January 16, 2003

Miscellaneous Subjects #171: Nipping Totalitarianism in the Bush

Hello everyone

As the sickening war preparations continue amidst growing public opposition, someone is advocating a drastic measure to put an end to it all - see #1 below.

Several other related issues are also covered...

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

This compilation is archived at

Check also my latest Media Compilation #109: The Radioactive Legacy of the Evil Empire-Builders archived at

"We sentenced Nazi leaders to death for waging a war of aggression."

- International Law Professor Francis A. Boyle (a long-time ERN subscriber) -- Taken from - More on this below.


1. Professor Francis A. Boyle calling for preventive impeachment of George W. Bush
2. Totalitarianism nears
3. As Bush threatens Iraq with nukes, US ramps up its own biowarfare research
4. Ted Sullivan's Interview on why war may not take place this year with Iraq
5. World Wide Democracy Network
6. Letter from the Editor of Yes! magazine

See also:

Israel's Sharon Slams Corruption Reports (Jan 8)
With a widening corruption scandal endangering his re-election campaign, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on Wednesday angrily denounced reports he is under police investigation for receiving $1.5 million from a South Africa-based businessman. Three weeks before Israel's Jan. 28 election, Sharon's once comfortable lead in the polls has been steadily dwindling since allegations surfaced of vote buying and underworld involvement in last month's primary, in which his Likud chose its candidates for parliament. (...) A poll broadcast on Israel TV, to be published Thursday in Haaretz, showed a dramatic shift. It showed Likud, which was winning 41 out of 120 parliament seats a month ago, now at 27, with Labor winning 24 seats and the reformist Shinui Party winning 17. Contacted by The Associated Press, Haaretz confirmed the poll but would not provide details. CLIP

Saudis gave Al Qaida $500 million and never stopped giving (Jan 3)
Saudi Arabia has transferred $500 million to Al Qaida over the past decade, according to a report prepared for the United Nations.

How to stitch up a terror suspect (Jan 12),11581,873332,00.html
There's no chance of a fair trial when Government, press and police get together to damn these 'terrorists'

Bumper Sticker "Impeach Bush"

CROP CIRCLES: QUEST FOR TRUTH (Excellent documentary! I saw it)
DVD and VHS available at

Jesus 'healed using cannabis' (Jan 6),2763,869359,00.html
Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.

SAVE THE BILL OF RIGHTS CAMPAIGN - to Fight the New World Order

U.N. Wants Up to a Year for Iraq Inspections
U.N. arms experts said on Monday they wanted up to a year to complete their inspections in Iraq, even as Washington massed a force in the Gulf that will be ready to wage war within weeks. The U.N. inspectors' comments were likely to further fuel an anti-war camp that includes much of the public in Europe and the Middle East, many of their governments, and the Pope, who declared Monday war would be a "defeat for humanity." CLIP



Professor Francis A. Boyle calling for preventive impeachment of George W. Bush

January 4, 2003

Impeachment due to lies pertaining to one's private member? High crimes indeed! Granted, Clinton was no angel and the Republicans attempted to take him out on the sex issue because Clinton was nearly as corrupt as the current Bush gang, and going after anything other than the petty sex issue would actually cut close to home.

Today, there's a growing number of people contemplating impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush and gang.

Professor Francis A Boyle worked with the late Congressman Henry Gonzalez to draft impeachment articles against George H. W. Bush. Now, he's letting people in Congress know that he's willing to help any of them that will stand up and enforce the rule of law. He makes the case that U.S. is violating international law, particularly the Bush doctrine of preemptive war, which in his words reads like a Nazi strategy document. He also makes the case that the "Ashcroft police state" is also grounds for impeachment.

Professor Boyle believes there are large numbers of Congress members that are seriously disturbed about what Bush is intending to do in Iraq, and what is going on with the nascent police state.

He's proposing six articles of impeachment. Listen to the radio show to learn more.

