the same things -- so maybe you're an al Qaeda member, too!

"The more that an individual's characteristic behavior patterns -- 'routines, relationships, and habits' -- can be represented in digital form, the easier it would become to distinguish among different individuals, or to monitor one," Aftergood, the Federation of American Scientists analyst, wrote in an e-mail.

In its LifeLog report, Darpa makes some nods to privacy protection, like when it suggests that "properly anonymized access to LifeLog data might support medical research and the early detection of an emerging epidemic."

But before these grand plans get underway, LifeLog will start small. Right now, Darpa is asking industry and academics to submit proposals for 18-month research efforts, with a possible 24-month extension.

(Darpa is not sure yet how much money it will sink into the program.) The researchers will be the centerpiece of their own study. Like a game show, winning this Darpa prize eventually will earn the lucky scientists a trip for three to Washington, D.C. Except on this excursion, every participating scientist's e-mail to the travel agent, every padded bar bill and every mad lunge for a cab will be monitored, categorized and later dissected.

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,58909,00.html http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,58909-2,00.html

Feedback and suggestions invited on COST 281


Dr. Repacholi und die WHO haben zu den Bestechungsvorwürfen durch die Mobilfunk-Industrie bis jetzt keine Stellung genommen



Dr. Claus Scheingraber 10-01-06

Lieber Peter,

sehr geehrter Herr Tittmann,

habe gerade die folgende Nachricht von Frau Atzmon erhalten. Dr. Repacholi und die WHO haben zu den Bestechungsvorwürfen durch die Mobilfunk-Industrie bis jetzt keine Stellung genommen. Es scheint, als möchte man den Vorwurf aussitzen.

Eine Übersetzung der Texte liefere ich demnächst nach.

Herzliche Grüße

Claus Scheingraber

Lieber Peter,

sehr geehrter Herr Tittmann,

ich habe die beiden englischen Texte übersetzt; die franz. Übersetzung erwarte ich in kürze!

Liebe Leute, zu eurer Information,

im Dezember wurde Mike Repacholi von "NEXT-UP" (einer franz. Organisation mit rechtlichem Status) zu den Aussagen in dem Brief an Lee Jong befragt, ob es denn zutreffend ist, dass er Geld von der Industrie genommen habe (auf Grundlage des Berichts von Microwave News); Repacholi hat bis heute nicht geantwortet. Eine Kopie des Briefes wurde auch an Herrn Lee Jong gesandt, aber auch er ignorierte diesen. Schweigen bedeutet Zustimmung, ist es aber nicht. Es müssen Nachforschungen angestellt werden und diese Dinge müssen veröffentlicht werden. Wenn Sie können, informieren Sie die Medien, Polizei, EU und wen auch immer ... Das Licht der Öffentlichkeit ist sehr heilsam für solche Informationen, weil solange die Bevölkerung darüber nicht informiert ist, die Zeit in die Hände der WHO spielt und der Industrie die Möglichkeit gibt damit weiter zu machen, und die Gerichte werden den Anspruch der Regierungen akzeptieren, dass die WHO für unser Gesundheit verantwortlich ist. Bitte, schauen Sie sich den Brief an, der von NEXT-UP an Repacholi gesandt wurde. Für alle das Beste und meinen Dank für ihre Mitwirkung und Unterzeichung.

Iris Atzmon

Next-up schrieb an die WHO und an Repacholi um ihn nach seinen Argumenten gegen die Beschuldigungen zu fragen, er habe Geld von der Mobilfunk-Lobby angenommen. Man teilte, dieser Person mit, dass niemals zuvor irgendjemand eine größere Verantwortung hatte in den letzten 10 Jahren, als er.

Man teilte ihm auch mit, dass die, welche die Wahrheit kennen auch die moralische Schuldigkeit haben, danach zu handeln. Man teile Repacholi ferner mit, dass der kleinste Fehler von ihm in der Auffassung bei internationalen Empfehlungen für Hunderte von Millionen Menschen gefährlich sein kann. Dass er professionellen Missbrauch betreibt.

Mit freundliche Grüßen


Die französische Übersetzung wird nachgeliefert!

Herzlichen Gruß

Claus Scheingraber




Diverse Statements bzw. Mails zum Repacholi (WHO) Vorgang




Betr. Repacholi (WHO)

Dr. Claus Scheingraber 13-01-06

Heute die Übersetzung des Briefes der franz. Organisation Next-up an Dr. Lee Jon-Wook In der WHO (Vorgesetzter von Dr. Repacholi).

Von: Marion DUPUIS

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2006 17:42
An: Claus Scheingraber
Betreff: Übersetzung Repacholi 2

Lieber Claus,

jetzt kommt die Übersetzung des vorletzten Mails an mich.

Übersetzung :

Copie au Dr LEE Jong-Wook Directeur Général de l'Administration Centrale de l'OMS. / Kopie an Dr. LEE Jong-Wook, Generaldirektor der Zentralverwaltung der WHO.

Réponse de Next-up au Message de Monsieur Michaël Harry REPACHOLI ( Coordinateur Général de l?OMS pour le programme International des Champs ÉlectroMagnétiques) concernant le Dossier spécial dont l?accès a été suspendu. / Antwort von Next-up auf das Schreiben von Herrn Michaël Harry REPACHOLI (General-Koordinator der WHO für das Internationale Programm der Elektromagnetischen Felder) bezüglich der Spezial-Akte im Internet, deren Zugang gesperrt worden ist.

Monsieur, Sehr geehrter Herr Repacholi,

Nous venons de prendre connaissance de votre message, et suivant la règle en la matière : Wir haben soeben Ihr Schreiben zur Kenntnis genommen, und wir gehen jetzt wie üblich in diesem Fall vor :

1. Avants propos : afin que vous sachiez exactement quelle association est Next-up , nous vous demandons de prendre connaissance de nos statuts juridiques légaux qui sont disponibles sur internet, de plus vous trouverez tous les renseignements dans le Journal Officiel Français sous le n°20050043. Seuls les statuts en langue Française sont contractuels. / 1.) Zum Eingang, damit Sie genau wissen, welcher Verein Next-up ist, bitten wir Sie, unsere gesetzlichen juristischen Statuten auf dem Internet einzusehen, des weiteren finden Sie alle Auskünfte im Frz. Journal Officiel (Gesetzblatt der Frz. Regierung) unter der Nr. 20050043. Die Statuten sind nur in ihrer frz. Fassung rechtsverbindlich.

2. Malgré le flot d'informations, il a été décidé de suspendre immédiatement la mise en ligne de cette lettre, ceci dès l?arrivée du Webmaster ce 15 Décembre 2005. / 2.) Trotz der Flut der Informationen wurde beschlossen, die Veröffentlichung dieses Briefes im Internet sofort einzustellen, dies gleich bei Ankunft des Webmaster vom 15. Dezember 2005.

3. Nous allons procéder dans les plus brefs délais à des vérifications complémentaires auprès de ceux qui ont apposé leur nom à cette lettre et de la réalité de ces informations. / 3.) Wir werden jetzt unverzüglich zusätzliche Erkundigungen bei denen, die diesen Brief mit ihren Namen unterzeichnet haben, einholen und die Wahrhaftigkeit dieser Informationen untersuchen.

4. Ayant votre adresse mail directe nous vous tiendrons informés du résultat de ces vérifications. / Da wir über Ihre direkte Mail-Adresse verfügen, werden wir Sie über die Ergebnisse dieser Erkundigungen auf dem Laufenden halten.

5. Entre-temps, afin d'avoir tous les éléments propices à la vérité, nous souhaitons que vous nous fassiez parvenir votre argumentation, dont nous nous réservons le droit de publication. / 5.) Um über alle Fakten zur Wahrheitsfindung zu verfügen, möchten wir Sie in der Zwischenzeit bitten, uns Ihre Argumentation zukommen zu lassen, mit dem Recht, sie dann veröffentlichen zu können.

6. Après, deux cas de figures peuvent se produire : / 6.) Zwei Fälle können eintreten: a. Soit il y a confirmation évidente et suffisante des éléments contenus dans cette lettre par les "signataires" avec les éléments de preuves, dans ce cas l'information sera remise en ligne, en y joignant votre information si vous le souhaitez (en droitde réponse). / a) Entweder erhalten wir von den "Unterzeichnern" dieses Briefes eine eindeutige und ausreichende Bestätigung der darin erwähnten Einzelheiten mit Angaben von Beweisen; in diesem Fall wird die Information ins Internet gebracht, mit Zufügung Ihrer eigenen Stellungnahme, wenn Sie es wünschen (Anspruch auf Gegendarstellung). b. Soit, il n'y aura pas confirmation des éléments contenus dans cette lettre par les "signataires", dans ce cas nous vous présenterons, comme de droit, nos excuses en même place et insérerons votre droit de réponse. / b) Oder die Bestätigung der Einzelheiten des Briefes durch die "Unterzeichner" selbigen Briefes bleibt aus; in diesem Fall, drücken wir Ihnen an gleicher Stelle unsere Bitte um Entschuldigung aus und fügen Ihre Gegendarstellung dazu.

Vous en souhaitant bonne réception et compréhension, nous souhaitons aussi que vous nous fassiez parvenir le plus tôt vôtre information afin que nous possédions l'ensemble des éléments d'appréciations. Il y a quelques mois dans un dossier, nous avions mis en cause sur un autre sujet relatif aux CEM le Pr Denis ZMIROU, nous avons été agréablement surpris par sa lettre de démission en date du 9 juin 2005. / Wir wünschen Ihnen guten Empfang dieses Schreibens und Ihr Verständnis, wir bitten Sie auch um eine möglichst baldige Stellungnahme, damit wir baldigst eine Gesamtübersicht und Beurteilungskriterien über die Einzelheiten dieser Affäre erhalten.

Vor einigen Monaten haben wir in einer Akte ein anderes Thema bezüglich der ELF durch den Prof. Denis ZMIROU aufgeworfen, wir haben mit Genugtuung sein Rücktrittsschreiben vom 9. Juni 2005 zur Kenntnis genommen.

Sachez qu'avec l?essor fulgurant de la téléphonie mobile le sujet des seuils des CEM (EMF) et en corollaire les effets biologiques et les effets délétères sanitaires sur les populations exposées sont maintenant de la plus haute importance pour le devenir de centaines de millions de personnes. Depuis une décennie, votre fonction au sein de l?OMS engendre donc une responsabilité dans le domaine de la santé comme personne jusqu'à présent avait eu une telle charge. La moindre petite erreur d'appréciation (même insignifiante), d'approche, ou de recommandations internationales peuvent avoir maintenant de graves conséquences sur une masse importante de la population mondiale. / Sie sind sich gewiss klar, dass mit dem äusserst schnellen Aufschwung des Mobilfunks das Thema über die Grenzwerte der EMF und als Folge davon die biologischen Wirkungen und die schädigenden Auswirkungen auf die Gesundheit der ausgesetzten Personenkreise jetzt von überaus grosser Bedeutung für das Leben und Werden von hunderten von Millionen Menschen ist.

Seit gut zehn Jahren verfügen Sie auf Ihrem Posten bei der WHO im Bereich der Gesundheit über eine gewaltige Verantwortung, wie wohl noch kein anderer je zuvor. Der kleinste Irrtum, selbst eine geringe Fehleinschätzung, oder auch die internationalen Empfehlungen können jetzt schwerwiegende Folgen für einen bedeutenden Teil der Weltbevölkerung mit sich bringen.

De même votre fonction au sein de l?OMS ne peut souffrir d'aucune faute déontologique. / Somit kann man sich auf Ihrem Posten innerhalb der WHO keinen einzigen Deontologie-Fehler erlauben.

Sachez que dans notre action, il y a deux paramètres essentiels qui comptent: Notre conscience et la vérité. La vérité est unique, infalsifiable et universelle. / Sie können gewiss sein, dass unsere Aktion von zwei Hauptparametern geleitet wird: Unser Gewissen und die Wahrheit. Die Wahrheit ist einzig, unfälschbar und universal.

Avec nos salutations. Mit unseren Grüssen Next-up


Repacholi was asked by Next up about the money he receives



Ätzende Abrechnung mit dem Irakkrieg

"Die Hälfte der Kriegskosten hätte das Sozialsystem der USA für die nächsten 75 Jahre auf eine stabile Basis gestellt".


Emails expose sordid tale of political corruption

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleads guilty and Washington trembles.

Another court case helping residents


Two groups of biological effects of the EM


Brief report on COST 281 workshop of May 15-16, Dublin


U.S. cellular tower battles continue


Tell Your Senators to Oppose Alito Nomination to the Supreme Court


IRS Concealing Corporate/Wealthy Tax Data

Records showing how thoroughly the Internal Revenue Service audits big corporations and the rich, and how much it discounts the additional taxes assessed after audits, are being withheld from the public despite a 1976 court order requiring their disclosure, according to a legal motion filed last week in federal court in Seattle.


From Big-Time Lobbyist to Object of Derision

Jack Abramoff, former superlobbyist and newly convicted felon, is learning how unpleasant disgrace can be. After pleading guilty last week to federal corruption charges in Washington and Florida, Mr. Abramoff is now mocked by late-night comedians and editorial cartoonists.


Alito Sounds Death Knell for Individual Rights

Marjorie Cohn writes: "If confirmed, Alito would tip the high court's delicate balance radically to the right. Nearly always favoring the government, corporations and universities, Alito has ruled against individual rights in 84 percent of his dissents."