The radio show below comes from

See the bottom right corner for playing or downloading the mp3.

See also:

Preemptive impeachment (EXCELLENT ARTICLE)
(...) Boyle is offering his services as counsel, free of charge, to any member of the House of Representatives willing to sponsor articles of impeachment. He is experienced in this work, having undertaken it in 1991 for the late Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez (D-TX), in an effort to stop the first Persian Gulf War. It takes only one member to introduce articles of impeachment. Of course, it will take many more than that to vote for impeachment, which will culminate in a trial in the Senate. Boyle is confident that, once the articles are introduced, others, including Republicans, will co-sponsor them. But we have to convince our Representatives that impeachment is necessary for the country and politically safe for them. This non-violent, constitutional process may be our best way of stopping World War III and saving our civil rights. (...) We don't have to wait for the devastation of Baghdad to impeach the Bush cabal because they have already repudiated the Nuremberg Charter via the so-called Bush Doctrine of preventive war and pre-emptive attack. "This doctrine of pre-emptive warfare or pre-emptive attack was rejected soundly in the Nuremberg Judgment, " Boyle says. "The Nuremberg Judgment... rejected this Nazi doctrine of international law of alleged self-defense." The Bush Doctrine, embodied in the National Security Strategy document, published on the White House web site, is appalling, Boyle says. "It reads like a Nazi planning document prior to the Second World War." (...) Since Bush has indicated that he is not likely to go to war before the end of January or early February, Boyle thinks we have a month to stop the war by impeaching the chain of command: Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, along with police state enforcer Ashcroft. Time and the Internet are advantages Rep. Gonzalez did not have in 1991, when the Persian Gulf War was launched the day after he introduced his articles. Boyle is asking the public to push for impeachment in two ways. First, contact your own member of Congress to urge him or her to introduce articles of impeachment, and tell the member that he or she may contact Prof. Boyle for assistance in drafting the articles. Second, demand impeachment by engaging in non-violent direct action, in exercise of your First Amendment rights to free speech, peaceable assembly and petition for redress of grievances. Boyle was pleased that 100,000 people marched around the White House last October 26 to protest the impending war on Iraq. But he says one million people need to peaceably take to the streets with signs, banners and voices shouting, "Impeach Bush!" "The bottom line: it's really up to you and to me to enforce the law and the Constitution against our own government," he says. "We are citizens of the United States of America. We have to act to preserve the republic that we have, to preserve our Constitution, to preserve a rule of law. This is our responsibility as citizens. We simply can't pass the buck and say 'Oh, some judge is going to do it somewhere.' It's up to us to keep this republic." READ FULL ARTICLE AT

The Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal


Preemptive Impeachment: Stopping the War by Enforcing the Constitution
An interview with International Law Professor Francis A. Boyle (audio)

Contact your U.S. Representative to Demand Impeachment!

Professor Boyle's bio page,%20Francis

Principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal, 1950
(...) Principle Vl

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:

a. Crimes against peace:

i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

ii. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

b. War crimes:

Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or illtreatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

c. Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.



Recommended by James DeGray <> on Jan 8


Totalitarianism nears

Without protest, Americans are giving up freedom


January 02, 2003

IN NAZI Germany at this time of year, people freely shopped in large department stores for gifts for family and friends. The streets were full of traffic. It was "business as usual" for most of the citizens. While in the colonial states conquered by the Nazis, and in the concentrations camps for Jews, gays and communists, life was a living nightmare of dehumanization and human-rights violations.

In the United States today, people freely shop in large department stores for gifts, and the streets are full of traffic. While in our most recent victim states of Afghanistan, Iraq under murderous sanctions, Argentina after engineering its economic collapse, and Colombia under U.S. military aid for repression, life is a living nightmare of dehumanization and human-rights violations.

But what once separated the United States from Nazi Germany was the protection of civil liberties for American citizens. People of Germany had no rights and did not care. Those few who did care were so terrified of their government that they did not dare to speak out. Those who did speak out were declared "enemy agents" and sent to concentration camps.