Completely disabled as a result of EMF disease


Cracking The Alito Codebook

by Ralph G. Neas, TomPaine.com

Separating spin from reality in the confirmation hearings.

Regaining Our Common Sense

by Harvey J. Kaye, TomPaine.com

Even 230 years after the publication of his revolutionary pamphlet, Thomas Paine's words still speak to the challenges of the American experience.


Terminator-Technologie ächten - Freie Saat statt tote Ernte

Pressemitteilung vom 10. Januar 2006

30 Organisation starten Kampagne gegen "Terminator-Technologie"

Gentechnisches Verfahren gefährdet weltweite Ernährungssicherheit

In einer gemeinsamen Kampagne fordern mehr als 30 Organisationen aus dem Umwelt-, Entwicklungs- und Agrarbereich, die so genannte "Terminator-Technologie" weltweit zu ächten. Mit diesem neuen gentechnischen Verfahren wollen Saatgutkonzerne Pflanzen unfruchtbar machen und damit verhindern, dass Landwirte einen Teil ihrer Ernte aufbewahren und im folgenden Jahr als Saatgut verwenden. Bisher wird die Anwendung dieser Technik durch ein Moratorium der Biodiversitätskonvention verhindert, doch dieses ist in Gefahr.

Die Kampagne unter dem Motto "Terminator-Technologie ächten - Freie Saat statt tote Ernte", die heute in Berlin vorgestellt wurde, richtet sich gegen diesen Versuch, die gefährliche Technik hoffähig zu machen. "Terminator-Technologie ist der Kopierschutz für Saatgut: Damit soll verhindert werden, dass weiterhin die überwiegende Mehrheit der Bauern das Saatgut aus der eigenen Ernte gewinnt", sagte Oliver Moldenhauer, Attac-Experte für geistige Eigentumsrechte. Rudolf Buntzel vom Evangelischen Entwicklungsdienst betonte die Gefahr gerade für kleine Landwirte im Süden: "1,4 Milliarden Menschen hängen direkt in ihrem Lebensunterhalt vom eigenen Saatgutnachbau ab. Terminator-Technologie ist lebensvernichtend, denn sie bringt diese Menschen um ihre Ernährungssicherheit."

Georg Janssen von der Arbeitsgemeinschaftliche Landwirtschaft (AbL) warnte: "Entweder können Bäuerinnen und Bauern bestimmen, was sie säen, und damit über die Vielfalt auf den Äckern entscheiden. Oder eine Handvoll multinationaler Saatgut-Unternehmen wird vom Acker bis zum Teller des Verbrauchers bestimmen, was angebaut und gegessen wird." Heike Moldenhauer, Gentechnik-Expertin beim Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, wies auf die ökologischen Gefahren der Terminator-Technologie hin: "Die genetische Eigenschaft der Samensterilität kann über Pollenflug auf Nachbarfelder oder in Wildpflanzen übertragen werden. Die Folge wären wirtschaftliche Einbußen bei Nutzpflanzen und die Gefährdung von Wildpflanzenpopulationen."

Nachdem eine Expertengruppe im Rahmen der Biodiversitätskonvention zu der Einschätzung gekommen war, dass die Terminator-Technologie nicht nur eine ökologische Katastrophe, sondern auch eine Bedrohung für die Ernährungssicherheit bedeuten kann, wurde ein weltweite Moratorium verhängt. Dieses Moratorium steht in der Gefahr, auf Druck der Regierungen, Neuseelands, Kanadas und Australiens auf der kommenden Vertragsstaatenkonferenz der Biodiversitätskonvention im März dieses Jahres gekippt zu werden.

Ziel der Kampagne ist es, zunächst möglichst viele Unterstützer für ein gemeinsames Positionspapier zu gewinnen. Darin fordern die unterzeichnenden Organisationen von der Bundesregierung, das Verbot der Terminator-Technologie im deutschen Gentechnik-Gesetz zu verankern. Zudem soll sich die Regierung dem Vorstoß, das internationale Moratorium zu beenden, entgegenstellen und sich stattdessen für eine Stärkung des weltweiten Verbots einsetzen.

Aufruf Terminator-Technologie ächten - „Freie Saat statt tote Ernte“


Seit Anfang 2005 ist die Terminator-Technologie wieder ins Blickfeld der internationalen Gentechnik-Debatte gerückt. Mittels Gentechnik werden bei der Terminator-Technologie, von der Saatgutindustrie auch als GURTs (Genetic Use Restriction Technologies) bezeichnet, Pflanzen so verändert, dass die Ernte nicht mehr keimen kann. Damit sollen Bauern gezwungen werden, jedes Jahr aufs Neue Saatgut zu kaufen. Dies stellt einen Angriff auf das Menschenrecht auf Nahrung dar, werden weltweit doch 80 Prozent des eingesetzten Saatguts aus der eigenen Ernte gewonnen.

Wie weit die Entwicklung der Technologie vorangeschritten ist, weiß im Moment außer den beteiligten Unternehmen niemand. Trotzdem wurden schon eine Reihe von Patenten auf die Terminator-Technologie angemeldet und erteilt, unter anderem an die deutsche Firma Bayer Crop Science.

Als 1998 dem amerikanischen Landwirtschaftsministerium und der Firma Delta & Pine Land das erste Terminator-Patent erteilt wurde, stieß dies weltweit auf scharfe Kritik. Die Mitgliedstaaten der Konvention über die Biologische Vielfalt (CBD) empfahlen 1999 ein Moratorium, das den weltweiten Anbau und Freisetzungsversuche von Terminator-Pflanzen vorläufig aufhielt. In einer Untersuchung im Rahmen der Konvention wurde begründet, dass eine solche Technologie nicht nur eine ökologische Katastrophe nach sich ziehen kann, sondern eine Gefährdung für den traditionellen Saatguttausch, die Vielfalt der Nutzpflanzen und damit eine Bedrohung der Ernährungssicherheit bedeutet.

Diese Tatsachen haben sich nicht geändert. Geändert hat sich lediglich die Argumentation der Saatgutindustrie. Seit kurzem bemüht sie sich, diese lebensfeindliche Technologie als wirksamen Schutz vor der Auskreuzung von gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen (GVO), also als Instrument der biologischen Sicherheit, zu verkaufen und so in internationalen Vertragswerken zu verankern. Das Problem der Auskreuzung von GVO soll nun mit einem weiteren technischen Verfahren – der Terminator-Technologie - bekämpft werden. Dieses Verfahren birgt jedoch eine ganze Reihe von Fehlermöglichkeiten, die durch das komplizierte Zusammenspiel der Gene entsteht, die in die Pflanze geschleust wurden. Terminator- Technologie ist daher kein Mittel zur Verhinderung von Kontamination durch Pollen oder Samen von GentechPflanzen, sondern dient ausschließlich den Konzernen.

Die Regierungen Kanadas, Neuseelands und Australiens versuchen, das Moratorium für die Kommerzialisierung von Terminator-Technologie auf der kommenden Vertragsstaatenkonferenz der Konvention über die Biologische Vielfalt im März 2006 zu kippen. Hiergegen protestieren die unterzeichnenden Organisationen aufs Schärfste.

Die Terminator-Technologie ist eine besonders gefährliche und zynische Form der Agro-Gentechnik. Sie bringt Bauern keinerlei landwirtschaftlichen Nutzen durch höherwertiges Saatgut, sondern zielt allein darauf ab, eine totale Kontrolle über das Saatgut und damit die Kontrolle über die Welternährung zu erlangen. Wer den Saatgut-Markt beherrscht, beherrscht einen Markt, den es immer geben wird:

Menschen müssen essen – es geht bei der Terminator-Technologie um nichts weniger als um die Kontrolle der Lebensgrundlagen.

Deshalb muss die Terminator-Technologie weltweit verboten werden.

Wir fordern...

die deutschen Vertreter auf der 8. Vertragsstaatenkonferenz zur Konvention über Biologische Vielfalt (COP8), die im März in Brasilien zusammentreten wird, auf,

* sich für eine Beibehaltung und Stärkung des De-facto-Moratoriums für die kommerzielle Nutzung und jegliche Freisetzungen mit der Terminator- Technologie einzusetzen und

* auf ein zeitlich unbegrenztes, weltweites Verbot der Terminator-Technologie im Rahmen der Konvention hinzuwirken.

Wir fordern zudem...

...den Deutschen Bundestag und die Bundesregierung auf,

* die Patentierung, Registrierung, Lizenzierung oder jede andere Form der Anerkennung geistiger Eigentumsrechte, die mit dieser Technologie einhergehen, zu verbieten,

* ein Verbot der Terminator-Technologie im deutschen Gentechnikgesetz zu verankern,

* Forschungsgelder der öffentlichen Hand nicht für Projekte zur Verfügung zu stellen, die geeignet sind, die Terminator-Technologie und ihre Entwicklung zu fördern und

* sich insbesondere im europäischen Kontext auf allen Ebenen für die Umsetzung der hier genannten Forderungen einzusetzen.

Die unterzeichnenden Organisationen sehen in der Entwicklung und Zulassung von Terminator-Technologie einen Angriff auf die weltweite Ernährungssicherheit. Sie stellt eine Form der Aneignung lebenswichtiger Ressourcen dar, die geächtet werden muss!

Für Rückfragen: Sandra Blessin, Tel. 040-392526 oder 0177-97 28 275, info@freie-saat.de

Die Kampagne "Terminator-Technologie ächten - Freie Saat statt tote Ernte" wird unterstützt von:

"Kein Patent auf Leben!"
Aktion 3. Welt Saar
Arbeitsgemeinschaft bäuerliche Landwirtschaft (AbL.)
Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Umweltbeauftragten in der Ev. Kirche in Deutschland (AGU)
Ausschuss für den Dienst auf dem Lande in der EKD
Bonner AK gegen Gentechnologie
Brot für die Welt
BUKO Agrar Koordination
BUKO-Kampagne gegen Biopiraterie
Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland (BUND)
Bund Ökologischer Lebensmittelwirtschaft (BÖLW)
Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft Evangelische Jugend im ländlichen Raum (BAG ejl)
Bündnis für die gentechnikfreie Landwirtschaft in Niedersachsen, Bremen und Hamburg
Bürgerinitiative gentechnikfreies Schleswig-Holstein
Coordination gegen BAYER-Gefahren
Dreschflegel e.V.
Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst (EED)
Evangelisches Bildungszentrum Hesselberg
Gen-ethisches Netzwerk
Gentechnikfreie Regionen in Deutschland
PAN Germany (Pestizid Aktionsnetzwerk)
Share e.V.
Umweltinstitut München
Verein zur Erhaltung der Nutzpflanzenvielfalt (VEN)
Zukunftsstiftung Landwirtschaft

Microchip Implants in Humans


Informant: Friends

Fitzgerald Maintains Focus on Rove

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is said to have spent the past month preparing evidence he will present to a grand jury alleging that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove knowingly made false statements to FBI and Justice Department investigators and lied under oath while he was being questioned about his role in the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity more than two years ago, according to sources knowledgeable about the probe.


Expanding presidential powers

Washington Times
by Nat Hentoff


As Congress begins to look into the president's authorization of the National Security Agency's warrantless searches of e-mails and phone calls into -- and out of -- the United States, a question many Americans are asking was posed to the president at a Dec. 19 press conference by Peter Baker of The Washington Post: 'If the global war on terrorism is to last for decades ... does that mean we're going to see ... a more or less permanent expansion of the unchecked power of the executive branch in American society?' The president had no direct answer, but he did say it was 'shameful' of the New York Times to break this story. However, the more we know about the porous nature of the president's defense of his authorization of the NSA's bypassing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, it's becoming clearer that the New York Times should not have held the story for a year at the Bush administration's request...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Bush's unlikely co-conspirators

by G. Pascal Zachary


President Bush deserves plenty of blame for secretly authorizing domestic spying by the National Security Agency. But some of the president's fiercest critics in Congress gave him the political cover to do so. The question why they did so says much about the nation's brittle democracy and how Democrats have covertly joined with Republicans to restore the imperial presidency and effectively remove any checks on the executive branch of the U.S. government...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Is it time for Cheney to go?

by Thomas L. Knapp


Another hospital visit -- this time for side effects of medicine he's been taking for a foot problem -- and so it's time for the question to be asked again: Is it time for Vice-President Dick Cheney to step down? I say 'yes,' but not for the reasons you probably think...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Has the age of vouchers ended?

ETC, phone home

National Review
by Adam B. Schaeffer


Has the age of vouchers ended? The Florida supreme court struck down vouchers last week in a disquieting decision that avoids federal issues entirely, thus evading an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court and opening up another rationale for denying vouchers to needy children. But Governor Jeb Bush's administration is quietly working on a plan to save school choice for thousands of children in Florida who use vouchers by using education tax credits instead. Although the recent court decision is a terrible blow against educational equity, it illustrates how important it is to pick the best policy in the first place. Education tax credits are quickly becoming, out of necessity, the last best hope for school choice in most of the country...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Are we giving away the greatest gift

The Price of Liberty
by Lady Liberty


It's becoming more and more obvious as time goes on that we're expected to say, write, and read the 'right' things; that we need to be careful of those with whom we associate, even loosely; that our travel and our activities will be monitored to ensure we behave in certain ways; and that those of us who don't toe the line will be added to lists and databases, visited by federal agents, and could even find our lifestyles compromised. If we don't have anything to hide, we're supposed to welcome random searches when we travel on airplanes or subways; we're expected to cooperate with being patted down like the meanest of criminals just because we happen to have a ticket to Sunday's game...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Counting the ways of governmental waste

The Free Liberal
by Fred E. Foldvary


Everybody knows that government is wasteful, but most of us have only a vague notion of the details of excessive spending. There is now a very useful book listing the federal projects that waste our resources and how this waste could be reduced. The book is Downsizing the Federal Government by Chris Edwards, published in 2005 by the Cato Institute. The U.S. federal government spent $2.5 trillion in 2005, most of which is either unnecessary or replaces programs better done by the states or by private enterprise. Edwards explains how the 'culture of spending' keeps expanding federal waste...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Imperial presidency, constitutional quicksand

Independent Institute
by Ivan Eland


After revelations about President Bush ordering surveillance of Americans without obtaining warrants, the boundaries of executive power will undoubtedly be one of the principal issues raised at the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. The conservative Alito has publicly endorsed the theory of the unitary executive, which takes a broad view of presidential authority. Alito's liberal critics say his record has been too obsequious to expanded executive power. The position of these two camps seems peculiar. Many of today's conservatives, such as Alito, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Cheney's chief of staff David Addington, believe that the presidency is not muscular enough. In fact, the vice president, contrary to most scholarship on the issue, feels that, in recent decades, the executive branch has been emasculated. Yet conservatives also tout their custodianship of the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. The nation's founders would turn over in their graves if they were to learn of the modern imperial presidency...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

GOP warms to curb on lobbying

Boston Globe


Worried that the case of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff may trigger a backlash at the polls this fall, Congress is showing new interest in sweeping changes to rules on lobbying, with Republican leaders poised to embrace major alterations they'd rejected when Democrats introduced them last year. Yesterday, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert announced that he would 'move forward aggressively and quickly to have the House of Representatives address lobbying reform.' 'Now is the time for action,' said Hastert, an Illinois Republican. He directed a top lieutenant, House Rules Committee chairman David Dreier, to spearhead the effort. Senate majority leader Bill Frist also publicly committed to changing laws and legislative rules to 'improve transparency and accountability,' shortly after Abramoff pleaded guilty last week in connection with a bribery scheme...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

US opens incoming mail on terror concerns



U.S. officials are opening personal mail that arrives from abroad when they deem it necessary to protect the country from terrorism, a Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman said Monday. News of the little-known practice follows revelations that the government approved eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without judicial oversight after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which sparked concern from civil liberties advocates and some lawmakers, who called for congressional hearings...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Judges belatedly briefed on domestic spying



The federal judges who were bypassed when the Bush administration ordered warrantless wiretaps in the United States received a secret briefing Monday on details of the surveillance. Separately, a former FBI director and other lawyers questioned whether the surveillance is legal. The classified briefing at the Justice Department had been requested by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, presiding judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Court denies DeLay's request dismissal request

Houston Chronicle


Texas' highest criminal court today rejected U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay's request to throw out criminal indictments against him or order an immediate trial on a charge of money laundering. DeLay, R-Sugar Land, had filed the request as part of an effort to get an immediate resolution to his case so he could regain his position as U.S. House majority leader. But DeLay on Saturday removed himself from contention for the spot, prompting a new House Republican caucus leadership election...


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp



Please sign the online petition to stop the execution of Clarence Ray Allen, at http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/ClarenceRayAllen

The state of California plans to execute Clarence Ray Allen at 12:01 am on January 17th, 2006, one day after his 76th birthday, and one day after the commemoration of the birthday of Martin Luther King Jr.

Allen is in extremely poor health, blind, and confined to a wheelchair. He recently suffered a heart attack, flatlined, and was revived by prison officials in order to enable his execution. If he is executed on the 17th, prison guards will have to carry him into the death chamber. For these reasons, even former San Quentin Prison Warden Danny Vazquez has come out against the execution, stating that "Allen's execution now would be a shameful act. Given his age, his infirmities, the punishment of the many years he has already spent on Death Row, his excellent behavior during that time and the very little natural life he has remaining, sparing Allen from execution would be an act of decency, compassion and justice."

Allen was convicted in 1982 for ordering the murders of three individuals while serving a life sentence at Folsom State Prison for the murder of a young woman in 1974. Billy Hamilton, the man who actually perpetrated the three murders, also received a death sentence.

As in virtually all death penalty cases in state of California, Allen's conviction and sentencing were contingent on racism, ineffective counsel, and jailhouse informants. Allen is Native American, all of the victims were white, and his case was tried in a rural, predominantly white county. California has a higher proportion of Native Americans on death row than any other state, and Native Americans nationwide are more likely to receive a death sentence than any other group.

In reviewing the quality of Allen's legal defense, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reported that Allen's "[t]rial counsel…failed sufficiently to investigate and adequately present available mitigating evidence" and that it is "overwhelmingly plain" that trial counsel's performance "fell below an objective standard of reasonableness."

The chief witnesses against Allen at trial were admitted participants in the crimes that he was charged with. The prosecutor secured their testimony by giving them benefits, including the promise that they would not be charged with the murders themselves. These witnesses had obvious reasons to lie, shifting blame and responsibility to Allen in order to protect themselves. At different times since the trial, each of these witnesses has admitted to lying at trial.

The California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice has been established to study exactly these kinds of flaws in California's system of capital punishment. The Justice Commission must report its recommendations to the Governor and Legislature by Dec. 31, 2007. No one should be executed while the Justice Commission is conducting this in-depth study.

Informant: Alice Kim

A measured response letter to Chernobyl nuclear disaster


Soviet Proof That Mobile Phones Do Cause Brain Damage


Many of us have successfully defeated Sprint and the other carriers, repeatedly


Who denounces the false experiment and the absence of "Health basis" in the mobile telephony?



More on Chernobyl: A published letter rebuttal to Professors Walton and Van der Putten.




FCC Levies $200,000 Fine under NEPA


Aspetuck Woods Group Meets with FCC Commissioner on Cell Tower National




Effects of Interference from Cellular Telephones on Aircraft Avionic


Money shouts


Cell Phones: You don't deserve brain cancer


Chernobyl bio-disater is a myth says two Irish professors of applied physics and medical physics


To evaluate the influence of electromagnetic waves (EMW)


"Bad reception": a victory case




FCC to Study Impact of Cell Phone Towers


Long-term RF study on animals starts amid exposure limits debate


New power line tech. may delay building new lines


Grocery shopping may never be the same


Paris: watch your Wi Fi


The sun-shined health

Guan X, Johansson O, "The sun-shined health", Europ Biol Bioelectromag 2005; 1: 420-423

To access go to http://www.ebab.eu.com/, click on "Volume 1 Issue 4", click on the title of the paper, write "olle.johansson@ki.se" as e-mail address and "ollejo" as password.

Olle Johansson,
assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit Department of Neuroscience Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm

Alzheimer mortality: why does it increase so fast in sparsely populated areas?

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O, "Alzheimer mortality - why does it increase so fast in sparsely populated areas?", Europ Biol Bioelectromag 2005; 1: 225-246

To access go to http://www.ebab.eu.com/, click on "Volume 1 Issue 3", click on the title of the paper, write "olle.johansson@ki.se" as e-mail address and "ollejo" as password:
http://www.ebab.eu.com/lv2v1/i3/Hallberg_Alzheimer.asp abstract: http://www.ebab.eu.com/dsp_abs.asp?s_aid=19&s_vol=1&s_iss=3

Olle Johansson,
assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit Department of Neuroscience Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm

Cancer studies 2006-01-14


Alzheimers and EMF/EMR toxicity


Exposure of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to electromagnetic fields associated with cellular phones leads to chromosomal instability


New NRPB Dose Assessment Methodology Report Published


'Phone threat' to air safety


UK plans to lower EMF limits




Arbeitsamt und Arbeitszwang, alltägliche Schikanen: Dauerbefragung

„Nach Ansicht von Wirtschaftsminister Wolfgang Clement bezieht jeder fünfte Erwerbslose zu Unrecht Leistungen. Zum Beleg seiner Missbrauchs-Visionen verweist der SPD-Mann auf eine Aktion, bei der im Sommer 2005 zahllose Erwerbslose angerufen – und teils nicht erreicht wurden. Aus dem Pilotprojekt wird nun eine Dauereinrichtung. Wie aus einem Schreiben des Vorstands der Bundesagentur für Arbeit an die Arbeitsgemeinschaften (ARGEn) hervorgeht, soll die »telefonische Bestandsklärung« bereits seit Monatsbeginn den 60 größten und ab spätestens Februar allen ARGEn zur Verfügung stehen. Die Bundesagentur gründet dafür eigens eine zentrale »Organisationseinheit«…“ Artikel von tos in Neues Deutschland vom 07.01.06


Aus: LabourNet, 10. Januar 2006

Kombilohn? Gemeint ist: Kombigewinn

Merkels Lohnmodell nützt lediglich den »Leistungsträger«-Haushalten. Vereinzelte Einstellung von Dienstmädchen wird als Wirtschaftspolitik verkauft. Artikel von Herbert Schui in junge Welt vom 09.01.2005


Aus: LabourNet, 10. Januar 2006

"Der UMTS Staat" oder "Die feindliche Übernahme der Demokratie?"



Am Mittwoch den 18.01.2006 um 19:30 Uhr spricht Prof. Dr. Karl Richter an der Universität Freiburg über das Thema:

Der UMTS Staat oder Die feindliche Übernahme der Demokratie

Eintritt ist frei.

Die genaue Einladung ist im Internet unter
http://www.ises-suedbaden.de/index.php?tab=1 abrufbar.

Nachricht von Ulrich Weiner


Gutachten Mobilfunk-Schäden



Prof. Dr. Richter 10-01-2006 Saarland

Liebe Mitstreiterinnen und Mitstreiter

- Vor Ort, die nicht zu unserem engeren Team gehören, aber gelegentlich informiert sein wollen, - im 'Netzwerk Risiko Mobilfunk', ohne dessen Rückhalt wir unsere gegenwärtige MF-Politik nicht hätten aufbauen können, - im Umfeld von Bürgerwelle und der von Herrn Hartenstein informierten Bürger, die uns seit langem unterstützen; einen besonderen Dank auch an Jochen Diefenthaler aus Bayern; - in Salzburg, wo wir neue Kollegen und Freunde gefunden haben, deren 'know how', Engagement und Mut für uns zur Ermutigung neuer Schritte erheblich beigetragen hat, - und last not least im nahen Luxemburg und in den Niederlanden!

Anbei erstmals in diese erweiterte Runde einige Informationen, die Einblicke in unsere Arbeit, Organisation, aber auch unsere Auseinandersetzungen vor Ort bieten. Besonders wichtig ist für uns das Gutachten von Frau Dr. med. Waldmann-Selsam und die Erfahrung einer Mobilfunkdebatte im Landtag des Saarlandes. Ich habe gerade den Mitgliedern unseres 'Bürgerrats' und 'Bürgerforums', aber auch einigen Politikern, die gut mit uns zusammenarbeiten, geschrieben: "Jede politische Dummheit ist ein Geschenk Gottes. Eine Häufung solcher Dummheiten ist die beste Bedingung des Fortschritts!" Die Bedingung für Fortschritt ist so gesehen im Saarland gut.

Eine zweite Sendung, die Ihnen in naher Zukunft z. I. zugeht, wird auf die geschilderten Verhältnisse mit einem deutlichen Offenen Brief an den Ministerpräsidenten reagieren und seiner Politik ein Manifest kritischer Demokraten entgegenstellen. Darin Vorschläge, wie man eine bessere Politik machen könnte und sollte.

Beide Sendungen im Sinne wechselseitiger Information(smöglichkeit) und 'bürgerlicher' Vernetzung und nicht in der unbedingten Erwartung, dass sich überforderte Freunde auch noch in die Probleme der Nachbarn vertiefen.

Mit Dank und herzlichen Grüßen

Karl Richter
Prof. Dr. Karl Richter Preußenstr. 11, 66386 St. Ingbert,
Tel. 06894/87469, Fax 06894/889946

*Sent:* Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:30 PM
*Subject:* Fw: Gutachten Mobilfunk-Schäden

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren aus Presse, Rundfunk und Fernsehen,

anbei geht Ihnen unverändert eine Sendung zu, die Sie vor nahezu einem Monat erreichen sollte. Selbst den Weihnachtsbrief haben wir nicht entfernt; er ist chronologisch, leider nicht in der Sache überholt.

Dass die Sendung am 9.12. nur an Regierung, Parteien, politische Institutionen sowie einige Bürgergruppierungen weitergegeben wurde, nicht auch an die angegebenen weiteren Adressaten, hat einen einfachen Grund. Ein externer Journalist trat telefonisch an mich heran, bat mich um das Material und darum, im Interesse einer exklusiven Auswertung für das Fernsehen bis auf weiteres von dem Weiterversand der Sendung abzusehen. Ich habe ihm dieses und noch weiteres Material überlassen. Er aber hat sich nie wieder bei mir gemeldet, so dass ich mir der Ehrlichkeit seiner Interessen inzwischen nicht mehr so sicher bin. Umgekehrt wurden Ärzte und Wissenschaftler, die sich in selbstloser Weise für betroffene Bürger auch in Völklingen eingesetzt hatten, per Internet und in der Presse von Nachbarländern auf einem Niveau diffamiert, dass ich am liebsten nach Grönland auswandern würde. Das aber geschah sicher nicht im Auftrag wirklicher Journalisten, sondern in dem verdeckt arbeitenden Agenten, die sich z.B. unter Decknamen wie 'Raylauncher' und 'Bernhard' zu Wort melden. Wir kommen auf die Vorgänge noch zurück.