Today, people of the United States have given up their rights through the "Patriot Act," the "Homeland Security Act" and the Pentagon's new system of "Total Information Awareness." The astonishing thing about this "land of the free" is that most Americans now have no effective rights and do not care.

As long as they are free to shop in department stores and have traffic in the streets (with automobiles burning oil stolen from dying Iraqi children), they do not care. And to a greater degree every day, those few who do care about our liberties and rights are too terrified of our government to speak out.

The so-called "Patriot Act" expanded our government's secret search and wiretapping powers enormously. It empowered racial profiling as a recognized police practice and allowed broad sweeps of people of Middle Eastern or Asian origin. It effectively abolished immigrants' rights, allowing noncitizens to be held in secret locations on secret "evidence," without right to an attorney, for as long as the government wishes.

The government now has the power to enter your home or your computer and secretly record whatever they find without ever having to notify you. They do not even have to obtain a warrant from a publicly accountable judge showing reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed.

Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold spoke the following words from the Senate floor on Oct. 11, 2001, when he was the only senator to vote against Attorney General John Ashcroft's USA Patriot Act: "There is no doubt that if we lived in a police state, it would be easier to catch terrorists. If we lived in a country where police were allowed to search your home at any time for any reason; if we lived in a country where the government is entitled to open your mail, eavesdrop on your phone conversations, or intercept your e-mail communications; if we lived in a country where people could be held in jail indefinitely based on what they write or think, or based on mere suspicion that they are up to no good, the government would probably discover more terrorists or would-be terrorists! But that wouldn't be a country in which we would want to live."

But today, it has gotten worse with the passage of the Homeland Security Act. Notice that these titles, "Patriot" and "Homeland," sound very much like the language of the Nazis. A common slogan of the Nazi regime was "the highest freedom is a noble slavery of the heart." People are free, the slogan meant, when they have enslaved their hearts to the "homeland" in absolute obedience to their government. "Deutschland, Deckhand, uber alles!" they shouted. Blind loyalty, patriotism, and emotion must triumph over liberty, reason and sound judgment.

Under the U.S. Homeland Security Act (our rights again given away freely by a bipartisan Congress), 22 U.S. agencies are combined in order to achieve "total information awareness" on every American citizen. The government will soon be amassing a file on every American that includes every magazine subscription, credit card purchase, Web site visit, medical record, library record, bank deposit or withdrawals, every airline purchase, as well as judicial, divorce records, and so on. This will be recorded in a central data base, not by a publicly accountable authority, but by the Pentagon, which already operates in total secrecy from the American public.

Government intimidation for political reasons is real and it has begun. Our government already is using its secret data bases to harass Americans. Political activists checking in at airports at the airline desk have had their names come up from a secret government list as "flight risks." They and their luggage have been supersearched to the point where they are made to miss their flights, and then released to fly. Obviously if they were really "flight risks," they would not be allowed to fly.

Attorneys have found that their attorney-client privilege has all but disappeared. The government has even placed hidden cameras in prisons to record attorney discussions with their clients. The government has begun harassing people maintaining Web sites they consider politically objectionable.

The Justice Department announced a plan to use its newfound power to designate U.S. citizens as "enemy combatants" to place such people in concentration camps. Declaring them "enemy combatants" would strip them of their constitutional rights, their access to the courts and allow the government to indefinitely hold them without trial.

This is identical in purpose to some of the Nazi concentration camps.

Do we citizens care at all about the future of our children or the plight of the millions of citizens in this country of Arab descent, or those who nonviolently oppose government policy? We have repeated for so long the slogan "it can't happen here." But the darkness and terror of totalitarianism is coming rapidly.

Do we have the courage and integrity to speak out now, before it is too late? Or will we continue to freely shop in our large department stores for gifts for family and friends - as they did in Nazi Germany.