Sonst ist inzwischen in der Situation der im Gutachten von Frau Dr. med. Waldmann-Selsam genannten Völklinger Familie(n) nichts geschehen, da die Grenzwerte ja eingehalten waren und auch das Saarländische Gesundheitsministerium sich zum engagiertesten Anwalt der eingesetzten Technik und ihrer Unbedenklichkeit gemacht hat, was eigentlich nicht seine gesetzliche Aufgabe ist, für die Bürger Steuern zahlen. Die Familie, die nur noch zum Essen und Kochen ihre Wohnung aufsucht, wird das Elternhaus demnächst mit hohem Verlust verkaufen und verkaufen müssen, weil sie anders nicht mehr ohne schwerste gesundheitliche Beeinträchtigungen leben kann. Wie wir die Vorgänge auf der Grundlage einer industrieunabhängigen Forschung beurteilen, werden wir im neuen Jahr 2006 mit Hilfe von weiteren medizinischen Gutachten und erfahrenen Juristen zeigen. In einem Offenen Brief und einem begleitenden Manifest kritischer Demokraten werden wir den Ministerpräsidenten des Landes und alle unten genannten Adressaten demnächst über unser Jahresprogramm 2006 informieren und sagen, dass es uns inzwischen nicht mehr nur um den Mobilfunk, sondern um die Legitimation eines politischen Systems und um Fragen einer politischen Kultur geht, die Fälle wie denjenigen in Völklingen nicht nur zulassen, sondern überhaupt erst möglich gemacht haben.

Als Antwort auf eine seit zwei Jahren durchgehaltene Politik des Totschweigens und Aussitzens jeglicher Kritik, die wir bisher nicht für das Charakteristikum einer starken Demokratie und selbstbewusster Eigenständigkeit gehalten hätten, machen wir unsere Auseinandersetzung gegenwärtig auf unserer Homepage http://www.buerger-machen-mobil.de frei zugänglich, weil Öffentlichkeit in manchen Situationen zum wichtigsten Schutz der Demokratie wird. Titel, die wir lange nahezu verschwiegen haben, weil sie uns bei der Vertretung von Bürgerinteressen eher hinderlich schienen, werden wieder genutzt, um nicht so leicht diffamiert zu werden.

Mit unseren Informationen für Medienvertreter wenden wir uns in Zukunft aber nur noch an Personen, zu denen wir einen persönlichen Gesprächskontakt haben.

Eine Einladung zu einer Veranstaltung, die Rehlinger Bürger organisiert haben, füge ich unten an. Leider hat Staatssekretär Altmaier, der zunächst seine Teilnahme zugesagt hatte und nur wenige hundert Meter vom Ort des Geschehens entfernt wohnt, die Rehlinger Bürger inzwischen wissen lassen, dass er an diesem Abend des 12. in dringender Angelegenheit unerwartet verhindert sei. Noch unbestätigten Informationen zufolge hat offenbar auch Herr Schreiner dem Bürgermeister vor Ort Probleme bezüglich seines Kommens signalisiert. Dabei hätten wir gerade von diesen beiden Parteien gern einige klärende Worte zur Begründung der unvergleichlich aggressiven, aber auch unvergleichlich schlecht informierten Mobilfunkpolitik dieses Landes gehört, zumal die Empfehlungen von Prof. Langguth, die die Mobilfunkpolitik des Landes fundieren, bis heute geheimgehalten werden.

Es wird aber selbst ohne die für die Zustände verantwortlichen großen Parteien noch interessante Gespräche geben. Obwohl ich als einer der Sprecher des Bündnisses saarländischer Bürgerinitiativen Mobilfunk nicht der Organisator der Veranstaltung in Rehlingen bin, lade ich auch im Namen unseres Bündnisses hiermit Medienvertreter herzlich dazu ein. Vielen, die sich im letzten Jahr bereits für unsere Arbeit interessiert haben, danken wir dafür nachdrücklich. In einem kleinen Land, wo man immer wieder die Einschüchterung und Angst ganzer Berufsgruppen angesichts des heiklen Themas und der geballten Ansammlung von politischer und finanzieller Macht beobachten kann, haben wir dazu besonderen Anlass.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Karl Richter

Ein Bürgergespräch mit Bundes- und Landespolitikern über die umstrittene Aufstellung von Mobilfunkantennen in Ortschaften bietet die Gemeinde Rehlingen-Siersburg. Donnerstag, 12.Januar (19 Uhr) im Großen Sitzungssaal des Rathauses Siersburg die Bundestagsabgeordneten Peter Altmaier (CDU) und Ottmar Schreiner (SPD) sowie die Landtagsabgeordneten Hubert Ulrich (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen) und Karl-Josef Jochem (FDP) mit den Bürgern.

Gesundheitliche und materielle Schäden durch Mobilfunk

*Sent:* Friday, December 09, 2005 3:39 PM
*Subject:* Gutachten Mobilfunk-Schäden

*Bündnis saarländischer Bürgerinitiativen Mobilfunk*
*An Regierung, Parlamentarier, Parteien, *
*Medienvertreter, Wissenschaftler, Ärzte und kritische Bürger aller Lebensbereiche!*
*Betrifft: /Gesundheitliche und materielle Schäden durch Mobilfunk/*

** Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,

im Anhang dieser E-Mail gehen Ihnen *vier Texte* zu, die untereinander eng zusammengehören:

Das *Gutachten* von Frau Dr. med. Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam (Bamberg) beschreibt am Beispiel von Familien aus Völklingen schwere gesundheitliche Schädigungen infolge der Aufstellung von Mobilfunkantennen mitten in Wohngebieten. Mit diesem Text starten wir eine Reihe gutachtlicher Sicherungen von gesundheitlichen und materiellen Schäden als Ergebnis einer aggressiven Mobilfunkpolitik. Wir machen die Dokumente öffentlich zugänglich, soweit es die Betroffenen ausdrücklich wünschen.

In einem Begleitschreiben fordert unser Bündnis saarländischer Bürgerinitiativen Mobilfunk von den Verantwortlichen und Zuständigen die unverzügliche Beendigung dieser Schädigungen und wendet sich allgemeiner gegen unzureichende Vorstellungen von technischem Fortschritt und Demokratie.

Ein kritischer Bericht über eine *Mobilfunkdebatte im Landtag des Saarlandes* am 23. 11. 05 beschreibt das politische System, das diese bürgerferne Wirklichkeit ermöglicht hat und aufrecht erhält. Er lädt zum Schluss Regierung und Parlamentarier zu einer Veranstaltung nach Salzburg ein, um mit uns gemeinsam über das Verhältnis von Mobilfunk, Menschen- und Bürgerrecht nachzudenken.

Angesichts diffamierender Äußerungen von Regierenden und Abgeordneten über kritische Bürger im Verlauf besagter Debatte fügen wir eine Information über Ziele und Arbeit unseres Bündnisses an - als Beispiel, wie bürgernah, selbstlos, preiswert, parteiübergreifend, unabhängig, und dabei effektiv demokratische Arbeit /auch/ funktionieren kann. Übergeben Sie uns am besten die Regierung, und das Land hat wieder mehr Geld für Kultur!

Wir fügen der Dokumentation *drei Fragen* an:

1. Wer trägt die Verantwortung für eine Politik, die im Zusammenwirken von politischer und industrieller Macht, mit Hilfe einer Kombination von Halbwahrheiten und ergänzenden Taktiken strategischer Blindheit Quälereien und Schädigungen von Bürgern als demokratische Kultur verkauft?

2. Wo liegen die Handlungsspielräume der Kommunen, die sich - unabhängig von Parteidenken - bald in ermutigender Weise den Nöten der Bürger öffnen, bald die Kaltschnäuzigkeit der Landespolitik noch zu übertreffen versuchen? Es ist Heuchelei, wenn Sprecher der Regierung und aller Parteien in einer Landtagsdebatte versichern, wie wichtig in der gegebenen Situation die Mitwirkung der Kommunen wäre - die sie wenig zuvor in mobilfunkgeeigneter Weise drastisch beschnitten haben!

3. Wer vor allem hilft jener immer größeren Zahl gequälter und geschädigter Bürger? Regierende und Parlamentarier auf grenzwertberuhigten Sesseln tun es mit Sicherheit nicht. Das an sich zuständige Gesundheitsministerium hat sich mit Dr. med. Weil an die Spitze regierungsamtlich tätiger Verharmloser gestellt, die dem Volk die Erkenntnisse einer (zu einem ungewöhnlich hohen Prozentsatz industriefinanzierten) Forschung als ganze Wahrheit aufzubinden versuchen. Autoritäre Regierungsstile, kurze Dienstwege, nachweisliche Einschüchterungen und eine eher eingeschränkte Medienvielfalt haben inzwischen zu einem Klima beigetragen, in dem wir die nötige Hilfe mehr und mehr außerhalb dieser Region suchen müssen - und finden: bei Ärzten in Bayern und Baden-Württemberg, Wissenschaftlern und Technikern im ganzen süd- und mitteldeutschen Raum, bei Prof. Dr. Ulrich Schöndorf, dem Staatsanwalt im Holzschutzmittelprozess, der sich nun auch der Schädigungen durch Mobilfunk annehmen will. Zum Nachdenken über das Verhältnis von Mobilfunk, Bürger- und Menschenrecht gehen wir inzwischen besser ins nahe Ausland - nach Luxemburg, die Niederlande oder jetzt eben am 16.12. nach Salzburg.

Wenn das alles Demokratie sein soll, dann möge man nach ersten Flirts mit Bill Gates vielleicht sogar den amerikanischen Präsidenten G. Bush in unser Land holen. Er hat noch mehr Macht, die demokratische Souveränität politischer Apparate und die Herrschaft der Industrie über das Volk zu stabilisieren!

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Prof. Dr. Karl Richter, RA Hermann Wittebrock, Sabine Goebel und Judith Hemm

The moving of the cancer (Carla Díez)


Warum psychiatrische Zwangsbehandlung Folter ist

Thema der Januar-Sendung des Dissidentenfunks am Donnerstag, den 12.1. um 16 Uhr ist: Warum psychiatrische Zwangsbehandlung Folter ist

Es geht um die Begründung dafür, dass psychiatrische Zwangsbehandlung zurecht als Folter bezeichnet wird, weil sie Folter ist.

Dazu haben wir zunächst ein Interview mit dem Direktor des Deutschen Instituts für Menschenrechte, Dr. Heiner Bielefeldt geführt. Danach vertiefen wir die Frage in einem Gespräch mit Prof. Wolf-Dieter Narr. In einem dritten Schritt stellen wir unsere Analyse in den Zusammenhang der aktuellen Diskussion über Folter.

Wiederholung der Sendung am 26.1.06 um 16 Uhr


Wir senden an jedem 2. und 4. Donnerstag im Monat von 16 bis 17 Uhr im Offenen Kanal Berlin UKW: 97,2 MHz (Kabel: 92,6), oder im Internet unter http://www.okb.de/radiostream.htm kann man den Livestream empfangen (mit dem Winamp Mediaplayer sollte das kein Problem sein).

In dem Archiv in der Dissidentenfunk Homepage:
http://www.dissidentenfunk.de finden Sie die GEMA-freien Teile der vergangenen Sendungen als Audio- und Textdateien sowie weitere Informationen zu den einzelnen Sendungen:

aus 2005:
Dezember..25 Jahre Irren-Offensive
November..Das Celler Urteil gegen Zwangsbehandlung und die Menschenrechte
Oktober...Bedingungsloses Grundeinkommen September...Antipsychiatrie und die Linken
Mai.......Faulheit (und die Folgen)
April.....Prinzhorn - "Entartete" Kunst - Biennale Meine Welt März......Patientenverfügung
Februar...Irrenoffensive - die Oper

aus 2004:
Dezember..Ambulante Zwangsbehandlung in Bremen
Oktober...Das Gert-Postel-Experiment
September.Psychiatrie - ein Witz
Juli......Zwangsbetreuung und die geplante Änderung des Betreuungsrechts

Werner-Fuß-Zentrum Scharnweberstr. 29, 10247 Berlin
http://www.antipsychiatrie.de und



Carla Díez, to which the future with the excuse of the great progress for the humanity, has been denied


Your cell phone records are for sale


January 5, 2006

BY FRANK MAIN Crime Reporter

The Chicago Police Department is warning officers their cell phone records are available to anyone -- for a price. Dozens of online services are selling lists of cell phone calls, raising security concerns among law enforcement and privacy experts.

Criminals can use such records to expose a government informant who regularly calls a law enforcement official.

Suspicious spouses can see if their husband or wife is calling a certain someone a bit too often.

And employers can check whether a worker is regularly calling a psychologist -- or a competing company.

Some online services might be skirting the law to obtain these phone lists, according to Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has called for legislation to criminalize phone record theft and use.

In some cases, telephone company insiders secretly sell customers' phone-call lists to online brokers, despite strict telephone company rules against such deals, according to Schumer.

And some online brokers have used deception to get the lists from the phone companies, he said.

"Though this problem is all too common, federal law is too narrow to include this type of crime," Schumer said last year in a prepared statement.

The Chicago Police Department is looking into the sale of phone records, a source said.

Late last month, the department sent a warning to officers about Locatecell.com, which sells lists of calls made on cell phones and land lines.

"Officers should be aware of this information when giving out their personal cell phone numbers to the general public," the bulletin said. "Undercover officers should also be aware of this information if they occasionally call personal numbers such as home or the office, from their [undercover] ones."

Test got FBI's calls in 3 hours

To test the service, the FBI paid Locatecell.com $160 to buy the records for an agent's cell phone and received the list within three hours, the police bulletin said.

Representatives of Data Find Solutions Inc., the Tennessee-based operator of Locatecell.com, could not be reached for comment.

Frank Bochte, a spokesman for the FBI in Chicago, said he was aware of the Web site.

"Not only in Chicago, but nationwide, the FBI notified its field offices of this potential threat to the security of our agents, and especially our undercover agents," Bochte said. "We need to educate our personnel about the dangers posed by individuals using this site and others like it. We are stressing that they should be careful in their cellular use."

How well do the services work? The Chicago Sun-Times paid $110 to Locatecell.com to purchase a one-month record of calls for this reporter's company cell phone. It was as simple as e-mailing the telephone number to the service along with a credit card number. The request was made Friday after the service was closed for the New Year's holiday.

'Most powerful investigative tool'

On Tuesday, when it reopened, Locatecell.com e-mailed a list of 78 telephone numbers this reporter called on his cell phone between Nov. 19 and Dec. 17. The list included calls to law enforcement sources, story subjects and other Sun-Times reporters and editors.

Ernie Rizzo, a Chicago private investigator, said he uses a similar cell phone record service to conduct research for his clients. On Friday, for instance, Rizzo said he ordered the cell phone records of a suburban police chief whose wife suspects he is cheating on her.

"I would say the most powerful investigative tool right now is cell records," Rizzo said. "I use it a couple times a week. A few hundred bucks a week is well worth the money."

Only financial info protected?

In July, the Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a petition with the Federal Communications Commission seeking an end to the sale of telephone records.

"We're very concerned about Locatecell," said Chris Jay Hoofnagle, senior counsel for the center. "This is the company that sold the phone records of a Canadian official to a reporter 'no questions asked.' "

Schumer has called for legislation to criminalize the "stealing and selling" of cell phone logs. He also urged the Federal Trade Commission to set up a unit to stop it.

He said a common method for obtaining cell phone records is "pretexting," involving a data broker pretending to be a phone's owner and duping the phone company into providing the information.

"Pretexting for financial data is illegal, but it does not include phone records," Schumer said. "We already have protections for our financial information. We ought to have it for the very personal information that can be gleaned from telephone records."

fmain suntimes com

Informant: Scott Munson

Will Jackgate Destroy the GOP?

David Corn speculates on the possibility that the Abramoff scandal might grow larger than Abramoff's wide-ranging dealings. "Once prosecutors penetrate a corrupt organization (say, the mob) and begin nailing people, they frequently find sources who squeal on others and disclose crimes unrelated to what brought the investigators knocking."


Egypt 'Has Proof' US Questioned Suspects in Romania

A fax sent by the Egyptian foreign ministry to its embassy in London stated that more than 20 Iraqis and Afghans had been questioned at a US-run base in Romania.


The Case Against Alito

There's reason to think that Alito's views on executive power are the main reasons Bush wants him on the Court.


From Information Clearing House

Jack Abramoff's, former firm takes survival course

Lawyers for the firm represented George W. Bush in the weeks after the disputed 2000 election. Its partnership ranks include high-powered lawyers like John Scalia, the son of Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court.


From Information Clearing House

A Donor Who Had Big Allies

In a case that echoes the Jack Abramoff influence-peddling scandal, two Northern California Republican congressmen used their official positions to try to stop a federal investigation of a wealthy Texas businessman who provided them with political contributions.


Cracks in an evil edifice

America's monstrous system of commercial political lobbying has long needed to be cut down to size. In Washington, more than 35,000 professional lobbyists now spend at least $5bn every year trying to influence the votes of members of the US Congress.


From Information Clearing House

Angry and Furious at the Collaborationist Democrats

Representative Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House, and Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, a man known for some sensitivity to civil liberties infringements, and a substantial number of congressmen, plus the New York Times, all knew of Bush's illegal spying.


From Information Clearing House

Ugly phrase conceals an uglier truth

Behind the US Government's corruption of language lies a far greater perversion, writes Salman Rushdie.


From Information Clearing House

15-Year-Old Combatant to Face Guantanamo Trial Three Years Later

Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen, faces imminent trial by military commission at Guantanamo Bay for war crimes he had allegedly committed at the age of 15, his lawyers say.


U.S. Warns the Netherlands

A decision not to send more troops in Afghanistan would be damaging for Dutch interests in the US, former American diplomat Paul Bremer III warned on Monday.


From Information Clearing House

Losing their minds

More U.S. soldiers than ever are sustaining serious brain injuries in Iraq. But a significant number of them are being misdiagnosed, forced to wait for treatment or even being called liars by the Army.


From Information Clearing House

Iraqi widows feel lost in land that cannot provide

Behind the daily bloodshed and attacks that make headlines across the world, there is a growing population of widows.


From Information Clearing House

MPs leaked Bush plan to hit al-Jazeera

Two Labour MPs have defied the Official Secrets Act by passing on the contents of a secret British document revealing how President George Bush wanted to bomb the Arabic TV station, al-Jazeera.


From Information Clearing House

Like arsenic in the water supply, lobbyists have poisoned Washington

Both Democrats and Republicans have got rich off the millions that flow to those in power, leaving the poor sidelined

By Gary Younge

Court papers reveal that this key financier of the Bush administration's high-minded agenda of moral piety is a foul-mouthed, greedy bigot. In intercepted emails, he refers to his Native American clients - whom he played off against each other for millions of dollars which he then used to pamper politicians - as "morons", "monkeys", "f... troglodytes" and "losers".


How Many Iraqis Have Died Since the US Invasion in 2003?

30,000? No. 100,000? No.


President Bush's off-hand summation last month of the number of Iraqis who have so far died as a result of our invasion and occupation as "30,000, more or less" was quite certainly an under-estimate. The true number is probably hitting around 180,000 by now, with a possibility, as we shall see, that it has reached as high as half a million.


Polar Bears Face New Toxic Threat: Flame Retardants

Already imperiled by melting ice and a brew of toxic chemicals, polar bears throughout the Arctic, particularly in remote dens near the North Pole, face an additional threat as flame retardants originating largely in the United States are building up in their bodies.


Dems to Attack Alito's Credibility at Hearings

Senate Democrats signaled yesterday they intend to pursue a two-punch attack in confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito this week, criticizing his conservative judicial philosophy as extreme while questioning his credibility as uncertain.


Jean Bricmont debunks humanitarian imperialism


Informant: jensenmk

From ufpj-news



January 9, 2006

From: International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration



When: 1:30 p.m. January 10, 2006
Where: The White House, Walk-in Gate, across from Lafayette Park
http://www.bushcommission.org Contact: Connie Julian 917-449-9064, or Janet Yip 212-941-8086, or e-mail: commission@nion.us

An unprecedented series of indictments alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity, in five separate areas, on moral, political, and legal grounds, will be delivered by a citizens’ tribunal to President Bush at the front gate of the White House this Tuesday, January 10th.

Named in the indictments are: President of the United States George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, U.S. Army Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, U.S. Army Major General Geoffrey Miller, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, et al.

The indictments will be delivered to the White House by:

Retired CIA analyst Ray McGovern, authors William Blum and Larry Everest, Code Pink, Mike Hersh (Progressive Democrats of America/After Downing Street), Kevin Zeese (Director, Democracy Rising; candidate for U.S. Senate in Maryland), Travis Morales (World Can’t Wait--Drive Out the Bush Regime) and others TBA.

A press conference will follow delivery of indictments, which will also be delivered to the Department of Justice.

The indictments result from preparatory work and testimony presented in New York City in October 2005, before the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration which featured former UN envoy to Iraq Denis Halliday, Guantanamo prisoners’ lawyer Michael Ratner, and former State Department officer Ann Wright. The Commission's second tribunal will be held at Riverside Church and the Columbia University Law School in New York, January 20-22. Witnesses will include Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, former British ambassador Craig Murray, and former arms inspector Scott Ritter, among many more. The indictments allege war crimes and crimes against humanity authorized by the Bush Administration in relation to:

1) Wars of Aggression, particular reference to Iraq and Afghanistan;

2) Torture and Indefinite Detention;

3) Destruction of the Global Environment, particular reference to distortion of science and obstruction of international efforts to stem global warming;

4) Attacks on Global Public Health and Reproductive Rights, particular reference to the potentially genocidal effects of enforcing abstinence only, global gag rule, distortion of science, and restriction of generic drugs; and

5) Failure of Bush administration, despite foreknowledge, to protect life during and after Hurricane Katrina.

Appended to these indictments will be the demand for investigation of the war crimes of Tony Blair and George Bush submitted by prominent British citizens to the UN Secretary General and the UK Attorney General.

The commission was organized by the Not in Our Name Statement of Conscience and is endorsed by: Center for Constitutional Rights, National Lawyers Guild, After Downing Street.org and others, including Former Sen. James Abourezk, former British MP Tony Benn, authors Gore Vidal and Howard Zinn, poet Lawrence Ferlinghetti, and actor Edward Asner.

Charter, full indictments, standards for judgment, and audio and video coverage of the first session:


Informant: C. Clark Kissinger

From ufpj-news

Transmission line aplication: response to an extensive EMF info request also from Dr. Bailey/Exponent

We need rebuttals!

Forward to experts, make them aware about our transmission Line application:


From: Humphrey, Lavern
Subject: FortisBC Nk'Mip filing of Dr. Bailey Report as noted in Jan 6 06 cover letter

The attached document has been posted to the BC Utilities Commission website on January 9 2006 as Exhibit B-5 and will be sent either via courier or mail to all registered intervenors.


Lavern Humphrey
Executive Assistant FortisBC Inc.
1290 Esplanade, Box 130 Trail BC V1R 4L4
Ph: 250 368 0386
Fx: 866 605 9431

Informant: Hans Karow


With regards of a transmission line application before the BC Utilities Commission, you might be interested in my extensive info request to our local power company and their response, that includes a response on their behalf by Dr. William Bailey at Exponent/New York, please see following Exhibits B-4 and B-5 by direct-clicking on there

B-4 Submitted: 06/01/2006 4:36:00 PM Letter dated January 6, 2006 filing Responses to Commission Information Request No. 2 and Intervenor Information Requests No. 1

B-5 Submitted: 09/01/2006 3:32:00 PM Letter dated January 9, 2006 filing a report by Dr. W.H. Bailey of Exponent as reference in response to Mr. Karow’s Information Requests 3.9, 3.10 and 3.18.1

Or got to :


I would appreciate your comment -if possible- a rebuttal if you see some grounds for a rebuttal.

The BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) has not allowed any experts’ participant assistant funding, normally available. Therefore we people have no qualified defense available. BCUC decides court-like: decision is made on evidence provided from either side.

We people are not given the opportunities like power companies: contracting one of the best industry consulting company (Exponent/New York), all paid not by Fortis or Fortis shareholders, but by us, the people, the very electricity rate payers! We, as ratepayers, who pay for everything what bears the “Fortis” name (generation plants, transmission/distribution lines, substations, buildings, equipmemnts, ….screwdrivers….Fortis employees’ and CEO’s wages…..at the same time we don’t get a penny for hiring experts of or choice and for our defense.

For the second time I will ask BCUC to allow us experts / participant funding, as well as a postponement of the on Jan 21. set oral hearing until after another major 230 kV TL hearing in Vancouver which starts Feb. 6 and will last about 4-5 weeks.

Please distribute to other fellow independent experts for their information.

Thank you,


Please find 3 attachments:


Do the Facts Support the President's Claims about the Economy?


U.S. Supreme Court to Decide If Unlawfully Seized Evidence Can Be Used By Police


A Reinstated Military Draft?


Challenging Abramoff's "Artificial Aristocracy"


Alito's Fantasy World


Iraq: Just a Coup Away


Ministers Warned of Huge Rise in Nuclear Waste


US Troops Seize Award-Winning Iraqi Journalist


Minimum Wage Fight Sidesteps Washington


Bush-Authorized Spying Spills Into Alito Hearings


Senate Moves Towards Forced Vaccinations

Zeus Note: This legislation was passed just before Christmas. Below are a collection of related articles. Some of the links that no longer work have been taken out.

From: Emma Holister Emma's cartoons attached to this article Senate Moves Towards Forced Vaccinations, Vaccine Damage Immunity for Drug Companies Associated Press | December 2, 2005



By creating a federal agency shielded from public scrutiny, some lawmakers think they can speed the development and testing of new drugs and vaccines needed to respond to a bioterrorist attack or super-flu pandemic.

The proposed Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency, or BARDA, would be exempt from long-standing open records and meetings laws that apply to most government departments, according to legislation approved Oct. 18 by the Senate health committee.

Those exemptions would streamline the development process, safeguard national security and protect the proprietary interests of drug companies, say Republican backers of the bill. The legislation also proposes giving manufacturers immunity from liability in exchange for their participation in the public-private effort.

"We must ensure the federal government acts as a partner with the private sector, providing the incentives and protections necessary to bring more and better drugs and vaccines to market faster," Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., said when the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions approved the bill.