As Bush threatens Iraq with nukes, US ramps up its own biowarfare research

by Kellia Ramares

26 December 2002

When I booted up my AOL account on the morning of December 11th, I was greeted by the picture of someone in a gas mask and the headline: "You gas us; We’ll nuke you!" Bad as that was, the headline on West County Times was worse: "Pre-emptive nuke strike a possibility." The San Francisco Chronicle banner headline was even pithier: Bush Doctrine: Hit First.

But while George W. Bush threatens Iraq, the United States is expanding its own biowarfare research programs. The government plans to increase the number of biohazard safety level (BSL) 3 and 4 labs around the United States. BSL 3 labs handle live anthrax, botulism, and bubonic plague, among many other things. BSL 4 labs conduct research on an array of even deadlier organisms, including smallpox and Ebola virus.

Steve Erickson, director of the Citizens’ Education Project in Salt Lake City, Utah said, "This expansion of laboratory capacity within the Defense Department and other departments of government has been in the works for a number of years, probably dating to about 1995. Certainly, the intensity and speed of these developments is picked up since 9/11/2001. The last count we had was about 14 [labs] that were being proposed in various locations by any one of four Cabinet level departments within the US Government. There are some indications now that the National Institutes of Health will be backing off in terms of the numbers of Biological Safety Level Four laboratories, but intends instead to renovate and perhaps build additional Biological Level Three laboratories."

The Department of Energy wants to build a BSL-3 facility at its Los Alamos lab in New Mexico. On December 16th, the DOE released the final Environmental Assessment of plans to build a BSL-3 lab at Lawrence Livermore National Lab , in the San Francisco suburbs. DOE issued a "Finding of No Significant Impact" for construction of this new facility. Additionally, Lawrence Livermore (LLNL) plans to be a partner in developing The Western National Center for Biodefense and Emerging Diseases, a BSL-4 facility slated for the University of California – Davis.

Why put high containment microbiology labs at nuclear facilities, such as Los Alamos and LLNL?

One might think the ready answer is that at the nuclear weapons lab security measures were already in place that would safeguard the community against accidents or terrorist attacks. But when I posed the question to John Bellardo, director of the Office of Public Affairs of the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, he did not even offer that much substance. Instead, he said, after a long pause, "There is no apparent problem with locating the biosafety level three facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. All of the potential ramifications were examined in the environmental assessment and it was determined that it does not pose any undue harm or potential threat to the human health or the environment."

Bellardo also said that a contract had been let for the construction of a prefabricated building to house the new facility. Construction should be completed by late summer or early fall of 2003.

The real reason for putting a high containment microbiology lab in a nuclear research facility may be to duck oversight protocols.

Prof. Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, Chair of the Working Group on Biological Weapons of the Federation of American Scientists , said "when various types of weapons are being researched at the same place, it means that if there is any kind of oversight or investigation or inspection of one type, it puts at risk classified information about the others. And this is a reason why this government frequently objects to any kind of oversight. And this is also, in my view, a reason why different kinds of weapons research should be conducted at different locations, rather than piling them all in the same place."

What might government microbiologists be researching that they wouldn’t want to have subject to inspection?

Robert Gould, MD, incoming president of Physicians for Social Responsibility , is concerned that the US may be breaching the Biological Weapons Convention, which limits research to defensive purposes, by genetically modifying anthrax. "This is a threat of developing offensive capabilities," Dr. Gould said, "because you’re modifying an organism to be resistant to antibiotics and therefore increasing its capability to be a weapon."

Dr. Gould’s concerns are borne out by several documents. LLNL, which already has a BSL-2 lab, has acknowledged in a "Frequently Asked Questions List" that it would be working with anthrax in the BSL-3 lab and that it has been "working with 25 different strains of anthrax since Spring 2000 as part of our regular program work for the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Chemical and Biological National Security Program."