The agency would provide the funding for development of treatments and vaccines to protect the United States from natural pandemics as well as chemical, biological and radiological agents.

But it is the secrecy and immunity provisions of the legislation that have alarmed patient rights and open government advocates. The agency would be exempt from the Freedom of Information and Federal Advisory Committee acts, both considered crucial for monitoring government accountability.

"There is no other agency that I am aware of where the agency is totally exempt either from FOIA or FACA," said Pete Weitzel, coordinator of the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government. The coalition is an alliance of journalism groups, including the American Society of Newspaper Editors and Associated Press Managing Editors, that wrote to lawmakers seeking amendments to the bill. "That is a cause for major concern and should raise major policy concerns," Weitzel said.

Burr spokesman Doug Heye said the provisions would keep competitors from gaining proprietary information through FOIA. However, confidential business information already is exempt from FOIA.

"There's no secrecy involved in BARDA," Heye said. "That is absolutely false. This is an agency that will be putting out information daily."

Some Democrats question whether the public would accept drugs or vaccines developed in conjunction with the agency, citing the abortive 2003 effort to vaccinate 500,000 front-line health care workers against smallpox. Only about 40,000 workers ultimately received the vaccine amid concerns about the vaccine's safety, which health authorities initially downplayed.

"Republican leaders in Congress are now proposing a plan that would make exactly the same mistake," Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said in a statement. "Their plan will protect companies that make ineffective or harmful medicines, and because it does not include compensation for those injured by a vaccine or drug, it will discourage first responders and patients from taking medicines to counter a biological attack or disease outbreak."

The bill does provide for limited compensation. However, another provision would grant drug companies immunity unless "willful misconduct" can be shown.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America said it was reviewing the bill. Another industry group, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, declined comment.

The National Vaccine Information Center, an advocacy group, called the legislation "a drug company stockholder's dream and a consumer's worst nightmare."

The proposed law comes amid growing concern about pandemics and the government's ability to meet such threats. For instance, the United State needs another three to five years to develop the manufacturing capacity to produce 300 million doses of flu vaccine, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."

The agency would improve on Project BioShield, a barely two-year-old program also meant to encourage production of vaccines and drugs, Heye said.

"While some progress has been made, we still haven't seen the participation from companies, universities and research institutions in developing vaccines we might need to protect us from the next threat, whatever that might be," Heye said. "One of the reasons is (they) don't want to put their very existence on the line."

Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, said the agency as proposed would represent a setback to decades of progress in opening up to the public the process of testing the safety and efficacy of drugs.

"These provisions are extremely dangerous," Wolfe said. "The fact that they are being proposed, really exploiting people's fears about pandemics and epidemics, is outrageous and goes backward on the progress on the use of the Freedom of Information Act and Federal Advisory Committee Act to increase public scrutiny and increase the correctness of decisions that are made."

Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike agree the drug industry needs some protections to encourage it to produce emergency stocks of vaccines and drugs, but Democrats have balked at providing blanket immunity without first establishing a compensation fund for patients.

Republicans are pushing for liability protections for vaccine manufacturers on other fronts as well. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is seeking to add such protections to a defense appropriations bill.

Frist spokeswoman Amy Call said drug company concerns about liability are real.

"There's really no financial incentive for them to get into the market, sell to the government at a reduced rate and then open themselves up to losses that could potentially bankrupt them," Call said.

The push for liability exemptions may force the Burr bill to the sidelines until the next session of Congress, Republican and Democratic aides said. But Call said Frist intends to pursue the legislation.

Thanks to Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath, for sending the articles below:- http://www.nccn.net IMMUNITY FOR THE DRUG INDUSTRY 22/12/05 - Written by the Democratic Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Staff, addressing scandalous language added in once again by Senator Frist, in a must pass DoD appropriations bill:

In the middle of the night, Republican leaders attached sweeping, never-before-seen immunity for drug companies into the Department of Defense Appropriations Conference Report. The language constitutes an unprecedented pharmaceutical industry wish-list of liability protections that go way beyond avian flu preparedness and that will allow the industry to injure or kill Americans with contaminated drugs and vaccines and never be held accountable. This language is broader than any House or Senate bill and has never been considered by any committee or passed by either body. The language in fact, even expressly immunizes pharmaceutical company recklessness.

The language:

Applies to a wide range of drugs, vaccines, and other products. The proposal provides that any "drug, biological product or device that is used to mitigate, prevent, treat, or cure a pandemic or epidemic or limit the harm such pandemic or epidemic might otherwise cause." may be covered and given immunity. The proposal does not, in any way, limit its application only to new drugs or vaccines used in a pandemic context. The scope of the proposal is so broad that it could include drugs like Tylenol, Advil or Vioxx.

Allows the Secretary to declare an emergency under ANY circumstance. The immunity for drug companies is triggered upon a declaration by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). The language is so broad that it allows the Secretary to make a declaration at any time, for almost any reason, and for any period of time he or she so chooses. The Secretary may make a declaration pursuant to this section if a disease or health condition is a public health emergency or "there is a credible risk that the disease, condition, or threat may in the future constitute such an emergency." [emphasis added.] There will always be a future risk of a health condition becoming an emergency, but that future risk alone should not be enough to justify total immunity for the pharmaceutical industry. This declaration is not subject to appeal, or to any independent judicial review.

Provides for total preemption of state law during the declaration. The language also preempts all state laws, requirements, or state tort law that is different from or in conflict with the federal rule.

Immunizes drug companies for reckless and grossly negligent conduct. The only exception to the grant of wholesale immunity is in the case of "willful misconduct." However, willful misconduct is defined as evidence that the drug company had actual knowledge that their product would injure or kill someone. This requirement means that only conduct that would also constitute assault, battery or murder would be sufficient to find "willful misconduct." The language explicitly protects recklessness by stating, "a standard for liability that is more stringent that a standard of negligence in any form or recklessness." That is language never before seen in any proposed bill.

Immunizes criminal conduct when the Secretary or the Attorney General fails to act. Even if a drug company has acted with "willful misconduct" as defined by this language, the drug company is still immune from accountability unless the Secretary or the Attorney General initiates an enforcement action against the drug company and that action is pending at the time a claim is filed or the action resulted in some form of punishment. So even if a drug company knowingly kills thousands of people, if no official enforcement action is taken, that company is still immune.

Erects insurmountable barriers such that Americans will never be able to hold a drug company accountable. Under the language, a person who has been injured by a dangerous drug or vaccine must prove "by clear and convincing evidence willful misconduct" on the part of each and every defendant drug company. This standard of proof is so high, and rarely used in civil proceedings, that the injured individual will never be able to hold a drug company accountable.

Includes severe restrictions even if a claim is allowed. In the unlikely event that a claim is allowed to go forward because a court has found sufficient evidence that a drug company intentionally and willfully injured or killed a person, the following restrictions would still apply:

* The complaint must be accompanied by physician's affidavit by a doctor who did not treat the person that the person is suffering from an effect of the covered countermeasure;

* The injured individual must provide their medical records that show that the injury was caused by that countermeasure;

* An exclusive federal cause of action, barring individuals from filing a claim in their own state court under state law;

* The elimination of the collateral source rule such that any damage award received by the injured person would be reduced by any other payment received by the individual, such as health insurance or disability benefits;

Includes provisions of the so-called "Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act" (LARA). Proponents have even dumped into this proposal provisions of LARA, a bill which has twice passed the House but has never been considered in the Senate. Among other things, the proposal would amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without following the normal rule-making processes.

Establishes a "compensation" fund under the sole direction of the Secretary. The language establishes a fund similar to the smallpox compensation fund. However, the fund is operated under regulations established by the Secretary alone, includes caps on compensation, and is inoperable until Congress appropriates a sufficient amount of money for the fund to operate.


"Vaccines are proving they can be blockbusters. Prevnar, Wyeth's children's pneumococcal vaccine, revenues total over $1 billion. Analysts say vaccines against human papilloma virus, a sexually transmitted disease that is a major cause of cervical cancer, could be big sellers for Merck & Co. and Glaxo who are each developing one. "


Drug makers seek protection

Home News Tribune Online 12/11/05


NEW YORK - Large pharmaceutical companies are approaching development of vaccines and drugs for potential pandemics with trepidation, even as fears abound of a bird flu outbreak and doctors lament a shortage of treatment options.

Drug makers are especially afraid of lawsuits stemming from vaccines which, unlike drugs, are given to healthy people, making any harm they cause an even bigger legal risk.

Proposals in Congress would exempt companies that manufacture vaccines and drugs for pandemics from lawsuits. Senator Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is trying to put a rider on a spending bill that would immunize drug makers and another freestanding bill introduced by Senator Richard Burr, R-N.C., seeks to accomplish the same goal.

That's a necessary safeguard to promote interest in developing those medicines, drug makers say.

"We won't do it without indemnification," said Len Lavenda, a spokesman for Sanofi Pasteur, the vaccine arm of Sanofi-Aventis SA.

But some insist immunizing drug companies won't be enough to spark interest in a field fraught with an uncertain pricing structure. Unlike drugs for conditions such as cholesterol and high blood pressure, which have guaranteed markets, medicines for pandemics will only be used sporadically, if at all.

The government adds to the pricing pressure. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention buys 55 percent of the recommended childhood vaccines and pays substantially less than the private sector, so some experts suspect payments for pandemic treatments will be less than generous.

When anthrax fears surfaced after the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. government threatened to break the patent covering Cipro, an antibiotic made by Bayer AG. And Roche Holding Ltd. has already been under tremendous pressure to lower the cost of its Tamiflu, which is believed to be effective against bird flu, and give others permission to make it.

"Companies are worried about low prices," said Frank Sloan, professor of health policy, law and management at Duke University.

"They are worried they won't recoup their research and development costs," he said. "That is the real problem."

In a statement, Senator Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., called the attempts to indemnify companies "a sweetheart deal for the drug industry."

A spokesman for Burr said his bill contains provisions to compensate people hurt from treatments through government funds and that companies will only be indemnified when the product is used in a pandemic, not for a general medical problem.

The drug industry insists such moves are crucial. In a pandemic, a vaccine may be approved without the same level of testing that would be normally required and given to virtually all Americans.

"This is 300 million plaintiffs you are talking about," said John Clerici, a lawyer who represents Sanofi and other companies. "If they get anything, they'll blame it on the vaccine."

Sheltering drug companies from lawsuits isn't without precedent. Acambis PLC was protected to make an Anthrax vaccine and the manufacturers of swine flu vaccines were given the same treatment back in the 1970s.

Individuals seriously harmed by vaccines the U.S. government recommends for children are paid through a federal pool funded by a tax on inoculations. But Lavenda said lawyers are seeking ways to collect damages from companies instead of the government fund.

Chris Viehbacher, president of GlaxoSmithKline PLC's U.S. pharmaceuticals business, estimates the industry has spent $200 million preparing itself for lawsuits over a vaccine preservative in children' s vaccines.

Lavenda said the issue of immunity from lawsuits must be cleared before other negotiations can begin on issues such as price.

Lobbyists and pharmaceutical executives said the main force pushing for indemnity is not the drug industry, but the Biotechnology Industry Organization, a trade group. BIO declined comment, but lobbyists and analysts suggested its members are far more interested in pandemic medicines than drug companies.

"Biotech companies are more amenable to working in new areas. They are startups," said Christopher Milne, assistant director at the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development. "Big pharmaceutical companies are resistant to getting heavily involved where the government is paying. They remember the Cipro incident."

Generex Biotechnology Corp. recently hired a lobbying firm to help it get government contracts to develop its bird flu vaccine.

Anna Gluskin, Generex's chairwoman, CEO and president, said she isn't worried about lawsuits because the company's vaccine is made from synthetic proteins, which she maintains is a safer manufacturing process.

Some pharmaceutical companies have chosen to develop a vaccine for bird flu. Sanofi Pasteur has a government contract to produce 8,000 doses of an experimental vaccine, but it has received indemnity from lawsuits. Glaxo said it will start a small trial in Europe during the first quarter of next year, and discussions with regulators haven't progressed enough to have included the indemnity issue.

Viehbacher said any company which successfully creates a vaccine would have leverage over the government. Vaccine production is complicated, so breaking a patent wouldn't guarantee supply, he said.

Vaccines are proving they can be blockbusters. Prevnar, Wyeth's children's pneumococcal vaccine, revenues total over $1 billion. Analysts say vaccines against human papilloma virus, a sexually transmitted disease that is a major cause of cervical cancer, could be big sellers for Merck & Co. and Glaxo who are each developing one.


U.S. Senators with up to $13.4 million in pharmaceutical holdings increased the value of their stock portfolios last night when they approved an amendment to the defense appropriations bill that immunizes drug makers from accountability to the public when they sell dangerous drugs and other products, according to the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR).



President Applauds Congress for Passing Defense Appropriations Bill I applaud the Congress for passing legislation to fund our troops who are fighting the war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. This funding will help us continue to hunt down the terrorists, pursue our strategy for victory in Iraq, and make America more secure. I look forward to signing the bill into law.

What the president does not mention in the 'making of America more secure' - is that in the bill, Senator Frist slipped language into the bill indemnifying manufacturers from their products (drugs/vaccines, et. al) that can harm, disable and/or kill the American people. The arctic drilling was widely focussed on, and that amendment was pulled from the bill. The environment in Alaska is now safe - Americans in the US however, are now not. What the president also fails to mention is that he was the #1 recipient of contribution funds for the 2004 election, bringing in over $1,000,000.00 from PHARMA.
http://www.secretwebsites.com/say_no_to_drugs.htm - For those that believe I'm slamming Republicans, I am not - it just so happens those mainly responsible are Republicans - but, there are a few democrats as well.

Again, here are the 38 senators that voted this bill in, with a conflict of interest with ties to the pharmaceuticals (stock holdings):

Allen (R-Va.), Bayh (D-Ind.), Bingaman (D-N.M.), Bond (R-Mo.), Boxer (D-Calif.), Brownback (R-Kan.), Burns (R-Mont.), Carper (D-Del.), Coburn (R-Okla.), Cochran (R-Miss.), Conrad (D-N.D.), Crapo (R-Idaho), Dayton (D-Minn.), DeWine (R-Ohio), Dole (R-N.C.), Ensign (R-Nev.), Feinstein (D-Calif.), Frist (R-Tenn.), Hatch (R-Utah), Hutchison (R-Texas), Inhofe (R-Okla.), Isakson (R-Ga.), Kerry (D-Mass.), Kyl (R-Ariz.), Landrieu (D-La.), Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Levin (D-Mich.), Lieberman (D-Conn.), Lott (R-Miss.), Reed (D-R.I.), Reid (D-Nev.), Roberts (R-Kan.), Stevens (R-Alaska), Sununu (R-N.H.), Talent (R-Mo.), Vitter (R-La.), Voinovich (R-Ohio) and Warner (R-Va.).

If you notice that your state/senator is listed above, congratulations - you just noticed that your Senator just screwed you over (don't expect a dinner - and remember this on election day). If you think that PHARMA does not run this country, think again. PHARMA has just proven that they can buy and even own Congress and the President. With all the hype on "protecing america against the war on terrorism" - today, America has just been taken hostage by its own government.

Read the below statemement from Dem. David Obey (WI) - it is long, but, it is very much worth the read. There are few exceptions to those in power who I believe are trying to do the right thing for their constituents and America - this gentleman below is one of them.

House Committee On Appropriations, Democratic Staff David R. Obey (WI-07), Ranking Member For Immediate Release Contact: Kirstin Brost December 22, 2005

Obey Statement on Defense Appropriations Correction Bill

A Shameful End to a Shameful Congress

WASHINGON -Dave Obey (D-WI), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Committee, made the following statement this afternoon on the bill stripping the provision to allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) from the Defense Appropriations Conference report:

"Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object: "More than a year ago, when Mr. Lewis was elected Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, he came to me and asked if we could have an understanding that we would express our substantive differences but still cooperate in moving bills forward in an orderly way once those differences had been expressed. We did that.

"Time and time again, the Minority was denied the opportunity to offer different sets of priorities, priorities that did not offer huge tax cuts for those who have the most in society, paid for with cuts in education, health care, and worker protection for those who have the least. Despite the fact that the rules of the House were used to block our efforts to obtain on-the-record votes on a number of our alternatives, Democrats continued to cooperate procedurally, even as we made clear our differences on policy.

"The Republican Majority wanted to finish all of these bills by the end of the fiscal year, and we did not procedurally obstruct them because while we differed strongly with the values that lie behind their budget priorities, we respected the fact that they are in the Majority and we respect and revere this institution. But because of internal divisions between the Majority party - divisions within the House GOP caucus and divisions between House and Senate Republicans - the fiscal year ended with the Labor-HHS bill and the Defense appropriations bill that represent 67 percent of the discretionary spending in our budget bill still being hung up in the legislative process.

"Now in the closing days of this Congress, the Republican Leadership has decided to use the must-pass Defense appropriations bill to force down the throats of the American people a number of wholly unrelated gifts to special interests. They decided to hold funds for our troops hostage in order to force Congress into removing protections against oil drilling in ANWR. To make room for their tax giveaways, they even imposed a second round of cuts to education, health, worker protection, and even imposing a $4 billion cut in military spending.

"Senate action yesterday has corrected one provision inserted in the bill by abuse of power - the strong-arm attempt at drilling in ANWR - and for that I mildly applaud the Senate. I led the opposition to ANWR's inclusion in the Conference and I am happy that the Congress was not blackmailed into accepting it.

"But frankly Mr. Speaker, continuing under my reservation, ANWR was not the biggest problem with the Conference report. The biggest problem is that it shortchanges our economic future by refusing to make adequate investments in education and it cruelly neglects to strengthen support for programs that help provide critical health care services to people who desperately need them. But we have lost that fight. This Congress has made the decision to cut critical health, education, worker protection, and social service funding by $3 billion below last year's level. What I find to be so gutless about Congress' performance on this bill is that those cuts could not pass the Senate on a roll call vote, so the Majority party had to arrange for their Senators to duck this vote and hide from accountability by arranging for the bill to be passed without a roll call vote. That means the Majority party has denied critical help to families most in need of help, but has not had the courage to forthrightly defend their votes to the people affected in the public arena. This bill makes that problem $1.4 billion worse for those programs and because of the across-the-board cut, it makes other ill-advised cuts in critical funding for the FBI, local law enforcement, and it even cuts an additional $4 billion out of the defense bill. If I could do anything to change that, I would. But it is clear that the die is cast.

"Continuing under my reservation Mr. Speaker, there is a second outrageous problem with this bill. The Majority has turned the proposal to prepare for a flu pandemic into a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry.

"When the President requested $7 billion to begin a much belated crash program to develop a new generation of vaccines and antiviral drugs to combat a potential flu pandemic, the Republican Majority responded by cutting it in half. When I asked Senator Stevens in Conference why we shouldn't fund the rest of the Administration's request so that it was clear that the government had a long-term commitment to the development of needed vaccines and antivirals, he responded that because liability protection language for manufacturers was not being adopted, long-range funding should be withheld. The Conference Committee ended its work with an understanding, both verbal and in writing, that there would be no -- I repeat no -- legislative liability protection language inserted in this bill. And because the Majority told us it did not want any compensation program for victims to come out of the discretionary portion of the budget, no funding was provided for that either. But after the Conference was finished at 6pm, Senator Frist marched over to the House side of the Capitol about four hours later and insisted that 40 pages of legislation - which I have in my hand - 40 pages of legislation that had never been seen by Conferees be attached to the bill. The Speaker joined him in that insistence so that, without a vote of the Conferees, that legislation was unilaterally and arrogantly inserted into the bill after the Conference was over in a blatantly abusive power play by two of the most powerful men in Congress. We then discovered that this language provided all sorts of insulation for pharmaceutical companies and that this insulation applied not just to drugs developed to deal with the flu, but in fact applied to a far broader range of products.

"In essence, the provisions allow the Secretary of HHS to issue a declaration that has the effect of almost completely prohibiting lawsuits in state or federal courts by persons whose health was injured against manufacturers and various others for compensation for injuries caused by the use of "covered countermeasures." That determination would bar lawsuits against a wide range of "covered persons" involved with the countermeasures-including manufacturers and their suppliers, distributors, state and local governments and their employees involved with use of the countermeasures, medical personnel prescribing and administering the countermeasures, and so forth. This is very broad power indeed to ban lawsuits. Unlike the language requested by the Administration, the Division E language is not limited to products to combat a flu pandemic. Rather, it applies to any drug, vaccine, medical device or other products useful in dealing with anything the Secretary considers to constitute a public health emergency or that could constitute an emergency in the future.

"Although a rationale often offered for lawsuit protection is that it is needed to encourage manufacturers to develop and produce new treatments, the protections of Division E are not limited to new or experimental products. Rather, nothing in the language would prevent the Secretary from providing protection against lawsuits to drugs that have been on the market for decades.

"Further, the language explicitly prohibits any judicial review, in either federal or state court, of the Secretary's decisions to grant immunity from lawsuits. If anyone believes that the power is being exercised too broadly, or even in violation of the law, they apparently would have no remedy other than asking the Secretary to change his mind or asking Congress to amend the law.

"Although proponents point to provisions of this language that make an exception and allow lawsuits in cases of willful misconduct, that exception is so narrowly drawn as to be almost meaningless. First, the provision defines "willful misconduct" as acts taken "intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose", knowing there is no legal or factual justification, and in disregard of known or obvious great risk. Basically, Mr. Speaker, the only conduct that would permit a lawsuit under this definition is probably conduct so egregious as to be criminal in nature.

"However, even this highly restrictive definition of "willful misconduct" doesn't seem to have been enough restriction on lawsuits to satisfy the authors of Division E. They added yet another provision that allows the Secretary of HHS to promulgate regulations further narrowing the scope of actions that could give rise to a right to sue. Then, there's yet another provision that says if the conduct in question is regulated under the Food and Drug Act or Public Health Service Act, a lawsuit for willful misconduct can be brought only if the federal government has taken enforcement action against that conduct. Finally, the language makes various changes to the normal rules of civil procedure to add further obstacles and difficulties in front of a potential plaintiff. In short, as a practical matter there is virtually no right for anyone to sue about anything covered by a Secretarial determination under this language.

"In summary, the Administration asked for some very broad liability protections for manufacturers and others involved with countermeasures against pandemic flu - and the Administration's proposal was widely criticized as going too far. With Division E of the Defense appropriations Conference report, Congress would be providing even broader protection, potentially covering a wide range of drugs, vaccines and devices far beyond what is needed to deal with the flu.

"Further, this denial of the right to sue is more sweeping than provided in the case of childhood vaccines, or in the case of smallpox vaccine. In the smallpox case, manufacturers are protected by basically substituting the federal government as defendant-with the scope of potential lawsuits against the federal government narrowed but not eliminated.

"Now Mr. Speaker, I recognize that some sort of liability protection or indemnification that would be necessary and appropriate to encourage development and manufacture of some measures to deal with pandemic flu and I would support such reasonable language, language that has been reviewed by a Committee that knows what it is doing in a process that allows for public comments. But there are real doubts as to whether it needs to be this broad. Its worth noting that Sanofi Pasteur, our only domestic flu vaccine manufacturer, has already signed contracts with the federal government to make avian flu vaccine and has already delivered some lots, rather than refusing to proceed until legislation like this is enacted. Similarly, Roche has been supplying Tamiflu for the national stockpile and actively seeking contracts to supply more.

"The result of this legislative action was a provision in the pending bill that prevents anyone who is a victim of a faulty vaccine from being able to obtain compensation in the courts. It says that if you become seriously ill because of mistakes in the manufacturing, that you lose your right to sue for compensation, but you can seek compensation from the government. But guess what -- the problem is that no money was provided for that fund. So anyone who gets sick would have to lobby Congress to put money in the money in the fund before they can collect. Thus, people injured lose their right to sue, but are not guaranteed any alternative means of covering their medical bills, lost earnings and other costs.

"Mr. Speaker, the Committee system was created years ago to ensure that to protect the public interest, legislation would be carefully reviewed before it was placed before the body for consideration. But that protection was arbitrarily by-passed by the Leadership in both Houses.

"This is the second time that this Congress has supinely done the bidding of the pharmaceutical industry in the dead of night. The first time, a vote was held open for three hours while the Republican Majority twisted arms to create the complex and ridiculously confusing prescription drug bill that our seniors are now so desperately trying to understand - a bill that was ushered through this institution by over 600 lobbyists and that protected companies by preventing the government from even attempting to negotiate lower drug prices.

"If I thought that denying unanimous consent on this bill would force the Majority to eliminate that language I would object. But, Mr. Speaker, it has also been made quite clear to me that the Majority will not relent on the language that insulates drug companies. So Mr. Speaker, I want it to be clear that the action to insert this special interest language in the bill is in my view a corruption of the legislative practices of the House. When Congress returns in January, I intend to raise a question about the privileges of the House that are highlighted by this action because it has brought discredit to the House and should disturb every Member who serves here. No Member of Congress, no matter how powerful, should be able to unilaterally insist that provisions that were never discussed and never debated in the Conference should be slipped in to that Conference report without a vote of that same Conference.

"This is what happens when there are no checks and balances, when one party controls the White House, the Senate, and the House and respects no limits on its own use of power. We have been placed in the this position because the House Republican Leadership has sent Members home for the Christmas holidays with the message to the Senate that we would not be here even if the Senate changed the legislation the House sent. That was irresponsible and the country will pay the price. This institution will pay a price as well, in terms of diminished respect from the people we were elected to represent. Members on both sides know it and it is time to have a modicum of respect for the way we do the people's business.

"This is a shameful and shabby way to the end the worst session of Congress I've experienced in 36 years in Congress. I most reluctantly withdraw my reservation because lodging an objection at this point would simply delay the shameful inevitable."

forwarded by Zeus Information Service Alternative Views on Health

Informant: Gomez

Sea Shepherd Being Monitored by the Office of U.S. Naval Intelligence

This site was initially blocked. The Block has been lifted. Due to the nature of the Release the someone, who was blocking the site, did not want you to see the Naval Posting.



Sea Shepherd Being Monitored by the Office of U.S. Naval Intelligence It appears that saving whales is a threat to national security.