The draft environmental assessment for the proposed lab says that current plans call for the facility to handle the DNA and RNA of a wide array of organisms. The lab could also engage in the chemical separation of DNA, RNA and proteins, and in sample amplification, which the assessment defines as "the process to rapidly and significantly increase the number of microorganisms in a sample." The environmental assessment also states that "the proposed facility would have the unique capability within DOE/NNSA to perform aerosol studies to include challenges of rodents using infectious agents or biologically derived toxins (biotoxins)."

While George W. Bush compels the Iraqis to bare all in connection with its weapons programs, what biological horrors is the American government cooking up in the secrecy of its own labs?


Kellia Ramares is Host/Producer of R.I.S.E.- Radio Internet Story Exchange

The December 16th, edition of R.I.S.E. is about the expansion of US biowarfare labs


From: "Stephanie Hope" <>
Subject: Ted Sullivan's Interview on why war may not take place this year with Iraq
Date: 8 Jan 2003

CNN today, (Wednesday 8th January 2003), Ted Sullivan, editor of Middle East Digest proposed in an interview that he felt war would not take place this year with Iraq. His reasons were that public opinion in both the US and Britain was against it and that it would take a brave or foolish statesman to go against the wishes of the majority of their peoples.

Today in the British Parliament the Opposition Leader Ian Duncan Smith ridiculed Tony Blair for not even having the support of his own party and asked how he expected to have the support of the British people when it was the case that there was even dissension to the prospect of war within his own rank and file members.

Perhaps the voice of peoples against pre-emptive strikes against Iraq on the grounds of `regime change and liberation of the Iraqi peoples, plus the supposed disarmament of its military regime' is evident that they are no longer fooled by the propaganda machines that they are led to believe is news anymore. It may be a very simplistic view I hold but the one thing that has always stuck in my throat is the demanding by the US of the getting rid of these weapons of mass destruction held by any regime other than their own or those they `approve of', when surely the US holds more weapons of mass destruction than anyone else on this planet? Perhaps they could set us all an example and get rid of their own and then start preaching at everyone else with a little more credibility?

Here in Britain I hope the voices continue to swell against the determination to go to war when absolutely no evidence has yet been produced that there is any cause or need to other than our suspicions that this is about oil, and gaining a US controlled outpost in the Middle East. I believe I am right in saying that Iraq is a sovereignty as is Britain. How can we justify pre-emptive strikes against what is not a dictatorship as is being suggested but is in fact a sovereign nation?

In Eternal Echoes by John O' Donohue, he states the following which for me encourages courage against the darkness of anonymity... nowadays the fear of speaking out against our own corrupt regimes who are prepared to commit atrocities in our name.

"I remember one evening going for a walk. As I came home the black tide of night was filling the valley, lights began to come on in the houses. The little lights seemed so fragile against the onrush of the night. This has always remained with me as an image of the vulnerability of human presence against the darkness of anonymity. Anywhere tenderness gathers itself, life often seems to assemble in threat about its nest.....there is a fragility and pathos in light when darkness encircles it."


Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003
From: Eluned Hurn & John Rogers <>
Subject: World Wide Democracy Network

Just occasionally, we come across a project that is so timely and so necessary that we wish to share it widely.

Do you agree that we currently have:


OF - the people
BY - interchangeable sets of political professionals
FOR - the pursuit of economic growth through trans-national corporate capitalism ?

Would you like to see a new paradigm of democracy, where this would be amended to:


OF - the people
BY - thinking, acting and learning together
FOR - the co-creation of just and sustainable societies?

If so, visit the World Wide Democracy Network at:

Check out in particular the Brazilian Participatory Budget process. We could do with it in the National Assembly and every local authority.

Best wishes

Eluned Hurn and John Rogers




Fall 2002

Letter from the Editor of Yes! magazine

Do we want a living, diverse, democratically accountable market economy, founded in communities and cities throughout the world, with power, decision-making, responsibility, and initiative resting in ordinary people?

Dear Reader,

The collapse of public confidence in corporations may be the silver lining in the dark cloud of economic news. In the race to revise our way of life before we inflict permanent damage to the Earth’s ecological and social fabric, losing our society’s almost religious faith in the corporate system could open us to fresh possibilities.

The Enron and WorldCom managers who walked off with millions while employees and other shareholders were left holding depreciated or worthless stock have provoked a crisis of confidence in corporations, a crisis Congress has responded to with reforms addressing only the tip of the iceberg—the accounting scandals.

But what if we responded to the deeper problems of corporate rule? What if along with investors, the natural world could cry “Foul?” What if the people who have lost their land, water, and livelihoods to corporations; the people whose governments have been corrupted or overthrown to extend corporate access to their resources and markets; the victims of land mines, massacres, and other attacks carried out with the products and blessings of the military-industrial complex—what if all these people had a voice? What might they say?

Corporate rule has thus far continued in spite of its damaging record in part because no one—at least no one whose voice is heard in the mainstream media—offers a workable alternative. Media pundits, economists, and politicians from both parties agree that the corporate capitalism of the late 20th century is it. We’ve reached “the end of history,” in the words of author Francis Fukuyama. This is the best of all possible worlds, and the best we can do for those devastated by its collateral damage is to enact a few social programs, tune out the suffering of those excluded from this bright new economy, and hope that the ecological damage will be repaired by the next invention or the next generation.

This issue of YES! reveals that in fact there are workable alternatives unfolding before our eyes. The protests against the WTO, World Bank, IMF, and specific corporations indicate widespread discontent with this system. One outcome of that has been serious rethinking and a spate of innovation. New, living economies are forming that provide for the long-term healing and sustaining of, well, life—people, communities, ecosystems, future generations. Life is not fodder for the corporate mill. Life is the whole point. Here’s some of what I’ve found to be at the foundation of this new economy, as it is envisioned and as it is beginning to emerge.

- Production and exchange takes place at the most local level possible, rather than at the most global. When production must be larger and more powerful—because of technology or real economies of scale—democratic accountability ensures that these enterprises remain responsive to the requisites of life.

- Those who have rights also take responsibility. Ownership and decision-making rest with employees, members of the community, single-proprietors, customers, and others with a direct stake in the enterprise itself.

- Mutually supportive networks develop among individuals, enterprises, and communities based in distributed power, not in the coercion that results from vast differences in size and power.

- There are rich and abundant feedback loops, so that those who make decisions for an enterprise are accountable for the impacts—not just the stock values. Transparency helps keep enterprises honest. And, instead of “externalizing” costs (passing on to the public such costs as pollution and poor safety standards), costs are borne by the enterprise. When the resulting prices reflect the true costs of production, the market can tell the truth.

- Instead of being invisible, the “care” and “gift” economies (involving, for example, the care of children and elders, the strengthening of community, or the sharing of cultural treasures) are celebrated, supported, and rewarded; the contribution of all ages, races, and genders is recognized.

- Government intervention in the market encourages the production of goods and services that meet basic needs and discourages practices that result in safety and health hazards; distributes power, wealth, and opportunities widely; enhances and protects the commons; protects the natural world so it can continue to meet the needs of the next seven generations and more.

As Americans wake up to the high costs of corporate rule, they are becoming more open then ever to the possibility of a truly life-centered economy. Now is the time to open a dialogue about the kind of economy we want. Do we want a world ever more dependent on giant corporations whose wealth and power exceed that of many nations, and whose centralized command-and-control structure makes them unaccountable to people, communities, and the future of the planet? Or do we want a living, diverse, democratically accountable market economy, founded in communities and cities throughout the world, with power, decision-making, responsibility, and initiative resting in ordinary people?

Let’s imagine together some of the possibilities.

Sarah Ruth van Gelder


If you would like to subscribe to the Earth Rainbow Network automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued every two week, please click on this SUBSCRIPTION page.