The following is a posting from the United States Office of Naval Intelligence:

04 Jan 06



1. GREENPEACE - SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY - INSTITUTE OF CETACEAN RESEARCH - ANTARCTIC WHALING: According to the Japanese Institute of Cetacean Research, the Greenpeace vessels (ESPERANZA)and (ARCTIC SUNRISE) and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society vessel (FARLEY MOWAT) follow and attempt to impede Japan’s whale research efforts in the Antarctic as of 21 Dec. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s web site describes a near collision between the (FARLEY MOWAT) and Japanese Research vessel (NISSHIN MARU) on 24 Dec in the vicinity of 62:55S 136:38E. Greenpeace rejects the claims made by Japan that its members are disregarding the laws of the sea as they trail the Japanese whalers, and denies claims they are working in conjunction with the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. The Institute of Cetacean Research claims the fleet of six Japanese research vessels are operating under special permit in the Antarctic.

ONI NOTE: Supporters of the Japanese projects are implying that Greenpeace and the Sea Shepherd Organization are acting in concert. ONI sees no evidence for this despite the fact that the current high-profile Japanese expedition has drawn the attention of both groups (GP, Institute of Cetacean Research, Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, ONI). It is interesting that the United States government does not officially recognize the whaling operations of Japan as legal yet the memo describes the Nisshin Maru as a research ship. Greenpeace may not be working with the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society but the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is working with Greenpeace.

“They are down here opposing illegal whaling,” said Captain Paul Watson. “And we are down here opposing illegal whaling. We are down here together, working towards the same objective. I would say we are working together.”

The question must be asked. Why is the U.S. Naval Intelligence office concerned with an issue that does not involve a U.S. ship in an area about as far from the United States as one can possibly get?

The Japanese whalers have attempted to ram both Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd ships yet that is not considered to be of any concern. The Japanese whalers have attacked Greenpeace crew with water cannons and struck Greenpeace crew with poles yet that does not seem to be a concern. The Japanese whalers have warned that if the whalers injure any protestors, it will be the fault of the protestors. This implies a threat yet there does not seem to be any concern.

Not one politician representing a government from the U.S., Australia, Canada, or New Zealand has condemned Japan’s threats or Japan’s actions.

What is going on here? These nations have policies that oppose what Japan is doing. Why are they defending illegal Japanese whaling?

In Australia the Green Party has demanded that the government of John Howard intervenes to inquire against a claim by Japanese whalers that protestors are being monitored by the Office of Naval Intelligence.

As incredible as it seems, the Japanese whalers that are down in Antarctic waters conducting a blatantly illegal slaughter of whales are complaining to governments like Australia and the United States and accusing the people trying to stop their illegal activities of piracy. And Australia and the United States are both giving credence to the complaints of this criminal nation.

Is there no limit to the hypocrisy of these politicians and bureaucrats? Sea Shepherd Conservation Society welcomes your support. To learn how to support our conservation work, please visit our donation page.

P.O. Box 2616, Friday Harbor, WA 98250 (USA) Tel: 360-370-5650 Fax: 360-370-5651

Copyright © 2005 Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. All rights reserved.

Informant: OLYecology

Homeland Security opened history professor’s mail


Scandals Are a Symptom, Not a Cause

Ron Paul on DC scandals.

The FISA Farce: a secret court is no protection against dictatorship

Article by James Bovard

An Odor of Fin du Régime in Washington


The Bureaucrat in Your Shower

The Regulator in Your Shower

Jeffrey Tucker on water fascism and the company that is circumventing it.


Item in Special issue of Ethical Consumer

"Blog"ish item on http://www.tetrawatch.net/main/news.php to keep this reminder going. It may have been 2001/2 but I can't see the situation has changed. So there's another ethical consideration for the C of E (see other news item below the above). No offence intended, but "We have faith, we believe, we don't need proof" doesn't sit easily with "There's no risk from our entertainment antennae, feeding into the brains of the young, because there's no definitive scientific proof".

Just a reminder, because it grows literally daily: health links at http://www.tetrawatch.net/links/links.php?id=health


Next-up News 1-7/01/2006


Wisp of smoke?


Repacholi was asked by Next up about the money he receives


Repacholi responds but not to NEXT UP


For those who don't know, Blake wrote the book:

Electromagnetic Fields: A Consumer's Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Ourselves by B. Blake Levitt, Blake B. Levitt (Paperback - October 1995)


and edited the book: Cell Towers: Wireless Convenience? or Environmental Hazard? by B. Blake Levitt (Editor) (Paperback - November 1, 2001)


----- Original Message -----
From: Blakelevit@cs.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:19 PM Subject: Re: FYI


This WHO "Fact Sheet" on EHS is very unfortunate and a direct slap at the work of Olle Johansson and others. I had great hope that this WHO committee would produce some balanced work but it just seems to be getting more rigid according to the individual bias/politics of the heads of the committee. Such a shame. I am increasingly convinced that this is a rogue committee within WHO whose work is so exemplary in so many other areas. Certainly their funding decisions in taking money for travel expenses from the industry goes against all WHO parameters. Not sure what will right this situation now. Once these fact sheets are produced, they can take on a patina of credibility that outlives rewrites. The baseline opinion contained in this is the same as 10 years ago -- as if no new work had been done. Worse, it utterly dismisses the increasing reports of EHS coming from all over the world. It's not likely that everyone is having the same transcultural psychotic hallucination.

Much of the basis for dismissal rests on the fact that those with EHS cannot distinguish between frequencies, cannot tell when exposures are on or off, and appear to have an emotional overlay. Therefore the syndrome must be imagined because it doesn't respond to our normal way of capturing data. The fact that a different nonlinear model might be needed doesn't even get mentioned. Olle's work in changes in skin mast cells appears to be one possibility. I often quote a line from Hippocrates in my speeches. Hippocrates his students, "Listen to your patients... They are handing you the diagnosis." Indeed, that's what often leads to further research. How come not with WHO?



Informant: Iris Atzmon


New information was accepted from the organization Next Up: Repacholi responded to them, according to the (yet not full) information I received, not only did Repacholi deny the accusation, but he also tried to scare/ threaten them, and he said: "“Could you please explain where you received this totally false information…”

This is a good sign. It's the first time something moved him seriously - Now he finally doesn't tell us anymore how scientific he is, but he starts to talk to the point- about the money issues. Since I am not familiar with the european institutions, who the strong people are (preferably people with some moral/conscience) I would thank for any adresses/emails of important key people who you think might have interest in advancing an investigation of a suspicion for bribe of Repacholi, and misleading the world by ignoring or doing bias of scientific studies and cooperating with industry. There is a need to involve people who are strong in the politics but the ones who care about this issue. Important judges, etc. If you know how to get to a unit of investigations in the European Union, let me know the adress, there should be a demand for investigation, since Lee Jong conveniently ignored the lettter that was sent to him. Please let us involve more people and we will try to advance it more.


----- Original Message -----
From: Next-up: Infos
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:44 AM
Subject: Re: Repacholi's industry benefits

Cher Ami,

Merci de vos premiers renseignements concernant Repacholi.

Actuellement Repacholi, nous avons suspendu provisoirement son dossier et il nous dit avec des menaces qui ne nous font pas peur, notamment que :

“Could you please explain where you received this totally false information…” etc . . .

“Pourriez vous svp expliquer où vous avez reçu cette information totalement fausse... ” etc . . .

Dr Mike H Repacholi Coordinator, Radiation & Environmental Health Protection of the Human Environment World Health Organization
20 Avenue Appia CH-1211 Geneva 27 Switzerland

Tel +41 22 791 34 27
Fax +41 22 791 41 23
Email: repacholim@who.int

Il est nécessaire pour pouvoir instruire son dossier d’avoir les éléments et le maximum de preuves de tout ce qu’il a fait qui est contraire à la déontologie au sein de l’OMS.

Tous ensemble nous devons gagner ce combat, mais il faut que nous nous aidions mutuellement.

Pouvez-vous intervenir auprès du Groupe d’Action des Résidants de Waiatarua, car il faudrait qu’il nous transmette tous les documents concernant les sommes d’argent qu’aurait touché Repacholi.

Vous pouvez leur garantir l’anonymat.

Il y a quelques mois, nous avions mis en demeure le Pr Denis Zmirou, Directeur Scientifique de l’AFSSE concernant le rapport qui porte son nom en France et qui fait force de loi actuellement. Nous lui avions demandé de s’expliquer sur ses incohérences que nous considérions comme une grave faute sur les établissements sensibles, école, hôpitaux, etc . . . Denis Zmirou avait dit qu’il ne fallait pas mettre ces établissements dans les faisceaux des antennes relais. Donc les enfants étaient protégés pendant les 8 heures de classes, et après pendant les 16 heures restantes ils pouvaient se faire irradier cher eux ! Courageusement il a préféré démissionner de son poste en écrivant une longue lettre qui est un modèle du genre sur l’état de mensonges de certaines institutions officielles de santé gouvernementale. Cette lettre est souvent reprise dans les émissions de télévision et les débats. " . . . Nous payons et nos enfants paieront demain le prix de nos aveuglements." . . . Vous pouvez traduire cette lettre qui est hallucinante pour une personne qui a dirigé pendant des années les études concernant les CEM (EMF) en France !

Reste malheureusement encore en poste Veyret, de Séze, Dixiaut et . . . Repacholi.

Hier nous avons publié en France ce texte de présentation :

L’OMS s’est réunie le 17 novembre 2005 à Melbourne (Australie), pour étudier l’avancement des travaux

relatifs aux études sur les CEM. En présence des deux figures emblématiques et dans des débats houleux,

révélateurs de grandes tensions..

Le compte rendu de Rowan Campbell est révélateur d’un état de crise qui ne peut perdurer. Face aux

réalités de la physique et aux évidences des effets biologiques et sanitaires des CEM sur l’homme, il serait

salutaire pour l’humanité qu’une page sombre de la “recherche scientifique orientée” se tourne au plus vite.

En 2005, au plus haut niveau, les problèmes de conscience ont déjà été explicitement évoqués, médiatisés

avec les conséquences que l’on connaient. Néanmoins reste encore aux commandes un quarteron qui veut

encore faire bonne figure. S’ils ne sont pas imbus de leur personne, nous pensons qu’ils comprendront . . .

Nous n’avons qu’un conseil a leur prodiguer : Qu’ils s’effacent discrètement, . . . sans autre forme de procès.

Informant: Iris Atzmon

War pimp alert: Iran rejection of nuclear deal becoming clear


The evidence that the US plans to nuke Iran?


Attack on Iran: A Looming Folly


Bombing will not settle the Iranian nuclear issue


Our Presidential Era: Who Can Check the President?


The Wiretappers That Couldn't Shoot Straight


Dems Charge GOP Has Corrupted Congress


Bush announces radical shift in foreign policy: no U.S. media report it


Zbigniew Brzezinski: The Real Choice in Iraq


Top armyman wants Blair impeached


Sheehan Urge Supporters to Take Action


Cindy Sheehan

Bush Advisor Says President Has Legal Power to Torture Children


Sen. Russ Feingold considering impeachment


War on Terror or reign of terror?


Wiretap City


The Winter of Our Discontent


Good and Bad Lobby Groups


Sen. Kennedy: Judge Alito's Record Troubles Me Deeply


Congress Flooded with Impeachment Letters


Vital Background to Downing Street Memo


The Man Who Bought Washington


Media's War Images Delude instead of Inform


State subsidy to private schools: A case history of destruction


McCain Is Not Enough


Show the public what an ultraconservative Supreme Court will mean for them


A peace movement demanding the rule of law


Once privacy is gone, it's gone


Big Brother is watching, and we're letting him


Losing the war on terror


Alito's bad luck


It's official: Fed will conceal inflation in 2006


Presumed guilty: Caught in the American gulag


Opposition builds to "black boxes" in cars


Scandal of force-fed prisoners


GOP coalition launches drive to replace DeLay


Feingold Won't Rule Out Bush Impeachment


„Für globale Bewegungsfreiheit“ - „Gleiche Rechte für Alle“


Konferenz und EuroMayday-Parade in Hamburg




UK: ID enforcement program emerges


GM: New study shows unborn babies could be harmed


The Global Spread of GMO Crops - Inherit the Wind


Whales: In Deep Trouble


The Precautionary Principle


Doch Klage wegen „Wertminderung“?



User Status

Du bist nicht angemeldet.




Januar 2006

Aktuelle Beiträge

Wenn das Telefon krank...
http://groups.google.com/g roup/mobilfunk_newsletter/ t/6f73cb93cafc5207   htt p://omega.twoday.net/searc h?q=elektromagnetische+Str ahlen http://omega.twoday. net/search?q=Strahlenschut z https://omega.twoday.net/ search?q=elektrosensibel h ttp://omega.twoday.net/sea rch?q=Funkloch https://omeg a.twoday.net/search?q=Alzh eimer http://freepage.twod ay.net/search?q=Alzheimer https://omega.twoday.net/se arch?q=Joachim+Mutter
Starmail - 8. Apr, 08:39
Familie Lange aus Bonn...
http://twitter.com/WILABon n/status/97313783480574361 6
Starmail - 15. Mär, 14:10
Dänische Studie findet...
https://omega.twoday.net/st ories/3035537/ -------- HLV...
Starmail - 12. Mär, 22:48
Schwere Menschenrechtsverletzungen ...
Bitte schenken Sie uns Beachtung: Interessengemeinschaft...
Starmail - 12. Mär, 22:01
Effects of cellular phone...
http://www.buergerwelle.de /pdf/effects_of_cellular_p hone_emissions_on_sperm_mo tility_in_rats.htm [...
Starmail - 27. Nov, 11:08


Online seit 7413 Tagen
Zuletzt aktualisiert: 8. Apr, 08:39